建筑工程施工层次分析法安全综合评价
|
摘要
建筑工程施工层次分析法综合评价是目前层次分析法在建筑施工安全领域的一项重要应用。本文通过对工程施工中的重要伤害事故进行事故树分析(以高空坠落事故为例),全面了解了导致事故发生的基本因素,然后通过层次分析法对这些基本因素进行权重计算,得出了它们在事故发生中的相对重要性,最后用数学的方法结合人为主观评价因素而成的一种综合评价方式。建筑工程施工层次分析法安全综合评价充分考虑了人、机、环境的三方面的因素,并结合了主观和客观两方面的评价优点,是一种相对比较全面、有效的评价方法。层次分析法安全综合评价的关键在于确定影响事故发生因素的权重,从而构造判断矩阵,它是建立在对事故进行透彻分析的基础之上。对施工重大伤害事故进行事故树分析,了解整个事故的成因。利用布尔代数对事故树进行简化,做出等效图,使得影响事故发生的根本原因一目了然。影响事故发生的因素有很多,而且有些因素之间有着或多或少的逻辑联系,也有的因素之间还存在着主次关系。在对事故进行事故树分析之后,这些影响事故发生的因素也就分门别类的浮出水面了,其中的相对重要程度也可相应的知道了。经过这样的分析下来,控制事故发生的关键点也就不难看出了。传统的评价模式一般都是做出模糊、笼统的评价,而层次分析法综合评价有着明确的目的性,它针对安全系统中的存在各种因素做出相应精确的分析,结合了人、机械和环境三方面的因素,从而能做出有效、全面的评价。在这个方面是传统的评价方法所不能及的,所以说层次分析法安全综合评价是一种行之有效的评价模式。
Construction AHP comprehensive evaluation is the Analytic Hierarchy Process in the field of construction safety an important application. Based on the construction of a major injury accident Fault Tree Analysis (high -altitude crash incident as an example), a comprehensive understanding of the cause of the accident, the basic factors, and then through the AHP these basic factors of weight calculation shows that the accident occurred in their relative importance in the final combined with mathematical methods are subjective evaluation factors from the way a comprehensive evaluation. Construction safety AHP comprehensive evaluation takes full account of man, machine and environment of three factors, combined with the subjective and objective evaluation of the merits, is a relatively comprehensive and effective evaluation methods. AHP comprehensive safety evaluation is to determine the key factors affecting the accident occurred weights, thereby judgment matrix structure, which is based on a thorough analysis of the incident on the basis of. Construction of a major injury accident Fault Tree Analysis, understanding the causes of the accident. Using Boolean algebra tree for simplification of the accident and make equivalent map, making impact on the root causes of the accident clearly. The accident affected by many factors, and some factors have a more or less logical links, and some are among factors still exist in sequence. In the incident on Fault Tree Analysis, these factors impact on the accident, the surface will be different categories, the relative importance of which can also be corresponding know. After this analysis down, the key to control of the accident is not hard to see the point. The traditional evaluation models are generally made vague, general evaluation, and comprehensive evaluation AHP has a clear purpose, its security system against the existence of various factors accordingly informed analysis, combining people, machinery and environment three factors, which can be made effective, comprehensive evaluation. In this regard isthetraditional evaluation method can not and, therefore, that AHP comprehensive safety evaluation of the evaluation is a well-established pattern.
Construction AHP comprehensive evaluation is the Analytic Hierarchy Process in the field of construction safety an important application. Based on the construction of a major injury accident Fault Tree Analysis (high -altitude crash incident as an example), a comprehensive understanding of the cause of the accident, the basic factors, and then through the AHP these basic factors of weight calculation shows that the accident occurred in their relative importance in the final combined with mathematical methods are subjective evaluation factors from the way a comprehensive evaluation. Construction safety AHP comprehensive evaluation takes full account of man, machine and environment of three factors, combined with the subjective and objective evaluation of the merits, is a relatively comprehensive and effective evaluation methods. AHP comprehensive safety evaluation is to determine the key factors affecting the accident occurred weights, thereby judgment matrix structure, which is based on a thorough analysis of the incident on the basis of. Construction of a major injury accident Fault Tree Analysis, understanding the causes of the accident. Using Boolean algebra tree for simplification of the accident and make equivalent map, making impact on the root causes of the accident clearly. The accident affected by many factors, and some factors have a more or less logical links, and some are among factors still exist in sequence. In the incident on Fault Tree Analysis, these factors impact on the accident, the surface will be different categories, the relative importance of which can also be corresponding know. After this analysis down, the key to control of the accident is not hard to see the point. The traditional evaluation models are generally made vague, general evaluation, and comprehensive evaluation AHP has a clear purpose, its security system against the existence of various factors accordingly informed analysis, combining people, machinery and environment three factors, which can be made effective, comprehensive evaluation. In this regard isthetraditional evaluation method can not and, therefore, that AHP comprehensive safety evaluation of the evaluation is a well-established pattern.
引文
[1]冯肇瑞,催国璋.安全系统工程.北京:冶金工业出版社,1987.
[2]肖辞源.工程模糊系统.北京:科学出版社,2004.
[3]朱建军.建筑安全工程.北京:化学工业出版社,2007.
[4]合肥市建筑业管理局.建筑施工安全管理.2006.
[5]建设部城市建设司、人事教育司.安全员专业与务实.北京:中国建筑工业出版社.2006.
[6]吕方全.安全员-本通.北京:中国建筑工业出版社2006.
[7]国家安全生产监督管理总局.安全评价.北京:煤炭-业出版社,2005.
[8]马鸣.高处作业安全要点.安全技术,2006.
[9]田元福,李惠民.我国建筑安全管理的现状及其思考.中国安全科学学报,2003.
[10]田元福,李惠民.施工现场安全综合模糊评价模型与方法研究.兰州交通大学学报,2005.
[11沈良峰,李启明.层次分析法(AHP)在建筑工程项目评标中的应用.施工技术,2005.
[12]Christinan Preyssl.Safety Risk Assessment and Management ESA Approsch.Reliability Engineering and System Safety.1995(49):303-309.
[13]Philip Charsley.HAZOP and Risk Assessment.DNV Loss Control Management.London England.1999(4):5-10.
[14]张飞连,张涛.建筑施工企业安全综合评价方法.基建优化,2006.
[15]宋国旺,姚锦宝.基于定性与定量分析的施工安全综合评价法。山西建筑,2007.
[16]孙威刚,秦新光.论层次分析法在工程分包方案选择中的应用.黑龙江,科技信息2007.
[17]施红健.建筑施工重大危险源的辨识及控制.建筑安全,2006.
[18]吕厚伟,马成松.水利与建筑工程学报,2007.
[19]高云莉.基于AHP-GRAP模型的项目建设评标方法.大连民族学院学报,2007.
[20]李万庆,严冠卓.AHP在建筑企业信息化综合评价中的应用.中国信息化管理2007.
[21]胡建兰,王鹏飞,史庆忠.建筑工程施工安全事故的模糊综合评价法.建筑安全2007.
[22]孙大海,刘雪飞.模糊层次分析法对建筑施工方案技术经济的评价.建筑机械技术与管理,2006.
[23]曾爱平,张维奇.浅谈建筑工程安全生产管理.江西科学,2007.
[24]台双良,张守健.建筑施工企业安全模糊综合评价.哈尔滨工业大学学报,2003.
[25]张仕廉,潘承仕.建设项目设计阶段安全设计与施工安全研究.建筑经济,2006.
[26]陈宏毅.用安全系统工程的原理与方法加强建筑工程管理工作.重庆建筑大学学报1998.
[27]施工企业安全生产评价标准.JGJ/T77-2003 J 278-2003.中国工业出版社,2003.
[28]杨文柱.建筑安全工程.北京:机械工业出版社,2003.
[29]孙桂林,任萍.工业生产安全技术.北京:中国劳动保障出版社,2000.
[30]建设部工程质量安全监督与行业发展司.建设工程安全生产技术.北京:中国建筑出版社,2004.
[31]建设部质量安全司.建筑工程施工安全专业标准体系.2005,3.
[32]陈宝智,王金波.安全管理.天津:天津大学出版社,1999.
[33]唐景山,从蕙珠,崔国璋.建筑安全技术.北京:化学工业出版社,2003.
[34]陆福春,璋洪尧,张兴才.故障数分析技术在建筑施工安全管理中的应用.江苏:沙洲职业工学院学报,2006,2.
[35]李宏.建筑施工企业安评价方法分析.施工技术,2006,12.
[36]韩笑艳,霍锦忠.浅析中外建筑安全管理.建筑安全.2003,8.
[37]张伟华.整体提升脚手架在国宾酒店工程中的应用.湖南株洲市建筑工程有限公司.2002,7.
[38]顾冲时,汪自力,刘成栋.堤防工程安全评估专家赋值模型.岩土力学,2006,12.
[39]王小群,陈洪彪.模糊层次综合法在企业安全评价中的应用.北京:铁道劳动安全卫生与环保,2003
[40]Hawksley J.L.Analysis and assessment of hazards and risks,Blackwel I Scientific Publication.1991
[41]建设部建筑管理司.建筑施上安全检杳标准实施指南.北京:中国建筑工业出版社.1999
[45]史润水,范世铭.建立矿井安全评价指标体系的研究.北京:中国安全科学学报,1995
[46]陈锦灿.确定安全评价等级的方法一模糊综合评判法.劳动保护科学技术,1996
[47]张文忠,公共建筑设计原理.北京:中国建筑工业出版社,2001
[48]谈建筑业高处坠落事故特点、原因及顶防对策.北京:中国安全科学学报,1995
[49]王金波,陈宝智,徐竹云.系统安全T程.沈阳:东北工学院出版社,1992
[50]吴宗之,高进东,魏利军.危险评价方法及应用.北京:冶金工业出版社,2001
[51]黄丽民.计算机网络信息系统安全评价方法研究(硕士论文),2005
[52]边尔伦.浅析我国建筑安全生产的现状与对策.成都:建筑安全,2003
[53]胡永宏,贺思辉,综合评价方法[M].北京:科学出版社,2000
[2]肖辞源.工程模糊系统.北京:科学出版社,2004.
[3]朱建军.建筑安全工程.北京:化学工业出版社,2007.
[4]合肥市建筑业管理局.建筑施工安全管理.2006.
[5]建设部城市建设司、人事教育司.安全员专业与务实.北京:中国建筑工业出版社.2006.
[6]吕方全.安全员-本通.北京:中国建筑工业出版社2006.
[7]国家安全生产监督管理总局.安全评价.北京:煤炭-业出版社,2005.
[8]马鸣.高处作业安全要点.安全技术,2006.
[9]田元福,李惠民.我国建筑安全管理的现状及其思考.中国安全科学学报,2003.
[10]田元福,李惠民.施工现场安全综合模糊评价模型与方法研究.兰州交通大学学报,2005.
[11沈良峰,李启明.层次分析法(AHP)在建筑工程项目评标中的应用.施工技术,2005.
[12]Christinan Preyssl.Safety Risk Assessment and Management ESA Approsch.Reliability Engineering and System Safety.1995(49):303-309.
[13]Philip Charsley.HAZOP and Risk Assessment.DNV Loss Control Management.London England.1999(4):5-10.
[14]张飞连,张涛.建筑施工企业安全综合评价方法.基建优化,2006.
[15]宋国旺,姚锦宝.基于定性与定量分析的施工安全综合评价法。山西建筑,2007.
[16]孙威刚,秦新光.论层次分析法在工程分包方案选择中的应用.黑龙江,科技信息2007.
[17]施红健.建筑施工重大危险源的辨识及控制.建筑安全,2006.
[18]吕厚伟,马成松.水利与建筑工程学报,2007.
[19]高云莉.基于AHP-GRAP模型的项目建设评标方法.大连民族学院学报,2007.
[20]李万庆,严冠卓.AHP在建筑企业信息化综合评价中的应用.中国信息化管理2007.
[21]胡建兰,王鹏飞,史庆忠.建筑工程施工安全事故的模糊综合评价法.建筑安全2007.
[22]孙大海,刘雪飞.模糊层次分析法对建筑施工方案技术经济的评价.建筑机械技术与管理,2006.
[23]曾爱平,张维奇.浅谈建筑工程安全生产管理.江西科学,2007.
[24]台双良,张守健.建筑施工企业安全模糊综合评价.哈尔滨工业大学学报,2003.
[25]张仕廉,潘承仕.建设项目设计阶段安全设计与施工安全研究.建筑经济,2006.
[26]陈宏毅.用安全系统工程的原理与方法加强建筑工程管理工作.重庆建筑大学学报1998.
[27]施工企业安全生产评价标准.JGJ/T77-2003 J 278-2003.中国工业出版社,2003.
[28]杨文柱.建筑安全工程.北京:机械工业出版社,2003.
[29]孙桂林,任萍.工业生产安全技术.北京:中国劳动保障出版社,2000.
[30]建设部工程质量安全监督与行业发展司.建设工程安全生产技术.北京:中国建筑出版社,2004.
[31]建设部质量安全司.建筑工程施工安全专业标准体系.2005,3.
[32]陈宝智,王金波.安全管理.天津:天津大学出版社,1999.
[33]唐景山,从蕙珠,崔国璋.建筑安全技术.北京:化学工业出版社,2003.
[34]陆福春,璋洪尧,张兴才.故障数分析技术在建筑施工安全管理中的应用.江苏:沙洲职业工学院学报,2006,2.
[35]李宏.建筑施工企业安评价方法分析.施工技术,2006,12.
[36]韩笑艳,霍锦忠.浅析中外建筑安全管理.建筑安全.2003,8.
[37]张伟华.整体提升脚手架在国宾酒店工程中的应用.湖南株洲市建筑工程有限公司.2002,7.
[38]顾冲时,汪自力,刘成栋.堤防工程安全评估专家赋值模型.岩土力学,2006,12.
[39]王小群,陈洪彪.模糊层次综合法在企业安全评价中的应用.北京:铁道劳动安全卫生与环保,2003
[40]Hawksley J.L.Analysis and assessment of hazards and risks,Blackwel I Scientific Publication.1991
[41]建设部建筑管理司.建筑施上安全检杳标准实施指南.北京:中国建筑工业出版社.1999
[45]史润水,范世铭.建立矿井安全评价指标体系的研究.北京:中国安全科学学报,1995
[46]陈锦灿.确定安全评价等级的方法一模糊综合评判法.劳动保护科学技术,1996
[47]张文忠,公共建筑设计原理.北京:中国建筑工业出版社,2001
[48]谈建筑业高处坠落事故特点、原因及顶防对策.北京:中国安全科学学报,1995
[49]王金波,陈宝智,徐竹云.系统安全T程.沈阳:东北工学院出版社,1992
[50]吴宗之,高进东,魏利军.危险评价方法及应用.北京:冶金工业出版社,2001
[51]黄丽民.计算机网络信息系统安全评价方法研究(硕士论文),2005
[52]边尔伦.浅析我国建筑安全生产的现状与对策.成都:建筑安全,2003
[53]胡永宏,贺思辉,综合评价方法[M].北京:科学出版社,2000