Risk Assessment Method for the Safe Operation of Long-Distance Pipeline Stations in High-Consequence Areas Based on Fault Tree Construction: Case Study of China–Myanmar Natural Gas Pipeline Branch Station
Publication: ASCE-ASME Journal of Risk and Uncertainty in Engineering Systems, Part A: Civil Engineering
Volume 9, Issue 1
Abstract
The safe operation of natural gas long-distance pipeline stations is the critical link for its sustainable transmission. Therefore, station operation risk assessment and space-time expression in high consequence areas have become a critical problem that must be urgently addressed. The conventional way to assess the probability of gas pipeline failure cannot meet the requirements of the natural gas operating companies for the safety assessment of natural gas stations. Taking the example of the China–Myanmar natural gas pipeline branch station, based on the fuzzy fault tree model (FFT), a comprehensive pipeline safety evaluation method (CPSE-FFT) has been introduced, which evaluates the risk factor of pipeline operation in the station area and the social security risk brought by it. In this case study, the method is applied to a branch station of the China–Myanmar long-distance pipeline. In the results, the probability of pipeline accidents in the area of the station is times/year, and six buildings with higher risk levels among the 37 buildings are also exposed on the risk distribution map. The overall social risk level is also expressed. CPSE-FFT is a practical, reasonable, and accurate assessment method that can quantitatively reflect the risks posed by the safe operation of natural gas stations. This method is suitable for most natural gas station risk assessments. The results of the risk assessment provide a reference for managers and decision-makers to reduce the risk of natural gas stations.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Data Availability Statement
All data, models, or code that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the Yunnan University Graduate Talent Training Model Reform Plan (CZ22622203); 2022 Yunnan University Professional Degree Graduate Practice Innovation Fund Project. We thank Yunnan Provincial Natural Gas Co., Ltd., Kunming Surveying and Mapping Institute, Yunnan Remote Sensing Center, and Kunming Branch of Yunnan PetroChina Kunlun Gas Co., Ltd. for their support and help.
References
Adel, M., and A. Mohammad. 2019. “Fuzzy fault tree analysis for coal burst occurrence probability in underground coal mining.” Tunnelling Underground Space Technol. 83 (Jan): 165–174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2018.09.029.
Alzbutas, R., T. Iešmantas, M. Povilaitis, and J. Vitkutė. 2014. “Risk and uncertainty analysis of gas pipeline failure and gas combustion consequence.” Stochastic Environ. Res. Risk Assess. 28 (6): 1431–1446. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-013-0845-4.
Brito, A. J., and A. Almeida. 2009. “Multi-attribute risk assessment for risk ranking of natural gas pipelines.” Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 94 (2): 187–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2008.02.014.
Cech, M., P. Davis, W. Guijt, A. Haskamp, and I. H. Barrio. 2022. Performance of European cross-country oil pipelines statistical summary of reported spillages in 2020 and since 1971. Brussels, Belgium: Concawe.
Chang, L., Z. Ru, S. Teng, and J. Juncheng. 2022. “Gas diffusion model based on an improved Gaussian plume model for inverse calculations of the source strength.” J. Loss Prev. Process Ind. 75 (Feb): 104677. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2021.104677.
Chen, S. J., C. L. Hwang, and F. P. Hwang. 1992. Fuzzy multiple attribute decision-making-methods and applications: Lecture notes in economics and mathematical systems. Berlin: Springer.
Ching-Torng, L., and J. W. Mao-Jiun. 1997. “Hybrid fault tree analysis using fuzzy sets.” Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 58 (3): 205–213. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0951-8320(97)00072-0.
Daoming, L., W. Jianming, K. Zhisheng, X. Zhengyi, and T. Xin. 2012. “Simulation of diffusion trend of unexpected gas leak accident based on Google earth.” Procedia Eng. 45 (Jan): 373–377. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2012.08.173.
David, H., C. Toly, and J. W. Mao-Jiun. 2001. “A fuzzy set approach for event tree analysis.” Fuzzy Sets Syst. 118 (1): 153–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-0114(98)00288-7.
Dey, P. K. 2002. “An integrated assessment model for cross-country pipelines.” Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 22 (6): 703–721. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0195-9255(02)00020-3.
Djamel, Z., B. Omar, G. Oualid, A. Abdelaziz, and B. D. Milos. 2022. “A probabilistic approach to estimate the remaining life and reliability of corroded pipelines.” J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 99 (Mar): 104387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.2021.104387.
EGIG (European Gas pipeline Incident data Group). 2020. “Gas pipeline incidents.” In Proc., 11th Report of the European Gas Pipeline Incident Data Group (Period 1970–2019). Groningen, Netherlands: EGIG.
Ghavami, S. M., Z. Borzoui, and J. Maleki. 2020. “An effective approach for assessing risk of failure in urban sewer pipelines using a combination of GIS and AHP-DEA.” Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 133 (Jan): 275–285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2019.10.036.
Hongfang, L., I. Tom, B. Saleh, and F. Lingdi. 2020. “Leakage detection techniques for oil and gas pipelines: State-of-the-art.” Tunnelling Underground Space Technol. 98 (Apr): 103249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2019.103249.
Jeffrey, L., T. Andrei, and E. Angunn. 2011. “Development of uniform harm criteria for use in quantitative risk analysis of the hydrogen infrastructure.” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 36 (3): 2381–2388. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2010.03.139.
Jianxing, Y., C. Haicheng, Y. Yang, and Y. Zhenglong. 2019. “A weakest -norm based fuzzy fault tree approach for leakage risk assessment of submarine pipeline.” J. Loss Prev. Process Ind. 62 (Nov): 103968. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2019.103968.
Jo, Y. D., and B. J. Ahn. 2002. “Analysis of hazard areas associated with high-pressure natural-gas pipelines.” J. Loss Prev. Process Ind. 15 (3): 179–188. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0950-4230(02)00007-4.
Julwan Hendry, P., D. T. W. Surip, and T. Hendro. 2017. “α-cut method-based importance measure for criticality analysis in fuzzy probability-based fault tree analysis.” Ann. Nucl. Energy 110 (Dec): 234–243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2017.06.023.
Kashkarov, S., Z. Li, and V. Molkov. 2020. “Blast wave from a hydrogen tank rupture in a fire in the open: Hazard distance nomograms.” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 45 (3): 2429–2446. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2019.11.084.
Koornneef, J., M. Spruijt, M. Molag, A. Ramirez, W. Turkenburg, and A. Faaij. 2010. “Quantitative risk assessment of transport by pipelines—A review of uncertainties and their impacts.” J. Hazard. Mater. 177 (1–3): 12–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2009.11.068.
Lavasani, S. M., N. Ramzali, F. Sabzalipour, and E. Akyuz. 2015. “Utilisation of fuzzy fault tree analysis (FFTA) for quantified risk analysis of leakage in abandoned oil and natural-gas wells.” Ocean Eng. 108 (Nov): 729–737. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2015.09.008.
Lin, C. T., and M. J. J. Wang. 1997. “Hybrid fault tree analysis using fuzzy sets.” Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 58 (3): 205–213. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0951-8320(97)00072-0.
Liu, C., Y. Liao, W. Yang, Y. Yin, Y. Wang, G. Cui, and Y. Li. 2021. “Estimation of explosion overpressure associated with background leakage in natural gas pipelines.” J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 89 (May): 103883. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.2021.103883.
Mohammad, Y., and K. Sohag. 2017. “A fuzzy Bayesian network approach for risk analysis in process industries.” Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 111 (Oct): 507–519. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2017.08.015.
Mousa, J., G. Reza, E. Reza, K. Hasan, and P. Gholamhossein. 2021. “Risk assessment of fire, explosion and release of toxic gas of Siri–Assalouyeh sour gas pipeline using fuzzy analytical hierarchy process.” Heliyon 7 (8): e07835. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07835.
Muhlbauer, W. K. 1996. Pipeline risk management manual. Houston: Gulf Professional Publication.
Nguyen, H. T., and N. R. Prasad. 1999. Fuzzy modeling and control: Selected works of M. Sugeno. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
Pahlevan, A., S. Lavasani, M. Omidvari, and R. Arjmandi. 2019. “Fuzzy analyses of adverse consequences resulted from offshore pipeline failure.” Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 16 (10): 5643–5656. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-018-1908-3.
Pavanaditya, B., B. Yakesh, and J. Jayapriya. 2019. “Risk evaluation of oil and natural gas pipelines due to natural hazards using fuzzy fault tree analysis.” J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 66 (Jun): 284–292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.2019.04.010.
Petroleum Industry Press. 2020. Oil & gas pipeline risk assessment methods. Part 2: Quantitative risk assessment method. Beijing: Petroleum Industry Press.
Rao, K. D., V. Gopika, V. Rao, H. S. Kushwaha, A. K. Verma, and A. Srividya. 2009. “Dynamic fault tree analysis using Monte Carlo simulation in probabilistic safety assessment.” Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 94 (4): 872–883. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2008.09.007.
Rui, Z., F. Weipeng, and W. Jiansong. 2020. “A risk assessment model of a sewer pipeline in an underground utility tunnel based on a Bayesian network.” Tunnelling Underground Space Technol. 103 (Sep): 103473. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2020.103473.
Shahriar, A., R. Sadiq, and S. Tesfamariam. 2012. “Risk analysis for oil & gas pipelines: A sustainability assessment approach using fuzzy based bow-tie analysis.” J. Loss Prev. Process Ind. 25 (3): 505–523. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2011.12.007.
Shan, K., J. Shuai, G. Yang, W. Meng, C. Wang, J. Zhou, X. Wu, and L. Shi. 2020. “Numerical study on the impact distance of a jet fire following the rupture of a natural gas pipeline.” Int. J. Press. Vessels Pip. 187 (Nov): 104159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpvp.2020.104159.
Shengzhu, Z., F. Xiaodong, W. Xu, F. Qingshan, and H. Yuxin. 2021. “Status and whole process management system of high consequence areas of oil and gas pipelines in China.” OilGas Storage Transp. 40 (5): 7. https://doi.org/10.6047/j.issn.1000-8241.2021.05.006.
Sklavounos, S., and F. Rigas. 2006. “Estimation of safety distances in the vicinity of fuel gas pipelines.” J. Loss Prev. Process Ind. 19 (1): 24–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2005.05.002.
Standards Press of China. 2015. Oil and gas pipeline integrity management specification. GB/T32167-2015. Beijing: Standards Press of China.
Tianditu. 2022. “National platform for common geospatial information services.” Accessed May 30, 2022. https://www.tianditu.gov.cn.
Wang, Z. Z., and C. Chen. 2017. “Fuzzy comprehensive Bayesian network-based safety risk assessment for metro construction projects.” Tunnelling Underground Space Technol. 70 (Nov): 330–342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2017.09.012.
Weikun, L. 2016. “Analysis of the relationships between occurrence of cyanobacteria bloom and meteorological factors for building forecasting model of cyanobacteria bloom in Dianchi lake.” Ph.D. thesis, School of Ecology and Environmental Science, Yunnan Univ.
Xiaolin, W., S. Jian, S. Hongbo, and W. Yong. 2015. “Identification and hierarchical management of high consequence areas for oil pipeline.” China Saf. Sci. J. 25 (6): 6. https://doi.org/10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2015.06.025.
Yi, Z., Q. Xin-Ming, L. Zhen-Yi, H. Ping, and Y. Meng-Qi. 2015. “Analysis and assessment of the Qingdao crude oil vapor explosion accident: Lessons learnt.” J. Loss Prev. Process Ind. 33 (Jan): 289–303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2015.01.004.
Young-Do, J., and A. Bum Jong. 2005. “A method of quantitative risk assessment for transmission pipeline carrying natural gas.” J. Hazard. Mater. 123 (1): 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2005.01.034.
Zadeh, L. A. 1965. “Fuzzy sets.” Inf. Control 8 (3): 338–353. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0019-9958(65)90241-X.
Zhang, P., G. Qin, and Y. Wang. 2019. “Risk assessment system for oil and gas pipelines laid in one ditch based on quantitative risk analysis.” Energies 12 (6): 1–21. https://doi.org/10.3390/en12060981.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
ASCE-ASME Journal of Risk and Uncertainty in Engineering Systems, Part A: Civil Engineering
Volume 9 • Issue 1 • March 2023
Copyright
© 2022 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Jun 18, 2022
Accepted: Sep 16, 2022
Published online: Nov 25, 2022
Published in print: Mar 1, 2023
Discussion open until: Apr 25, 2023
ASCE Technical Topics:
- Analysis (by type)
- Business management
- Case studies
- Disaster risk management
- Energy engineering
- Energy infrastructure
- Energy sources (by type)
- Engineering fundamentals
- Failure analysis
- Fuels
- Gas pipelines
- Infrastructure
- Lifeline systems
- Methodology (by type)
- Natural gas
- Non-renewable energy
- Petroleum
- Practice and Profession
- Public administration
- Public health and safety
- Research methods (by type)
- Risk management
- Safety
- Social factors
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.
Cited by
- Yihuan Wang, Ailin Xia, Guojin Qin, Fuzzy Bayesian Network–Based Multidimensional Risk Assessment for Leakage of Blended Hydrogen Natural Gas Pipelines, Journal of Pipeline Systems Engineering and Practice, 10.1061/JPSEA2.PSENG-1577, 15, 2, (2024).
- Liping Huang, Chen Wang, Benben Cui, Haimin Zhou, Mabao Wu, Changtai Li, Employing an Interpretive Structural Modeling–System Dynamics Approach for Deep Foundation Pit Risk Assessment Model, ASCE-ASME Journal of Risk and Uncertainty in Engineering Systems, Part A: Civil Engineering, 10.1061/AJRUA6.RUENG-1191, 10, 2, (2024).
- Hao Jin, Jian Kang, Zhixing Wang, Jiwu Wang, Wei Cao, Deep-Sea Accident Risk Posture Assessment Based on a Variable-Weighted Five-Element Connection Number, ASCE-ASME Journal of Risk and Uncertainty in Engineering Systems, Part A: Civil Engineering, 10.1061/AJRUA6.RUENG-1168, 10, 2, (2024).