Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A 3S_BN Based Approach for the Quantitative Risk Assessment of Third-Party Damage on Pipelines

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Damage Assessment of Structures

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering ((LNME))

  • 1827 Accesses

Abstract

Third-party damage (TPD) is identified as the greatest threat to the safe operation of pipelines in different countries. The traditional TPD risk assessment methods cannot calculate the failure probability quantitatively and ignore the conditional dependence between risk influence factors (RIFs). In view of this, a theoretical system called 3S_BN is proposed based on Statistics, Scenario analysis, Safety barrier, and Bayesian network to realize the quantitative risk analysis of TPD. According to the 3S_BN, RIFs and their causal relationships are analyzed firstly. After that, a BN model including multi-state risk is developed and historical data and experts’ opinions are used for the computation of conditional probability table. Besides, evidence theory is adopted in order to improve experts’ belief. And then, the proposed approach is verified by a fire and explosion accident. Through sensitivity analysis and posterior probability reversal, the key influence factors and possible paths of the incident are confirmed. Finally, as discussed, the model can be applied to the TPD risk management of pipelines to continuously improve the safety level of pipelines.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. EGIG: 10th Report of the European Gas Pipeline Incident Data Group (period 1970–2015), pp. 22–26 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Lam, C., Zhou, W.X.: Statistical analyses of incidents on onshore gas transmission pipelines based on PHMSA database. Int. J. Press. Vessels Pip. 145, 29–40 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Peng, X.Y., Yao, D.C., Liang, G.C., et al.: Overall reliability analysis on oil/gas pipeline under typical third-party actions based on fragility theory. J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 34, 993–1003 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Baksh, A., Khan, F., Gadag, V., et al.: Network based approach for predictive accident modeling. Saf. Sci. 80, 274–287 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Guo, X., Zhang, L., Liang, W., et al.: Risk identification of third-party damage on oil and gas pipelines through the Bayesian network. J. Loss Prev. Process Ind. 54, 163–178 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Jiang, H.Y., Yao, A.L., et al.: Sensitivity analysis on risk factors of the third party damage in gas pipeline. Nat. Gas Oil 29(1), 1–4 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Liang, W., Hu, J., Guo, C., et al.: Assessing and classifying risk of pipeline third-party interference based on fault tree and SOM. Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell. 25(3), 594–608 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Li, J., Zhang, H., Han, Y., et al.: Study on failure of third-party damage for urban gas pipeline based on fuzzy comprehensive evaluation. PLoS One 11(11), 112–127 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Hayhurst, E.R.: Industrial accident prevention, a scientific approach. Ind. Labor Relat. Rev. 4(4), 609 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Reason, J.: Human Error, pp. 173–216. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1990)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  11. Cai, B., Huang, L., Xie, M.: Bayesian networks in fault diagnosis. IEEE Trans. Industr. Inf. 13(5), 2227–2240 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Lee, E., Park, Y., Shin, J.G.: Large engineering project risk management using a Bayesian belief network. Expert Syst. Appl. 36(3), 5880–5887 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Jensen, F.V., Nielsen, T.D.: Bayesian Network and Decision Graphs. Springer Science & Business Media (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-68282-2

    Book  Google Scholar 

  14. Bhandari, J., Abbassi, R., Garaniya, V., et al.: Risk analysis of deepwater drilling operations using Bayesian network. J. Loss Prev. Process Ind. 38, 11–23 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Wu, S.N., Zhang, L.B., Zheng, W.P., Liu, Y.L., Lundteigen, M.A.: A DBN-based risk assessment model for prediction and diagnosis of offshore drilling incidents. J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 34, 139–158 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Adedigba, S.A., Khan, F., Yang, M.: Process accident model considering dependency among contributory factors. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 102, 633–647 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Rathnayaka, S., Khan, F., Amyotte, P.: SHIPP methodology: predictive accident modeling approach. Part I: Methodology and model description. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 89(3), 151–164 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Baksh, A.A., Khan, F., Gadag, V., et al.: Network based approach for predictive accident modeling. Saf. Sci. 80, 274–287 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Wang, W., Shen, K., Wang, B., et al.: Failure probability analysis of the urban buried gas pipelines using Bayesian networks. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 111, 678–686 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Yang, Y., Khan, F., Thodi, P., et al.: Corrosion induced failure analysis of subsea pipelines. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 159, 214–222 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Zhang, C., Wu, J., Hu, X., et al.: A probabilistic analysis model of oil pipeline accidents based on an integrated Event-Evolution-Bayesian (EEB) model. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 117, 694–703 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Xin, P., Khan, F., Ahmed, S.: Dynamic hazard identification and scenario mapping using Bayesian network. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 105, 143–155 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Sklet, S.: Safety barriers: definition, classification, and performance. J. Loss Prev. Process Ind. 19, 494–506 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Khan, F.I.: Use maximum-credible accident scenarios for realistic and reliable risk assessment. Chem. Eng. Prog. 97(11), 56–64 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Li, X., Chen, G., Zhu, H.: Quantitative risk analysis on leakage failure of submarine oil and gas pipelines using Bayesian network. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 103, 163–173 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Cowell, R.G., Dawid, A.P., Lauritzen, S.L., et al.: Probabilistic Networks and Expert Systems, vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 289–320. Springer, Berlin (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Ramoni, M., Sebastiani, P.: Parameter estimation in bayesian networks from incomplete databases. Intell. Data Anal. 2(1–4), 139–160 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Wu, J., Zhou, R., Xu, S., et al.: Probabilistic analysis of natural gas pipeline network accident based on Bayesian network. J. Loss Prev. Process Ind. 46, 126–136 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Hua, Z., Gong, B., Xu, X.: A DS–AHP approach for multi-attribute decision making problem with incomplete information. Expert Syst. Appl. 34(3), 2221–2227 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Khan, F., Hashemi, S.J., Paltrinieri, N., et al.: Dynamic risk management: a contemporary approach to process safety management. Curr. Opin. Chem. Eng. 14, 9–17 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the National Key R&D Program of China (Grant No.2018YFC0809300) and the Major scientific and technological innovation projects of Shandong (Grant No. 2018YFJH0802). The authors are grateful for the valuable suggestions of reviewers.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. State Key Laboratory of Safety and Control for Chemicals, SINOPEC Research Institute of Safety Engineering, Qingdao, China

    Xiaoyan Guo, Guozhi Zhang & Yunlong Wang

  2. China University of Petroleum-Beijing, Beijing, China

    Laibin Zhang & Wei Liang

Authors
  1. Xiaoyan Guo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Guozhi Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yunlong Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Laibin Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Wei Liang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Xiaoyan Guo .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Laboratory Soete, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium

    Magd Abdel Wahab

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Guo, X., Zhang, G., Wang, Y., Zhang, L., Liang, W. (2020). A 3S_BN Based Approach for the Quantitative Risk Assessment of Third-Party Damage on Pipelines. In: Wahab, M. (eds) Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Damage Assessment of Structures. Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-8331-1_54

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-8331-1_54

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-13-8330-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-13-8331-1

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation