Abstract
Urban gas pipe network (GPN) is an important infrastructure to guarantee residents’ daily life. However, the risk of GPN has become increasingly prominent. Leakage is one of the biggest issues, which is easy to cause fire, explosion, poisoning, and so on. Therefore, the risk assessment of leakage is significant for the safety management of urban GPN. The main idea is to analyze the history accidents and predict the accidents that are happening. This paper explores to construct an integrated assessment model through Bayesian network (BN), Interpretive structural model (ISM), and expert evaluation method. First, the main risk factors of leakage and their coupling relationship are determined to increase the understanding of the complex system. Then, ISM is used to divide the logical network of factors to determine the hierarchical structure of BN. Finally, node probability is evaluated by Expectation–Maximization algorithm with the data collection of 89 real accidents. The model can be used to quantify the coupling strength and influence degree of each factor on the occurrence of leakage (the leakage that can easily lead to accidents, rather than small leaks). Then, the probability of GPN leakage can be predicted under a specific scenario. This study can provide a reference for safety management of GPN to reduce risk and potential loss.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Agarwal A, Ayello F, Raghunathan V, Demay V, Sridhar N (2020) Quantitative assessment of failure probability of underground natural gas storage wells using an integrated bow-tie bayesian network approach. J Fail Anal Prev 21(1):107–123. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11668-020-01038-x
Andejany M, Elshennawy A, Darwish M, Bahaitham H (2019) Developing an Industrial engineering study plan using ISM approach. Int J Eng Pedagog iJEP. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijep.v9i3.9884
Badida P, Balasubramaniam Y, Jayaprakash J (2019) Risk evaluation of oil and natural gas pipelines due to natural hazards using fuzzy fault tree analysis. J Nat Gas Sci Eng 66:284–292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.2019.04.010
Bian H, Zhang J, Li R, Zhao H, Wang X, Bai Y (2021) Risk analysis of tripping accidents of power grid caused by typical natural hazards based on FTA-BN model. Nat Hazards 106(3):1771–1795. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-021-04510-5
De Iuliis M, Kammouh O, Cimellaro GP, Tesfamariam S (2021) Quantifying restoration time of pipelines after earthquakes: comparison of Bayesian belief networks and fuzzy models. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2021.102491
Dempster AP, Laird NM, Rubin DB (1977) Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the EM algorithm. J R Stat Soc Ser B 39(1):1–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2517-6161.1977.tb01600.x
Fakhravar D, Khakzad N, Reniers G, Cozzani V (2017) Security vulnerability assessment of gas pipelines using Discrete-time Bayesian network. Process Saf Environ Prot 111:714–725. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2017.08.036
Farahani S, Tahershamsi A, Behnam B (2020) Earthquake and post-earthquake vulnerability assessment of urban gas pipelines network. Nat Hazards 101(2):327–347. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-020-03874-4
Farzadi A (2016) Gas pipeline failure caused by in-service welding. J Press Vessel Technol. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4031443
Guo Y, Meng X, Meng T, Wang D, Liu S (2016) A novel method of risk assessment based on cloud inference for natural gas pipelines. J Nat Gas Sci Eng 30:421–429. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.2016.02.051
Hao MJ, You QJ, Yue Z (2017) Risk analysis of urban gas pipeline network based on improved bow-tie model. In: IOP conference series: earth and environmental science, vol 93, Art no 012059. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/82/1/012059
He Z, Elhami Khorasani N (2022) Identification and hierarchical structure of cause factors for fire following earthquake using data mining and interpretive structural modeling. Nat Hazards 112(1):947–976. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-022-05214-0
Hosseini N, Givehchi S, Maknoon R (2020) Cost-based fire risk assessment in natural gas industry by means of fuzzy FTA and ETA. J Loss Prev Process Ind. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2019.104025
Kumar R, Goel P (2021) Exploring the domain of interpretive structural modelling (ISM) for sustainable future panorama: a bibliometric and content analysis. Arch Comput Methods Eng (prepublish)
Li F, Wang W, Dubljevic S, Khan F, Xu J, Yi J (2019a) Analysis on accident-causing factors of urban buried gas pipeline network by combining DEMATEL, ISM and BN methods. J Loss Prev Process Ind 61:49–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2019.06.001
Li Y-F, Huang H-Z, Mi J, Peng W, Han X (2019b) Reliability analysis of multi-state systems with common cause failures based on Bayesian network and fuzzy probability. Ann Oper Res 311(1):195–209. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-019-03247-6
Li X, Zhang Y, Abbassi R, Yang M, Zhang R, Chen G (2021) Dynamic probability assessment of urban natural gas pipeline accidents considering integrated external activities. J Loss Prev Process Ind. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2020.104388
Mimović P, Stanković J, Janković Milić V (2015) Decision-making under uncertainty – the integrated approach of the AHP and Bayesian analysis. Econ Res Ekon Istraž 28(1):868–878. https://doi.org/10.1080/1331677x.2015.1092309
Oaksford, M., & Chater, N. (2009). Precis of bayesian rationality: The probabilistic approach to human reasoning. Behav Brain Sci, 32(1), 69–84; discussion 85–120. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X09000284
Qiu Z, Liang W, Zhang L (2018) Tracing and prediction analysis of an urban pipeline leakage accident based on the catastrophe DBN model. J Nat Gas Sci Eng 57:339–348. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.2018.07.019
Sammaknejad N, Zhao Y, Huang B (2019) A review of the expectation maximization algorithm in data-driven process identification. J Process Control 73:123–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jprocont.2018.12.010
Shan X, Liu K, Sun P-L (2017) Risk analysis on leakage failure of natural gas pipelines by fuzzy bayesian network with a bow-tie model. Sci Program 2017:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/3639524
Sultana S, Andersen BS, Haugen S (2019) Identifying safety indicators for safety performance measurement using a system engineering approach. Process Saf Environ Prot 128:107–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2019.05.047
Taleb-Berrouane M, Khan F, Hawboldt K (2021) Corrosion risk assessment using adaptive bow-tie (ABT) analysis. Reliab Eng Syst Saf. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2021.107731
TohidiFar A, Mousavi M, Alvanchi A (2021) A hybrid BIM and BN-based model to improve the resiliency of hospitals’ utility systems in disasters. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2021.102176
Wang K, Shi T, He Y, Li M, Qian X (2019) Case analysis and CFD numerical study on gas explosion and damage processing caused by aging urban subsurface pipeline failures. Eng Fail Anal 97:201–219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2019.01.052
Wu W-S, Yang C-F, Chang J-C, Château P-A, Chang Y-C (2015) Risk assessment by integrating interpretive structural modeling and Bayesian network, case of offshore pipeline project. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 142:515–524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2015.06.013
Wu J, Bai Y, Zhao H, Hu X, Cozzani V (2021) A quantitative LNG risk assessment model based on integrated Bayesian-Catastrophe-EPE method. Saf Sci. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2021.105184
Xue Z (2022) Simulation research on fire and explosion risk in oil storage tank area of oil depot (Vol. 12160). SPIE. https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2627586
Yang Y, Li S, Zhang P (2022) Data-driven accident consequence assessment on urban gas pipeline network based on machine learning. Reliab Eng Syst Saf. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2021.108216
Zhang Y, Weng WG (2020) Bayesian network model for buried gas pipeline failure analysis caused by corrosion and external interference. Reliab Eng Syst Saf. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2020.107089
Zhang P, Qin G, Wang Y (2018) Optimal maintenance decision method for urban gas pipelines based on as low as reasonably practicable principle. Sustainability. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11010153
Zhang G, Dou L, Xu Y (2019) Opportunities and challenges of natural gas development and utilization in China. Clean Technol Environ Policy 21(6):1193–1211. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-019-01690-4
Zou C, Xue H, Xiong B, Zhang G, Pan S, Jia C, Wang Y, Ma F, Sun Q, Guan C, Lin M (2021) Connotation, innovation and vision of “carbon neutrality.” Nat Gas Ind B 8(5):523–537. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ngib.2021.08.009
Funding
This work is supported by National Key R&D Program of China (No. 2020YFA0714500), National Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 72004113, 72174099, 71904121, 72104123, 71904193), Science and Technology Program of The Ministry of Emergency Management (No. 2021XFCX25), and High-tech Discipline Construction Fundings for Universities in Beijing (Safety Science and Engineering).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflicts of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Ethical approval
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals.
Consent for publication
All individual participants were informed and agreed to publish this manuscript.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Deng, Q., Wang, K., Wu, J. et al. An integrated model for evaluating the leakage risk of urban gas pipe: a case study based on Chinese real accident data. Nat Hazards 116, 319–340 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-022-05676-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-022-05676-2