Safety risk analysis and intervention strategy simulation for petrochemical product transportation based on analytic network process and system dynamics

doi:10.3969/j.issn.2096-1693.2026.02.055

Abstract

Abstract:

To investigate the dynamic mechanisms of risk factors in petrochemical product transportation and thereby formulate risk control strategies, this study takes petrochemical product transportation risk as its research object. Based on 86 typical accident cases from 2018 to 2024, the Wuli-Shili-Renli (WSR, i.e., physical-logical-human) methodology is adopted to systematically identify 11 key risk factors across three dimensions. The Analytic Network Process (ANP) is employed to calculate the weights of these factors and clarify their mutual influencing relationships, and System Dynamics (SD) is used to construct a simulation model of the risk level of petrochemical product transportation, so as to explore the effects of different strategies on risk levels. The results show that intervention strategies across all three dimensions—physical, logical, and human—can effectively reduce the risk level of petrochemical product transportation. Among them, increased investment in the human dimension has the most significant effect on risk control; among all influencing factors, the intensity of government supervision has the greatest impact on the risk level of petrochemical product transportation; the optimal intervention in the physical dimension is increasing investment in emergency facilities, in the logical dimension is strengthening government supervision, and in the human dimension is improving the operational skills of workers. The conclusions provide a decision-making reference for the safety management of petrochemical product transportation: it is recommended that the government improve regulations and standards and strengthen supervision, that enterprises rationally allocate safety investments across the three dimensions, and that they focus on personnel education, training, and skill enhancement to reduce the risk of the petrochemical product transportation system.

Key words: petrochemical product, safety risk, wuli-shili-renli systems methodology, analytic network process, system dynamics

摘要：

为了深入探究石油化工产品运输风险因素的动态作用机理并制定风险控制策略，本文以石油化工产品运输风险为研究对象，基于2018—2024年86起典型事故案例，通过物理—事理—人理(WSR)方法论系统识别3个维度下的11项关键风险因素。采用网络层次分析法(ANP)计算各因素权重，明确因素间相互影响关系，运用系统动力学(SD)构建石油化工产品运输风险水平仿真模型，探究不同策略对风险水平的影响规律。结果表明：“物理—事理—人理”3个维度的干预策略均可有效降低石油化工产品运输风险水平。其中人理维度投入增加对风险水平控制效果最为显著；各影响因素中政府监管力度对石油化工产品运输风险水平影响最大；物理维度最优干预为增加应急设施投入，事理维度为强化政府监管，人理维度为提升作业人员操作技能。研究结论可为石油化工产品运输安全管理提供决策参考：建议政府完善法规标准并强化监管，企业合理配置3个维度的安全投入，重点加强人员教育培训与技能提升，降低石油化工产品运输系统风险。

关键词: 石油化工产品, 安全风险, 物理—事理—人理方法论, 网络层次分析法, 系统动力学

CLC Number:

TE88
X937

WU Jun, LI Jinhao, HUANG Kuan, JIANG Tianhan, LIU Chunying, QIU Rui. Safety risk analysis and intervention strategy simulation for petrochemical product transportation based on analytic network process and system dynamics[J]. Petroleum Science Bulletin, 2026, 11(5): 1571-1582.

吴军, 李锦昊, 黄宽, 江田汉, 刘春颖, 邱睿. 基于ANP和SD的石油化工产品运输安全风险分析与干预策略仿真研究[J]. 石油科学通报, 2026, 11(5): 1571-1582.

/ / Recommend / Download Citations

URL: https://sykxtb.cup.edu.cn/EN/10.3969/j.issn.2096-1693.2026.02.055

https://sykxtb.cup.edu.cn/EN/Y2026/V11/I5/1571

Figures/Tables 17

References 28

[1]	中华人民共和国应急管理部. 国务院安委会办公室部署加强油气储存安全管理工作[EB/OL]. [2026-03-10]. https://www.mem.gov.cn/xw/yjglbgzdt/202208/t20220810_419877.shtml. URL
	[Ministry of Emergency Management of the People’s Republic of China. The Office of the Safety Committee of the State Council deploys work to strengthen the safety management of oil and gas storage[EB/OL]. [2026-03-10]. https://www.mem.gov.cn/xw/yjglbgzdt/202208/t20220810_419877.shtml.] URL
[2]	胡瑾秋, 韩子从, 董绍华. 气象灾害下的油气站场设备脆弱节点辨识方法[J]. 石油科学通报, 2024, 9(2): 297-306.
	[Hu J Q, Han Z C, Dong S H. Identification method of vulnerable nodes of oil and gas station equip-ment under meteorological disasters[J]. Petroleum Science Bulletin, 2024, 9(2): 297-306.]
[3]	朱婷, 赵来军, 王旭磊. 基于贝叶斯网络的危险化学品道路运输事故分析[J]. 安全与环境学报, 2016, 16(2): 53-60.
	[Zhu T, Zhao L J, Wang X L. Analysis of the hazardous material transportation accidents based on the Bayesian network method[J]. Journal of Safety and Environment, 2016, 16(2): 53-60.]
[4]	Li M T, Zhao L J. Using data mining and complex network analysis for causal analysis of impact factors in hazardous chemical accidents[J]. Journal of Industrial and Management Optimization, 2024, 20(8): 2795-2819.
[5]	Ni Z J, Zhang Q. Mining the critical factors of hazardous material road transportation accidents from Chinese investigation reports[J]. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 2023, 24(10): 11121-11131.
[6]	柳长森, 郭建华, 金浩, 等. 基于WSR方法论的企业安全风险管控模式研究: “11·22”中石化管道泄漏爆炸事故案例分析[J]. 管理评论, 2017, 29(1): 265-272.
	[Liu C S, Guo J H, Jin H, et al. Research on the safety risk management and control model for enterprise based on WSR methodology: Case analysis of“11·22”Sinopec oil pipeline leakage and explosion accident[J]. Management Review, 2017, 29(1): 265-272.]
[7]	张冠湘, 邓思琪, 付余, 等. 风险控制视角下的危险品物流管理策略研究[J]. 软科学, 2017, 31(8): 91-94.
	[Zhang G X, Deng S Q, Fu Y, et al. Management strategy research of hazmat logistics under the perspective in risk control[J]. Soft Science, 2017, 31(8): 91-94.]
[8]	燕冰川, 冯庆善, 张宏, 等. 脆弱性评价方法及其在油气管道行业的应用[J]. 油气储运, 2023, 42(6): 612-623.
	[Yan B C, Feng Q S, Zhang H, et al. Vulnerability assessment method and its application in oil and gas pipeline industry[J]. Oil & Gas Storage and Transportation, 2023, 42(6): 612-623.]
[9]	Khan R U, Yin J B, Mustafa F S, et al. A data centered human factor analysis approach for hazardous cargo accidents in a port environment[J]. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2022, 75: 104711.
[10]	Ding S, Pan X, Zuo D J, et al. Uncertainty analysis of accident causality model using Credal Network with IDM method: A case study of hazardous material road transportation accidents[J]. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 2022, 158: 461-473.
[11]	张来斌, 胡瑾秋, 肖尚蕊, 等. 深部地下空间储能安全与应急保障技术现状与发展趋势[J]. 石油科学通报, 2024, 9(3): 434-448.
	[Zhang L B, Hu J Q, Xiao S R, et al. Current status and development trend of safety and emergency support technology for energy storage in deep underground spaces[J]. Petroleum Science Bulletin, 2024, 9(3): 434-448.]
[12]	Jiang W, Han W. Analysis of “2·28” KEEPER chemical industries hazardous chemical explosion accident based on FTA and HFACS[J]. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 2018, 15(10): 2151.
[13]	付净, 聂方超, 刘虹, 等. 基于FTA-24Model的化工事故原因分析[J]. 安全与环境工程, 2019, 26(6): 159-165.
	[Fu J, Nie F C, Liu H, et al. Cause analysis of chemical accidents based on FTA-24Model[J]. Safety and Environmental Engineering, 2019, 26(6): 159-165.]
[14]	张博, 梁永图, 魏雪梅, 等. 不同边界条件下掺氢对天然气管网运行工况的影响分析[J]. 石油科学通报, 2024, 9(5): 808-818.
	[Zhang B, Liang Y T, Wei X M, et al. Analysis of the influence of hydrogen blending on the operation of natural gas pipeline network under different boundary conditions[J]. Petroleum Science Bulletin, 2024, 9(5): 808-818.]
[15]	Li C Y, Ren J, Wang H Y. A system dynamics simulation model of chemical supply chain transportation risk management systems[J]. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 2016, 89: 71-83.
[16]	陈伟珂, 张欣. 危化品储运火灾爆炸事故多因素耦合动力学关系[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2017, 27(6): 49-54.
	[Chen W K, Zhang X. Dynamic relationship between multi coupling risk factors of hazardous chemical storage and transportation fire and explosion accidents[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2017, 27(6): 49-54.]
[17]	李圆圆, 孙李傲, 袁文燕, 等. 考虑恐怖袭击下危险品运输安全监管的演化博弈与稳定性分析[J]. 中国安全生产科学技术, 2022, 18(5): 18-24.
	[Li Y Y, Sun L A, Yuan W Y, et al. Evolutionary game and stability analysis of safety supervision on hazmat transportation considering terrorist attack[J]. Journal of Safety Science and Technology, 2022, 18(5): 18-24.]
[18]	李鹏飞, 唐旭, 姜钰卿, 等. 全面风险管理对油气企业经营绩效的影响[J]. 石油科学通报, 2022, 7(2): 270-280.
	[Li P F, Tang X, Jiang Y Q, et al. The impact of comprehensive risk management on the operating performance of oil and gas enterprises[J]. Petroleum Science Bulletin, 2022, 7(2): 270-280.]
[19]	Hou J, Gai W M, Cheng W Y, et al. Hazardous chemical leakage accidents and emergency evacuation response from 2009 to 2018 in China: A review[J]. Safety Science, 2021, 135: 105101.
[20]	Leveson N. A new accident model for engineering safer systems[J]. Safety Science, 2004, 42(4): 237-270.
[21]	顾基发, 高飞. 从管理科学角度谈物理-事理-人理系统方法论[J]. 系统工程理论与实践, 1998, 18(8): 1-5.
	[Gu J F, Gao F. To see Wuli Shili renli systems approach from the view of management science[J]. Systems Engineering-Theory & Practice, 1998, 18(8): 1-5.]
[22]	寇晓东, 顾基发. 物理-事理-人理系统方法论25周年回顾: 溯源、释义、比较与前瞻[J]. 管理评论, 2021, 33(5): 3-14.
	[Kou X D, Gu J F. A twenty-five-year review of WSR methodology: Origin, connotation, comparison and outlook[J]. Management Review, 2021, 33(5): 3-14.]
[23]	周欢, 刘家国. 港口危化品物流风险管理的WSR模型研究[J]. 管理评论, 2021, 33(5): 142-151.
	[Zhou H, Liu J G. The port logistics risk management of hazardous chemicals based on WSR model[J]. Management Review, 2021, 33(5): 142-151.]
[24]	Li Q, Zhang L Y, Zhang L M, et al. Exploring multi-level motivations towards green design practices: A system dynamics approach[J]. Sustainable Cities and Society, 2021, 64: 102490.
[25]	Eskandari D, Gharabagh M J, Barkhordari A, et al. Development of a scale for assessing the organization’s safety performance based fuzzy ANP[J]. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2021, 69: 104342.
[26]	蒋含明, 胡灵芝, 陈洪章, 等. 突发扰动事件下原油供应链风险模拟与调控研究: 基于系统动力学方法[J]. 系统工程理论与实践, 2025, 45(1): 326-344.
	[Jiang H M, Hu L Z, Chen H Z, et al. Simulation and regulation study on crude oil supply chain risk under disruptive events: Based on system dynamics approach[J]. Systems Engineering-Theory & Practice, 2025, 45(1): 326-344.]
[27]	王成军, 郭辉. 基于博弈论组合赋权的油气场站安全脆弱性SD仿真[J]. 油气储运, 2022, 41(1): 55-62.
	[Wang C J, Guo H. SD simulation on safety vulnerability of oil and gas stations based on combination weighting of game theory[J]. Oil & Gas Storage and Transportation, 2022, 41(1): 55-62.]
[28]	杨瑞, 孙猛, 赵慧莹, 等. 基于系统动力学的中国中长期原油需求情景模拟[J]. 油气储运, 2024, 43(11): 1294-1305.
	[Yang R, Sun M, Zhao H Y, et al. Simulation of medium-and long-term crude oil demand scenarios in China based on system dynamics[J]. Oil & Gas Storage and Transportation, 2024, 43(11): 1294-1305.]

序号	事故名称	事故原因	风险因素
1	2023宁夏银川富洋烧烤店“6·21”特别重大燃气爆炸事故	相关企业违法违规经营，有关部门履职不到位，作业人员专业知识不足。	W	设备合规性、应急设备投入
			S	政府监管力度、教育培训力度
			R	作业人员操作技能、负责人安全意识
2	2022安阳市河南宇天化工有限公司“1·5”较大爆炸事故	工作人员违规作业，企业安全生产意识淡薄，安全生产属地管理职责落实不到位。	W	设备合规性
			S	政府监管力度、企业监管力度、作业的合理性
			R	作业人员安全意识、负责人安全意识
3	2021沧州市南大港东兴工业区鼎睿石化有限公司“5·31”火灾事故	违规动火作业，非法储存，事故单位安全生产主体责任不落实。	W	设备合规性、防护设施投入
			S	政府监管力度、改为作业的合理性、企业监管力度
			R	负责人安全意识、作业人员操作技能、作业人员安全意识
…	…	…	…	…
86	2020沈海高速温岭段“6·13”液化石油气运输槽罐车重大爆炸事故	驾驶员超速驾驶，旋转式防撞护栏未按设计施工，不符合相关技术标准要求。	W	设备合规性
			S	教育培训力度、政府监管力度、作业合理性
			R	作业人员安全意识、负责人安全意识

序号	事故名称	事故原因	风险因素
1	2023宁夏银川富洋烧烤店“6·21”特别重大燃气爆炸事故	相关企业违法违规经营，有关部门履职不到位，作业人员专业知识不足。	W	设备合规性、应急设备投入
			S	政府监管力度、教育培训力度
			R	作业人员操作技能、负责人安全意识
2	2022安阳市河南宇天化工有限公司“1·5”较大爆炸事故	工作人员违规作业，企业安全生产意识淡薄，安全生产属地管理职责落实不到位。	W	设备合规性
			S	政府监管力度、企业监管力度、作业的合理性
			R	作业人员安全意识、负责人安全意识
3	2021沧州市南大港东兴工业区鼎睿石化有限公司“5·31”火灾事故	违规动火作业，非法储存，事故单位安全生产主体责任不落实。	W	设备合规性、防护设施投入
			S	政府监管力度、改为作业的合理性、企业监管力度
			R	负责人安全意识、作业人员操作技能、作业人员安全意识
…	…	…	…	…
86	2020沈海高速温岭段“6·13”液化石油气运输槽罐车重大爆炸事故	驾驶员超速驾驶，旋转式防撞护栏未按设计施工，不符合相关技术标准要求。	W	设备合规性
			S	教育培训力度、政府监管力度、作业合理性
			R	作业人员安全意识、负责人安全意识

维度	因素	编号
物理维度	设备合规性	W1
	防护设施投入	W2
	应急设施投入	W3
事理维度	政府监管力度	S1
	企业监管力度	S2
	教育培训力度	S3
	作业合规性	S4
	应急处置	S5
人理维度	作业人员操作技能	R1
	负责人安全意识	R2
	作业人员安全意识	R3

维度	因素	编号
物理维度	设备合规性	W1
	防护设施投入	W2
	应急设施投入	W3
事理维度	政府监管力度	S1
	企业监管力度	S2
	教育培训力度	S3
	作业合规性	S4
	应急处置	S5
人理维度	作业人员操作技能	R1
	负责人安全意识	R2
	作业人员安全意识	R3

一级指标	一级指标权重	影响因素(二级指标)	局部权重	全局权重
W	0.264	设备合规率	0.424	0.112
		防护设施投入	0.267	0.070
		应急设施投入	0.310	0.082
R	0.244	作业人员操作技能	0.500	0.122
		负责人安全意识	0.063	0.015
		作业人员安全意识	0.437	0.107
S	0.492	政府监管力度	0.333	0.164
		企业监管力度	0.085	0.042
		教育培训力度	0.035	0.017
		作业合规率	0.405	0.199
		应急处置	0.140	0.069

Please choose a citation manager

Content to export