Third-Party Damage Factors Analysis and Control Measures of Daqing-Harbin Oil Pipeline

Li Xin Wei; Li Yan Han

doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.411-414.2527

Paper Titles

Building Carbon Emissions Trading System for China under the Experience of EU Emissions Trading System
p.2505

A Novel Approach for Product Design Scheme Evaluation with Non-Functional Attributes
p.2511

The Regional Evaluation Model of Scientific and Technological Innovation Level
p.2516

Study on the Construction of China Development Bank Co's Main Businesses Framework Based on ERM
p.2521

Third-Party Damage Factors Analysis and Control Measures of Daqing-Harbin Oil Pipeline
p.2527

The Contribution of Information Technology to Economic Growth
p.2533

Engineering of Xinjiang Non Electricity Area and the Project Risk Assessment
p.2537

Empirical Study on Emergency Inter-Organizational Information Communication Barriers for Expressway Emergency
p.2542

Natural Science Based Training in Quality Management for Engineering Managers
p.2552

HomeApplied Mechanics and MaterialsApplied Mechanics and Materials Vols. 411-414Third-Party Damage Factors Analysis and Control...

Third-Party Damage Factors Analysis and Control Measures of Daqing-Harbin Oil Pipeline

Abstract:

The third-party damage is the main factor of Daqing-Harbin oil pipeline failure. This paper analyzes a variety of factors causing the third-party damage, and establishes the fault tree model. By analyzing the minimal cut set and structures importance degree of fault tree, the main factors of the third-party damage that caused pipeline failure are determined. The main factors are as follows: Lack of pipeline conditions, human vandalism, the frequency of line patrol and management systems, lack of public education and the legal concept, and construction operation injury. On the basis of analyzing the factors, the precautions of the third-party interference are proposed.

You might also be interested in these eBooks

View Preview

Info:

Periodical:

Applied Mechanics and Materials (Volumes 411-414)

Pages:

2527-2532

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.411-414.2527

Citation:

Cite this paper

Online since:

September 2013

Authors:

Li Xin Wei, Li Yan Han

Keywords:

Control Measure, Fault Tree Analysis (FTA), Pipeline, Prevention, Third-Party Damage

Export:

RIS, BibTeX

Price:

Permissions CCC:

Request Permissions

Permissions PLS:

Request Permissions

Сopyright:

Citation:

References

[1] XU Tao-long, YAO An-lin, JIANG Hong-ye, LI You-lv. Key Technology Research of Oil and Gas Pipeline Third-Party Damage Risk Assessment. Journal of Oil and Gas Technology, 2011, 33(2): 150~154.

Google Scholar

[2] DONG Yu-hua, YU Da-tao, Gao Hui-lin, ZHOU Jing-en. Fault Tree Analysis of Oil and Gas Pipelines. Oil & Gas Storage and Transportation, 2002, 21(6): 15~17, 29.

Google Scholar

[3] Huo Chun-yong, Dong Yu-hua, Gao Hui-lin. The Fault Tree Research of Long Distance Natural Gas Pipeline. Natural Gas Industry, 2005, 25(10): 99~102.

Google Scholar

[4] W. Kent Muhlbauer. Pipeline Risk Management Manual [M]. Second edition. Beijing: China Petrochemical Press, 2005: 19 ~ 33.

Google Scholar

[5] ZHANG Zhen, LI Zhu-xin, SHI Jin. Third-Party Damage Fault Tree Analysis of Long Distance Oil and Gas Pipeline. Oil & Gas Storage and Transportation, 2008, 27(6): 37~40.

Google Scholar

[6] YOU Yun, Gao Long-zhu, LIU Jing-cheng, FAN Zhao-ting. Fault Tree Analysis Technology in the Application of City Gas Pipeline Safe Operation. Oil-Gas field Surface Engineering, 2010, 29(1): 20~22.

Google Scholar

[7] Liao Ke-xi, Yao An-lin, Zhong Huai-xin. Natural Gas Pipeline Failure Fault Tree Analysis. Natural Gas Industry, 2001, 21(2): 94~96.

Google Scholar

[8] Cao Bin, Liao Ke-xi, Luo Min, Yang Hong. Third-Party Damage Factor Analysis of High Consequence Areas in Sichuan and Chongqing Pipeline. Natural Gas and Oil, 2011, 29(2): 12~14.

Google Scholar

[9] Yao Hui-quan, Feng Wei. West-East Gas Pipeline Third-Party Damage Risks and Control Measures. Oil & Gas Storage and Transportation, 2010, 29(5): 384~386, 389.

Google Scholar