4.7 Article

Proposed model of potential accident process at hydrogen refueling stations based on multi-level variable weight fuzzy Petri net

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HYDROGEN ENERGY
卷 47, 期 67, 页码 29162-29171

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2022.06.213

关键词

Hydrogen refueling station (HRS); Bow-tie analysis; Multi-level variable weight fuzzy; Petri net; Accident evolution

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [71901029]
  2. Science and Tech-nology Program of Beijing Education Commission

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper presents a model using a multi-level variable weight fuzzy Petri net to analyze the evolution of hydrogen leakage and explosion accidents, and deduce the causes and paths of the accidents. The usability and effectiveness of the model are verified through an example of an urban hydrogen refueling station accident.
Hydrogen is becoming more popular as a fuel for vehicles. It is stored and dispensed at hydrogen refueling stations. Once the hydrogen in hydrogen refueling stations leaks, it easily forms a combustible cloud, and can explode by encountering a spark. It is therefore important for the safe and stable operation of hydrogen refueling stations to analyze the evolution of a leakage and explosion accident, clarify the causes and processes of the ac-cident, and prevent the spread of risks. This paper proposes a model using multi-level variable weight fuzzy Petri net. On the basis of hierarchical consideration of the develop-ment of the accident, it adds a variable weight factor, which can quantify information in the development of the accident. According to the calculated results, the evolutionary path of risk and the most likely initial cause of the accident are deduced. Finally, taking the leakage and explosion accident of an urban hydrogen refueling station as an example, the usability and effectiveness of the model are verified.(c) 2022 Hydrogen Energy Publications LLC. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据