1 Introduction
2 Basic analysis thought on fire safety site selection
-
The layout of temporary houses and facilities shall meet the requirements of fire
-
Prevention, fire fighting and safe evacuation of personnel on site.
-
The fire protection spacing between the inflammable and explosive dangerous
-
Goods warehouse and the construction in process shall not be less than 15 m, the fire prevention distance between the combustible material yard and its processing yard, fixed fire operation yard and the construction in process shall not be less than 10 m, and the fire prevention distance of other temporary housing, temporary facilities and construction in process shall be not less than 6 m [23].
-
The layout is scientific and reasonable, and the second handling is reduced.
-
Division of construction area and temporary occupancy of site shall meet the requirements of overall construction deployment and construction process, reduce mutual interference, and make full use of existing buildings and facilities to serve the project construction, so as to reduce the construction cost of temporary facilities [24].
-
Temporary fire safety points shall be set up in the decoration stage of construction in process.
-
Temporary fire safety points shall be located on the long side of temporary premises arranged in groups and on the long side of construction in process.
-
The width of temporary fire safety point shall meet the normal operation requirements of fire fighting equipment, and shall not be less than 6 m. The net distance between temporary fire safety point and scaffolding outside the construction in process shall not be less than 2 m, and shall not exceed 6 m.
3 Determination of safety risk grade based on lec evaluation method
4 Construction and solution of fire safety site selection
4.1 Construction of fire safety site selection model
4.2 Model solving algorithms
5 Optimal selection of scheme
5.1 Description of analytic hierarchy process
5.2 Analytic hierarchy process site selection steps
-
The judgement matrix A is normalized by column:\(b_{ij} = {{a_{ij} } \mathord{\left/ {\vphantom {{a_{ij} } {\sum {a_{ij} } }}} \right. \kern-\nulldelimiterspace} {\sum {a_{ij} } }}\);
-
The normalized matrix is summed by row:\(c_{i} = \sum {b_{ij} } \,\,(i = 1,2,3 \cdots n)\);
-
\(c_{i}\) isnormalized: Weight is obtained \(W^{(2)} = (\omega_{1}^{(2)} , \cdots ,\omega_{i}^{(2)} )\), among \(\omega_{i}^{(2)} = {{c_{i} } \mathord{\left/ {\vphantom {{c_{i} } {\sum {c_{i} } }}} \right. \kern-\nulldelimiterspace} {\sum {c_{i} } }}\) (8);
-
Find the maximum eigenvalue corresponding to weight \(W^{(2)}\):\(\lambda_{\max } = \frac{1}{n}\sum\limits_{i} {\left( {\frac{{\left( {AW^{(2)} } \right)_{i} }}{{\omega_{{\text{i}}}^{(2)} }}} \right)}\)
-
Calculate and measure the index \(CI\) of judging the degree of inconsistency of
-
Select average random consistency index \(RI\)[32], and judge random consistency
6 Application case analysis
No | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | … | 26 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Abscissa (Km) | 0.627 | 1.816 | 1.599 | 2.485 | … | 7.967 |
Ordinate (Km) | 3.227 | 3.333 | 2.622 | 2.618 | … | 0.930 |
No | Risk point | Risk description | Assessment | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
L | E | C | D | Level | |||
1 | Living office area | Careless use of fire, smoking | 3 | 10 | 40 | 1200 | Level I |
2 | Placement of the housing | Electrical fire, production open fire operation, spontaneous combustion | 6 | 6 | 15 | 540 | Level I |
3 | Woodworking shed | Open fire production, spontaneous combustion | 3 | 3 | 7 | 42 | Level IV |
4 | Steel processing shed | Electrical fire | 3 | 3 | 15 | 135 | Level III |
5 | High-speed Railway Mountain Park | Open fire production | 1 | 6 | 7 | 42 | Level IV |
6 | Multistory parking area | Electrical fire, careless use of fire | 1 | 6 | 7 | 42 | Level IV |
7 | Distribution room | Electrical fire | 1 | 2 | 7 | 14 | Level V |
8 | District a public toilet | Open fire production | 3 | 6 | 7 | 126 | Level III |
9 | Public plaza | Open fire production | 1 | 6 | 7 | 42 | Level IV |
10 | Material stack site | Spontaneous combustion and smoking | 6 | 6 | 15 | 540 | Level I |
11 | Woodworking shed | Open fire production, spontaneous combustion | 6 | 3 | 7 | 126 | Level III |
12 | Steel processing shed | Electrical fire | 6 | 6 | 15 | 540 | Level I |
13 | Resettlement housing | Electrical fire, production open fire operation, spontaneous combustion | 6 | 6 | 40 | 1440 | Level I |
14 | Distribution room | Electrical fire | 3 | 2 | 7 | 42 | Level IV |
15 | High-speed railway mountain park | Open fire production | 1 | 6 | 7 | 42 | Level IV |
16 | Sewage Treatment Plant | Open fire production | 3 | 6 | 7 | 126 | Level III |
17 | Parking lot | Open fire production | 3 | 6 | 7 | 126 | Level III |
18 | Zhigu Huaxiang Park | Open fire production | 1 | 6 | 7 | 126 | Level III |
19 | Protective green space | Spontaneous combustion | 1 | 3 | 7 | 21 | Level IV |
20 | Protective green space | Spontaneous combustion | 1 | 3 | 7 | 21 | Level IV |
21 | Living office area | Careless use of fire, and smoking | 3 | 10 | 40 | 1200 | Level I |
22 | Sports venues | Open fire production, and careless use of fire | 3 | 10 | 15 | 450 | Level I |
23 | Steel processing shed | Electrical fire | 6 | 6 | 15 | 540 | Level I |
24 | Resettlement housing | Electrical fire, production open fire operation, spontaneous combustion | 6 | 6 | 40 | 1440 | Level I |
25 | Material storage place | Spontaneous combustion and smoking | 10 | 6 | 7 | 420 | Level I |
26 | Multistory parking area | Electrical fire, careless use of fire | 3 | 6 | 7 | 126 | Level III |
6.1 Determine the number of fire safety points
6.2 Data analysis in case algorithms
Source of risk | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Abscissa (KM) | 0.627 | 1.816 | 3.145 | 4.324 | 4.727 | 6.181 | 7.179 | 7.174 | 7.258 | 7.918 |
Ordinate (KM) | 3.227 | 3.333 | 1.210 | 0.91 | 1.626 | 0.232 | 1.675 | 1.004 | 0.278 | 1.649 |
Demand | 35 | 25 | 20 | 40 | 20 | 40 | 30 | 35 | 25 | 25 |
Alternative point | Demand | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | |
1 | 16 | 17 | 16 | 18 | 20 | 18 | 20 | 17 | 19 | 21 |
2 | 20 | 16 | 21 | 21 | 19 | 15 | 17 | 17 | 17 | 20 |
3 | 17 | 17 | 15 | 15 | 17 | 21 | 17 | 20 | 19 | 18 |
4 | 18 | 21 | 20 | 17 | 18 | 21 | 18 | 15 | 16 | 18 |
5 | 16 | 16 | 20 | 16 | 18 | 18 | 16 | 18 | 19 | 18 |
6 | 19 | 20 | 20 | 16 | 16 | 18 | 16 | 16 | 18 | 17 |
7 | 17 | 19 | 16 | 20 | 17 | 17 | 21 | 19 | 17 | 18 |
8 | 19 | 21 | 17 | 19 | 16 | 21 | 21 | 19 | 19 | 18 |
9 | 19 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 16 | 17 | 19 | 19 | 20 | 20 |
10 | 20 | 18 | 20 | 16 | 17 | 16 | 18 | 18 | 16 | 20 |
Fire safety point | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Fixed investment(10000yuan) | 93 | 97 | 95 | 96 | 96 | 94 | 99 | 93 | 92 | 95 |
Capacity ceiling | 140 | 150 | 130 | 130 | 130 | 150 | 160 | 140 | 150 | 130 |
6.3 The solution process of examples
Scheme one | Scheme two | Scheme three | Scheme four | Scheme five | Scheme six | Scheme seven | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Site selection | 2, 6, 9 | 1, 8, 9 | 1, 6, 9 | 1, 6, 10 | 1, 4, 10 | 1, 4, 7 | 2, 4, 7 |
Coverage | 2 → 1, 2, 3 6 → 4, 5, 6 9 → 7, 8, 9, 10 | 1 → 1, 2, 3 8 → 5, 7, 8, 10 9 → 4, 6, 9 | 1 → 1, 2 6 → 3, 4, 5, 6 9 → 7, 8, 9, 10 | 1 → 1, 2 6 → 3, 4, 5, 6, 9 10 → 7, 8, 10 | 1 → 1, 2 4 → 3, 4, 5, 6 10 → 7, 8, 9, 10 | 1 → 1, 2 4 → 3, 4, 5, 6 7 → 7, 8, 9, 10 | 2 → 1, 2 4 → 3, 4, 5, 6 7 → 7, 8, 9, 10 |
Total cost | 748 | 743 | 744 | 747 | 749 | 753 | 757 |
Time of arrival (h) | 0.61 | 0.74 | 0.66 | 0.63 | 0.46 | 0.42 | 0.41 |
6.4 Evaluation of fire safety point site selection scheme based on analytic hierarchy process (AHP)
7 Research conclusion
-
The coverage of fire safety points only involves the primary risk sources which are extremely vulnerable to fire safety accidents, there are some limitations in considering other demand points which are not easy to occur fire safety accidents in the construction site, which can only reduce the losses caused by fire safety accidents to a certain extent. Therefore, taking the coverage of fire safety points into accounting the demand points of the whole construction site needs further study.
-
In the article site selection model, only four representative factors are considered to participate in site selection selection, but it is not comprehensive enough; Secondly, the model assumes that there are no other fire safety points in the site, however, in the actual layout, fire safety points will be considered in the site. Therefore, with the deepening of the research, how to make the theoretical model closer to the actual site selection optimization problem has become the focus of researchers.
-
The improvement of particle swarm optimization still has great research potential. The reasonable setting of parameters is studied. On the one hand, it promotes the development of algorithm, on the other hand, it can serve multi-objective optimization problems better. At the same time, the problem is simplified in the construction of set selection optimization model. There are some shortcomings in solving practical engineering projects. In the future research, the content of the model shall be further enriched to make the model closer to the actual situation of the project.