Description: To predict the risk of the accident at the potentially hazardous facility, the two-level mathematical model with random input parameters have been proposed. It is based on the system-structural approach, according to which the potentially dangerous object have been defined as the system consisting of different subsystems. The relationship between the vector of indicators of the subsystem and the vector of its parameters using multi-factor linear regression mathematical dependencies has been described. Application of the mathematical model provides the opportunity to determine basic qualities of the man-made component, as a complex system and allows to get the quantitative assessment of these qualities. By changing parameters of the subsystems and the interdependence of vectors of the subsystem indices preconditions and the risk of the accident on the potentially dangerous object has been determined. The prediction of the development of preconditions for the accident of the potentially dangerous object by changing values of time regression coefficients has been carried out. Numerical value of indicators has been determined by the computer simulation of dangerous processes of the potentially dangerous object and their functional elements in the application of the computer interactive systems of the engineering analysis. According to simulation results, the algorithm for managing the risk of the accident and the safety of a potentially dangerous object has been used, which includes performing certain procedures and the continuous monitoring.
Keywords: complex system potentially dangerous object, computer simulation, engineering analysis, multi-factor linear mathematical dependencies, random input parameters, subsystem vector of indicators, risk-oriented approach
1. Departament strahovogo fondu dokumentacіyi Ukrderzharhіvu (2018), “Derzhavnij reyestr PNO” [State Registry PNO], available at: www.sfd.archives.gov.ua/page4.html.
2. Kachinskij, A.B. and Ivanyuta, S.P. (2012), “Ocinka ekonomichnogo riziku nadzvichajnih situacij v oblastyah Zahidnogo regionu Ukrayinii” [Estimation of the economic risk of emergencies in the areas of western region of Ukraine], Regionalna ekonomika, No. 2, pp. 62-67.
3. DSNS Ukrayini (2017), “Analitichnij oglyad stanu tehnogennoyi ta prirodnoyi bezpeki v Ukrayini za 2016 rik” [Analytical review of the state of man-made and Natural Safety in Ukraine for 2016], Kyiv, 433 р., available at: www.dsns.gov.ua/files/2017/8/18/Analit%20 dopovid/1%20stan.pdf.
4. Henli, Dzh. and Kumamoto, H. (1984), “Nadezhnost' tehnicheskih sistem i ocenka riska” [Reliability of technical systems and risk assessment], Mashinostroyenie, Moscow, 528 р.
5. Marushak, A.M., Kyryljuk, R.М. and Okipnjak, D.А. (2011), “Ocinyuvannya riziku avarij v sistemi bezpeki promislovih ob’yektiv” [Assessment of the risk of accidents in the security system of industrial facilities], State and regions, рр. 516-519.
6. Trush, O.O., Stepanenko, V.D., Serghijechko, M.Gh. and Oleksandrov, N.O. (2005), “Metod prognozuvannja velichini riziku viniknennja nadzvichajnih situacіj tehnogennogo harakteru” [Method of forecasting the magnitude of the risk of emergency situations of anthropogenic nature], Information Processing Systems, No. 7(47), pp. 157-160.
7. Shevchenko, R.І., Taraduda, D.V. and Paljuh, V.V. (2012), “Analіz metodologіchnoї bazi z ocіnki riziku viniknennja avarії na potencіjno nebezpechnih obyektah” [Analysis of the methodological base to assess the risk of an accident at potentially hazardous facilities], Zbіrka naukovih prac' NUCZU, No. 16, NUCZU, Kharkіv, рр. 138-148.
8. Chemical industries association (1977), A Guide to Hazard and Operability Studies, Chemical industry safety and health council of the Chemical industries association, 42 p.
9. Mock, R. and Van Mahnen, J. (1999), Risk Analysis Methods in Processing Industry, Risk Analysis: Opening the Process. Proceedings of the SRA-E 8th Conference October 11-14, 1998, Vol. 2, ISPN, Fontenay-aux-Roses, Paris, pp. 1145-1156.
10. Nakagawa, M. Shirao, T. and Kawasaki, Y. (2005), The New Methodology of Quantitative Process Hazard Analysis (MQPHA), PSAM 5 – Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Management, Vol. 1, Universal Academy Press, Inc.,Tokyo, pp. 307-313.
11. Powers, G.J. and Tompkins, F.C. (1973), Synthesis Strategy for Fault Trees in Chemical Processing, СЕР Loss Prevention. A. IChemE, Vol. 8.
12. Poliezhaev, A.M., Kovzhoha, S.O., Malko, O.D. and Pysariev, A.V. (2011), “Shchodo vyznachennia krytychnoi velychyny pokaznyka zahrozy vynyknennia nadzvychainoi sytuatsii v umovakh vypadkovosti informatsii” [Concerning the definition of the critical value of the indicator of the threat of an emergency situation in the event of a random information], Systems of Arms and Military Equipment, No. 1(25), pp. 180-182.
13. Golubeva, N.V. (2006), “Osnovy matematicheskogo modelirovanija sistem i processov” [Fundamentals of mathematical modeling of systems and processes], Omskij gosudarstvennyj universitet putej soobshhenija, Omsk, 95 р.
14. Stepanishin, V.M. and Tisovs'kij, L.O. (2012), “Pobudova modelі koreljacіjnogo analіzu dlja doslіdzhennja bagatofaktornih procesіv і javishh” [Construction of a correlation analysis model for the investigation of multifactorial processes and phenomena], Vіsnik Nacіonal'nogo unіversitetu “L'vіvs'ka polіtehnіka”, No. 736, рр. 133-138.
15. (1982), “Spravochnik po ekonomiko-matematicheskim modelyam i metodam” [Handbook of economic and mathematical models and methods], Tehnika, Kyiv, 208 р.
16. Morozov, A.O. (2015), “Naukovoyі osnovi vprovadzhennja rizik-orіyentovanogo pіdhodu v upravlіnnі tehnogenno-ekologіchnoju bezpekoju (za materіalami naukovoї dopovіdі na zasіdannі Prezidіyi NAN Ukraїni 17 chervnja 2015 r.” [Scientific fundamentals of implementation of a risk-oriented approach in the management of technogenic and ecological safety (according to the materials of the scientific report at the session of the Presidium of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, June 17, 2015], Vіsnik NAN Ukraїny, No. 8, рр. 24-31.