Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety 164 (2018) 325–330

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ecoenv

Failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA) for the security of the supply T
chain system of the gas station in China
⁎
Yongkui Liua, , Zhaojun Konga, Qing Zhangb
a
School of Management and Economics, Beijing Institute of Technology, 100081 Beijing, China
b
Hiwing Group of CASIC, West Road South Fourth Ring, Xincun Street Fengtai District, Beijing 100074, China

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: With the popularity of automobiles, gas stations carry more gas supply and security risks. In order to effectively
Gas station analyze the security of the supply chain system of the gas station, this study set the gas station as the center, then
Failure modes and effects analysis the upstream suppliers and downstream consumers were classified into three sub-systems, and the whole system
Entropy weight method was analyzed by using the method of failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA). A total of 50 typical cases of
Risk priority number
accidents at gas stations in China in the past 20 years have been collected from different websites, uses entropy
weight method to deal with the cause of system failure modes, obtains and sorts the risk priority number (RPN).
The type and failure cause of the most frequent accidents is the static electricity-induced explosion, and the
effective measures to alleviate and deal with the accidents are put forward. The results of the study will help
management and gas station staffs reasonably prevent gas station safety risks.

1. Introduction
With the frequent occurrence of chemical hazards, it is particularly
important to analyze the reliability and safety of the system in which it
is located. With the rapid development of the national economy, the
growth of the GDP has caused the people to have a stronger purchasing
power, especially outstanding performance is the purchase of cars. The
excessive number of cars has led to an increasingly serious traffic jam in
the city, which has led the state to regulate and implement or intend to
implement the car purchase restriction policy in multiple places. The
battery life of new energy electric vehicles is not enough to support
long-distance driving, and the construction of supporting charging
stations has not kept pace. In this situation, traditional car gas stations
still maintain a relatively stable position. The oil has flammable, ex-
plosive and other characteristics, once a fire, explosion, and other ac-
cidents occurred, easily lead to serious casualties, economic losses and
environmental pollution (Wu and Zhang, 2012). Analyzing the safety of
the gas station system will effectively avoid the occurrence of major
dangerous accidents, provide consumers with convenience, and reduce
their damage to the natural environment.
The current research on the safety of gas stations mainly includes
gas station pollution problems (Zheng et al., 2018; Li et al., 2017) and
the health problems of gas station attendants (Iyanda, 2018) derived
from them, research on oil and gas recovery technologies (He et al.,
2016), long-distance pipeline transport safety (Cui et al., 2016), ex-
perimental simulation of underground oil tank explosion accidents (Xu
et al., 2016), as well as analysis of the risk index of fire explosions in
city gas stations (Lv and Ma, 2015) et al. The research methods are
more commonly used in the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and Grey
Relational Analysis (GRA), the AHP is used to derive the weights of the
evaluation indicators, and the GRA is used to determine the correlation
between the evaluation data series and the standard data series, then
obtain the level of gas station safety (Deng et al., 2011); fuzzy theory,
establishes a mathematical model for the comprehensive assessment of
gas station safety based on fuzzy mathematics theory, and validates by
example, provides an effective comprehensive evaluation method for
gas station safety evaluation (Zhu et al., 2005); FAHP-FCE models,
analyses the risk factors affecting the safety of gas stations from the four
aspects of safety management, equipment and facilities status, en-
vironmental factors, and personnel quality, then establishes the safety
evaluation index system of gas station (Ma et al., 2014). This paper sets
up the upstream and downstream supply chain of gas stations as the
whole system, and uses the method of failure modes and effects analysis
(FMEA) (Mikulak et al., 2008; Stamatis, 2003) to effectively analyze the
safety of subsystems in the gas station supply chain, ranking of each
failure mode is determined by risk priority number (RPN) which is
calculated by multiplying the values of three risk factors: occurrence
probability (O), severity (S), and detection probability (D), then

⁎
Correspondence to: School of Management and Economics, Beijing Institute of Technology, No.5 South Street Zhongguancun Haidian District, Beijing 100081,
China.
E-mail address: liuyongkui_bit@163.com (Y. Liu).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2018.08.028
Received 27 June 2018; Received in revised form 6 August 2018; Accepted 8 August 2018
Available online 18 August 2018
0147-6513/ © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Y. Liu et al.
Fig. 1. Gas station supply chain system diagram.
comprehensively evaluate its security. To further validate the evalua-
tion results and the core failure causes of the supply chain system
combined with case analysis. Therefore, the analysis results of this ar-
ticle will enable people to more deeply know and understand the safety
of the gas station supply chain system, as well as more targeted prevent
the possibility of gas station accidents.
2. Methods
2.1. Supply chain of gas station
Build and analyze a supply chain for the gas stations as the center,
suppliers as the upstream and consumers as the downstream (Fig. 1).
Suppliers include China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC),
Sinopec Group (SG) and China National Offshore Oil Corporation
(CNOOC). In the normal state, consumers mainly concentrate on diesel
vehicles and petrol vehicles traveling in cities. At present, its suppliers
are fixed for each gas station, that is, CNPC's gas stations will only sell
CNPC's oil, the same as SG and CNOOC. Whereas the suppliers need
tankers to transport the oil and deliver to various gas stations.
According to the steps of the FMEA, set a circulatory system A which
contains that the tanker truck was loaded from the oil refinery and
transported to the gas station, and the gas station's staff installed ga-
soline on the customer's car. The system A is decomposed and mainly
includes three large blocks, tanker truck, oil reservoir and gasoline
dispenser. Elaborate the operating process of System A, that is, tanker
truck transports gasoline to the gas station and unloads the oil to oil
reservoir, gasoline dispenser and oil reservoir are connected, and the oil
in oil reservoir is pumped into the gasoline dispenser, and uses the
refueling gun to inject it into the consumers’ cars.
2.2. Failure mode of gas station supply chain system
2.2.1. Tanker truck transporting oil
The process of tanker truck transporting oil, which includes tanker
trucks taking oil from a refinery and transporting the oil to a gas station,
is set to Process I. The main causes of the process I failure modes are oil
leakage, fire and explosion.
Reasons for oil spillage in tank trucks include problems with the
quality of product accessories, non-standard operations, and aging due
to years of use. The main causes of fire are encountered by static
electricity or other fire sources, once the electrostatic discharge volume
exceeds the minimum ignition energy of oil vapor, it will ignite the oil
product, and failure to do so will lead to an explosion. At the same time,
if the filling is too full, it will cause the tank to expand and also cause an
explosion.
2.2.2. Oil reservoir loading oil
The process of the tanker unloads the oil and stores the oil in the
reservoir until refueling the vehicle is set to Process II. The main causes
of process II failure modes are oil leakage, fire, explosion, and failure to
operate properly.
The main reason for oil leakage during the unloading process is the
operational error. For example, an oil spill accident in Guangzhou was
caused by lack of experience of operators. When the unloading pipe was
not fully tightened, the unloading valve was opened, resulting in a large
area of oil leakage. A gas station in Qingdao, the driver thought that the
oil had been unloaded and loosened the handbrake. As a result, the first
326
Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety 164 (2018) 325–330
flange of the oil discharge pipe damaged, and the pipeline pressure was
too high and broken, resulting in a lot of waste of oil. The cause of fire
and explosion is similar to that when transporting oil. The reason for
the failure to operate properly is due to the sudden necrosis of some
parts, such as oil discharge nozzles, oil unloading valves, and reservoir
openings.
2.2.3. Gasoline dispenser refueling
The process of pumping the oil from the reservoir and refueling the
consumer's car through the fueling gun is set as Process III. The main
causes of process III failure modes are mainly oil leakage, blockages,
fire and explosion.
The main reason for oil leakage when refueling a car is that the pipe
of the fueling gun is seriously damaged, the phenomenon of fracture
occurs under the moderate external force, and causing oil leakage. The
blockage is due to the accumulation of chemicals inside the oil for a
long time and the muzzle is blocked. The causes of fire and explosion
are the same as Process I and Process II.
2.2.4. Failure detection
For static electricity-induced failure, it can be removed by an expert
through an electrostatic ground device. As for the failure caused by oil
leakage, during the process I, it is necessary for professionals to test
materials and processes and select products that meet safety and use
standards. In addition, components must be regularly overhauled to
determine if they are necrotic or aging. In Process II, workers need to be
trained regularly to prevent them from taking up posts without fully
mastering the operational procedures and causing unnecessary losses.
Process III requires periodic inspections of the tubing to see if it is da-
maged or deteriorated. As for the failure caused by fire, in the case of
preventing static electricity, it is necessary to pay attention to the ex-
istence of other fire sources in the surrounding environment. As for the
failure caused by the explosion, in addition to the emergency plan,
periodically check the status of fire-fighting facilities such as fire hy-
drants and fire extinguishers.
2.3. Risk assessment of gas station supply chain system security
2.3.1. FMEA
The FMEA is a preventive method, in which a group of appointed
individuals analyses the structures of the product, as well as its man-
ufacturing process in order to identify all locations and areas, in which
potential errors, defects, and problems may arise, and then determines
actions aimed at eliminating those errors. It is a versatile method of
analysis, which can be used in various industries, in particular in the
automotive, machinery and steel industries (Dudek-Burlikowska, 2011,
2017; Fattahi and Khalilzadeh, 2018).
2.3.2. Entropy weight method
Entropy weight method is an objective method of empowerment
(Wu, 2012). In the specific use process, entropy weight method uses the
information entropy to calculate the entropy weight of each index ac-
cording to the degree of its variation, and then corrects the its weight
through entropy weight, so as to obtain a more objective weight of the
index, proceed as follows (Li et al., 2010; Liu, 2009):
(1) The ratio of parameter index value, j, and the i sample is calculated
by Eq. (1):
m
Pij =x ij / ∑ x ij
i=1 (1)
In the formula (1), Pij is the ratio of the i sample under the j index
(i = 1, 2, …, m; j = 1, 2, …, n); x ij is the observed data of the j index
m
in the i sample; ∑i = 1 x ij is the sum of all samples observed data of
the j index.
Y. Liu et al. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety 164 (2018) 325–330

(2) Then, the information entropy, Ej , is computed by Eq. (2)

m
Ej = −(lnm)−1 × ∑ PijlnPij
i=1 (2)
In the formula (2), (lnm)−1 is a Boltzmann constant K in Shennong
information entropy (m is the total number of samples). If Pij = 0 ,
m
then Pij lnPij = 0 . ∑i = 1 PijlnPij is the sum of products of the ratio of the
i sample and its natural logarithm under the j index (i = 1,2,…,m;
j = 1, 2, ⋯, n). The smaller the value of Ej is, the bigger the effect of
j index is.
(3) The degree of variation, Gj , is computed by Eq. (3)
Fig. 2. Distributions of failure phases and failure causes.
Gj = 1−Ej ??1 ≤ j ≤ n? (3)
In the formula (3), Gj is the degree of variation for the j index, the which failure process the remaining 39 cases belong to and obtain the
smaller the value of Ej is, the bigger the value of Gj is. corresponding failure mode. The types of gas station accidents can be
(4) Eq. (4) is used to calculate the entropy weight, Qj , of each para- classified as leaks, fires, explosions and others, among which other
meter types include high-altitude crashes, traffic accidents and illegal opera-
n tion. The causes of these accidents can be divided into 7 types: electrical
Qj =Gj / ∑ Gj appliances, open flames, welding, engines, static electricity, non-stan-
j=1 (4) dard operation, and non-personal factors. Among the above 40 cases,
n there were 13 fires, accounting for 32.5%; 4 leakages, accounting for
In the formula (4), is the sum of the variations in all j in-
∑ j = 1 Gj
10%; 16 explosions, accounting for 40%; and 7 other types, accounting
dexes, Qj is the entropy weight of the j index, the bigger the value of Qj
for 17.5%. Among them, in the gas station supply chain system, a total
is, the bigger the entropy weight of j index is.
of 2 failure cases in process I, accounting for 5%, which the failure
modes are other modes (traffic accident); a total of 24 failure cases in
2.3.3. RPN
process II, accounting for 60%, the failure modes of 4 cases are the
Calculate the RPN for each failure cause and rank them. First, re-
leakage, 14 cases are the explosion, 4 cases are the fire, and 2 cases are
spectively set three indicators of the occurrence probability (O), se-
others (high altitude crash and illegal operation); a total of 14 failure
verity (S), and detection probability (D), then, establish the relationship
cases in process III, accounting for 35%, the failure modes of 9 case are
RPN = O × S × D according to the scoring criteria (Silva et al., 2014,
the fire, 2 cases are the explosion, and 3 cases are others (traffic acci-
see Table 1), and assign values to O, S, and D at the same time, then
dent, oil quality, and illegal operation) (Fig. 2).
each value is converted by an entropy weight method and a consistency
check is performed.
3. Results
2.4. Case collection
3.1. RPNs of gas station supply chain system
Search for “gas station accidents” through Google, and filter news
about gas station accidents in China in the past 20 years. Totally collect Based on the criteria in Table 1, the calculated RPNs for gas station
50 cases and classify them to eliminate similar phenomena (such as supply chain system failures are shown in Table 2.
leakages, fires, explosions, etc.) and causes (such as static electricity, If the relationship between the indicators is rather vague, the con-
spilling, etc.), 40 typical cases left. In order to explore the failure pro- strained random weighting method (Song et al., 2013) can be used. The
cess and failure mode of 40 cases, the steps of processing method are as relationship among O, S, and D is clearer, and weights can be calculated
follows: Firstly, number them as case 1 to case 40 in accordance with through routine steps (Liu, 2009). The results obtained by multiplying
the chronological order of occurrence. Secondly, classify the failure the calculated weights (formula (1) to formula (4)) with the indicators
process and determine the failure mode according to the settings in of each failure mode are shown in Table 3. For example, the weight
Section 2.2 and the detailed accident description of 40 cases (refer to (QO ) of the indicator O calculated by the entropy weight method is 0.13,
Supplementary data). For example, Case 1: When the gas station staff and the all scores of O in Table 2 multiplied by the weight 0.13 are the
filled up the fuel tank and pulled the gun out, the electric circuit leaked values of O in Table 3, same as the calculation of S (QS = 0.282 ) and D
because the vehicle did not turn off, causing a potential difference be- (QD = 0.588). The sorting of the results and the corresponding failure
tween the fuel tank port and the oil gun to discharge and sparking, then causes are shown in Fig. 3.
ignited the gasoline vapor. Because Case 1 is an accident that occurs It can be seen from the above research results that the maximum
during the refueling process, it belongs to Process Ⅲ, and the failure RPN corresponds to a misfire phenomenon during the refueling process,
mode caused by the accident type is the fire. And so on, determine and the minimum RPN corresponds to the blockage phenomenon of the

Table 1
Scoring standards of O, S, D.
O S D

Occurrence probability Rating Severity Rating Detection probability Rating

High-risk factor, hardly be avoided 9–10 Extremely serious 9–10 Extremely low 10
High-risk factor, recurring 7–8 Very serious 8 Very low 7–9
The risk factor is moderate, happens occasionally 5–6 More serious 7 Lower 5–6
The risk factor is low, rarely occurs 3–4 General serious 5–6 Higher 3–4
The risk factor is extremely low, hardly occurs 1–2 Relatively slight 4 Extremely high 1–2
Slight 2–3
No effect 1

327
Y. Liu et al. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety 164 (2018) 325–330

Table 2 sources caused the explosion of static electricity, open flames, electrical
Unverified RPNs. appliances, etc. In order to verify whether this result is worth learning,
Process Failure mode O S N RPN it is necessary to further analyze with the real case study.

Ⅰ Leakage 1 6 5 30
Fire 3 8 1 24 3.2. RPNs of case study
Explosion 5 10 7 350
Ⅱ Leakage 2 6 1 12
Classified and summarized according to the gas station's supply
Fire 4 8 3 96
Explosion 9 10 7 630 chain system process and the type of accident (failure mode), the
Failure to operate properly 2 1 1 2 analysis shows that the probability of oil tanker's problems in the oil
Ⅲ Leakage 2 6 1 12 transportation process is relatively small, and it is generally con-
Blockage 3 1 1 3 centrated on traffic accidents and the caused secondary hazards. Gas
Fire 5 8 7 280
Explosion 9 10 3 270
stations connecting tankers to unload oil and refueling cars have a
higher probability of an explosion. The process of gasoline dispensers
refuel the car did not reveal any leakage, indicating that any leakage in
Table 3 this process could be converted into a fire or an explosion. In order to
RPNs verified by the entropy weight method. verify the accuracy of the analysis results, it needs to be combined with
case data for quantitative analysis. Calculate the RPNs of the case
Process Failure mode O S N RPN
analysis according to the above steps, and sort the results (Fig. 4).
Ⅰ Leakage 0.52 1.69 2.94 2.58 The largest RPN is Case 19, followed by Case 28, and the fourth is
Fire 0.39 2.26 0.59 0.52 Case 16, which all belong to the type of explosion in Process II, which is
Explosion 0.26 2.82 4.12 3.01
consistent with the analysis above. Further analysis of the causes re-
Ⅱ Leakage 0.78 1.69 0.59 0.78
Fire 0.65 2.26 1.76 2.58
vealed that the cause of Case 19 was “a large amount of static electricity
Explosion 0.39 2.82 4.12 4.52 accumulation caused electrostatic discharge, ignition of oil vapor, and
Failure to operate properly 0.52 0.28 0.59 0.09 resulted in fire and explosion”. Case 28 occurred because “the driver
Ⅲ Leakage 0.78 1.69 0.59 0.78 illegally inserted the oil pipe directly into the oil storage tank. When the
Blockage 0.39 0.28 0.59 0.06
employees went to close the valve, the clothes they wear created static
Fire 0.65 2.26 4.12 6.03
Explosion 0.26 2.82 1.76 1.29 electricity and caused a flaming explosion”. The reason for the occur-
rence of Case 16 was that “There was no static grounding device in the
unloading, which caused an explosion due to electrostatic accumulation
that could not be exported during unloading”. All of them are explo-
sions caused by static electricity, which provides some basis for gas
stations to improve equipment and standard operation.
The smallest RPNs are concentrated in case 25, case 32, and case 36.
Comparison Fig. 2 and Supplementary data show that it belongs to
other types of process III, the fire of process III, and other types of
process II. Looking back at these three cases, the cause of the incident in
Case 25 was “After oil truck driver Sun unloaded the oil, he started the
vehicle without observing the surrounding environment. The front end
of the protective net after the right front wheel plundered and got in-
volved Zhao in the bottom of the car body, who measured on the right
side of the tanker. The left rear wheel was rolled over from Zhao who
died after being rescued”. The reason for the occurrence of Case 32 was
Fig. 3. RPNs sorting. that “the man wanted to give up life and light the fueling gun”. Case 36
occurred because “the construction unit has not had the relevant qua-
fuel gun during gasoline dispenser working. So, more attention should lifications, has not tested the safety conditions of the tank, the protec-
be paid to the cause of the fire in the refueling process and prevent it. At tive equipment does not have the safety performance, and arbitrarily
the same time, as far as possible in the unloading process in accordance expanded the scope of construction and operated illegally without ob-
with the rules and regulations and work norms, timely control the taining the instruction of clearing tank”. All the above three cases are of

Fig. 4. RPN sort of each case.

328
Y. Liu et al.
the type that the frequency of occurrence is not high, the severity of the
operation according to the specification is lower, and the difficulty of
detection is relatively easy, the obtained results are in line with their
actual meaning.
Through the above case analysis, it can be seen that in the gas
station supply chain system, special attention should be paid to the
system security of each link related to the gas station. In addition to
tanker accidents, they must be standardized during the unloading
process. Gas station staff should always pay attention to whether there
are people or things that are harmful to the gas station and stop their
actions in a timely manner. If a fire occurs, learn to use a fire extin-
guisher in time.
4. Discussion
The safe operation of gas stations is very important to the society.
Based on the analysis results of this paper, the following suggestions
can be made: (1) When transporting oil with tanker trucks, it is ne-
cessary to pay attention to checking whether some parts of the tanker
are normal and avoid the phenomenon of oil leakage. At the same time,
the driver must pay attention to the surrounding environment and
avoid passing through the fire source during the driving process. (2)
When unloading the oil, pay attention to whether the static electricity is
removed and whether there are other fire sources near the gas station.
Check regularly whether the fire extinguishing facilities can be used
normally. (3) Strict training must be performed for the operators to
maintain awareness of potential Security risks at any time, and to re-
mind consumers to prohibit cell phones and smoking when refueling. It
can start from the following aspects: focus on staff's safety education,
the overall quality of people to implement safety training, grasp the
safety behavior of staff and implement the safety system, carry out
safety activities against staff's ideological obstacles, pay attention to
staff's safety supervision, do a good job of safety production manage-
ment, and strengthen their safety responsibility. (4) Strengthen the
construction of hardware configuration. Install some devices that can
prevent the volatilization of oil and gas from being avoided in the gas
station, and configure some alarm system devices to prevent the oc-
currence of fire and explosion accidents. (5) Define safety management
responsibilities and strengthen supervision and management mechan-
isms. Efforts should be made to ensure the emergency response plan for
gas stations from the institutional mechanism, improve the rules and
regulations of the safety production, and strictly implement the re-
sponsibility system. (6) Increase the promotion of gas station safety
knowledge. In addition to the employees working at gas stations, per-
sonnel who come to refuel will also cause some safety problems. The
notices on the safety management of gas stations can be posted as
posters in a prominent position to prevent people from committing acts
harmful to the safety of gas stations.
There are many safety risk issues at gas stations in real life, as
mentioned in Section 1, different research methods used for specific
research objects, which have made an outstanding contribution to im-
proving the safety of gas stations. Compared to the above studies, dif-
ferent from the research on the safety of equipment such as tank trucks,
fuel tanks or oil storages, evaluate the safety of gas station from the
perspective of the gas station supply chain system has the advantages of
more comprehensive coverage, wider control range, and more clear
safety focus, as well as can more fully understand and master the se-
curity status of the system. Different from the safety level of gas stations
evaluated by fuzzy theory, AHP, GAP and FAHP-FCE evaluation
models, analyze by using FMEA and entropy weight method combined
with actual cases can make the research results (the failure mode and
cause of specific process) more intuitive and accurate, provide a theo-
retical and practical basis for the relevant personnel (managers, su-
pervisors, staffers, etc.) and other developing countries to evaluate,
prevent and protect the safety of the gas station supply chain system
from a macro level. If we can further apply the research methods at gas
329
Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety 164 (2018) 325–330
stations to other areas of environmental safety, it will inevitably pro-
mote the continuous improvement of the overall environmental safety
factor. As for how to refer to and select the safety evaluation methods of
the gas station in other fields, the researcher needs to determine ac-
cording to the actual characteristics of the research object.
Although there are some discoveries revealed by these studies, there
are also limitations. First, whether the selected cases are representative
and whether they can effectively cover different regions in China;
Second, whether the rating system for gas station failures is reasonable
and whether it has a strong subjective bias; Third, whether the proposal
is comprehensive and has a good guiding effect on the safety of the gas
station system. The above deficiencies are also expected to gradually
improve in the next study.
5. Conclusion
In an environment where people are increasingly dependent on
automobiles, it is necessary to analyze the safety of gas station supply
chain systems. This paper uses the FMEA and the entropy weight
method to process the data and analyze the whole system of the gas
station, find the result that the type and failure cause of the most fre-
quent accidents is the static electricity-induced explosion. This allows
the system-related personnel to clearly recognize which areas are ac-
cident-prone, and correspondingly, what preventive measures should
be taken to reduce the degree of threat to the security of life and
property, and the destructive of the natural environment. Combined
with actual cases, it is further clarified that it is particularly important
to prevent fires and explosions occurring in the daily operation of gas
stations. It also provides effective advice and theoretical support for gas
station construction and management.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by National Social Science Foundation of
China (No. 16BGL175) and National Natural Science Foundation of
China (No. 71473015). All the authors would like to express our sincere
gratitude to the sponsor.
Appendix A. Supporting information
Supplementary data associated with this article can be found in the
online version at doi:10.1016/j.ecoenv.2018.08.028.
References
Cui, G., Li, Z.L., Yang, C., 2016. Study on the interference between cathodic protection
systems of the gas station and long distance trunk pipeline. Anti-Corr. Methods Mater.
63 (5), 405–413.
Deng, Z.Z., Liu, D.J., Jiang, D.F., 2011. Application of grey relational analysis and ana-
lytic hierarchy process in the gas station safety evaluation. Oil Gas Stg. Trans. 30
(11), 811–815.
Dudek-Burlikowska, M., 2011. Application of FMEA method in enterprise focused on
quality. J. Achiev. Mater. Manuf. Eng. 45 (1), 89–102.
Dudek-Burlikowska, M., 2017. Monitoring of the production processing in a metallurgical
company using FMEA method. Arch. Metall. Mater. 62 (4), 2089–2094.
Fattahi, R., Khalilzadeh, M., 2018. Risk evaluation using a novel hybrid method based on
FMEA, extended MULTIMOORA, and AHP methods under fuzzy environment. Saf.
Sci. 102, 290–300.
He, Y.H., Zhi, G.Q., Li, G.F., 2016. Research on oil and gas recovery technology of gas
stations. Environ. Eng. 35 (34), 905–909.
Iyanda, A.A., 2018. Serum heavy metal levels in teenagers currently or formerly em-
ployed as gas station attendants. Bangladesh J. Med. Sci. 17 (2), 224–229.
Li, P.Y., Wu, J.H., Qian, H., 2010. Groundwater quality assessment based on entropy
weighted osculating value method. Int. J. Environ. Sci. 27 (3), 31–34.
Li, X.P., Shi, X.M., Wang, A., 2017. Heavy metals contamination and assessment in gas
station dust of Xi’an, a mega-city of China. Environ. Earth Sci. 76 (7), 1–10.
Liu, T.Z., 2009. Theory of Enterprise Security Management. Beijing Institute of
Technology Press, Beijing, pp. 66–67.
Lv, H.L., Ma, R., 2015. Analysis of the risk index of the explosion in city gas station. Fire
Sci. Technol. 34 (7), 954–956.
Ma, Q.C., Zhang, J.W., Zhang, L.B., 2014. Evaluation of gas station safety based on FAHP-
FCE model. Safety 21 (6), 18–21 (26).
Y. Liu et al.
Mikulak, R.J., McDermott, R., Beauregard, M., 2008. The Basics of FMEA. CRC Press,
Florida, USA.
Stamatis, D.H., 2003. Failure Mode and Effect Analysis: FMEA from Theory to Execution.
ASQ Quality Press, Milwaukee, pp. 21–44.
Silva, M.M., de Gusmão, A.P.H., Poleto, T., e Silva, L.C., Costa, A.P.C.S., 2014. A multi-
dimensional approach to information security risk management using FMEA and
fuzzy theory. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 34 (6), 733–740.
Song, C.X., Zhang, R., Zhou, A.X., Hong, M., 2013. Water security risk assessment of the
Yellow River Basin based on constrained-random weighting method and cloud
model. J. Risk Anal. Crisis Resp. 3 (4), 201–209.
Wu, N.L., 2012. The Maximum Entropy Method, vol. 32. Springer Science & Business
330
Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety 164 (2018) 325–330
Media, Medford, pp. 1–9.
Wu, Z.Z., Zhang, S.Z., 2012. Research progress on risk acceptance criteria for long-dis-
tance oil and gas pipelines. J. Risk Anal. Crisis Resp. 2 (3), 188–194.
Xu, G., Zhang, J.Z., Zhao, W.Q., Zhang, W.P., 2016. Experimental simulation of under-
ground oil tank explosion accidents in fuel filling station. Chin. Saf. Sci. J. 26 (4),
50–54.
Zheng, H., Kong, S.F., Xing, X.L., Mao, Y., Hu, T.P., Ding, Y., et al., 2018. Monitoring of
volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from an oil and gas station in northwest China for
1 year. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 18 (7) (4567–459).
Zhu, X.Y., Yang, H.G., Zhao, J.P., Guo, J.P., 2005. Research on safety evaluation method
of the gas station based on fuzzy theory. Chin. Saf. Sci. Technol. 1 (6), 51–54.