Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Sustainability 14 14174
Sustainability 14 14174
Article
Bridge Fire Vulnerability Hierarchy Assessment Based on the
Weighted Topsis Method
Qingfu Li, Hao Guo *, Jianpeng Zhou and Mengyuan Wang
School of Water Conservancy Science and Engneering, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, China
* Correspondence: ghfw@gs.zzu.edu.cn
Abstract: With the increasing traffic volume and gradually higher percentage of hazardous goods
transport vehicles, bridge fire accidents are more frequent and the resulting losses are striking.
Therefore, the assessment of fire risk in bridges has important implications. In this paper, we identify
and establish a bridge fire vulnerability indicator system based on vulnerability theory from three
aspects: the susceptibility to fire, its resistance to reversal, and its exposure during a fire. On the basis
of grading fire vulnerability and making a description of the status of each grade, the corresponding
index values of each grade were established by the method of assigning values to the qualitative
indexes, and then the empowering TOPSIS method was applied to calculate the relative closeness of
each indicator to the ideal status, so as to establish a bridge fire vulnerability grade evaluation model.
Finally, using a bridge as an example, it was verified that the assessment method was reasonably
feasible by calculating the relative proximity of the bridge to the ideal condition, resulting in a fire
vulnerability grade of I for the bridge, which corresponded to its fire history.
Keywords: bridge fires; vulnerability theory; entropy weight method; TOPSIS; risk assessment
probability of the bridge being exposed to fire, the sensitivity of the bridge to fire, and the
Sustainability 2022, 14, 14174 ability of the bridge to resist the damage caused by fire. Exposure refers to the time3 of the
11
probability of the bridge being exposed to fire, the sensitivity of the bridge to fire, and the
bridge is exposed to fire and the range affected by the fire; sensitivity refers to the degree
ability of the bridge to resist the damage caused by fire. Exposure refers to the time the
of response of the bridge when it suffers from fire; and art degrees refers to the fire re-
bridge is exposed to fire and the range affected by the fire; sensitivity refers to the degree
sistance of athe
to response
fire and bridge. The mechanism of action of the three to
is shown in Figure 1.
of of range affected
the bridge whenby it
the fire;
suffers sensitivity
from fire;refers
and art the degree
degrees of response
refers of the
to the fire re-
bridge when it suffers from fire; and art degrees refers to the fire resistance
sistance of a bridge. The mechanism of action of the three is shown in Figure 1. of a bridge.
The mechanism of action of the three is shown in Figure 1.
Figure 2.
Figure Bridge fire
2. Bridge fire vulnerability
vulnerability indicator
indicator system.
system.
relatively simple, does not need to introduce additional functions and variables, and the
programming language is easy to implement. The method is designed as a program for
engineering projects, which can make the evaluation work more conveniently and has the
advantages of economy and efficiency. However, as the influence degree of each index on
the result may not be the same, this paper adopts the weighted TOPSIS method to calculate
the weight of each index through the AHP and entropy weight method, and then calculates
the relative proximity degree. In this way, the importance of each index to bridge fire
vulnerability can be considered and the results are more reliable.
where aij is the importance of index i relative to index j, which is assigned according to the
1–9 scale.
(2) Normalized judgment matrix
To normalize the elements in the judgment matrix:
ωij0
ωi = ∑m 0 , i = 1, 2, 3, . . . , m
j=1 ωij (2)
ωij0 = aij/ ∑m aij , j
i =1 = 1, 2, 3, . . . , m
λmax − n
CI = (3)
n−1
CI
CR = (4)
RI
where λmax is the largest characteristic root of the judgment matrix; RI is the consistency
index, which can be obtained by looking up the table according to the order of the judgment
matrix. If CR > 0.1, the judgment matrix is not a consistency matrix and needs to be
reconstructed.
3.2.2. The Entropy Weight Method to Calculate the Index Objective Weights
The entropy weighting method is used to judge the discrete degree of the index by
calculating the entropy value of the index. The larger the entropy value, the greater the
discrete degree of the index and the greater the corresponding weight. It is an objective
weighting method. The calculation steps are as follows:
Sustainability 2022, 14, 14174 6 of 11
(1) There are m evaluation indicators and n objects to be evaluated, thus constructing
an initial judgment matrix X:
x11 x12 ... x1m
x21 x22 ··· x2m
X = . (5)
.. .. ..
.. . . .
xn1 xn2 · · · xnm
where xij represents the value corresponding to the jth index of the ith evaluation object.
(2) Determine positive and negative indicators. A positive index means that, the larger
the index value, the more favorable it is to treat the evaluation object, and vice versa if it is
a negative index. If it is a negative indicator, it will be converted into a positive indicator
through the formula. The conversion formula is as follows:
where xˆ represents the converted value and xj,max represents the maximum value of the jth
column.
(3) The initial judgment matrix X is normalized to obtain the judgment matrix A:
xij − min x1j , x2j , . . . , x3j
xeij = (7)
max x1j , x2j , . . . , x3j − min x1j , x2j , . . . , x3j
where xeij is the element value in the normalized judgment matrix A, min x1j , x2j , . . . , xnj
is the minimum value of the element in the jth column of the initial judgment matrix,
and max x1j , x2j , . . . , xnj is the maximum value of elements in column j.
(4) To calculate the specific gravity, the formula is as follows:
xeij
Pij = n (j = 1, 2, . . . , m) (8)
∑i=1 xeij
d j = 1 − ej (10)
where ej is the entropy value of the jth index, k = ln(1n) , and if Pij is 0, then let Pij ln Pij be 0;
dj is the information entropy redundancy of jth indicator.
(6) Calculate the indicator weights:
dj
ωj = n (11)
∑ j=1 d j
where β is the subjective influence coefficient, which is taken as 0.5 in this paper.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 14174 7 of 11
(2) Determine the positive ideal solution and the negative ideal solution; the positive
ideal solution refers to the most ideal state of the evaluation object and the negative ideal
solution refers to the most unfavorable state of the evaluation object.
Z + = Z1+ , Z2+ , . . . , Zm
+
= max Zij ( j = 1, 2, . . . , m) (14)
Z − = Z1− , Z2− , . . . , Zm
−
= min Zij (j = 1, 2, . . . , m) (15)
max Zij is the maximum value of the jth column in the judgment
In the formula,
matrix Z and min Zij is the minimum value of the jth column.
(3) Calculate the distance to the positive and negative ideal solutions.
v
un 2
Di+ = t ∑ ωj Zj+ − Zij
u
(i = 1, 2, . . . , m) (16)
j=1
v
un 2
Di− = t ∑ ωj Zj− − Zij
u
(i = 1, 2, . . . , m) (17)
j=1
(2) Calculate the relative proximity; the greater the relative proximity, the closer to the
positive ideal solution.
D−
Si = − i + (18)
Di + Di
The weight of the indicator I1 ∼ I10 is calculated by Formulas (2)~(7) and the results
are shown in Table 3.
Index I1 I2 I3 I4 I5 I6 I7 I8 I9 I10
ω 0.0953 0.1256 0.0705 0.0719 0.0915 0.1777 0.1126 0.0802 0.1077 0.0672
Sustainability 2022, 14, 14174 8 of 11
After the weight of each indicator is obtained, the relative proximity of the four levels
can be calculated by Formulas (8)~(13). The closer the relative proximity is to 1, the better
the result. Si results are shown in Table 4. According to the calculated relative proximity of
each grade, the bridge vulnerability grade standard can be established; it can be seen in
Table 5.
4. Case Analysis
A bridge with a total length of 1293 m adopts a two-way, six-lane design with a design
speed of 100 km/h. It was completed and opened to traffic in 1998. The bridge structure is
a prestressed reinforced concrete box-type continuous beam. With an average daily traffic
flow of more than 10,000 vehicles, there is a high possibility of collisions. There was a
bridge fire accident caused by the explosion of an oil tanker, so the bridge has little fire
history, the database for fire risks is not perfect, and the perception of fire is low. It can be
seen from Table 1 that the fire sensitivity and exposure of the bridge are relatively high.
Therefore, taking this bridge as an example, the fire vulnerability assessment of the bridge
is carried out.
Figure
Figure 3. Euclidean
3. Euclidean distance
distance of1,YI,1 ,and
of Y I, and
IV.IV.
the fire. 3 The time required for fire rescue should be considered when selecting the bridge
site and the detour distance of the bridge should be shortened. At the same time, the fire
rescue emergency response mechanism should be improved. 4 Irreversible components in
the ecological environment around the bridge should be reduced and the impact of fire on
the entire bridge system should be minimized.
5. Conclusions
In the first quarter of 2022, a total of 219,000 fires were reported across the coun-
try, a total of 625 people died due to fires, and the direct property loss was as high as
1.52 billion yuan. Countless shocking facts have made people realize how vulnerable hu-
man society is in the face of fire. Fire can have a devastating effect on structural works such
as bridges. If the fire risk can be assessed scientifically and accurately, countermeasures
and aftermath plans can be prepared in advance to minimize the losses caused by the fire.
Through this study, the following conclusions can be drawn:
(1) The combination of vulnerability theory and bridge fire enriches the bridge fire risk
theory and brings new ideas for risk identification. This paper analyzes the mechanism
of bridge fire vulnerability from three aspects of bridge sensitivity, exposure, and stress
resistance, and constructs bridges with 10 bridge fire disaster factors including bridge
structure type and repair difficulty. This is called a fire vulnerability indicator system.
(2) By consulting the relevant literature, the bridge fire vulnerability is divided into
four grades, the TOPSIS method is used to calculate the relative proximity of the four grades
to the ideal state, and the bridge fire vulnerability grade evaluation standard is established
according to the calculation results. Considering that the TOPSIS method ignores the
different degrees of influence of each index on the evaluation object, the entropy weight
method is combined with the TOPSIS method and the weight of each index is first calculated
by the entropy weight method, which makes the calculation result of the TOPSIS method
more reasonable.
(3) Taking a bridge as an example, according to the actual data of the bridge, the relative
proximity to the ideal state is calculated and compared with the grade evaluation standard
obtained above; it is concluded that the bridge fire vulnerability grade of the bridge is
grade IV. Combined with the fire history of the bridge, it shows that the method in this
paper is more feasible.
(4) In this paper, the bridge fire vulnerability is divided into four grades. However,
with the analysis of bridge fire accidents and further research into the disaster-causing
factors, the index system needs to be better and the grade standards need to be further
refined to reflect the actual situation, with complexity and comprehensiveness. The index
system of bridge fire vulnerability is established using the Delphi method. Based on
the advice of many senior experts in the industry, the index system was established.
Accordingly, an unavoidable artificial subjective factor of ground interference appeared.
In the process of calculating the relative proximity by the TOPSIS method, the assignment
of qualitative indexes still cannot completely avoid the influence of subjective factors,
so the objectivity of this method is not ideal. In addition, this method can only provide
the vulnerability level of bridge fire of specific engineering projects at present and cannot
identify the direct causes of bridge fire. Therefore, the fire treatment module can also be
added and the disaster-causing factors can be identified and predicted by grey prediction,
least square method, and BP neural network, and the corresponding specific prevention
measures can be provided to guide the bridge fire prevention work.
Author Contributions: Writing—original draft, H.G.; Writing—review & editing, Q.L., J.Z. and M.W.
All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 14174 11 of 11
References
1. Ju, X.; Liu, X.; Zhao, X. Research on Fire Scene of Railway Bridge Based on Large Eddy Simulation Method. Bridge Constr. 2019,
49, 78–83.
2. Liu, X.; Li, R.; Yu, C.; Guo, H. Preliminary Assessment Method for Structural Safety of Concrete Bridges after Fire. J. Guangxi
Univ. 2022, 47, 62–73.
3. Jeoung, C.; Kim, W.S.; Gil, H.B.; Lee, I.K.; Yun, S.H. Bridge Fire Risk Assessment on the Highway in South Korea. Adv. Mater. Res.
2014, 1025, 854–857. [CrossRef]
4. Ann, H.; Choi, Y.; Lee, J.H.; Jang, Y.I.; Kong, J.S. Semiquantitative Fire Risk Grade Model and Response Plans on a National
Highway Bridge. Adv. Civ. Eng. 2019, 2019, 5154309. [CrossRef]
5. Kim, M.O.; Kim, K.; Yun, J.H.; Kim, M.K. Fire risk assessment of cable bridges for installation of firefighting facilities. Fire Saf. J.
2020, 115, 103146. [CrossRef]
6. Zhang, X.; Ma, R.; Chen, A. Probabilistic Assessment Method of Bridge Risk under Vehicle Fire. J. South China Univ. Technol. 2019,
47, 108–118.
7. Liu, M.; Huang, G.; Lu, Z. Fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method for bridge fire risk. J. Civ. Eng. Manag. 2018, 35, 8–14.
8. Wang, X.; Zhang, L.; Tao, G.; Wang, X. Bridge fire toughness Assessment Model based on TOPSIS method. China Saf. Sci. J. 2018,
28, 59–64.
9. Zhang, L.; Duan, X.; Niu, T.; Liu, Y. Research on Safety Management of Tunnel Construction Based on Vulnerability Analysis. J.
Saf. Environ. 2017, 17, 1863–1868.
10. Zhang, X.; Li, T.; Fang, C.; Wang, Z. Comprehensive Measurement of Urban Vulnerability. Geogr. Geo-Inf. Sci. 2016, 32, 89–93.
11. Lukai, C. Research on The Evaluation of Urban Spatial Vulnerability under Typhoon Disasters; Harbin Institute of Technology: Harbin,
China, 2021.
12. Hou, G.; Liu, W.; Li, L.; Ma, X.; Mu, X.; Liu, Y. Vulnerability Analysis of Subway Construction Safety System Coupled with
Multiple Risk Factors. China Civ. Eng. J. 2022, 55, 111–119.
13. Yang, H.; Chen, W.; Gao, Z. Research on the Vulnerability Factors of Prefabricated Building Construction System. J. Qingdao Univ.
Technol. 2021, 42, 35–43.
14. Djemai, M.C.; Bensaibi, M.; Zellat, K. Seismic vulnerability assessment of bridges using analytical hierarchy process. IOP Conf.
Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2019, 615, 012106. [CrossRef]
15. Han, X.; Cui, S.; Cui, E.; Su, J.; Zhu, B. Bridge Seismic Risk Assessment Based on Failure Probability Method. J. Southwest Jiaotong
Univ. 2018, 53, 696–703.
16. Giuliani, L.; Crosti, C.; Gentili, F. Vulnerability of bridges to fire. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Bridge
Maintenance, Safety and Management (IABMAS), Lake Como, Italy, 8–12 July 2012; pp. 1565–1572.
17. Li, J.; Xu, F. Bridge Fire Vulnerability Evaluation Based on Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation Method; WTC2021; China Communications
Press Co., Ltd.: Beijing, China, 2021; pp. 1036–1042.
18. Wang, X.; Zhang, J.; Zhu, Y.; Liu, X.; Fang, H.; Wang, C. Research on Bridge Fire Risk Assessment System Based on Vulnerability Theory;
China Public Security(Academy Edition): Beijing, China, 2017; pp. 25–30.
19. Ghorabaee, M.K.; Amiri, M.; Zavadskas, E.K.; Antucheviciene, J. A new hybrid fuzzy MCDM approach for evaluation of
construction equipment with sustainability considerations. Arch. Civ. Mech. Eng. 2018, 18, 32–49. [CrossRef]
20. Manman, L.; Wudhikarn, R. Using the Best-Worst Method to Develop Intellectual Capital Indicators in Financial Service Company.
In Proceedings of the 2022 Joint International Conference on Digital Arts, Media and Technology with ECTI Northern Section
Conference on Electrical, Electronics, Computer and Telecommunications Engineering (ECTI DAMT & NCON), Chiang Rai,
Thailand, 26–28 January 2022; pp. 81–86.
21. Ratapol, W. An approach to enhancing the human capital of enterprises associated with cooperative education. Int. J. Learn.
Intellect. Cap. 2015, 12, 61.