通过大量文献调研对目前管道风险评价中常用的三种方法——定性分析、半定量分析和定量分析进行了详细的阐述，并针对由于管道外腐蚀引起失效的评价问题提出了相应的模型和方法。结果表明：在定性评价和半定量评价中，过多地依赖历史数据库和工程经验，使得管道风险评价具有明显的局限性和主观性；而对于定量评价来说，只着重考虑“高危险”因素带来的风险，且缺少基础评价模型和动态评价模型，使得管道定量评价无法从全影响因素的角度考虑管道的潜在经济损失。随着管道完整性及管道大数据技术的推进，其全因素定量风险评价成为了可能，但这也对数据对齐、数据筛选以及数据处理等相关的方法和模型的研究提出了更高的要求。

Through a large number of literature investigations, three methods commonly used in pipeline risk assessment (qualitative analysis, semi-quantitative analysis and quantitative analysis) were elaborated in detail, and corresponding models and methods were proposed for the evaluation of failures caused by external corrosion of pipelines. The results show that qualitative evaluation and semi-quantitative evaluation relied too much on historical database and engineering experience, which made pipeline risk assessment have obvious limitations and subjectivity. The quantitative evaluation only focuses on the risk caused by the "high risk" factor, and lacks the basic evaluation model and dynamic evaluation model, so that the quantitative evaluation of pipelines could not consider the potential economic loss of pipelines from the perspective of all-influence factors. With the advancement of pipeline integrity and pipeline big data technology, its full-factor quantitative risk assessment becomes possible, but it also puts forward higher requirements for data alignment, data screening, data processing and other related methods and models.