A method for evaluating the operating health status of relay protection devices

Abstract

The present invention provides an evaluation method for the operational health status of a relay protection device, comprising: 1) obtaining each evaluation state quantity of the relay protection device; 2) classifying each evaluation state quantity into 7 types of attributes; 3) weighting the 7 types of attributes; 4) evaluating and scoring each of the 7 types of attributes after weighting; 5) calculating the final evaluation score of the relay protection device; 6) issuing a risk warning to an equipment management department based on the final evaluation score of the relay protection device; The present invention provides an evaluation method for the management of the operational health status of a relay protection device, which reflects the operational health status of the relay protection device. The evaluation result can be used as a reference for the maintenance, transformation, service life and other work of the relay protection device, thereby improving the operational stability of the relay protection device, improving the asset utilization efficiency, and further improving the lean management level of the relay protection technical transformation work.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The invention relates to a method for evaluating the operating health status of a relay protection device, and belongs to the field of relay protection dispatching, operation and maintenance management. Background Art

[0002] As the first line of defense of the power grid, the relay protection device provides a firm protective effect for the strong power grid. As the power grid load becomes larger and larger, the number of relay protection devices also increases, which brings great pressure to the professional operation and maintenance management of relay protection. There will be a situation where managers do not have a comprehensive grasp of on-site relay protection devices and operation risks. For example: Relay protection device operation risk warning. Because some operation and maintenance units fail to strictly supervise the service life of relay protection and safety and self-service equipment in accordance with regulations and specifications, there is a risk of over-service of relay protection and safety and self-service equipment, and there is a lack of reliable technical means to assess the risk of over-service; the health levels of on-site relay protection devices of various operation and maintenance units are uneven, and the defect records of some units cannot be updated in time. It is difficult for protection professionals to fully evaluate and grasp their status by manual means, and there are certain safety hazards. Various technical materials are not fully preserved.

[0003] Based on the above problems, it is necessary to evaluate the operating status of the relay protection device, and combine data maps, evaluation models and other technologies to automatically evaluate the health status, overdue service status, operating risks, etc. of the relay protection device to ensure its healthy operating status. Based on the effective use of resources and improved personnel efficiency, the decision-making basis provided by the status assessment results can ultimately achieve the goal of "replace what needs to be replaced, and retain what needs to be retained" for the relay protection device. Summary of the invention

[0004] In order to solve the above problems, the present invention proposes a method for evaluating the operating health status of a relay protection device.

[0005] In order to achieve the above object, the present invention adopts the following technical solution:

[0006] A method for evaluating the operating health status of a relay protection device comprises the following steps performed in sequence:

[0007] 1) Obtain each evaluation state quantity of the relay protection device;

[0008] 2) Classify the evaluation state quantities obtained in step 1) into 7 types of attributes;

[0009] 3) weighting the 7 attributes obtained in step 2);

[0010] 4) Evaluate and score each of the 7 attributes after weight allocation in step 3);

[0011] 5) Calculate the final evaluation score of the relay protection device;

[0012] 6) Issue risk warnings to the equipment management department based on the final evaluation score of the relay protection device.

[0013] Preferably, step 1) is specifically as follows: during the operation cycle of the relay protection device, if the failure rate of the relay protection device is high and the nature of the failure is serious, the reliability of the relay protection device is poor;

[0014] During the evaluation period, if the average failure rate of the same type of relay protection device is high and the nature of the failure is serious, the overall reliability of the same type of relay protection device is poor;

[0015] During the operation cycle, the more abnormal data found by the patrol relay protection device, the worse the reliability of the relay protection device;

[0016] The completeness of various technical data of relay protection devices, including instructions, setting sheets, drawings and operating instructions;

[0017] The relative aging degree of the evaluated relay protection device's cumulative operating time and the designed operating life of the relay protection device;

[0018] Familial defects should be eliminated promptly;

[0019] The anti-accident measures of the relay protection device itself should be eliminated in a timely manner as required.

[0020] Preferably, step 2) is specifically as follows: 7 types of attributes include equipment operation reliability, reliability of equipment of the same model, equipment inspection status, completeness of technical data, equipment operating years, rectification status of family defects and rectification status of anti-accident measures.

[0021] Preferably, step 3) specifically includes: dividing the 7 types of attributes into 3 weights, namely reliability state quantity, impact state quantity and improvement state quantity;

[0022] In the reliability status quantity, the equipment operation reliability and the reliability of the same model equipment are weighted according to 7:3, and the total score is 100 points;

[0023] Among the impact-type status quantities, the equipment inspection situation and the completeness of technical data are weighted at 8:2, with a total score of 100 points;

[0024] In the improvement status quantity, the equipment operating years, the rectification of family defects and the rectification of anti-accident measures are weighted according to 3:4:3, with a total score of 3 points.

[0025] Preferably, step 4) is specifically as follows: the evaluation and scoring method for each of the 7 attributes is as follows:

[0026] (4.1) The calculation formula for the equipment operation reliability score is as follows:

[0027] Ka1=Max(0,R1-15×Q1-20×Q2-30×Q3);

[0028] Q1—Number of abnormal items during routine inspections;

[0029] Q2—Abnormal quantity of regular work data (outside the set normal data range);

[0030] Q3—abnormal number of special patrol data (outside the set normal data range);

[0031] R1 is the full score of the equipment operation reliability after weight allocation;

[0032] (4.2) Reliability of equipment of the same model: Based on the defect type classification of the same model relay protection device, weighted statistics are performed according to the different weights of general, serious and critical defects. The calculation formula for the average defect rate μ of the same model relay protection device is as follows:

[0033] μ=(A1×W1+A2×W2+A3×W3) / Ns;

[0034] W1—Number of general defects, the A1 defect weight factor is 1;

[0035] W2—Number of serious defects, the A2 defect weight factor is 2;

[0036] W3—Number of critical defects, the A3 defect weight factor is 5;

[0037] Ns—the number of relay protection devices of this model in the whole network;

[0038] The calculation formula for the reliability score of the same type of equipment is: Ka2 = Max[30×(1-μ),0];

[0039] (4.3) The calculation formula for the scoring of equipment inspection is as follows:

[0040] Kb1=Max(0,R3-2×P1-2×P2-2×P3);

[0041] P1—Number of abnormal items during routine inspections;

[0042] P2—abnormal number of regular work data (outside the set normal data range);

[0043] P3—abnormal number of special patrol data (outside the set normal data range);

[0044] R3 is the full score of the equipment inspection after weight allocation;

[0045] (4.4) Technical data completeness is evaluated based on the completeness of various technical data of the relay protection device. There are four categories: instructions, setting sheets, drawings and operating instructions. If one category is missing, 5 points will be deducted. The calculation formula for the score of technical data completeness is as follows:

[0046] Kb2=20-i×5;

[0047] i is the number of missing data types;

[0048] (4.5) The calculation rules for the scoring of equipment operating life are as follows:

[0049] 1 point is awarded if the equipment is in operation for no more than 12 years;

[0050] The equipment operation period is 13 years and gets 0.7 points;

[0051] The equipment operation life is 14 years and gets 0.65 points;

[0052] If the equipment is in operation for 15 years, 0.6 points will be awarded;

[0053] If the equipment is in operation for more than 15 years, 0 points will be awarded;

[0054] (4.6) The scoring rules for the rectification of familial defects are as follows:

[0055] 0.6 points for the presence of severe familial defects;

[0056] 0.8 points for suspected familial defects;

[0057] 1 point for absence of familial defects or elimination of familial defects;

[0058] (4.7) The scoring rules for the rectification of anti-accident measures are as follows:

[0059] If there are any problems with anti-accident measures that directly affect the safe operation of relay protection devices, 0.6 points will be awarded;

[0060] 0.8 points for the existence of general anti-accident measures;

[0061] 1 point will be awarded if there are no issues with anti-accident measures or if rectification of anti-accident measures is completed.

[0062] Preferably, after Ka1 and Ka2 are added into one score, 6 corresponding scores are obtained for the 7 classification attributes, and then the 6 corresponding scores are made into a hexagonal six-dimensional attribute graph for display, and a life cycle timeline graph of the relay protection device is prepared.

[0063] Preferably, step 5) is specifically as follows: the score of the reliability state quantity is A, A=Ka1+Ka2;

[0064] The score of the impact state quantity is B, B = Kb1 + Kb2;

[0065] The score of the improved state quantity is C, C = 0.3 × the score of the equipment's operating life + 0.4 × the score of the rectification of family defects + 0.3 × the score of the rectification of anti-accident measures;

[0066] The calculation formula for the final evaluation score of the relay protection device is as follows:

[0067] Final evaluation score = 100-(100-(A×I1+B×I2)×C)×K;

[0068] I1 and I2 are weight factors, I1 is 0.7, I2 is 0.3;

[0069] K is the correction factor, which is corrected according to the voltage level of the relay protection device and the importance of the substation. K=1.2 for 500kV relay protection device, K=1 for 220kV relay protection device, and K=0.8 for 110kV relay protection device.

[0070] Preferably, step 6) specifically includes: displaying the final evaluation score in a dial style, and different stage scores are distinguished by different colors on the dial;

[0071] And according to the final evaluation score of the relay protection device, a normal, caution, abnormal alarm or severe alarm will be issued to the equipment management department, among which 86 to 100 points are normal, 71 to 85 points are caution, 61 to 70 points are abnormal alarm, and 0 to 60 points are severe alarm.

[0072] The beneficial effects of the present invention are:

[0073] (1) This application issues a risk warning to the equipment management department based on the final evaluation score of the relay protection device, effectively controls the protection status of the relay protection device, and provides a decision-making basis for the regular inspection, modification and replacement, and over-service risk assessment of the relay protection device.

[0074] (2) In actual power grid applications, the present invention can establish a full-process data profile for each relay protection device, realize the full life cycle inspection trajectory tracking and evaluation of the relay protection device, and provide support and basis for the maintenance, transformation and replacement of the relay protection device.

[0075] (3) The present invention is used to construct a digital image of the relay protection device in the digital space to evaluate the operating status of the relay protection device, which effectively improves the safe and stable operation level of the relay protection device and reduces the workload and error rate of manual evaluation, analysis and judgment.

[0076] (4) The present invention can effectively improve resource utilization, improve the work efficiency of operation and maintenance personnel, and make the operation and maintenance more purposeful and professional.

[0077] (5) The method and system of the present invention can derive a series of program functions to improve lean management, such as comprehensive evaluation of operational risk warning and technical data management. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0078] Figure 1 A flow chart of a method for evaluating the operating health status of a relay protection device provided by the present invention;

[0079] Figure 2 It is the final evaluation score, six-dimensional attribute diagram, and life cycle timeline diagram of the relay protection device in Example 1. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0080] In order to make the purpose, technical solution and advantages of the embodiments of the present invention clearer, the technical solution in the embodiments of the present invention will be clearly and completely described below in combination with the embodiments of the present invention. Obviously, the described embodiments are part of the embodiments of the present invention, not all of the embodiments. Based on the embodiments of the present invention, all other embodiments obtained by ordinary technicians in this field without making creative work are within the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0081] The present application provides a method for evaluating the operating health status of a relay protection device, comprising the following steps performed in sequence:

[0082] 1) Obtain each evaluation state quantity of the relay protection device;

[0083] 2) Classify the evaluation state quantities obtained in step 1) into 7 types of attributes;

[0084] 3) weighting the 7 attributes obtained in step 2);

[0085] 4) Evaluate and score each of the 7 attributes after weight allocation in step 3);

[0086] 5) Calculate the final evaluation score of the relay protection device;

[0087] 6) Issue risk warnings to the equipment management department based on the final evaluation score of the relay protection device.

[0088] In one embodiment of the present application, step 1) is specifically: during the operation cycle of the relay protection device, if the failure rate of the relay protection device is high and the nature of the failure is serious, the reliability of the relay protection device is poor;

[0089] During the evaluation period, if the average failure rate of the same type of relay protection device is high and the nature of the failure is serious, the overall reliability of the same type of relay protection device is poor;

[0090] During the operation cycle, the more abnormal data found by the patrol relay protection device, the worse the reliability of the relay protection device;

[0091] The completeness of various technical data of relay protection devices, including instructions, setting sheets, drawings and operating instructions;

[0092] The relative aging degree of the evaluated relay protection device's cumulative operating time and the designed operating life of the relay protection device;

[0093] Familial defects should be eliminated promptly;

[0094] The anti-accident measures of the relay protection device itself should be eliminated in a timely manner as required.

[0095] In one embodiment of the present application, step 2) is specifically: 7 types of attributes include equipment operation reliability, reliability of equipment of the same model, equipment inspection status, completeness of technical data, equipment operating years, rectification of family defects and rectification of anti-accident measures.

[0096] In one embodiment of the present application, step 3) is specifically: dividing the 7 types of attributes into 3 weights, namely reliability state quantity, impact state quantity and improvement state quantity;

[0097] In the reliability status quantity, the equipment operation reliability and the reliability of the same model equipment are weighted according to 7:3, and the total score is 100 points;

[0098] Among the impact-type status quantities, the equipment inspection situation and the completeness of technical data are weighted at 8:2, with a total score of 100 points;

[0099] In the improvement status quantity, the equipment operating years, the rectification of family defects and the rectification of anti-accident measures are weighted according to 3:4:3, with a total score of 3 points.

[0100] In one embodiment of the present application, step 4) is specifically as follows: the evaluation and scoring method for each of the 7 types of attributes is as follows:

[0101] (4.1) The calculation formula for the equipment operation reliability score is as follows:

[0102] Ka1=Max(0,R1-15×Q1-20×Q2-30×Q3);

[0103] Q1—Number of abnormal items during routine inspections;

[0104] Q2—Abnormal quantity of regular work data (outside the set normal data range);

[0105] Q3—abnormal number of special patrol data (outside the set normal data range);

[0106] R1 is the full score of the equipment operation reliability after weight allocation;

[0107] (4.2) Reliability of equipment of the same model: Based on the defect type classification of the same model relay protection device, weighted statistics are performed according to the different weights of general, serious and critical defects. The calculation formula for the average defect rate μ of the same model relay protection device is as follows:

[0108] μ=(A1×W1+A2×W2+A3×W3) / Ns;

[0109] W1—Number of general defects, the A1 defect weight factor is 1;

[0110] W2—Number of serious defects, the A2 defect weight factor is 2;

[0111] W3—Number of critical defects, the A3 defect weight factor is 5;

[0112] Ns—the number of relay protection devices of this model in the whole network;

[0113] The calculation formula for the reliability score of the same type of equipment is: Ka2 = Max[30×(1-μ),0];

[0114] (4.3) The calculation formula for the scoring of equipment inspection is as follows:

[0115] Kb1=Max(0,R3-2×P1-2×P2-2×P3);

[0116] P1—Number of abnormal items in routine inspections;

[0117] P2—abnormal number of regular work data (outside the set normal data range);

[0118] P3—abnormal number of special patrol data (outside the set normal data range);

[0119] R3 is the full score of the equipment inspection after weight allocation;

[0120] (4.4) Technical data completeness is evaluated based on the completeness of various technical data of the relay protection device. There are four categories: instructions, setting sheets, drawings and operating instructions. If one category is missing, 5 points will be deducted. The calculation formula for the score of technical data completeness is as follows:

[0121] Kb2=20-i×5;

[0122] i is the number of missing data types;

[0123] (4.5) The calculation rules for the scoring of equipment operating life are as follows:

[0124] 1 point is awarded if the equipment is in operation for no more than 12 years;

[0125] The equipment operation period is 13 years and gets 0.7 points;

[0126] The equipment operation life is 14 years and gets 0.65 points;

[0127] If the equipment is in operation for 15 years, 0.6 points will be awarded;

[0128] If the equipment is in operation for more than 15 years, 0 points will be awarded;

[0129] (4.6) The scoring rules for the rectification of familial defects are as follows:

[0130] 0.6 points for the presence of severe familial defects;

[0131] 0.8 points for suspected familial defects;

[0132] 1 point for absence of familial defects or elimination of familial defects;

[0133] (4.7) The scoring rules for the rectification of anti-accident measures are as follows:

[0134] If there are any problems with anti-accident measures that directly affect the safe operation of relay protection devices, 0.6 points will be awarded;

[0135] 0.8 points for the existence of general anti-accident measures;

[0136] 1 point will be awarded if there are no issues with anti-accident measures or if rectification of anti-accident measures is completed.

[0137] In one embodiment of the present application, after Ka1 and Ka2 are added into one score, 7 classification attributes obtain 6 corresponding scores in total, and then the 6 corresponding scores are made into a hexagonal six-dimensional attribute graph for display, and a life cycle timeline graph of the relay protection device is prepared.

[0138] In one embodiment of the present application, step 5) is specifically as follows: the score of the reliability state quantity is A, A=Ka1+Ka2;

[0139] The score of the impact state quantity is B, B = Kb1 + Kb2;

[0140] The score of the improved state quantity is C, C = 0.3 × the score of the equipment's operating life + 0.4 × the score of the rectification of family defects + 0.3 × the score of the rectification of anti-accident measures;

[0141] The calculation formula for the final evaluation score of the relay protection device is as follows:

[0142] Final evaluation score = 100-(100-(A×I1+B×I2)×C)×K;

[0143] I1 and I2 are weight factors, I1 is 0.7, I2 is 0.3;

[0144] K is the correction factor, which is corrected according to the voltage level of the relay protection device and the importance of the substation. K=1.2 for 500kV relay protection device, K=1 for 220kV relay protection device, and K=0.8 for 110kV relay protection device.

[0145] In one embodiment of the present application, step 6) specifically includes: displaying the final evaluation score in a dial style, and different stage scores are distinguished by different colors on the dial;

[0146] And according to the final evaluation score of the relay protection device, a normal, caution, abnormal alarm or severe alarm will be issued to the equipment management department, among which 86 to 100 points are normal, 71 to 85 points are caution, 61 to 70 points are abnormal alarm, and 0 to 60 points are severe alarm.

[0147] The present invention also provides a system for evaluating the operating health status of a relay protection device, comprising the following modules:

[0148] (1) Account management module: the basic module of the system, providing various basic information attributes of relay protection devices;

[0149] The Excel spreadsheet prepared according to the specifications can be directly imported into the ledger system;

[0150] The ledger attributes include plant name, panel name, voltage level, primary relay protection device name, relay protection device name, identification code, relay protection device type, relay protection device name, relay protection device responsibility, relay protection device set, relay protection device model, manufacturer, software version, checksum, mixing date, last inspection date, etc.

[0151] (2) Technical data management module: provides classified management of manuals, value sheets, drawings, and work instructions, and links them to relay protection devices based on the ledger;

[0152] By importing the ledger, the corresponding relay protection device is found and the relevant technical information of the classification is entered, thus realizing the data association of the relay protection device and facilitating retrieval;

[0153] It also provides current and historical version management of technical information;

[0154] (3) Anti-accident measures management module: The anti-accident measures technical transformation process is standardized. For the relay protection devices that need anti-accident measures technical transformation, the anti-accident measures tasks are automatically generated and sent to each subordinate unit. After the subordinate unit submits the anti-accident measures implementation status, the completeness and timeliness of the anti-accident measures execution are automatically evaluated;

[0155] According to the ledger attributes, when issuing anti-accident measures tasks, you can filter key attributes such as model and type, so as to select relay protection devices in batches, achieve unified issuance, associate relay protection devices, and close the process loop;

[0156] (4) Scheduled inspection management module: Automatically generate a list of relay protection devices to be inspected based on the ledger, compare and analyze the annual work plan and monthly work plan submitted by each unit with the list of relay protection devices to be inspected, and issue warnings or alarms for any inconsistencies;

[0157] Intelligently identify and warn overdue relay protection devices, and automatically generate a list of overdue relay protection devices;

[0158] (5) Defect management module: Based on information such as anti-accident measures and standardized operations, it collects various event information such as defects and abnormalities of relay protection devices, automatically associates them with the relay protection devices, and forms an event record of the life cycle of the relay protection devices;

[0159] (6) Lifecycle management module: Based on the information from the above modules, the status assessment score of the relay protection device is automatically obtained according to the automatic assessment method of the relay protection status throughout its lifecycle, and a chart is displayed to issue an alarm.

[0160] The methods and devices not described in detail in the present invention are all prior art and will not be described in detail.

[0161] In order to further understand the present invention, a method for evaluating the operating health status of a relay protection device provided by the present invention is described in detail below in conjunction with embodiments. The protection scope of the present invention is not limited by the following embodiments.

[0162] Example 1

[0163] For example, for a 500kV plant 5023 switch protection, which was put into operation in April 2017, the data lacked some factory drawings. During the inspection, some normal communication alarms were found and entered into the system. There were no abnormalities or defects. The anti-accident measures were rectified and the system automatically evaluated as follows:

[0164] A. Reliability state quantity

[0165]

[0166]

[0167] After calculation, A=70+30=100 points.

[0168] B. Influencing state quantity

[0169]

[0170]

[0171] After calculation, B=80+19=99 points.

[0172] C. Improved state quantity

[0173]

[0174] After calculation, C = 0.3×1+0.4×1+0.3×1=1 point.

[0175] According to the final relay protection device evaluation scoring formula:

[0176] Final evaluation score = 100-(100-(A×I1+B×I2)×C)×K;

[0177] I1 is 0.7, I2 is 0.3; 500kV relay protection device: K = 1.2;

[0178] Final evaluation score = 100-(100-(A×I1+B×I2)×C)×K=100-(100-(100×0.7+99×0.3)×1)×1.2=99.64;

[0179] The final evaluation score of the relay protection device is 99.64 points, which is in the range of 86 to 100 points, indicating to the equipment management department that the operating status of the relay protection device is normal.

[0180] The above embodiments are only used to help understand the method and core idea of ​​the present invention. It should be noted that, for those skilled in the art, several improvements and modifications can be made to the present invention without departing from the principles of the present invention, and these improvements and modifications also fall within the scope of protection of the claims of the present invention.

Claims

1. A method for evaluating the operating health status of a relay protection device, characterized in that: The method includes the following steps in sequence: 1) Obtain each evaluation state quantity of the relay protection device; 2) Classify the evaluation state quantities obtained in step 1) into 7 types of attributes; 3) Assign weights to the 7 attributes obtained in step 2); 4) Evaluate and score each of the 7 attributes after weight assignment in step 3); 5) Calculate the final evaluation score of the relay protection device; 6) Issue risk warnings to the equipment management department based on the final evaluation score of the relay protection device; Step 2) is as follows: 7 attributes include equipment operation reliability, reliability of equipment of the same model, equipment inspection, completeness of technical data, equipment operation years, rectification of family defects and rectification of anti-accident measures; Step 3) is as follows: the seven attributes are divided into three weights, namely reliability state quantity, impact state quantity and improvement state quantity; In the reliability status quantity, the equipment operation reliability and the reliability of the same model equipment are weighted according to 7:3, and the total score is 100 points; Among the impact-type status quantities, the equipment inspection situation and the completeness of technical data are weighted at 8:2, with a total score of 100 points; In the improvement status quantity, the equipment operating years, family defect rectification and anti-accident measures rectification are weighted according to 3:4:3, with a total score of 3 points; Step 4) is as follows: The evaluation and scoring method for each of the 7 attributes is as follows: (4.1) The calculation formula for the equipment operation reliability score is as follows: Ka1=Max(0, R1-15×Q1-20×Q2-30×Q3); Q1—Number of general defects; Q2—Number of serious defects; Q3—Number of critical defects; R1 is the full score of the equipment operation reliability after weight allocation; (4.2) Reliability of equipment of the same model: according to the defect type classification of relay protection devices of the same model, weighted statistics are performed according to the different weights of general, serious and critical defects, and the average defect rate of relay protection devices of the same model is calculated. μ The calculation formula is as follows: ； W 1 —Number of general defects, A 1 The defect weight factor is 1; W 2 —Number of serious defects, A 2 The defect weight factor is 2; W 3 —Number of critical defects, A 3 The defect weight factor is 5; N —The number of relay protection devices of this type in the entire network; The calculation formula for the reliability score of the same type of equipment is: Ka2=Max[30×(1- μ) , 0]; (4.3) The calculation formula for the scoring of equipment inspection is as follows: Kb1=Max(0, R3-2×P1-2×P2-2×P3); P1—Number of abnormal items during routine inspections; P2—abnormal number of regular work data; P3—abnormal number of special inspection data; R3 is the full score of the equipment inspection after weight allocation; (4.4) Technical data completeness is evaluated based on the completeness of various technical data of the relay protection device, including instructions, setting sheets, drawings and operating instructions. If one of the four types is missing, 5 points will be deducted. The calculation formula for the score of technical data completeness is as follows: Kb2=20-i×5; i is the number of missing data types; (4.5) The calculation rules for the scoring of equipment operating life are as follows: 1 point is awarded if the equipment is in operation for no more than 12 years; The equipment operation period is 13 years and gets 0.7 points; The equipment operation life is 14 years and gets 0.65 points; If the equipment is in operation for 15 years, 0.6 points will be awarded; If the equipment is in operation for more than 15 years, 0 points will be awarded; (4.6) The scoring rules for the rectification of familial defects are as follows: 0.6 points for the presence of severe familial defects; 0.8 points for suspected familial defects; 1 point for absence of familial defects or elimination of familial defects; (4.7) The scoring rules for the rectification of anti-accident measures are as follows: If there are any problems with anti-accident measures that directly affect the safe operation of relay protection devices, 0.6 points will be awarded; 0.8 points for the existence of general anti-accident measures; 1 point if there are no problems with the anti-accident measures or the rectification of the anti-accident measures has been completed; After Ka1 and Ka2 are added to form a score, 6 corresponding scores are obtained for the 7 classification attributes, and then the 6 corresponding scores are made into a hexagonal six-dimensional attribute graph for display, and a life cycle timeline graph of the relay protection device is prepared; Step 5) is specifically as follows: the score of the reliability state quantity is A, A=Ka1+Ka2; The score of the impact state quantity is B, B=Kb1+Kb2; The score of the improved state quantity is C, C=0.3×the score of the equipment operating life+0.4×the score of the rectification of family defects+0.3×the score of the rectification of anti-accident measures; The calculation formula for the final evaluation score of the relay protection device is as follows: Final evaluation score = 100-(100-(A×I1 + B×I2)×C)×K; I1 and I2 are weight factors, I1 is 0.7, I2 is 0.3; K is the correction factor, which is corrected according to the voltage level of the relay protection device and the importance of the substation. K=1.2 for 500kV relay protection device, K=1 for 220kV relay protection device, and K=0.8 for 110kV relay protection device.

2. A method for evaluating the operating health status of a relay protection device according to claim 1, characterized in that: Step 1) is specifically as follows: during the operation cycle of the relay protection device, if the failure rate of the relay protection device is high and the nature of the failure is serious, the reliability of the relay protection device is poor; During the evaluation period, if the average failure rate of the same type of relay protection device is high and the nature of the failure is serious, the overall reliability of the same type of relay protection device is poor; During the operation cycle, the more abnormal data found by the patrol relay protection device, the worse the reliability of the relay protection device; The completeness of various technical data of relay protection devices, including instructions, setting sheets, drawings and operating instructions; Determine the relative aging degree by the cumulative operating time of the relay protection device being evaluated and the designed operating life of the relay protection device; Familial defects should be eliminated promptly; The anti-accident measures of the relay protection device itself should be eliminated in a timely manner as required.

3. The method for evaluating the operating health status of a relay protection device according to claim 1, characterized in that: Step 6) is specifically as follows: the final evaluation score is displayed in a dial style, and the scores of different stages are distinguished by different colors on the dial; And according to the final evaluation score of the relay protection device, a normal, caution, abnormal alarm or severe alarm will be issued to the equipment management department, among which 86 to 100 points are normal, 71 to 85 points are caution, 61 to 70 points are abnormal alarm, and 0 to 60 points are severe alarm.

Images