Nuclear facility reliability allocation method, device and computer readable medium

Abstract

The present invention mainly relates to the field of nuclear reactor technology, and in particular to a method, device and computer-readable medium for allocating reliability of nuclear facilities. The method for allocating reliability of nuclear facilities includes: system-level task reliability allocation, and the system-level task reliability allocation includes: determining the system to be allocated based on the specified tasks of the nuclear facility and the functions of each system; scoring each system to be allocated according to the factors affecting reliability, and calculating the relative ratio of the score of each system to be allocated; constructing a task reliability model, and determining the reliability logical relationship between the systems to be allocated through the task reliability model; and allocating task reliability to each system to be allocated according to the reliability logical relationship and the relative ratio of the score. The present invention takes the task reliability of nuclear facilities as the goal, decomposes the total task reliability from top to bottom according to the two levels of system and equipment, and allocates reliability in qualitative and quantitative ways to determine the reliability indicators of the system and equipment.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention mainly relates to the field of nuclear reactor technology, and in particular to a nuclear facility reliability allocation method, device and computer-readable medium. Background Art

[0002] With the continuous improvement of modernization and the development of science and technology, nuclear facilities have become a large and complex system with high-tech. Reliability, as one of the important attributes of nuclear facilities, has always attracted public attention. At present, my country has clear reliability requirements for all aspects of nuclear facility research and development, design, manufacturing, commissioning, operation and maintenance. Reliability technology has been introduced in the design and development stage of nuclear facilities to carry out reliability design. Reliability design refers to the process of making the overall design meet or reach the reliability index in order to meet the qualitative and quantitative requirements of reliability based on reliability theory and methods, combined with previous design experience and lessons, and using mature reliability design technology. It is divided into two parts: qualitative design and quantitative design. Qualitative reliability design mainly includes the formulation of reliability design criteria, and quantitative reliability design includes elements such as reliability allocation and reliability prediction.

[0003] Reliability allocation is one of the important links of reliability quantitative design. It mainly allocates the reliability target from the whole to the part according to a certain method to each subsystem (or component) according to the reliability requirements of the analysis object, clarifies the index requirements of each subsystem (or component), so as to ensure the overall reliability index. The purpose is to make the designers clear about the reliability design requirements of the system (or component) and quantitatively allocate the reliability index to the specified level. Through quantitative allocation, the quantitative reliability requirements of the whole and the part are coordinated and consistent; and the design indicators are implemented on the designers at the corresponding level, and the required manpower, time and resources are estimated with this quantitatively allocated reliability requirement to ensure the realization of the reliability index.

[0004] In the design and development of nuclear facilities, the purpose of reliability allocation is to ensure that the reliability of nuclear facilities meets the requirements, that is, to implement the quantitative reliability requirements of nuclear facilities. Mission reliability, as a commonly used mission reliability parameter, is an important reliability target for nuclear facilities. It refers to the probability that a nuclear facility can complete the specified function under specified conditions and within a specified time. Therefore, it is necessary to establish a reliability allocation method with mission reliability as the target to implement the quantitative reliability requirements of nuclear facilities, thereby supporting the design and development of nuclear facilities. Summary of the invention

[0005] The technical problem to be solved by the present invention is to provide a nuclear facility reliability allocation method, device and computer-readable medium to solve the current lack of a nuclear facility reliability allocation method with mission reliability as the goal.

[0006] To solve the above technical problems, the present invention provides a nuclear facility reliability allocation method, including: system-level task reliability allocation, the system-level task reliability allocation includes: determining the system to be allocated based on the specified tasks of the nuclear facility and the functions of each system; scoring each system to be allocated according to factors affecting reliability, and calculating the relative ratio of the score of each system to be allocated; constructing a task reliability model, and determining the reliability logical relationship between the systems to be allocated through the task reliability model; and allocating task reliability to each system to be allocated according to the reliability logical relationship and the relative ratio of the score.

[0007] Optionally, the factors affecting reliability include: system complexity, technology maturity, importance, environmental conditions of the system and maintainability of the system.

[0008] Optionally, each system to be assigned is scored according to factors affecting reliability including:

[0009] The higher the system complexity, the higher the score; the lower the technical maturity, the higher the score; the lower the importance, the higher the score; the worse the environmental conditions in which the system is located, the higher the score; the stronger the maintainability of the system, the higher the score.

[0010] Optionally, the score of each system to be assigned is calculated by the following formula:

[0011]

[0012] in, is the score of the i-th system to be assigned, is the jth factor score of the i-th system to be assigned, and n is the number of factors affecting reliability.

[0013] Optionally, when the reliability logic relationship is a series relationship, the task reliability is allocated to each system to be allocated by the following formula:

[0014]

[0015] in, is the task reliability of the i-th system to be assigned, is the relative ratio of the score of the i-th system to be assigned, is the overall mission reliability.

[0016] Optionally, it also includes: adjusting the assigned task reliability according to the system task reliability of similar nuclear facilities, judging whether the adjusted task reliability meets the overall task reliability, and if not, continuing to adjust until the overall task reliability is met.

[0017] Optionally, it also includes: device-level task reliability allocation, the device-level task reliability allocation includes: constructing a system reliability block diagram for each system to be allocated, the system reliability block diagram considers the relationship between the various devices that make up the system from the perspective of reliability; conducting equipment failure mode and impact analysis on each system to be allocated, determining a list of equipment and corresponding equipment failure modes that will cause system unavailability due to failure, and collecting the failure probability and average repair time of each equipment failure mode; constructing a system fault tree model based on the system reliability block diagram, the equipment list and the corresponding failure modes; inputting the failure probability and average repair time of each equipment failure mode into the system fault tree model to obtain system availability; judging whether the system availability is greater than the task reliability of the system to be allocated, and if so, using the failure probability and average repair time of each equipment failure mode as equipment indicators.

[0018] Optionally, conducting equipment failure mode and impact analysis on each system to be allocated includes: analyzing possible equipment failures and their impact on system operation from the perspective of failure mode, failure cause, failure impact, failure detection method and compensation measures.

[0019] In order to solve the above technical problems, the present invention provides a nuclear facility reliability allocation device, comprising: a memory for storing instructions executable by a processor; a processor for executing the instructions to implement the above method.

[0020] In order to solve the above technical problem, the present invention provides a computer readable medium storing a computer program code, and the computer program code implements the above method when executed by a processor.

[0021] Compared with the prior art, the present invention has the following advantages:

[0022] (1) Taking the mission reliability of nuclear facilities as the goal, the total mission reliability is decomposed from top to bottom according to the system and equipment levels, and reliability is allocated in qualitative and quantitative ways to determine the reliability indicators of the system and equipment, thereby guiding the system design and equipment procurement of nuclear facilities.

[0023] (2) In the allocation of system-level indicators, multiple factors affecting system reliability are comprehensively considered, including complexity, technology maturity, importance, environmental conditions and maintainability, making the allocation process and results more comprehensive and scientific.

[0024] (3) Technologies such as FMEA and fault tree modeling are introduced into equipment-level reliability allocation to logically sort out and quantitatively analyze the equipment failure combinations that cause the system to be unable to perform its mission functions, making the allocation process and results more objective and accurate. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0025] The accompanying drawings are included to provide a further understanding of the present application. They are included and constitute a part of the present application. The accompanying drawings illustrate embodiments of the present application and together with the present specification serve to explain the principles of the present application. In the accompanying drawings:

[0026] Figure 1 is a schematic diagram of a nuclear facility reliability allocation method according to an embodiment of the present invention.

[0027] Figure 2 yes Figure 1 A flow chart of an embodiment of system-level task reliability allocation.

[0028] Figure 3 yes Figure 1 A flow chart of an embodiment of device-level task reliability allocation.

[0029] Figure 4 is a system reliability block diagram for chemical and volumetric control systems.

[0030] Figure 5 It is a system fault tree model for chemical and volume control systems.

[0031] Figure 6 It is a system block diagram of a nuclear facility reliability allocation device according to an embodiment of the present application. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0032] In order to more clearly illustrate the technical solutions of the embodiments of the present application, the following is a brief introduction to the drawings required for the description of the embodiments. Obviously, the drawings described below are only some examples or embodiments of the present application. For ordinary technicians in this field, the present application can also be applied to other similar scenarios based on these drawings without creative work. Unless it is obvious from the language environment or otherwise explained, the same reference numerals in the figures represent the same structure or operation.

[0033] The present invention proposes a nuclear facility reliability allocation method with mission reliability as the target. The method takes the mission reliability of nuclear facilities as the total quantitative reliability index and decomposes it into lower levels step by step. For nuclear facilities, mission reliability is the probability of successfully executing the specified mission within the design life cycle. The allocation method mainly includes system-level mission reliability allocation and equipment-level mission reliability allocation.

[0034] Figure 1 FIG. 1 is a schematic diagram of a method for allocating nuclear facility reliability according to an embodiment of the present invention. Figure 1 As shown, the nuclear facility reliability allocation method 100 includes:

[0035] Step S1: System-level task reliability allocation.

[0036] The system-level task reliability allocation mainly allocates the total system task reliability to each system. The system-level task reliability allocation mainly applies the scoring allocation method and makes appropriate adjustments by referring to the reliability allocation results of similar nuclear facilities.

[0037] Figure 2 yes Figure 1 A flowchart of an embodiment of the system-level task reliability allocation. Figure 2 As shown, the system-level task reliability allocation step S1 includes:

[0038] Step S11: Determine the system to be allocated based on the specified tasks of the nuclear facility and the functions of each system.

[0039] Based on the prescribed mission of the nuclear facility and the functions of each system, the systems that have a direct impact on the execution of the mission of the nuclear facility are identified and designated as systems to be allocated.

[0040] Step S12: Score each system to be allocated according to the factors affecting reliability, and calculate the relative ratio of the score of each system to be allocated.

[0041] Specifically, when allocating the total system task reliability to each system, system designers or experts score several factors that affect reliability and conduct a comprehensive analysis of the score values ​​to obtain the relative reliability ratios between the systems. Reliability indicators are then allocated to each unit based on the relative ratios.

[0042] According to the design characteristics of nuclear facilities, the following five factors are selected for scoring. The scoring value range of various factors is 1 to 10, and the higher the score, the lower the requirement for its reliability.

[0043] System complexity: Consider the layout of the process system and the number and type of components (especially active components); the structural layout of the instrumentation system and the number and type of components. The system is evaluated based on the number of system components and the difficulty of assembly. The highest complexity is rated 10 points and the lowest is rated 1 point.

[0044] Technology maturity: Consider the design similarity with other nuclear power plants that provide similar functions, and whether the equipment and pipelines used adopt mature and verified manufacturing processes. The system design is evaluated based on its current technology maturity, with the lowest technology maturity being rated 10 points and the highest being 1 point.

[0045] Importance: Consider the functions and risk importance of the system, as well as the equipment classification in the system. The system is rated based on its role, with the lowest importance being 10 points and the highest being 1 point.

[0046] Environmental conditions of the system: Consider the influence of factors such as temperature, humidity, pressure, dosage and vibration. Evaluate according to the environment in which the system is located, with the worst environmental conditions being rated 10 points and the best being rated 1 point.

[0047] System maintainability: Consider the maintainability of the equipment. Under existing conditions, focus on the feasibility of equipment maintenance; for vulnerable parts, focus on whether there are replaceable common parts. Evaluate according to the difficulty of repairing or replacing the equipment or remedying it in time through manual methods. The easiest to repair or replace is rated 10 points, and the most difficult to repair or replace is rated 1 point.

[0048] Optionally, the score of each system to be assigned is calculated by the following formula:

[0049] (1)

[0050] in, is the score of the i-th system to be assigned, is the jth factor score of the i-th system to be assigned, and m is the number of factors affecting reliability.

[0051] Optionally, the relative ratio of the scores of each system to be allocated is calculated by the following formula: :

[0052] (2)

[0053] where ω i represents the score of the i-th system to be assigned, and ω represents the total number of scores.

[0054] (3)

[0055] Where n is the number of systems to be allocated.

[0056] Step S13: construct a task reliability model, and determine the reliability logic relationship between the systems to be allocated through the task reliability model.

[0057] Reliability modeling is the basis for reliability allocation. Its role is to clarify the reliability logical relationship and mathematical model between items and use the model to quantitatively allocate reliability. In the reliability allocation at the system level, it is assumed that the failure of any system to be allocated will cause the nuclear facility to be unable to perform its mission normally, which is a series relationship.

[0058] Step S14: assigning task reliability to each system to be assigned according to the reliability logic relationship and the relative ratio of the scores.

[0059] For the series model, the following conditions should be met:

[0060] (4)

[0061] in, is the overall mission reliability, is the mission reliability of the nth system.

[0062] Assume the total failure probability is , the failure probability assigned to the i-th system is :

[0063] (5)

[0064] According to the design requirements of nuclear facilities, the system often has high reliability. When it is very small, formula (5) is simplified to:

[0065] (6)

[0066] so:

[0067] (7)

[0068] The failure probability assigned to the ith system is:

[0069] (8)

[0070] Finally, the task reliability is assigned to each system to be assigned through the following formula:

[0071] (9)

[0072] in, is the task reliability of the i-th system to be assigned, is the relative ratio of the score of the i-th system to be assigned, is the overall mission reliability.

[0073] For the parallel model, it should satisfy:

[0074] (10)

[0075] Optionally, the system-level task reliability allocation also includes adjusting the assigned task reliability according to the system task reliability of similar nuclear facilities, and judging whether the adjusted task reliability meets the total task reliability. If not, continue to adjust until the total task reliability is met. For the corresponding series systems, the adjusted task reliability is multiplied for verification to obtain the total task reliability index. If it is greater than the total task reliability, it meets the requirements. If not, continue to adjust the task reliability until the requirements are met.

[0076] Optionally, the nuclear facility reliability allocation method 100 further includes step S2: equipment-level task reliability allocation.

[0077] The equipment-level task reliability allocation mainly uses the predicted value allocation method, that is, using past engineering experience and current technical levels, and taking the failure data of components and parts as the basis to estimate the actual reliability that the equipment may achieve, and use it as the reliability index of the equipment; and verify through the reliability model whether the equipment-level allocation plan can meet the system task reliability index. The premise for carrying out equipment-level task reliability allocation is to have system design information for establishing reliability block diagrams and reliability allocation models. Under this premise, equipment-level reliability allocation is carried out for each system that affects the overall mission reliability of the nuclear facility.

[0078] Figure 3 yes Figure 1 A flowchart of an embodiment of the device-level task reliability allocation. Figure 3 As shown, the equipment-level task reliability allocation step S2 includes:

[0079] Step S21: construct a system reliability block diagram for each system to be allocated. The system reliability block diagram considers the relationship between various devices constituting the system from the perspective of reliability.

[0080] Based on the system design information, the system reliability block diagram is constructed from the perspective of system functions to determine the logical process of the system successfully performing its mission functions, so as to facilitate subsequent modeling and key equipment identification. The reliability block diagram considers the relationship between various components from the perspective of reliability, and uses interconnected boxes to represent the failure logic of the system, that is, the impact of the failure of each unit of the system on the function of the entire system.

[0081] Figure 4 is a system reliability block diagram for chemical and volume control systems. Figure 4 As shown in the figure, the system reliability block diagram of the Chemistry and Volume Control System (CVS) considers the relationship between various components from the reliability perspective. For example, when the main flow channel components are operational → the next step of desalination mixed bed is operational → multiple valves are operational → desalination mixed bed is operational → reactor coolant filter is operational → return to SG lower head is operational → purification loop pipeline is operational.

[0082] Step S22: Conduct equipment failure mode and impact analysis for each system to be allocated, determine the equipment list and corresponding equipment failure modes that will cause system unavailability due to failure, and collect the failure probability and mean repair time of each equipment failure mode.

[0083] Table 1 is a failure mode and effect analysis of equipment according to an embodiment of the present invention. As shown in Table 1, a failure mode and effect analysis (FMEA) is performed on each system to be allocated, including analyzing the possible failures of the equipment and the impact on the operation of the system from the perspective of failure mode, failure cause, failure impact, failure detection method and compensation measures. Determine the list of equipment and the corresponding failure modes that will cause the system to be unavailable due to failure; and collect the failure probability and mean time to repair (MTTR) of each equipment failure mode, which are mainly based on a specific nuclear facility database or historical experience data of similar equipment.

[0084]

[0085] Step S23: construct a system fault tree model based on the system reliability block diagram, equipment list and corresponding failure modes.

[0086] Based on the system reliability block diagram and FMEA, determine the logical relationship between the various components of the system and establish a system fault tree model. Before modeling, make relevant assumptions and simplifications based on the design and operation information of the system, such as assuming that the failure rate of all equipment is a constant that is independent of time; the equipment is immediately restored to the original functional state after repair, etc. Fault Tree is an inverted tree-like logical causal relationship diagram. Fault Tree Analysis (FTA) takes an undesirable product failure event (used for preventive safety analysis) as the top event as the object of analysis, and through a strict hierarchical fault causal logic analysis from top to bottom, find out the necessary and sufficient direct causes of the fault event layer by layer, draw a fault tree, and finally find out all possible causes and cause combinations that lead to the top event. Figure 5 is a system fault tree model for chemical and volume control systems. Figure 5 As shown in the figure, the top event of the system fault tree model of the chemical and volumetric control system (CVS) is the failure of the CVS system leading to the shutdown of the unit, and the cause of the top event is the occurrence of the CVS001-1 event (failure of the RCS purification function and failure to repair in time) or the CVS001-2 event (failure of the RCS water replenishment / injection function and failure to repair in time). The cause of the CVS001-1 event is the simultaneous occurrence of the CVS001-3 event (failure of the RCS purification function) and the CVSPURREPAIR event (RCS purification failure cannot be repaired within one week). The cause of the CVS001-2 event is the simultaneous occurrence of the CVSMKUPREPAIR event (failure to repair water replenishment within 24 hours) and the CVS009 event (failure of the RCS water replenishment / injection function).

[0087] Step S24: Input the failure probability and mean repair time of each device failure mode into the system fault tree model to obtain system availability.

[0088] The failure probability and mean repair time of each equipment failure mode are input into the system fault tree modeling software (Riskspectrum software) to calculate the system unavailability. The failure probability and mean repair time of each equipment failure mode are used as the parameter values ​​of the basic events at the bottom of the fault tree, and the basic event unavailability is calculated according to the following formula: :

[0089] (11)

[0090] Among them, is the failure probability, is the mean time to repair.

[0091] After obtaining the unavailability of the basic event, according to the logical causal relationship in the system fault tree model, the probability of occurrence of the top event is calculated layer by layer from bottom to top until it is obtained, and it is used as the system unavailability.

[0092] The relationship between system unavailability and system availability is:

[0093] A = 1- U (12)

[0094] Where U is the system unavailability and A is the system availability.

[0095] Step S25: Determine whether the system availability is greater than the task reliability of the system to be assigned. If so, use the failure probability and mean repair time of each device failure mode as device indicators.

[0096] Compare the system availability with the system task reliability assigned by the previous level. If the system availability meets the assigned value requirements, the currently used failure probability and mean repair time are used as equipment indicators; if the estimated value cannot meet the assigned requirements, adjust the equipment unavailability rate and substitute it into the fault tree model to check the system availability until the system availability meets the assigned value.

[0097] When the reliability index of the equipment cannot be met due to objective factors such as changes in system design or equipment procurement, the reliability allocation plan needs to be readjusted from the bottom up. The reliability index of the system is adjusted based on the predicted value of system unavailability obtained by quantitative calculation until the overall mission reliability of the nuclear facility is met.

[0098] The nuclear facility reliability allocation method of the present invention has the following beneficial effects:

[0099] (1) Taking the mission reliability of nuclear facilities as the goal, the total mission reliability is decomposed from top to bottom according to the system and equipment levels, and reliability is allocated in qualitative and quantitative ways to determine the reliability indicators of the system and equipment, thereby guiding the system design and equipment procurement of nuclear facilities.

[0100] (2) In the allocation of system-level indicators, multiple factors affecting system reliability are comprehensively considered, including complexity, technology maturity, importance, environmental conditions and maintainability, making the allocation process and results more comprehensive and scientific.

[0101] (3) Technologies such as FMEA and fault tree modeling are introduced into equipment-level reliability allocation to logically sort out and quantitatively analyze the equipment failure combinations that cause the system to be unable to perform its mission functions, making the allocation process and results more objective and accurate.

[0102] The present application also includes a nuclear facility reliability allocation device, including a memory and a processor, wherein the memory is used to store instructions executable by the processor; the processor is used to execute the instructions to implement a nuclear facility reliability allocation method mentioned above.

[0103] Figure 6 1 is a system block diagram of a nuclear facility reliability allocation device according to an embodiment of the present application. Figure 6 As shown, the nuclear facility reliability allocation device 600 may include an internal communication bus 601, a processor 602, a read-only memory (ROM) 603, a random access memory (RAM) 604, and a communication port 605. When applied to a personal computer, the nuclear facility reliability allocation device 600 may also include a hard disk 606. The internal communication bus 601 can realize data communication between the components of the nuclear facility reliability allocation device 600. The processor 602 can make judgments and issue prompts. In some embodiments, the processor 602 can be composed of one or more processors. The communication port 605 can realize data communication between the nuclear facility reliability allocation device 600 and the outside. In some embodiments, the nuclear facility reliability allocation device 600 can send and receive information and data from the network through the communication port 605. The nuclear facility reliability allocation device 600 may also include different forms of program storage units and data storage units, such as a hard disk 606, a read-only memory (ROM) 603 and a random access memory (RAM) 604, which can store various data files used for computer processing and / or communication, and possible program instructions executed by the processor 602. The processor executes these instructions to implement the main part of the method. The result processed by the processor is transmitted to the user device through the communication port and displayed on the user interface.

[0104] The above-mentioned operating method can be implemented as a computer program, stored in the hard disk 606, and loaded into the processor 602 for execution to implement the nuclear facility reliability allocation method of the present application.

[0105] The present application also includes a computer-readable medium storing a computer program code, which implements the above-mentioned nuclear facility reliability allocation method when executed by a processor.

[0106] When the nuclear facility reliability allocation method is implemented as a computer program, it can also be stored in a computer-readable storage medium as a product. For example, a computer-readable storage medium may include, but is not limited to, a magnetic storage device (e.g., a hard disk, a floppy disk, a magnetic strip), an optical disk (e.g., a compact disk (CD), a digital versatile disk (DVD)), a smart card, and a flash memory device (e.g., an electrically erasable programmable read-only memory (EPROM), a card, a stick, a key drive). In addition, the various storage media described herein can represent one or more devices and / or other machine-readable media for storing information. The term "machine-readable medium" may include, but is not limited to, wireless channels and various other media (and / or storage media) that can store, contain and / or carry code and / or instructions and / or data.

[0107] Flowcharts are used in the present application to illustrate the operations performed by the system according to the embodiments of the present application. It should be understood that the preceding or following operations are not necessarily performed accurately in order. On the contrary, various steps may be processed in reverse order or simultaneously. At the same time, other operations may be added to these processes, or one or more operations may be removed from these processes.

[0108] The basic concepts have been described above. Obviously, for those skilled in the art, the above invention disclosure is only used as an example and does not constitute a limitation of the present application. Although not explicitly stated herein, those skilled in the art may make various modifications, improvements and amendments to the present application. Such modifications, improvements and amendments are suggested in the present application, so such modifications, improvements and amendments still belong to the spirit and scope of the exemplary embodiments of the present application.

[0109] At the same time, the present application uses specific words to describe the embodiments of the present application. For example, "one embodiment", "an embodiment", and / or "some embodiments" refer to a certain feature, structure or characteristic related to at least one embodiment of the present application. Therefore, it should be emphasized and noted that "one embodiment" or "an embodiment" or "an alternative embodiment" mentioned twice or more in different positions in this specification does not necessarily refer to the same embodiment. In addition, some features, structures or characteristics in one or more embodiments of the present application can be appropriately combined.

[0110] Some aspects of the present application may be performed entirely by hardware, entirely by software (including firmware, resident software, microcode, etc.), or by a combination of hardware and software. The above hardware or software may be referred to as "data blocks", "modules", "engines", "units", "components" or "systems". The processor may be one or more application specific integrated circuits (ASICs), digital signal processors (DSPs), digital signal processing devices (DAPDs), programmable logic devices (PLDs), field programmable gate arrays (FPGAs), processors, controllers, microcontrollers, microprocessors, or combinations thereof. In addition, various aspects of the present application may be represented as computer products located in one or more computer-readable media, which include computer-readable program codes. For example, computer-readable media may include, but are not limited to, magnetic storage devices (e.g., hard disks, floppy disks, tapes ...), optical disks (e.g., compact disks CDs, digital versatile disks DVDs ...), smart cards, and flash memory devices (e.g., cards, sticks, key drives ...).

[0111] A computer-readable medium may include a propagated data signal containing computer program code, such as in baseband or as part of a carrier wave. The propagated signal may have a variety of manifestations, including electromagnetic, optical, etc., or a suitable combination. A computer-readable medium may be any computer-readable medium other than a computer-readable storage medium, which may be connected to an instruction execution system, device or apparatus to communicate, propagate or transmit a program for use. The program code on the computer-readable medium may be propagated via any suitable medium, including radio, cable, fiber optic cable, radio frequency signal, or similar medium, or any combination of the above mediums.

[0112] Similarly, it should be noted that in order to simplify the description of the disclosure of this application and thus help understand one or more embodiments of the invention, in the above description of the embodiments of the present application, multiple features are sometimes combined into one embodiment, figure or description thereof. However, this disclosure method does not mean that the subject of the present application requires more features than the features mentioned. In fact, the features of the embodiment are less than all the features of the single embodiment disclosed above.

[0113] In some embodiments, numbers describing the number of components and attributes are used. It should be understood that such numbers used for the description of the embodiments are modified by the modifiers "about", "approximately" or "substantially" in some examples. Unless otherwise specified, "about", "approximately" or "substantially" indicate that the numbers are allowed to vary by ±20%. Accordingly, in some embodiments, the numerical parameters used in the specification are approximate values, which can be changed according to the required characteristics of individual embodiments. In some embodiments, the numerical parameters should take into account the specified significant digits and adopt the method of general digit retention. Although the numerical domains and parameters used to confirm the breadth of the range in some embodiments of the present application are approximate values, in specific embodiments, the setting of such numerical values ​​is as accurate as possible within the feasible range.

[0114] As shown in this application, unless the context clearly indicates an exception, the words "a", "an", "a kind" and / or "the" do not refer to the singular, but also include the plural. Generally speaking, the terms "include" and "comprise" only indicate the inclusion of the steps and elements that have been clearly identified, and these steps and elements do not constitute an exclusive list. The method or device may also include other steps or elements.

[0115] Unless otherwise specifically stated, the relative arrangement, numerical expressions and numerical values ​​of the parts and steps set forth in these embodiments do not limit the scope of the application. Meanwhile, it should be understood that, for ease of description, the sizes of the various parts shown in the accompanying drawings are not drawn according to actual proportional relationships. The technology, methods and equipment known to those of ordinary skill in the relevant art may not be discussed in detail, but in appropriate cases, the technology, methods and equipment should be considered as a part of the specification. In all examples shown and discussed here, any specific value should be interpreted as being merely exemplary, rather than as a limitation. Therefore, other examples of exemplary embodiments may have different values. It should be noted that similar reference numerals and letters represent similar items in the following drawings, and therefore, once a certain item is defined in an accompanying drawing, it does not need to be further discussed in subsequent drawings.

[0116] In addition, it should be noted that the use of words such as "first" and "second" to define components is only for the convenience of distinguishing the corresponding components. If not otherwise stated, the above words have no special meaning and cannot be understood as limiting the scope of protection of this application. In addition, although the terms used in this application are selected from well-known and commonly used terms, some terms mentioned in the specification of this application may be selected by the applicant at his or her discretion, and their detailed meanings are explained in the relevant parts of the description of this article. In addition, it is required to understand this application not only by the actual terms used, but also by the meaning implied by each term.

[0117] Although the present application has been described with reference to the current specific embodiments, ordinary technicians in this technical field should recognize that the above embodiments are only used to illustrate the present application, and various equivalent changes or substitutions may be made without departing from the spirit of the present application. Therefore, as long as the changes and modifications to the above embodiments are within the essential spirit of the present application, they will fall within the scope of the present application.

Claims

1. A method for allocating nuclear facility reliability, characterized in that: include: System-level task reliability allocation and device-level task reliability allocation, the system-level task reliability allocation includes: Determine the systems to be assigned based on the nuclear facility's specified mission and the functions of each system; Scoring each system to be allocated according to factors affecting reliability, and calculating a relative ratio of the scores of each system to be allocated, wherein the factors affecting reliability include: system complexity, technology maturity, importance, environmental conditions of the system, and maintainability of the system; Constructing a task reliability model, and determining the reliability logic relationship between the systems to be assigned through the task reliability model; Assigning task reliability to each system to be assigned according to the reliability logical relationship and the score relative ratio; When the reliability logic relationship is a series relationship, the task reliability is assigned to each system to be assigned by the following formula: in, is the task reliability of the i-th system to be assigned, is the relative ratio of the score of the i-th system to be assigned, is the overall mission reliability; The equipment-level task reliability allocation includes: Constructing a system reliability block diagram for each system to be allocated, wherein the system reliability block diagram considers the relationship between various devices constituting the system from a reliability perspective; Conduct equipment failure mode and impact analysis for each system to be allocated, determine the equipment list and corresponding equipment failure modes that will cause system unavailability, and collect the failure probability and mean repair time for each equipment failure mode; Constructing a system fault tree model based on the system reliability block diagram, the equipment list and the corresponding failure modes; Inputting the failure probability and mean repair time of each equipment failure mode into the system fault tree model to obtain system availability; It is determined whether the system availability is greater than the task reliability of the system to be assigned. If so, the failure probability and mean repair time of each device failure mode are used as device indicators.

2. The nuclear facility reliability allocation method according to claim 1, characterized in that: Each candidate system is scored based on factors that affect reliability including: The higher the system complexity, the higher the score; The lower the technology maturity, the higher the score; The lower the importance, the higher the score; The worse the environmental conditions of the system, the higher the score; The more maintainable the system is, the higher the score will be.

3. The nuclear facility reliability allocation method according to claim 1, characterized in that: The score of each system to be assigned is calculated using the following formula: in, is the score of the i-th system to be assigned, is the jth factor score of the i-th system to be assigned, and n is the number of factors affecting reliability.

4. The nuclear facility reliability allocation method according to claim 1, characterized in that: Also includes: The assigned mission reliability is adjusted according to the system mission reliability of similar nuclear facilities, and it is determined whether the adjusted mission reliability meets the overall mission reliability. If not, the adjustment is continued until the overall mission reliability is met.

5. The nuclear facility reliability allocation method according to claim 1, characterized in that: Conduct an FMEA for each system to be allocated including: Analyze possible equipment failures and their impact on system operation from the perspective of failure mode, failure cause, failure impact, fault detection method and compensation measures.

6. A nuclear facility reliability allocation device, characterized in that: include: a memory for storing instructions executable by a processor; A processor, used to execute the instructions to implement the nuclear facility reliability allocation method as described in any one of claims 1-5.

7. A computer readable medium storing computer program code, characterized in that: When executed by a processor, the computer program code implements the nuclear facility reliability allocation method as described in any one of claims 1-5.

Images