Power grid production technical improvement input and output evaluation optimization method

Abstract

The invention discloses a power grid production technical improvement input-output evaluation optimization method, and relates to the technical field of power grid production technical improvement, and the method comprises the following steps: carrying out the evaluation of a power grid equipment state based on a fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method, and obtaining a total evaluation score; judging the overall state of the equipment according to the overall evaluation score, and determining whether transformation is needed and the transformation priority; if modification is needed, the annual average cost under the overhaul mode and the technical modification mode is calculated according to a preset whole life cycle cost calculation formula; safety state evaluation is carried out on the equipment after the overhaul and technical improvement modes, and corresponding safety state scores are obtained according to a safety state evaluation method; and integrating the safety state score after equipment transformation and the annual average cost of transformation as a scheme comparison and selection basis, forming a power grid equipment technical improvement project optimization decision, and judging whether the equipment accords with a technical improvement project access condition or not.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the technical field of production technology transformation, and more specifically, to an input-output evaluation optimization method for power grid production technology transformation. Background Art

[0002] In recent years, cost analysis of power grid technical transformation projects has become a regular task for State Grid Corporation. From the early basic data collection, data splitting, verification and reporting, to the mid-term cost index calculation, comparison, cause analysis, and then to the final typical plan cost determination, the preparation of the main report and special report, the workload is large and time-consuming. In order to promote the construction of the cost analysis system of power grid production technical transformation projects, it is urgent to optimize the existing cost analysis model and improve work efficiency and quality. The optimization of cost analysis of power grid technical transformation projects covers four stages of cost analysis work, including the basic data collection stage, data splitting stage, data verification stage and report preparation stage. By establishing a standardized sample data splitting process, the data splitting efficiency is improved; by introducing data verification rules, the data splitting quality is improved; through a digital management solution based on standardized processes, the digital needs of cost analysis are met.

[0003] The main idea of ​​the power grid production technical transformation project is to update, improve and match the existing equipment and devices in the electrical technology production process system and production facilities on the premise of ensuring the original plane layout, the overall process system and its main structure remain unchanged, so as to improve production performance, enhance the stability and reliability of the system, and meet the process requirements of intelligence, energy saving and environmental protection. With the rapid development of the economy and society, load users have put forward higher requirements for the safety and stability of electricity use. Against the background of the gradual saturation of power grid infrastructure projects, technical transformation projects are an important means for power grid companies to improve power reliability and customer satisfaction. The investment of power grid companies in technical transformation projects has also shown an increasing trend year by year.

[0004] Although the investment in power grid production technical transformation projects has increased year by year, unlike ordinary infrastructure projects, power grid production technical transformation projects have the characteristics of a large number of projects, many types, small investment scale, and short implementation period. Its implementation effect, benefit evaluation, and overall execution status are more difficult to measure than infrastructure projects.

[0005] At present, the evaluation of power grid production technology transformation projects lacks a complete, systematic and quantifiable evaluation index system, and the evaluation has not yet formed a standardized standard. In the process of gradual improvement of power grid production technology transformation projects, domestic and foreign scholars have gradually carried out evaluation research on their implementation status. Based on the post-evaluation theory, in order to better analyze and solve the evaluation difficulties in the implementation effect and transformation benefits of power grid production technology transformation projects, a post-evaluation method and evaluation system for power grid production technology transformation projects were constructed from the perspective of power grid production technology transformation project management. The rationality of investment in power grid production technology transformation projects was studied, and an economic benefit analysis model suitable for power grid production technology transformation projects was established based on the full life cycle theory. Based on the improved factor analysis method and the incremental method, the economic benefit measurement and evaluation of technical transformation in cogeneration were studied. A rule for determining the reasonable cost range of power grid production technology transformation projects based on kernel density estimation was proposed, in order to evaluate the implementation cost of power grid production technology transformation projects.

[0006] In the above disclosed technical solutions, there are at least the following technical problems: the benefit evaluation method of power grid production technical transformation projects needs to be improved; there is a lack of a systematic evaluation index system suitable for power grid production technical transformation projects; the evaluation of the implementation of power grid production technical transformation projects is mostly a brief qualitative analysis, lacking a measurement and evaluation supported by quantitative indicators; the power supply company does not fully consider the economic considerations when making access decisions for power grid equipment technical transformation projects, and does not fully calculate the full life cycle cost of equipment under the two schemes of technical transformation and overhaul, while ignoring the reality that different schemes have different transformation effects on power grid equipment; there is a lack of an objective and unified judgment method to determine whether power grid equipment needs to be transformed. In response to the above problems, the present invention proposes a solution. Summary of the invention

[0007] In order to overcome the above-mentioned defects of the prior art, an embodiment of the present invention provides an input-output evaluation optimization method for power grid production technical transformation, which solves the problem of whether power grid equipment needs to be transformed by evaluating and studying power grid production technical transformation projects.

[0008] To achieve the above object, the present invention provides the following technical solutions: The input-output evaluation optimization method of power grid production technical transformation includes the following steps: evaluating the power grid equipment status based on the fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method to obtain an overall evaluation score; judging the overall status of the equipment based on the overall evaluation score, and deciding whether transformation is needed and the transformation priority; if transformation is needed, calculating the annual average cost under the overhaul and technical transformation methods respectively according to a preset full life cycle cost calculation formula; conducting safety status evaluation on the equipment after the overhaul and technical transformation, and obtaining the corresponding safety status score according to the safety status evaluation method; using the safety status score after the comprehensive equipment transformation and the annual average transformation cost as the basis for scheme comparison, forming the optimal decision of the power grid equipment technical transformation project, and judging whether the equipment meets the access conditions of the technical transformation project.

[0009] In a preferred embodiment, the power grid equipment status includes a safety status, a technical performance status and an economic performance status.

[0010] In a preferred embodiment, the evaluation of the state of the power grid equipment is specifically as follows: conducting on-site investigations on the power grid equipment, collecting historical fault data of the power grid equipment, identifying component factors that affect the safe and stable operation of the equipment, namely, safety evaluation influencing factors; obtaining characteristic quantities, indicators and their weights of the corresponding component states based on the safety evaluation influencing factors and the membership of each evaluation factor to the power grid equipment; and establishing a fuzzy comprehensive evaluation model to score the component state quantities.

[0011] In a preferred embodiment, the membership of each evaluation factor to the power grid equipment is specifically: each influencing factor of the safety status of the power grid equipment is used as an element of a fuzzy set; a membership function is established for each element to obtain the membership of each element to the safety status of the equipment.

[0012] In a preferred embodiment, the characteristic quantities, indicators and weights of the corresponding component states are specifically as follows: p evaluation factors constitute an evaluation factor set; based on a preset scaling method, the elements in the evaluation factor set are compared pairwise to obtain a judgment matrix; the maximum eigenvalue root of the judgment matrix and its corresponding eigenvector are calculated according to a preset formula; the consistency index and the consistency ratio are calculated based on the maximum eigenvalue root and its corresponding eigenvector; when the consistency ratio is less than 0.1, the constructed judgment matrix passes the consistency test, that is, the obtained weights are reasonable, otherwise the judgment matrix needs to be reconstructed.

[0013] In a preferred embodiment, the establishment of the fuzzy comprehensive evaluation model is specifically as follows: constructing the factor domain and the evaluation level domain of the evaluation object based on each evaluation factor; calculating the degree of membership of the evaluated index to each level fuzzy subset based on single factor perspective analysis, and then obtaining the fuzzy relationship matrix; The preset weight vector and fuzzy relationship matrix are synthesized to calculate the fuzzy comprehensive evaluation result vector of the evaluated object; based on the maximum membership degree and the fuzzy vector singularization method, the ranking results of the evaluation vector are obtained and compared and analyzed.

[0014] In a preferred embodiment, the formation of the preferred decision of the power grid equipment technical transformation project is specifically: if the value coefficient under the overhaul mode is greater than the value coefficient under the technical transformation mode, the overhaul mode should be selected; on the contrary, if the value coefficient under the overhaul mode is less than the value coefficient under the technical transformation mode, the technical transformation mode should be selected. The technical effects and advantages of the power grid production technical transformation input-output evaluation optimization method of the present invention are as follows: 1. The present invention uses a systematic status evaluation method to more accurately understand the actual situation of power grid equipment and avoid the subjectivity in traditional evaluation.

[0015] 2. The present invention helps prioritize the treatment of equipment in poor condition through quantitative sorting results, making resource allocation more reasonable and efficient. The optimization model for technical transformation project access is based on comprehensive data analysis, which improves the scientificity and accuracy of project selection, thereby improving the overall maintenance and upgrade strategy of power grid equipment. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0016] Figure 1 It is a structural schematic diagram of the input-output evaluation optimization method of power grid production technical transformation of the present invention.

[0017] Figure 2 is the average consistency index value.

[0018] Figure 3 Provide scoring criteria for the technical and economic performance status of power grid equipment. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0019] The following will be combined with the drawings in the embodiments of the present invention to clearly and completely describe the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention. Obviously, the described embodiments are only 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 creative work are within the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0020] Embodiment 1, Figure 1 The invention provides a method for optimizing the input-output evaluation of power grid production technology reform, comprising the following steps: S1, evaluate the power grid equipment status based on the fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method to obtain the overall evaluation score; Power grid equipment can be divided into substation equipment, transmission equipment and secondary system equipment according to its professional type.

[0021] The service life of power grid equipment is generally long. As the operating time increases, the equipment will gradually wear out and age, and the failure phenomenon will increase accordingly. The technical performance continues to decline, and the corresponding maintenance cost increases. Therefore, in order to reduce the relevant power grid equipment operation and maintenance costs, improve the economic benefits of the enterprise and the safety and stability of equipment operation, it is necessary to conduct a status evaluation of the power grid equipment to determine whether the power grid equipment needs technical transformation or overhaul.

[0022] Starting from the three aspects of safety status, technical performance status and economic performance status, the overall status evaluation conclusion of the power grid equipment is finally obtained. Among them, the safety status of the power grid equipment is a particularly important aspect in the status evaluation and an important factor in ensuring the safe operation of the power grid. The overall status level of the power grid equipment will serve as the basis for judging whether it needs to carry out technical transformation or overhaul.

[0023] To evaluate the safety status of power grid equipment, it is first necessary to conduct field research on the equipment, collect statistics on its historical fault information, and identify the component factors that affect the safe and stable operation of the equipment, that is, the safety evaluation influencing factors; secondly, determine the characteristic quantities that can characterize the status of the corresponding components, determine the indicators and their weights; finally, establish corresponding scoring standards to score the component status quantities. Considering the importance of evaluating the safety status of power grid equipment, as well as the uncertainty and ambiguity in its evaluation process, this embodiment uses a fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method to score the safety status of power grid equipment, specifically: This paper uses the AHP method to calculate and determine the weights of the first and second level evaluation indicators of the power grid production technical transformation project. The steps for determining the indicator weights are as follows: p evaluation factors can constitute the evaluation factor set ; Use the 9-level scaling method to determine the importance of each factor to each other and obtain the judgment matrix ; Calculate the maximum characteristic root of the judgment moment S and its corresponding eigenvector A, which reflects the weights of all factors; According to the above calculation results, the consistency of the judgment matrix S is further calculated to verify whether the constructed judgment matrix is ​​reasonable; First, calculate the consistency index CI:

[0024] In the formula, n is the order of the judgment matrix; Next, calculate the consistency ratio CR:

[0025] In the formula, RI is the average consistency index, and the specific value is shown in Figure 2 ; When CR<0.1, the constructed judgment matrix passes the consistency test, that is, the obtained weights are reasonable, otherwise the judgment matrix needs to be reconstructed.

[0026] Fuzzy comprehensive evaluation is based on the membership theory in fuzzy mathematics, which can well realize the process from qualitative evaluation to quantitative evaluation. Its calculation process is clear and more systematic, and it is suitable for processing various uncertainty problems. This embodiment applies the fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method to the overall implementation effect evaluation of the power grid production technical transformation project. The specific calculation steps are as follows: Get the factor domain U of the evaluation object

[0027] In the formula, p is the number of factors; Get the evaluation level domain V

[0028] In the formula, V is a set of levels, where each level corresponds to a fuzzy subset; In the single factor evaluation process, the fuzzy relationship matrix R is established. From the perspective of single factor analysis, the degree of membership of the evaluated index to each level fuzzy subset is calculated, and then the fuzzy relationship matrix is ​​obtained:

[0029] In the formula, Factors to be evaluated right The degree of membership of hierarchical fuzzy subsets; AHP is used to obtain the weight vector of the evaluation factors, which is the size of the index corresponding to each evaluation factor; Calculate the fuzzy comprehensive evaluation vector B:

[0030]

[0031] In the formula, bi is the degree of membership of the evaluated object to the fuzzy subset of vj level from the overall perspective; Analyze the fuzzy comprehensive evaluation vector. Based on the maximum membership criterion, fuzzy vector singularization or weighted average method, the ranking results of the evaluation vector are obtained and compared and analyzed.

[0032] The technical and economic performance status evaluation of power grid equipment requires the acquisition of relevant data such as equipment parameter data, operation data, maintenance data, equipment family defect data, and equipment failure mode data. In addition, it is also necessary to use relevant statistical concepts to classify equipment failure types and estimate their corresponding failure probabilities.

[0033] The evaluation of the technical performance and economic performance of power grid equipment mainly analyzes whether the equipment can meet the needs of power grid operation and the urgency of transformation needs from the perspective of technical performance and economic performance. The evaluation method adopts the qualitative evaluation method and formulates the scoring rules as follows: Figure 3 As shown in , the technical and economic performance status of the equipment is scored according to the scoring criteria to draw evaluation conclusions.

[0034] Through statistical analysis of basic data such as historical operation data, maintenance data, and family defect data of power grid equipment, combined with the opinions of maintenance engineers, the weight ratio of safety status evaluation, technical performance status evaluation, and economic performance status evaluation in the overall status evaluation is determined. The individual evaluation scores of the three divisions are safety status evaluation (P), technical performance status evaluation (T), and economic performance status evaluation (O), and the overall evaluation score (M) is the sum of the product of each part evaluation and the corresponding division weight.

[0035]

[0036] The overall status of the power grid equipment is evaluated on a percentage basis, combining the evaluation results of the three aspects of the safety status, technical performance status and economic performance status of the power grid equipment. At the same time, the overall status of the power grid equipment is graded according to the scoring results, with corresponding scores and levels. The lower the score, the worse the overall status of the power grid equipment is, and the more it needs transformation.

[0037] S2, judge the overall status of the equipment based on the overall evaluation score, and decide whether it needs to be modified and the priority of the modification; According to the overall evaluation score, the equipment that needs to be transformed will be sorted from low to high according to the comprehensive score to determine the priority of transformation. Equipment with lower scores will be given priority for transformation because their condition is relatively poor and the urgency of transformation is higher.

[0038] When the score is between 75-100, it means that the condition is the best and no transformation is needed; when the score is between 50-75, it means that the condition is average and the need for transformation is not urgent; when the score is between 25-50, it means that the condition is poor and the need for transformation is more urgent; when the score is between 0-25, it means that the condition is very poor and transformation is urgently needed.

[0039] The benefits of judging the overall condition of the equipment based on the overall evaluation score and deciding whether modification is needed and the modification priority include: Objectivity and scientificity: Reduce subjective bias: Comprehensively score the equipment through systematic evaluation methods (such as entropy weight method, fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method, etc.), which reduces the influence of human subjective factors and ensures the objectivity of decision-making.

[0040] Data-driven: Decisions are made based on actual data and clear scoring criteria, which enhances the scientific nature of the decisions.

[0041] Optimize resource allocation: Clear priorities: By sorting the equipment by evaluation scores, we can clarify the priority of transformation, effectively allocate limited resources, and give priority to equipment in poor condition.

[0042] Reasonable budget: According to the priority of equipment transformation, formulate a reasonable budget and resource allocation plan to improve the efficiency of resource utilization.

[0043] Improve equipment safety and performance: Targeted transformation: Through comprehensive evaluation, we can identify the equipment that needs to be transformed and transform it according to its specific problems, thereby improving the safety and performance of the equipment.

[0044] Preventive maintenance: Early identification of potential equipment problems and modification can help prevent equipment failures and reduce the risk of sudden failures.

[0045] The transformation plan is scientific and reasonable: Systematic transformation: The transformation plan formulated based on the overall evaluation score is more systematic and scientific, and can ensure the effectiveness of the implementation of the transformation measures.

[0046] Implementation efficiency: Clarifying priorities can improve the efficiency of transformation implementation and avoid wasting resources.

[0047] Transparency in decision making: Clear basis: Through evaluation scores and ranking results, the decision-making process is more transparent and can provide clear basis to support renovation decisions.

[0048] Enhanced trust: Improved fairness and transparency in the decision-making process helps to enhance the trust of management and stakeholders in transformation decisions.

[0049] Long-term benefits: Improve reliability: Systematic evaluation and modification can improve the reliability and stability of power grid equipment and reduce problems in long-term operations.

[0050] Reduce overall costs: Effective renovation planning and prioritization can reduce equipment failure rates and maintenance costs, thereby reducing overall operating costs.

[0051] Supporting continuous improvement: Feedback mechanism: After the transformation is implemented, feedback and adjustments can be made based on the actual results, forming a closed loop of continuous improvement, which helps to optimize equipment management and transformation strategies in the long term.

[0052] S3, based on the evaluation results, establish an evaluation optimization model for power grid equipment technical transformation projects and calculate the full life cycle cost of power grid equipment under technical transformation and overhaul plans; Furthermore, the life cycle cost refers to the sum of all costs incurred by the equipment during each process of its life cycle, such as procurement, operation, maintenance, and decommissioning, and is the quantitative sum of all resources consumed by the equipment during its life cycle. The life cycle cost clearly expresses the cost that needs to be paid throughout its life cycle in order to obtain the use efficiency of a certain equipment, so it is a quantitative parameter that can be used to measure the economic efficiency of equipment. It has become an important component of modern enterprise project and equipment quality management. The life cycle cost comprehensively considers the reliability of equipment operation and conducts a reasonable assessment of the economic efficiency of the equipment life cycle, so as to determine whether its related decisions are scientific and optimal. In the past, the usual practice was to focus on the initial investment of equipment, while the life cycle cost management focuses on the entire equipment life cycle based on the value chain, and no longer uses the initial investment as the main principle for equipment procurement or renewal decisions.

[0053] Life cycle cost technology mainly includes life cycle cost calculation, analysis, evaluation and management. These technologies have both overlaps and their own applicability, including: Life cycle cost calculation: Life cycle cost calculation is a method of monetizing all resources required by a project at each stage during its life cycle and finally summing up the total cost. It is the basic technology in the life cycle technology and the premise for the development of analysis, evaluation and management technology. It is usually implemented before the actual development of the project or the cost is generated, so it is necessary to analyze its cost structure, build the corresponding cost calculation formula and model, and combine the currently available technical methods to achieve accurate cost calculation.

[0054] Life cycle cost analysis: Life cycle cost analysis is an in-depth analysis of the various cost components of a project. It usually starts with establishing the project implementation objectives and planned implementation results, and then identifies important cost influencing elements and existing risk cost elements based on the correlation between changes in various relevant influencing factors and their cost changes.

[0055] Life cycle cost evaluation: Life cycle cost evaluation is an activity to select the best solution from several feasible solutions by using certain evaluation methods. In the selection process, key requirements such as system safety, operating performance, technological advancement and economic effect should be considered at the same time. The evaluation results will provide a basis for the project's solution comparison and solution-related cost decisions.

[0056] Life cycle cost management: Life cycle cost management is a method of controlling cost-related activities by taking corresponding measures in each period of the system with the goal of minimizing the cost throughout the life cycle.

[0057] The life cycle cost refers to the sum of all costs incurred in each period of the equipment's life cycle. Specifically for power grid equipment, its content mainly includes the following parts: Purchase and construction costs: including costs incurred during planning, design, procurement, installation, commissioning and startup, etc.

[0058] Operating cost: refers to the consumption costs incurred by the equipment during operation, such as the costs incurred by related supporting expenses such as materials and energy.

[0059] Maintenance and overhaul costs: refers to the daily maintenance of equipment and the related costs incurred to eliminate faults after a failure occurs.

[0060] Failure loss cost: mainly refers to the economic losses caused when the equipment fails to operate normally, including direct losses and indirect losses.

[0061] Technical transformation cost: refers to the total monetized amount of resources consumed in carrying out technical transformation activities or replacing equipment for the purpose of ensuring safe and stable operation of the equipment in order to achieve the goals of improving its safety and stability, improving operating results, increasing transportation capacity or reducing transportation losses.

[0062] The decommissioning and disposal cost refers to the sum of the costs incurred in decommissioning and recycling equipment.

[0063] The calculation formula used in the full life cycle method in power grid equipment management is as follows:

[0064] Among them, CS is the initial cost, YX is the operating cost, WH is the inspection and maintenance cost, GZ is the failure cost, and TY is the decommissioning cost.

[0065] Initial costs include purchase costs, transportation costs and installation costs; operating costs are the monetized sum of resources consumed by the equipment during operation, including materials, energy and other related expenses that must be used during operation; inspection and maintenance costs refer to the costs incurred for necessary maintenance, troubleshooting and planned inspections of the equipment during use, such as necessary testing costs, planned maintenance costs and labor costs; decommissioning and disposal costs include the residual value income after the equipment is retired and the related costs incurred in the scrapping and disposal process, among which the residual value income is income and is calculated as a negative value in the total cost.

[0066] Operating cost YX:

[0067] In the formula, m refers to the number of auxiliary equipment, n refers to the working life of the main and auxiliary equipment, is the labor, material, and machine-hour costs consumed during the operation of the main equipment in year i, represents the energy cost consumed by the main equipment in the i-th year, is the cost consumed by the jth auxiliary equipment in the operation of the i-th year, is the energy cost consumed by the jth auxiliary equipment during its operation in the i-th year; Repair and maintenance costs:

[0068] In the formula, is the number of repairs within time T, q is the number of fault types, is the proportion of the probability of the jth fault type in all fault types, is the maintenance cost of the jth fault type, Indicates the repair cost after each failure; Cost of failure: After a power grid equipment failure actually occurs, there are two main parts of failure costs: one is the power loss cost caused by the inability to carry out timely maintenance after the power grid equipment fails; the other is the cost paid to compensate the economic losses incurred by the power user due to the power outage caused by the power grid equipment failure. The calculation formula for the failure loss cost of power grid equipment can be expressed as follows:

[0069] Where p is the average local electricity sales profit, W is the average power outage load, T is the duration of the grid equipment failure, and BC is the cost paid to compensate for the economic losses caused to power users by the grid equipment failure.

[0070] Decommissioning disposal costs:

[0071] In the formula, TYR is the cost of a single equipment decommissioning, including labor costs and environmental protection costs, and CR is the residual value that can be recovered after the equipment is scrapped; The average annual cost NJFY for overhaul and technical transformation is calculated respectively. It is worth noting that, as mentioned in the previous article, in order to facilitate the comparison of the two transformation methods with different service life, the average annual cost is used to compare the costs of the two transformation methods.

[0072] Average annual cost model using overhaul method:

[0073] In the formula, To carry out overhaul plan for the equipment in the future The average annual cost in the year, K represents the remaining value of the old equipment in the decision year, The total equipment investment estimated for the equipment overhaul, is the expected service life after overhaul, is the production efficiency coefficient after overhaul, is the operating cost of the equipment within j years after the overhaul, is the maintenance cost within j years after the equipment is overhauled, is the failure cost within j years after the equipment is overhauled; The average annual cost model of adopting technical transformation is: In the formula, To carry out technical transformation plan for equipment in the future The average annual cost of is the total investment when updating with new equipment, To calculate the expected service life of a new device, is the production efficiency coefficient after using the new equipment, is the operating cost of the equipment within j years after the technical transformation, is the maintenance cost of the equipment within j years after the technical transformation. is the failure cost within j years after the technical transformation of the equipment; S4. Conduct safety status evaluation on the equipment after overhaul and technical transformation, and obtain corresponding safety status scores based on the safety status evaluation method.

[0074] Safety status evaluation is carried out on the equipment after overhaul and technical transformation, and the corresponding safety status score S is obtained according to the safety status evaluation method.

[0075] Determine the security status indicators that need to be evaluated based on the type of equipment and actual situation. Common indicators include: Equipment failure rate: How often equipment fails.

[0076] Equipment health status: the operating status of the equipment, including wear and tear, aging, etc.

[0077] Equipment safety protection system: the completeness and effectiveness of the safety protection system.

[0078] Historical accident records: historical safety accident records of the equipment.

[0079] Maintenance and repair records: equipment maintenance and repair status.

[0080] Operator training status: operator training and operating specifications.

[0081] Collect relevant data for the indicator, including: Equipment operation data: including fault records, operating hours, etc.

[0082] Maintenance records: record the maintenance status after overhaul and technical transformation.

[0083] Safety inspection report: The results of the safety inspection of the equipment.

[0084] Operating procedures: operator training records and operating specifications.

[0085] 3. Establish scoring criteria Establish clear scoring criteria for each indicator. For example: Device failure rate: Devices with a failure rate above a certain threshold may receive a lower score.

[0086] Equipment health status: The equipment is scored based on its actual health status (such as degree of wear and tear).

[0087] Safety protection system: score based on the completeness of the safety protection system, such as whether complete protective measures are in place.

[0088] Historical incident records: Equipment with a history of incidents may receive a lower score.

[0089] Maintenance and service records: Equipment with good maintenance and service records will score higher.

[0090] Operator training: Equipment with good training scores higher.

[0091] The safety status evaluation method is specifically: Apply the same evaluation indexes to the equipment after overhaul and the equipment after technical transformation; Based on the collected data and the scoring criteria, a score is assigned to each indicator; The scores of each indicator are weighted and summarized to calculate the total security status score of each device.

[0092] The safety status evaluation method is the same as the fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method in S1 to score the safety status of the power grid equipment, which will not be described in detail here.

[0093] S5, comprehensively considers the safety status score of the equipment after transformation and the average annual transformation cost as the basis for scheme selection, forms the optimal decision for the technical transformation project of power grid equipment, and determines whether the equipment meets the entry conditions for the technical transformation project.

[0094] There are many types of power grid equipment, and the functions and impacts of different equipment on the safety and stability of the power grid vary greatly. Therefore, whether the equipment is overhauled or technically modified cannot be decided entirely based on the principle of minimum LCC, but also requires consideration of the safety status of the equipment. For example, for important equipment that has a significant role and will have a huge impact on the power grid once a failure occurs, the safety status of the equipment after the transformation must be fully considered when making decisions on the transformation plan. If you choose equipment with good performance and high price, you can ensure that it will operate 100% safely and stably after the transformation. At this time, you should not blindly choose the transformation plan with the lowest LCC or the lowest annual cost. Based on the above considerations, a value evaluation model based on the value engineering model is proposed here, which takes the safety status of the equipment after the transformation and the average annual cost of the transformation as the basis for the scheme comparison, forming a new scheme comparison method.

[0095] Based on the safety status score S and the average annual cost NJFY of power grid equipment under two transformation modes, namely overhaul and technical transformation, the value evaluation model is established as follows:

[0096] If the value coefficient under the overhaul method Greater than the value coefficient under the technical reform method , then the overhaul method should be selected; on the contrary, if the value coefficient under the overhaul method Less than the value coefficient under the technical reform method , then technical reform should be selected.

[0097] The above formulas are all dimensionless and numerical calculations. The formula is a formula for the most recent real situation obtained by collecting a large amount of data and performing software simulation. The preset parameters in the formula are set by technicians in this field according to actual conditions.

[0098] The above embodiments may be implemented in whole or in part by software, hardware, firmware or any other combination. When implemented by software, the above embodiments may be implemented in whole or in part in the form of a computer program product.

[0099] Those of ordinary skill in the art will appreciate that the modules and algorithm steps of each example described in conjunction with the embodiments disclosed herein can be implemented in electronic hardware, or a combination of computer software and electronic hardware. Whether these functions are performed in hardware or software depends on the specific application and design constraints of the technical solution. Professional and technical personnel can use different methods to implement the described functions for each specific application, but such implementation should not be considered to be beyond the scope of this application.

[0100] In addition, each functional module in each embodiment of the present application may be integrated into one processing module, or each module may exist physically separately, or two or more modules may be integrated into one module.

[0101] The above is only a specific implementation of the present application, but the protection scope of the present application is not limited thereto. Any person skilled in the art who is familiar with the present technical field can easily think of changes or substitutions within the technical scope disclosed in the present application, which should be included in the protection scope of the present application. Therefore, the protection scope of the present application should be based on the protection scope of the claims.

[0102] Finally: The above description is only a preferred embodiment of the present invention and is not intended to limit the present invention. Any modifications, equivalent substitutions, improvements, etc. made within the spirit and principles of the present invention should be included in the protection scope of the present invention.

Claims

1. A method for optimizing the input-output evaluation of power grid production technology reform, characterized in that: The following steps are involved: The power grid equipment status is evaluated based on the fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method to obtain the overall evaluation score; Determine the overall status of the equipment based on the overall evaluation score, and decide whether modification is needed and the modification priority; If transformation is required, the average annual cost under the overhaul and technical transformation methods will be calculated separately according to the preset full life cycle cost calculation formula; Carry out safety status evaluation on the equipment after overhaul and technical transformation, and obtain corresponding safety status scores according to the safety status evaluation method; The safety status score of the equipment after transformation and the average annual transformation cost are used as the basis for scheme selection, forming the optimal decision for the technical transformation project of power grid equipment and judging whether the equipment meets the entry conditions of the technical transformation project.

2. The power grid production technical reform input-output evaluation optimization method according to claim 1 is characterized in that: The power grid equipment status includes a safety status, a technical performance status and an economic performance status.

3. The method for optimizing the input-output evaluation of power grid production technology reform according to claim 2 is characterized in that: The evaluation of the power grid equipment status is specifically as follows: Conduct field research on power grid equipment, collect historical fault data of power grid equipment, and identify component factors that affect the safe and stable operation of equipment, i.e. safety evaluation influencing factors; According to the safety evaluation influencing factors and the membership of each evaluation factor to the power grid equipment, the characteristic quantity, index and weight of the corresponding component status are obtained; A fuzzy comprehensive evaluation model is established to score the component status quantities.

4. The method for optimizing the input-output evaluation of power grid production technical reform according to claim 3 is characterized in that: The membership degree of each evaluation factor to the power grid equipment is specifically: The various influencing factors of the safety status of power grid equipment are taken as elements of fuzzy sets; A membership function is established for each of the elements to obtain the degree of membership of each element to the safety status of the device.

5. The method for optimizing the input-output evaluation of power grid production technical reform according to claim 4 is characterized in that: The characteristic quantities, indicators and weights of the corresponding component states are specifically: The p evaluation factors constitute an evaluation factor set; Based on the preset scaling method, the elements in the evaluation factor set are compared pairwise to obtain the judgment matrix; Calculate the maximum eigenvalue of the judgment matrix and its corresponding eigenvector according to the preset formula; The consistency index and consistency ratio are calculated based on the maximum eigenvalue root and its corresponding eigenvector; When the consistency ratio is less than 0.1, the constructed judgment matrix passes the consistency test, that is, the obtained weights are reasonable, otherwise the judgment matrix needs to be reconstructed.

6. The method for optimizing the input-output evaluation of power grid production technical reform according to claim 5, characterized in that: The fuzzy comprehensive evaluation model is established as follows: Construct the factor domain and evaluation level domain of the evaluation object based on each evaluation factor; Based on the single factor analysis, the membership degree of the evaluated index to each level fuzzy subset is calculated, and then the fuzzy relationship matrix is ​​obtained; The preset weight vector and the fuzzy relationship matrix are combined to calculate the fuzzy comprehensive evaluation result vector of the evaluated object; Based on the maximum membership degree and fuzzy vector unification, the ranking results of the evaluation vectors are obtained and compared and analyzed.

7. The method for optimizing the input-output evaluation of power grid production technology reform according to claim 6, characterized in that: The preset full life cycle cost calculation formula is specifically: Among them, CS is the initial cost, YX is the operating cost, WH is the inspection and maintenance cost, GZ is the failure cost, and TY is the decommissioning cost.

8. The method for optimizing the input-output evaluation of power grid production technical reform according to claim 7 is characterized in that: The average annual cost of the overhaul method is as follows: In the formula, To carry out overhaul plan for the equipment in the future The average annual cost in the year, K represents the remaining value of the old equipment in the decision year, The total equipment investment estimated for the equipment overhaul, is the expected service life after overhaul, is the production efficiency coefficient after overhaul, is the operating cost of the equipment within j years after the overhaul, is the maintenance cost within j years after the equipment is overhauled, is the failure cost within j years after the equipment is overhauled.

9. The method for optimizing the input-output evaluation of power grid production technical reform according to claim 8, characterized in that: The average annual cost of the technical transformation method is as follows: In the formula, To carry out technical transformation plan for equipment in the future The average annual cost of is the total investment when updating with new equipment, To calculate the expected service life of a new device, is the production efficiency coefficient after using the new equipment, is the operating cost of the equipment within j years after the technical transformation, is the maintenance cost of the equipment within j years after the technical transformation. is the failure cost within j years after the technical transformation of the equipment.

10. The method for optimizing input-output evaluation of power grid production technical reform according to claim 9, characterized in that: The forming of the optimal decision for the power grid equipment technical transformation project is specifically as follows: If the value coefficient under the overhaul method is greater than the value coefficient under the technical transformation method, the overhaul method should be selected; on the contrary, if the value coefficient under the overhaul method is less than the value coefficient under the technical transformation method, the technical transformation method should be selected.

Images