Pumped storage power station site selection evaluation and system based on correction factor analytic hierarchy process

Abstract

The invention discloses a pumped storage power station site selection evaluation method and system based on a correction factor analytic hierarchy process. The method comprises a pumped storage power station site selection evaluation index system constructed according to influence factors of site selection of a pumped storage power station; establishing an expert scoring table for site selection of the pumped storage power station according to the characteristics of the pumped storage power station; correcting the expert scoring scale value of the evaluation index by adopting a correction factor; calculating the weight of each index in the index system by adopting an analytic hierarchy process; and establishing a comprehensive evaluation model by adopting a fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method, and evaluating the pre-selected site of the pumped storage power station. According to the method, the influence of expert subjectivity on the evaluation index weight is reduced, and the evaluation result is closer to the actual situation.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the field of site selection evaluation for pumped storage power stations, and in particular to a site selection evaluation and system for pumped storage power stations based on a modified factor analytic hierarchy process. Background Art

[0002] The site selection of pumped storage power stations is a primary key technical issue encountered in the process of pumped storage planning. Whether the site selection is reasonable will directly affect the layout, scale, investment and benefits. The correct site selection is crucial for the construction and operation of pumped storage power stations. The current site selection methods mostly use empirical judgment and hierarchical analysis method. However, the hierarchical analysis method is easily affected by expert experience, which makes the evaluation results deviate from the actual situation. Therefore, it is urgent to establish a comprehensive evaluation system for the site selection of pumped storage power stations to provide support for the scientific and efficient selection of pumped storage power station sites.

[0003] The existing methods for evaluating the site selection of pumped storage power plants mostly use the analytic hierarchy process to weight the evaluation indexes. However, there will be a large gap in the expert scoring values ​​during the expert scoring stage. Therefore, it is necessary to correct the original expert scoring scale values ​​to reduce the influence of expert subjectivity on the evaluation index weights and make the evaluation index weight results more scientific and reliable. This improves the scientific nature of the weighted decision and the accuracy of the site selection evaluation. Summary of the invention

[0004] In view of the shortcomings of the existing methods, the present invention proposes a pumped storage power station site selection evaluation method and system based on the modified factor hierarchical analysis method, which realizes the correction of the expert scoring scale value and improves the scientificity and accuracy of the site selection.

[0005] To achieve the above object, the technical solution of the method of the present invention is:

[0006] A method for evaluating the site selection of a pumped storage power station based on a modified factor analytic hierarchy process comprises the following steps:

[0007] Step S1: establishing a pumped-storage power station site selection evaluation system based on the factors affecting the site selection of the pumped-storage power station, wherein the pumped-storage power station site selection evaluation system includes a plurality of primary indicators, and the primary indicators include a plurality of secondary indicators;

[0008] Step S2: establishing a pumped-storage power station site selection expert scoring table for the secondary indicators under the primary indicators in step S1, and scoring each evaluation indicator in the pumped-storage power station site selection evaluation system based on the expert scoring table to construct a comprehensive score set;

[0009] Step S3: constructing a first-level indicator judgment matrix and multiple second-level indicator judgment matrices for the first-level indicator and the second-level indicators belonging to the same first-level indicator respectively; obtaining the mean of the first-level indicator expert scoring scale in the first-level indicator judgment matrix and the mean of the second-level indicator expert scoring scale in the second-level indicator judgment matrix, as well as the second-level indicator expert scoring scale values ​​of multiple experts for different second-level indicators respectively;

[0010] Step S4: using the correction factor to correct the expert scoring scale value of the secondary indicator to obtain the corrected scale value of the secondary evaluation indicator;

[0011] Step S5: Calculate the normalized weight of the first-level indicator and the normalized weight of the second-level indicator based on the mean value of the first-level indicator expert scoring scale and the corrected scale value of the second-level evaluation indicator, and construct the first-level indicator weight set and the second-level indicator weight set respectively;

[0012] Step S6: Calculate the secondary indicator comprehensive weight set based on the primary indicator weight set and the secondary indicator weight set in step S5, and construct a fuzzy comprehensive evaluation model based on the comprehensive score set in step S2 to calculate the comprehensive evaluation score;

[0013] Step S7: Establish a comprehensive evaluation set including multiple evaluation levels, assign points to the evaluation levels in the comprehensive evaluation set, and determine the site selection level of the pumped-storage power station based on the comprehensive evaluation scores.

[0014] Furthermore, the first-level indicators in step 1 include: geographical factors, topographic factors, geological factors, water source factors, social factors, engineering factors, and economic factors;

[0015] The geographical factors include four secondary indicators: distance to the grid load center, distance to the new energy regional center, distance to the highway, and distance to the substation;

[0016] The topographic factors include three secondary indicators: the height difference between the upper and lower reservoirs, the distance-to-height ratio, and the regulating storage capacity of the upper and lower reservoirs;

[0017] The geological factors include four secondary indicators: regional structural stability, geological conditions of the upper and lower reservoirs and their dam sites, geological conditions of the water transmission and power generation system, and natural building materials;

[0018] The water source factor includes two secondary indicators: multi-year average runoff and multi-year average sediment content;

[0019] Social factors include three secondary indicators: land acquisition area C 51 Migrant population C 52 , environmentally sensitive objects;

[0020] Engineering factors include three secondary indicators: installed capacity, continuous full-power hours, and reservoir characteristic water level;

[0021] Economic factors include three secondary indicators: static investment per kilowatt, financial internal rate of return, and local on-grid electricity price.

[0022] Furthermore, in step 2, the scores R of the evaluation indicators in the site selection evaluation system of the pumped storage power station based on the expert scoring table are:

[0023]

[0024] In the formula, r pm is the score of the mth expert on the Pth secondary indicator, m∈(1,k),P∈(1,N); is the comprehensive score of the Pth secondary indicator, is the comprehensive score of the first secondary indicator, is the comprehensive score of the Nth secondary indicator, k is the total number of experts, and N is the total number of secondary indicators.

[0025] Furthermore, in step S3

[0026] First-level indicator judgment matrix A 1 :

[0027]

[0028] Where: is the scaled mean of the first-level indicator l for the first-level indicator j; is the scale mean of first-level indicator j for first-level indicator l; M is the total number of first-level indicators;

[0029] Secondary indicator judgment matrix A 2l :

[0030]

[0031] In the formula, A 2l is the judgment matrix of the second-level indicators under the l-th first-level indicator, l∈(1,M); is the second-level index p under the first-level index l l For the secondary index f l The scaled mean of ; is the second-level index f under the first-level index l l For the secondary index p l The scale mean of ; n is the number of evaluation indicators in the lth category of the second-level indicators;

[0032] Furthermore, in step S4, the correction scale value of the secondary evaluation index is for:

[0033]

[0034] Among them, m represents the mth expert, is the correction factor, is the second-level index p of the mth expert for the lth first-level index l For the secondary index f l The scale value of .

[0035] Furthermore, the correction factor for:

[0036]

[0037] in, is the second-level index p of the mth expert for the lth first-level index l For the secondary index f l The scale value weight of ;

[0038]

[0039] Among them, σ is The variance of is the second-level index p of the mth expert for the lth first-level index l For the secondary index f l Deviation of the mean scale value of ;

[0040]

[0041] In the formula, p l 、f l =1,2…n l ;n l is the number of secondary indicators under the lth primary indicator; is the secondary index p under the lth primary index by k experts l For the secondary index f l The scaled mean of ;

[0042]

[0043] Furthermore, the normalized weight of the primary index in step S5 is:

[0044]

[0045] Normalized weight of secondary indicators:

[0046]

[0047] Among them, ω l is the weight corresponding to the lth first-level indicator, is the normalized weight corresponding to the lth first-level indicator; is the pth value under the lth first-level index l The weight corresponding to the secondary indicators is: is the pth value under the lth level indicator l The normalized weight corresponding to each secondary indicator;

[0048] First-level indicator weight set

[0049] Secondary indicator weight set

[0050] in, is the normalized weight of the first level indicator, is the normalized weight of the Mth first-level indicator, is the normalized weight corresponding to the first secondary indicator under the first primary indicator, is the nth level under the lth level indicator l The normalized weight corresponding to each secondary indicator.

[0051] Furthermore, the comprehensive weight set of the secondary indicators in step S6 is:

[0052]

[0053] The fuzzy comprehensive evaluation model is constructed as follows:

[0054]

[0055] Among them, S is the comprehensive evaluation score.

[0056] Furthermore, the step S7 includes a comprehensive evaluation set V of multiple evaluation levels:

[0057] V={v 1 ,v 2 ,…,v o}, o is the number of evaluation result levels;

[0058] v 1 、v 2 、v o They are the first evaluation level, the second evaluation level, and the oth evaluation level respectively;

[0059] The evaluation grades in the comprehensive evaluation set are scored, and the site selection grade of the pumped-storage power station is determined based on the comprehensive evaluation score S and the evaluation grade scores.

[0060] On the other hand, the present invention provides a pumped storage power station site selection evaluation system based on a modified factor analytic hierarchy process, comprising:

[0061] Evaluation system building module: it is used to establish a pumped storage power station site selection evaluation system based on the factors affecting the site selection of the pumped storage power station, and the pumped storage power station site selection evaluation system includes multiple first-level indicators, and the first-level indicators include multiple second-level indicators;

[0062] Comprehensive score set construction module: It is used to establish an expert scoring table for pumped storage power station site selection for the secondary indicators under the primary indicators, and to construct a comprehensive score set by scoring each evaluation indicator in the pumped storage power station site selection evaluation system based on the expert scoring table;

[0063] Scoring scale value acquisition module: It is used to construct a first-level indicator judgment matrix and multiple second-level indicator judgment matrices for the first-level indicator and the second-level indicators belonging to the same first-level indicator respectively; respectively obtain the first-level indicator expert scoring scale mean in the first-level indicator judgment matrix and the second-level indicator expert scoring scale mean in the second-level indicator judgment matrix, as well as the second-level indicator expert scoring scale values ​​of multiple experts for different second-level indicators;

[0064] Secondary evaluation index correction scale value acquisition module: it is used to correct the secondary index expert scoring scale value by using the correction factor to obtain the secondary evaluation index correction scale value;

[0065] Indicator weight set construction module: It is used to calculate the normalized weight of the first-level indicator and the normalized weight of the second-level indicator based on the mean value of the first-level indicator expert scoring scale and the corrected scale value of the second-level evaluation indicator, and to construct the first-level indicator weight set and the second-level indicator weight set respectively;

[0066] Comprehensive evaluation score calculation module: it is used to calculate the comprehensive weight set of the secondary indicators based on the weight set of the primary indicators and the weight set of the secondary indicators, and to construct a fuzzy comprehensive evaluation model based on the comprehensive score set in step S2 to calculate the comprehensive evaluation score;

[0067] Evaluation level judgment module: It is used to establish a comprehensive evaluation set containing multiple evaluation levels, assign points to the evaluation levels in the comprehensive evaluation set, and judge the site selection level of the pumped-storage power station based on the comprehensive evaluation scores.

[0068] Compared with the prior art, the present invention has the following beneficial effects:

[0069] 1. The present invention uses the hierarchical analysis method with correction factors to calculate the weights of evaluation indicators. The correction factors compensate for the excessive differences in the expert scale value scores, reduce the influence of expert subjectivity on the evaluation indicator weights, and make the evaluation results closer to the actual situation. This method provides a certain reference for the scientific site selection of pumped storage power stations.

[0070] 2. The present invention comprehensively considers the factors affecting the site selection of pumped-storage power stations from seven aspects, namely geographical factors, topographic factors, geological factors, water source factors, social factors, engineering factors and economic factors, proposes 22 evaluation indicators, and constructs an evaluation indicator system for the site selection of pumped-storage power stations. It is not limited to a single influencing factor, and analyzes from multiple angles from all aspects, which can systematically, scientifically, objectively and comprehensively describe the influence of geographical factors, topographic factors, geological factors, water source factors, social factors, engineering factors and economic factors on the site selection of pumped-storage power stations. And introduces a veto standard to enhance the feasibility of site selection of pumped-storage power stations.

[0071] 3. The present invention is applicable to the selection of pre-selected sites for pumped storage power stations. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0072] In order to more clearly illustrate the technical solutions in the present invention or the prior art, the drawings required for use in the embodiments or the description of the prior art will be briefly introduced below. Obviously, the drawings described below are some embodiments of the present invention. For ordinary technicians in this field, other drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without paying creative work.

[0073] Figure 1 This is a diagram of the evaluation index system for site selection of a pumped storage power station according to the present invention;

[0074] Figure 2 It is the flowchart of the hierarchical analysis method of the present invention;

[0075] Figure 3 The present invention is a flow chart of the site selection and evaluation method for a pumped storage power station. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0076] In order to make the purpose, technical solution and advantages of the present invention clearer, the technical solution of the present invention will be clearly and completely described below in conjunction with the drawings of the present invention. Obviously, the described embodiments are part of the embodiments of the present invention, not all of the embodiments. Based on the embodiments of the present invention, all other embodiments obtained by ordinary technicians in this field without creative work are within the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0077] Example 1

[0078] The present invention is further described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings and specific embodiments:

[0079] The pre-selected site for a pumped storage power station project is 54km away from the city, with good geological conditions and no major earthquake risk. The geology of the upper and lower reservoirs is different, but the rock mass is intact and there is little natural gravel near the project area. The construction requires the acquisition of 344hm2 of land, the relocation of 500 people, and no environmental sensitive factors. The installed capacity of the power station is 1800MW, the height ratio is 3.9, the height difference of the reservoir is 515m, and the financial rate of return is 6.5%.

[0080] like Figure 1 As shown, this embodiment provides a method for evaluating the site selection of a pumped storage power station based on a modified factor analytic hierarchy process, comprising the following steps:

[0081] Step S1: establishing a pumped-storage power station site selection evaluation system based on the factors affecting the site selection of the pumped-storage power station, wherein the pumped-storage power station site selection evaluation system includes a plurality of primary indicators, and the primary indicators include a plurality of secondary indicators;

[0082] The evaluation index system is divided into 7 first-level indicators, each of which has several second-level indicators. The 7 factors are: geographical factors (B 1 ), terrain factors (B 2 ), geological factors (B 3 ), water source factors (B 4 ), social factors (B 5 ), engineering factors (B 6 ), economic factors (B 7 );

[0083] Geographical factors (B 1 ) has four secondary indicators, namely: distance from the grid load center (C 11 ), distance to the center of the new energy region (C 12 ), distance to the road (C 13 ), distance to substation (C 14 );

[0084] Terrain factors (B 2 ) has three secondary indicators, namely: the height difference between the upper and lower reservoirs (C 21 ), distance-to-height ratio (C 22 ), upper and lower reservoir regulation capacity (C 23 );

[0085] Geological factors (B 3 ) has four secondary indicators, namely: regional structural stability (C 31 ), the upper and lower reservoirs and their dam site geological conditions (C 32 ), geological conditions of water transmission and power generation system (C 33 ), natural building materials (C 34 );

[0086] Water source factors (B 4 ) has two secondary indicators, namely: multi-year average runoff (C 41 ), multi-year average sediment content (C 42 );

[0087] Social factors (B 5 ) has three secondary indicators, namely: land acquisition area (C 51 ), Migrant population (C 52 ), environmentally sensitive objects (C 53 );

[0088] Engineering factors (B 6 ) has three secondary indicators, namely: installed capacity (C 61 ), continuous full-load hours (C 62 ), reservoir characteristic water level (C 63 );

[0089] Economic factors (B 7 ) has three secondary indicators, namely: static investment per kilowatt (C 71 ), Financial Internal Rate of Return (C 72 ), local on-grid electricity price (C 73 );

[0090] The rejection criteria are environmental conditions such as ecological protection red lines, nature reserves, and military restricted areas;

[0091] Step S2: establishing a pumped-storage power station site selection expert scoring table for the secondary indicators under the primary indicators in step S1, and scoring each evaluation indicator in the pumped-storage power station site selection evaluation system based on the expert scoring table to construct a comprehensive score set;

[0092] Table 1 Expert scoring table for pumped storage power station site selection

[0093]

[0094]

[0095] Suppose there are k experts, N secondary indicators, and M primary indicators. Invite k experts to score each evaluation indicator in the primary indicator and the secondary indicator through centralized evaluation. The formula is as follows:

[0096]

[0097] In the formula, r pm is the score of the mth expert on the Pth secondary indicator, m∈(1,k),P∈(1,N); is the comprehensive score of the Pth secondary indicator, is the comprehensive score of the first secondary indicator, is the comprehensive score of the Nth secondary indicator, k is the total number of experts, and N is the total number of secondary indicators.

[0098] In this embodiment, in order to solve the site selection problem of pumped-storage power stations, 10 industry experts were invited to score the secondary evaluation indicators according to the scoring table for pre-selected sites of pumped-storage power stations. The comprehensive scores of each evaluation indicator of the pre-selected sites were obtained according to formulas (1) and (2). The comprehensive scores of the 22 evaluation indicators were: 90, 72, 89, 90, 88, 85, 85, 95, 80, 80, 68, 84, 93, 73, 82, 90, 92, 85, 86, 85, 90, and 89.

[0099] In step S3, a first-level indicator judgment matrix and multiple second-level indicator judgment matrices are constructed for the first-level indicator and the second-level indicators belonging to the same first-level indicator respectively; the mean of the first-level indicator expert scoring scale in the first-level indicator judgment matrix and the mean of the second-level indicator expert scoring scale in the second-level indicator judgment matrix are obtained respectively, as well as the second-level indicator expert scoring scale values ​​of multiple experts for different second-level indicators.

[0100] First-level indicator judgment matrix A 1 :

[0101]

[0102] Where: is the scaled mean of the first-level indicator l for the first-level indicator j; is the scale mean of first-level indicator j for first-level indicator l; M is the total number of first-level indicators; a lj is the scale value of indicator l in the first-level indicator for indicator j; a jl is the scale value of indicator j in the first-level indicator for indicator l; a lj (m) is the mth expert's lj The scale value score, a jl (m) is the mth expert's lj The scale value of .

[0103] Secondary indicator judgment matrix A 2l :

[0104]

[0105] In the formula, A 2l is the judgment matrix of the second-level indicators under the l-th first-level indicator, l∈(1,M); is the second-level index p under the first-level index l l For the secondary index f l The scaled mean of ; is the second-level index f under the first-level index l lFor the secondary index p l The scale mean of ; n is the number of evaluation indicators in the lth category of the second-level indicators; For the mth expert to give the lth first-level indicator the second-level indicator f l For the secondary index p l The scale value of For the mth expert to give the lth first-level indicator a second-level indicator p l For the secondary index f l The scale value of .

[0106] For example, A 21 Represents the judgment matrix composed of four evaluation indicators such as the distance to the grid load center and the distance to the new energy center area under geographical factors. 22 It represents the judgment matrix composed of three evaluation indicators, namely, the height difference between the upper and lower reservoirs and the distance-to-height ratio under terrain factors, and so on.

[0107] Table 2 Judgment matrix element scale values

[0108]

[0109]

[0110] Step S4: using the correction factor to correct the expert scoring scale value of the secondary indicator to obtain the corrected scale value of the secondary evaluation indicator;

[0111] Corrected scale value of secondary evaluation index for:

[0112]

[0113] Among them, m represents the mth expert, is the correction factor, is the second-level index p of the mth expert for the lth first-level index l For the secondary index f l The scale value of .

[0114] Correction Factor for:

[0115]

[0116] in, is the second-level index p of the mth expert for the lth first-level index l For the secondary index f l The scale value weight of ;

[0117]

[0118] Among them, σ is The variance of is the second-level index p of the mth expert for the lth first-level index l For the secondary index f l Deviation of the mean scale value of ;

[0119]

[0120] In the formula, p l 、f l =1,2…n l ;n l is the number of secondary indicators under the lth primary indicator; is the secondary index p under the lth primary index by k experts l For the secondary index f l The scaled mean of ;

[0121]

[0122] In view of the site selection problem of pumped storage power stations, the aforementioned experts were invited to score the scale values ​​of each indicator in the evaluation index system, and the scale value judgment matrix of the first-level and second-level evaluation indicators was obtained. The correction factor was used to correct the expert scale value scores in the second-level evaluation indicators, and some results were obtained as shown in Table 3:

[0123] Table 3 Corrected scale values ​​of secondary evaluation indicators

[0124]

[0125] Step S5: Calculate the normalized weight of the first-level indicator and the normalized weight of the second-level indicator based on the mean value of the first-level indicator expert scoring scale and the corrected scale value of the second-level evaluation indicator, and construct the first-level indicator weight set and the second-level indicator weight set respectively;

[0126] The normalized weight of the primary index in step S5 is:

[0127]

[0128] Normalized weight of secondary indicators:

[0129]

[0130] Among them, ω l is the weight corresponding to the lth first-level indicator, is the normalized weight corresponding to the lth first-level indicator; is the pth value under the lth level indicator l The weight corresponding to the secondary indicators is: is the pth value under the lth level indicator l The normalized weight corresponding to each secondary indicator;

[0131] First-level indicator weight set

[0132] Secondary indicator weight set

[0133] in, is the normalized weight of the first level indicator, is the normalized weight of the Mth first-level indicator, is the normalized weight corresponding to the first secondary indicator under the first primary indicator, is the nth level under the lth level indicator l The normalized weight corresponding to each secondary indicator.

[0134] Step S6: Calculate the secondary indicator comprehensive weight set based on the primary indicator weight set and the secondary indicator weight set in step S5, and construct a fuzzy comprehensive evaluation model based on the comprehensive score set in step S2 to calculate the comprehensive evaluation score;

[0135] The comprehensive weight set of the secondary indicators in step S6 is:

[0136]

[0137] The analytic hierarchy process is used to calculate the weights of each evaluation index, and the results are shown in Table 4:

[0138] Table 4 Weight table of evaluation indicators

[0139]

[0140] The fuzzy comprehensive evaluation model is constructed as follows:

[0141]

[0142] Among them, S is the comprehensive evaluation score.

[0143] Based on the weights of the evaluation indicators and the scores of the evaluation indicators for the site selection of the pumped storage power station that have been determined above, the final score S=84.99 for the pre-selected site is calculated.

[0144] Step S7: Establish a comprehensive evaluation set including multiple evaluation levels, assign points to the evaluation levels in the comprehensive evaluation set, and determine the site selection level of the pumped-storage power station based on the comprehensive evaluation scores.

[0145] Comprehensive evaluation set V:

[0146] V={v 1 ,v 2 ,…,v o}, o is the number of evaluation result levels;

[0147] v1 、v 2 、v o They are the first evaluation level, the second evaluation level, and the oth evaluation level respectively;

[0148] The evaluation grades in the comprehensive evaluation set are scored, and the site selection grade of the pumped-storage power station is determined based on the comprehensive evaluation score S and the evaluation grade scores.

[0149] In this embodiment, the evaluation set established by this patent is: V = {excellent, good, average, poor}, and in order to calculate the specific score of the comprehensive evaluation, the evaluation set is quantized to V = {90-100, 80-89, 70-79, 50-69}.

[0150] In this embodiment, S=84.99, and it is finally determined to be a good pre-selected site.

[0151] In summary, the present invention uses the hierarchical analysis method with correction factors to calculate the weights of evaluation indicators. The correction factors compensate for the excessive differences in the expert scale value scores, reduce the influence of expert subjectivity on the evaluation indicator weights, and make the evaluation results closer to the actual situation. This method provides a certain reference for the scientific site selection of pumped storage power stations.

[0152] The present invention comprehensively considers the factors affecting the site selection of pumped storage power stations from seven aspects, namely geographical factors, topographic factors, geological factors, water source factors, social factors, engineering factors and economic factors, proposes 22 evaluation indicators, and constructs an evaluation indicator system for the site selection of pumped storage power stations. It is not limited to a single influencing factor, and analyzes from multiple angles from all aspects, which can systematically, scientifically, objectively and comprehensively describe the influence of geographical factors, topographic factors, geological factors, water source factors, social factors, engineering factors and economic factors on the site selection of pumped storage power stations. And introduces a veto standard to enhance the feasibility of site selection of pumped storage power stations.

[0153] Example 2

[0154] This embodiment provides a pumped storage power station site selection evaluation system based on a modified factor analytic hierarchy process, including:

[0155] Evaluation system building module: it is used to establish a pumped storage power station site selection evaluation system based on the factors affecting the site selection of the pumped storage power station, and the pumped storage power station site selection evaluation system includes multiple first-level indicators, and the first-level indicators include multiple second-level indicators;

[0156] Comprehensive score set construction module: It is used to establish an expert scoring table for pumped storage power station site selection for the secondary indicators under the primary indicators, and to construct a comprehensive score set by scoring each evaluation indicator in the pumped storage power station site selection evaluation system based on the expert scoring table;

[0157] Scoring scale value acquisition module: It is used to construct a first-level indicator judgment matrix and multiple second-level indicator judgment matrices for the first-level indicator and the second-level indicators belonging to the same first-level indicator respectively; respectively obtain the first-level indicator expert scoring scale mean in the first-level indicator judgment matrix and the second-level indicator expert scoring scale mean in the second-level indicator judgment matrix, as well as the second-level indicator expert scoring scale values ​​of multiple experts for different second-level indicators;

[0158] Secondary evaluation index correction scale value acquisition module: it is used to correct the secondary index expert scoring scale value by using the correction factor to obtain the secondary evaluation index correction scale value;

[0159] Indicator weight set construction module: It is used to calculate the normalized weight of the first-level indicator and the normalized weight of the second-level indicator based on the mean value of the first-level indicator expert scoring scale and the corrected scale value of the second-level evaluation indicator, and to construct the first-level indicator weight set and the second-level indicator weight set respectively;

[0160] Comprehensive evaluation score calculation module: it is used to calculate the comprehensive weight set of the secondary indicators based on the weight set of the primary indicators and the weight set of the secondary indicators, and to construct a fuzzy comprehensive evaluation model based on the comprehensive score set in step S2 to calculate the comprehensive evaluation score;

[0161] Evaluation level judgment module: It is used to establish a comprehensive evaluation set containing multiple evaluation levels, assign points to the evaluation levels in the comprehensive evaluation set, and judge the site selection level of the pumped-storage power station based on the comprehensive evaluation scores.

[0162] Although the preferred embodiments of the present invention have been described, those skilled in the art may make other changes and modifications to these embodiments once they have learned the basic creative concept. Therefore, the appended claims are intended to be interpreted as including the preferred embodiments and all changes and modifications falling within the scope of the present invention.

[0163] Obviously, those skilled in the art can make various changes and modifications to the embodiments of the present invention without departing from the spirit and scope of the embodiments of the present invention. Thus, if these modifications and variations of the embodiments of the present invention fall within the scope of the claims of the present invention and their equivalents, the present invention is also intended to include these modifications and variations.

[0164] Other parts not described in detail are all prior art.

Claims

1. A method for evaluating the site selection of a pumped storage power station based on a modified factor analytic hierarchy process, characterized in that: The steps include: Step S1: establishing a pumped-storage power station site selection evaluation system based on the factors affecting the site selection of the pumped-storage power station, wherein the pumped-storage power station site selection evaluation system includes a plurality of primary indicators, and the primary indicators include a plurality of secondary indicators; Step S2: establishing a pumped-storage power station site selection expert scoring table for the secondary indicators under the primary indicators in step S1, and scoring each evaluation indicator in the pumped-storage power station site selection evaluation system based on the expert scoring table to construct a comprehensive score set; Step S3: constructing a first-level indicator judgment matrix and multiple second-level indicator judgment matrices for the first-level indicator and the second-level indicators belonging to the same first-level indicator respectively; obtaining the mean of the first-level indicator expert scoring scale in the first-level indicator judgment matrix and the mean of the second-level indicator expert scoring scale in the second-level indicator judgment matrix, as well as the second-level indicator expert scoring scale values ​​of multiple experts for different second-level indicators respectively; Step S4: using the correction factor to correct the expert scoring scale value of the secondary indicator to obtain the corrected scale value of the secondary evaluation indicator; Step S5: Calculate the normalized weight of the first-level indicator and the normalized weight of the second-level indicator based on the mean value of the first-level indicator expert scoring scale and the corrected scale value of the second-level evaluation indicator, and construct the first-level indicator weight set and the second-level indicator weight set respectively; Step S6: Calculate the secondary indicator comprehensive weight set based on the primary indicator weight set and the secondary indicator weight set in step S5, and construct a fuzzy comprehensive evaluation model based on the comprehensive score set in step S2 to calculate the comprehensive evaluation score; Step S7: Establish a comprehensive evaluation set including multiple evaluation levels, assign points to the evaluation levels in the comprehensive evaluation set, and determine the site selection level of the pumped-storage power station based on the comprehensive evaluation scores.

2. The method for site selection and evaluation of a pumped storage power station based on modified factor analytic hierarchy process according to claim 1, characterized in that: The first-level indicators in step 1 include: geographical factors, topographic factors, geological factors, water source factors, social factors, engineering factors, and economic factors; The geographical factors include four secondary indicators: distance to the grid load center, distance to the new energy regional center, distance to the highway, and distance to the substation; The topographic factors include three secondary indicators: the height difference between the upper and lower reservoirs, the distance-to-height ratio, and the regulating storage capacity of the upper and lower reservoirs; The geological factors include four secondary indicators: regional structural stability, geological conditions of the upper and lower reservoirs and their dam sites, geological conditions of the water transmission and power generation system, and natural building materials; The water source factor includes two secondary indicators: multi-year average runoff and multi-year average sediment content; Social factors include three secondary indicators: land acquisition area C 51 、Migrant population C 52 , environmentally sensitive objects; Engineering factors include three secondary indicators: installed capacity, continuous full-power hours, and reservoir characteristic water level; Economic factors include three secondary indicators: static investment per kilowatt, financial internal rate of return, and local on-grid electricity price.

3. The pumped storage power station site selection evaluation method based on modified factor analytic hierarchy process according to claim 1, characterized in that: In step 2, the scores R of each evaluation index in the site selection evaluation system of pumped storage power station based on the expert scoring table are: In the formula, r pm is the score of the mth expert on the Pth secondary indicator, m∈(1,k),P∈(1,N); is the comprehensive score of the Pth secondary indicator, is the comprehensive score of the first secondary indicator, is the comprehensive score of the Nth secondary indicator, k is the total number of experts, and N is the total number of secondary indicators.

4. The method for site selection and evaluation of a pumped storage power station based on modified factor analytic hierarchy process according to claim 1, characterized in that: In step S3 First-level indicator judgment matrix A1: Where: is the scaled mean of the first-level indicator l for the first-level indicator j; is the scaled mean of the first-level indicator j for the first-level indicator l; M is the total number of first-level indicators; Secondary indicator judgment matrix A 2l : In the formula, A 2l is the judgment matrix of the second-level indicators under the l-th first-level indicator, l∈(1,M); is the second-level index p under the first-level index l l For the secondary index f l The scaled mean of ; is the second-level index f under the first-level index l l For the secondary index p l ; n is the number of evaluation indicators in the lth category of the second-level indicators.

5. The method for site selection and evaluation of a pumped storage power station based on modified factor analytic hierarchy process according to claim 4, characterized in that: The secondary evaluation index correction scale value in step S4 for: Among them, m represents the mth expert, is the correction factor, is the second-level index p of the mth expert for the lth first-level index l For the secondary index f l The scale value of .

6. The method for site selection and evaluation of a pumped storage power station based on modified factor analytic hierarchy process according to claim 5, characterized in that: Correction Factor for: in, is the second-level index p of the mth expert for the lth first-level index l For the secondary index f l The scale value weight of ; Among them, σ is The variance of is the second-level index p of the mth expert for the lth first-level index l For the secondary index f l Deviation of the mean scale value of ; In the formula, p l 、f l =1,2…n l ;n l is the number of secondary indicators under the lth primary indicator; is the secondary index p under the lth primary index by k experts l For the secondary index f l The scaled mean of ; 7. The method for site selection and evaluation of a pumped storage power station based on modified factor analytic hierarchy process according to claim 5, characterized in that: The normalized weight of the primary index in step S5 is: Normalized weights of secondary indicators: Among them, ω l is the weight corresponding to the lth first-level indicator, is the normalized weight corresponding to the lth first-level indicator; is the pth value under the lth level indicator l The weight corresponding to the secondary indicators is: is the pth value under the lth level indicator l The normalized weight corresponding to each secondary indicator; First-level indicator weight set Secondary indicator weight set in, is the normalized weight of the first level indicator, is the normalized weight of the Mth first-level indicator, is the normalized weight corresponding to the first secondary indicator under the first primary indicator, is the nth level under the lth level indicator l The normalized weight corresponding to each secondary indicator.

8. The method for site selection and evaluation of a pumped storage power station based on modified factor analytic hierarchy process according to claim 7, characterized in that: The comprehensive weight set of the secondary indicators in step S6 is: The fuzzy comprehensive evaluation model is constructed as follows: Among them, S is the comprehensive evaluation score.

9. The method for site selection and evaluation of a pumped storage power station based on modified factor analytic hierarchy process according to claim 8, characterized in that: The comprehensive evaluation set V comprising multiple evaluation levels in step S7 is: V={v1,v2,…,v o }, o is the number of evaluation result levels; v1, v2, v o They are the first evaluation level, the second evaluation level, and the oth evaluation level respectively; The evaluation grades in the comprehensive evaluation set are scored, and the site selection grade of the pumped-storage power station is determined based on the comprehensive evaluation score S and the evaluation grade scores.

10. The pumped storage power station site selection evaluation system based on modified factor analytic hierarchy process is characterized by: include: Evaluation system building module: it is used to establish a pumped storage power station site selection evaluation system based on the factors affecting the site selection of the pumped storage power station, and the pumped storage power station site selection evaluation system includes multiple first-level indicators, and the first-level indicators include multiple second-level indicators; Comprehensive score set construction module: It is used to establish an expert scoring table for pumped storage power station site selection for the secondary indicators under the primary indicators, and to construct a comprehensive score set by scoring each evaluation indicator in the pumped storage power station site selection evaluation system based on the expert scoring table; Scoring scale value acquisition module: It is used to construct a first-level indicator judgment matrix and multiple second-level indicator judgment matrices for the first-level indicator and the second-level indicators belonging to the same first-level indicator respectively; respectively obtain the first-level indicator expert scoring scale mean in the first-level indicator judgment matrix and the second-level indicator expert scoring scale mean in the second-level indicator judgment matrix, as well as the second-level indicator expert scoring scale values ​​of multiple experts for different second-level indicators; Secondary evaluation index correction scale value acquisition module: it is used to correct the secondary index expert scoring scale value by using the correction factor to obtain the secondary evaluation index correction scale value; Indicator weight set construction module: It is used to calculate the normalized weight of the first-level indicator and the normalized weight of the second-level indicator based on the mean value of the first-level indicator expert scoring scale and the corrected scale value of the second-level evaluation indicator, and to construct the first-level indicator weight set and the second-level indicator weight set respectively; Comprehensive evaluation score calculation module: it is used to calculate the comprehensive weight set of the secondary indicators based on the weight set of the primary indicators and the weight set of the secondary indicators, and to construct a fuzzy comprehensive evaluation model based on the comprehensive score set in step S2 to calculate the comprehensive evaluation score; Evaluation level judgment module: It is used to establish a comprehensive evaluation set containing multiple evaluation levels, assign points to the evaluation levels in the comprehensive evaluation set, and judge the site selection level of the pumped storage power station according to the comprehensive evaluation scores; The pumped storage power station site selection evaluation system of the modified factor hierarchy analysis method is used to execute the steps in the pumped storage power station site selection evaluation method of the modified factor hierarchy analysis method described in any one of claims 1-9.

Images