Operation risk evaluation method and device for relay protection device

Abstract

The invention discloses an operation risk evaluation method and device for a relay protection device, and relates to the technical field of power equipment, and the method comprises the steps: obtaining aging data of a plurality of components, and determining a hardware health score of the relay protection device according to the aging data of the plurality of components; acquiring latest operation state data of the relay protection device, and determining an operation state score of the relay protection device according to the latest operation state data; acquiring the familial defect condition, the software design defect condition and the technical standard design principle violation condition of the relay protection device, and determining the technical score of the relay protection device according to the familial defect condition, the software design defect condition and the technical standard design principle violation condition; determining a comprehensive score of the relay protection device according to the hardware health score, the operation state score and the technical score; and determining the operation risk level of the relay protection device according to the comprehensive score.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the technical field of electric power equipment and can also be used in the field of risk assessment, and in particular to an operation risk assessment method and device for a relay protection device. Background Art

[0002] With the continuous development and expansion of the power system, the complexity and uncertainty of the power grid are also increasing, which puts higher requirements on the reliability and stability of relay protection devices. As an important protection device of the power system, the operation risk of relay protection devices is directly related to the safe and stable operation of the power grid.

[0003] The traditional risk assessment method for the operation of relay protection devices is mainly based on the age of the equipment, which lacks scientificity and accuracy. Generally speaking, the equipment life of the relay protection device is 12 years, and it should be arranged for transformation after exceeding the operating life. With the construction of the power system, the number of relay protection devices in the power grid alone exceeds 2 million sets, and the number increases by 30,000 sets per year. Under the current situation where the age is used as the basis for transformation, the number of relay protection devices that need to be transformed each year reaches tens of thousands and increases year by year, which requires a lot of manpower and material resources. The maintenance task has exceeded the current maintenance unit's carrying capacity. At the same time, a large number of transformation constructions require substation power outages, which reduces the reliability of power supply to the power grid.

[0004] The current transformation of old relay protection equipment faces the following problems:

[0005] (1) With the advancement of technology, the quality and service life of relay protection devices have been improved. Some relay protection devices can operate continuously without failure for more than 18 years. It is not scientific to eliminate relay protection devices according to a fixed period of time.

[0006] (2) Due to factors such as funding, personnel, and power outage plans, it is difficult to implement the renovation of all obsolete equipment on time. In addition, as the scale of the power grid grows, the scale and difficulty of the renovation of obsolete relay protection equipment are increasing.

[0007] Therefore, the operational risk assessment of power grid relay protection devices is an inevitable trend in the development of the power system and one of the important means to ensure the safe and stable operation of the power grid.

[0008] This section is intended to provide a background or context to the embodiments of the invention recited in the claims. No admission is made that the description herein is prior art by inclusion in this section. Summary of the invention

[0009] To solve at least one of the above technical problems, the present application provides a method and device for evaluating the operation risk of a relay protection device.

[0010] According to a first aspect of the present application, there is provided an operation risk assessment method for a relay protection device, wherein the relay protection device comprises a plurality of components, and the method comprises:

[0011] Obtain aging data of the multiple components, and determine the hardware health score of the relay protection device based on the aging data of the multiple components; obtain the latest operating status data of the relay protection device, and determine the operating status score of the relay protection device based on the latest operating status data; obtain the family defects, software design defects and violations of technical standard design principles of the relay protection device, and determine the technical score of the relay protection device based on the family defects, software design defects and violations of technical standard design principles; determine the comprehensive score of the relay protection device based on the hardware health score, the operating status score and the technical score; determine the operating risk level of the relay protection device based on the comprehensive score.

[0012] In some optional aspects of this embodiment, determining the hardware health score of the relay protection device according to the aging data of the multiple components includes:

[0013] According to the aging data of each of the components and a preset aging scoring function, an aging sub-score of each of the components is determined; according to the aging sub-score of each of the components and an aging correction coefficient, a hardware health score of the relay protection device is determined.

[0014] In some optional methods of the present embodiment, determining the hardware health score of the relay protection device based on the aging sub-scores and aging correction coefficients of each of the components includes: determining the total aging score of the relay protection device based on the aging sub-scores and aging correction coefficients of each of the components; determining the non-aging sub-scores of each of the components based on the preset aging score function; determining the non-aging total score of the relay protection device based on the non-aging sub-scores and aging correction coefficients of each of the components; determining the hardware health score of the relay protection device based on the total aging score and the non-aging total score of the relay protection device.

[0015] In some optional methods of this embodiment, the latest operating status data includes detection-type status data, reliability-type status data and failure-type status data, and determining the operating status score of the relay protection device based on the latest operating status data includes: determining a detection-type status score based on the detection-type status data; determining a reliability-type status score based on the reliability-type status data; determining a failure-type status score based on the failure-type status data; and determining the operating status score of the relay protection device based on the detection-type status score, the reliability-type status score and the failure-type status score.

[0016] In some optional methods of the present embodiment, the detection type state data includes multiple detection type state quantities, and determining the detection type state score based on the detection type state data includes: determining the detection type state sub-score of each of the detection type state quantities based on a preset detection type state scoring function; determining the detection type state score based on the detection type state sub-score of each of the detection type state quantities and the detection type state score influence coefficient.

[0017] In some optional methods of the present embodiment, the reliability status data includes multiple reliability status quantities, and determining the reliability status score based on the reliability status data includes: determining the reliability status sub-score of each of the reliability status quantities based on a preset reliability status score function; determining the reliability status score based on the reliability status sub-score of each of the reliability status quantities and the reliability status score influence coefficient.

[0018] In some optional methods of the present embodiment, the failure type state data includes multiple failure type state quantities, and determining the failure type state score based on the failure type state data includes: determining the failure type state sub-score of each of the failure type state quantities based on a preset failure type state scoring function; determining the failure type state score based on the failure type state sub-score of each of the failure type state quantities and the failure type state score influence coefficient.

[0019] In some optional methods of this embodiment, the technical score of the relay protection device is determined according to the family defect situation, the software design defect situation and the violation of the technical standard design principle, including:

[0020] Based on the family defect situation, the family defect score is determined; based on the software design defect situation, the software design defect score is determined; based on the technical standard design principle violation situation, the technical standard design principle violation score is determined; based on the family defect score, the software design defect score and the technical standard design principle violation score, the technical score of the relay protection device is determined.

[0021] In some optional aspects of this embodiment, determining the comprehensive score of the relay protection device according to the hardware health score, the operating status score, and the technical score includes:

[0022] Calculate the sum of the hardware health score and the operating status score; multiply the sum of the hardware health score and the operating status score by the technical score to obtain a product, and determine the product as the comprehensive score of the relay protection device.

[0023] In some optional aspects of this embodiment, determining the operation risk level of the relay protection device according to the comprehensive score includes:

[0024] In response to determining that the comprehensive score is in a first preset score interval, it is determined that the operating risk level of the relay protection device is normal; in response to determining that the comprehensive score is in a second preset score interval, it is determined that the operating risk level of the relay protection device is abnormal; in response to determining that the comprehensive score is in a third preset score interval, it is determined that the operating risk level of the relay protection device is severe.

[0025] According to a second aspect of the present application, there is provided an operation risk assessment device for a relay protection device, wherein the relay protection device comprises a plurality of components, including:

[0026] a hardware health score determination module, configured to obtain aging data of the plurality of components, and determine a hardware health score of the relay protection device according to the aging data of the plurality of components;

[0027] An operation status score determination module is configured to obtain the latest operation status data of the relay protection device and determine the operation status score of the relay protection device according to the latest operation status data;

[0028] A technical score determination module is configured to obtain the family defect situation, software design defect situation and violation of technical standard design principles of the relay protection device, and determine the technical score of the relay protection device according to the family defect situation, software design defect situation and violation of technical standard design principles;

[0029] a comprehensive score determination module, configured to determine a comprehensive score of the relay protection device according to the hardware health score, the operating status score and the technical score;

[0030] The operation risk level determination module is configured to determine the operation risk level of the relay protection device according to the comprehensive score.

[0031] According to a third aspect of the present application, an electronic device is provided, comprising a memory, a processor, and a computer program stored in the memory and executable on the processor, wherein the processor implements the above-mentioned operation risk assessment method for a relay protection device when executing the computer program.

[0032] According to a fourth aspect of the present application, a computer-readable storage medium is provided, wherein the computer-readable storage medium stores a computer program, and when the computer program is executed by a processor, the computer program implements the above-mentioned operation risk assessment method for a relay protection device.

[0033] According to a fifth aspect of the present application, a computer program product is provided, the computer program product comprising a computer program, and the computer program, when executed by a processor, implements the above-mentioned operation risk assessment method for a relay protection device.

[0034] The present application provides an operation risk assessment method and device for a relay protection device, which determines the hardware health score, operation status score and technical score of the relay protection device through aging data, status data, family defects, software design defects and violations of technical standard design principles of components, and finally determines the comprehensive score of the relay protection device. Based on the comprehensive score, the operation risk level of the relay protection device is determined, so as to timely issue alarms to abnormal equipment or equipment with greater potential operation risks, provide scientific decision-making basis for power companies, optimize equipment maintenance and management, reduce equipment failure rate and maintenance costs, avoid the occurrence of power accidents, and ensure the safe and stable operation of the power grid. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0035] In order to more clearly illustrate the embodiments of the present invention or the technical solutions in the prior art, the following briefly introduces the drawings required for use in the embodiments or the prior art descriptions. Obviously, the drawings described below are only some embodiments of the present invention. For ordinary technicians in this field, other drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without creative work. In the drawings:

[0036] Figure 1 One of the flow charts of the operation risk assessment method for a relay protection device in an embodiment of the present invention;

[0037] Figure 2 This is a second flow chart of the operation risk assessment method for a relay protection device in an embodiment of the present invention;

[0038] Figure 3 This is a third flow chart of the operation risk assessment method for a relay protection device in an embodiment of the present invention;

[0039] Figure 4 It is a schematic diagram of the aging function scoring calculation curve of the components in the embodiment of the present invention;

[0040] Figure 5 This is a fourth flow chart of the operation risk assessment method for a relay protection device in an embodiment of the present invention;

[0041] Figure 6 This is a fifth flow chart of the operation risk assessment method for a relay protection device in an embodiment of the present invention;

[0042] Figure 7Schematic diagram of a curve for calculating the operating environment temperature evaluation score in an embodiment of the present invention;

[0043] Figure 8 Schematic diagram of a curve for calculating the operating environment humidity evaluation score in an embodiment of the present invention;

[0044] Fig. 9 Schematic diagram of a curve for calculating a device temperature evaluation score in an embodiment of the present invention;

[0045] Fig.10 Schematic diagram of a curve for calculating a simulation error evaluation score in an embodiment of the present invention;

[0046] Fig.11 Schematic diagram of a curve for calculating a channel operation status evaluation score in an embodiment of the present invention;

[0047] Fig.12 A schematic diagram of a curve for calculating a differential flow condition evaluation score in an embodiment of the present invention;

[0048] Fig.13 This is a sixth flow chart of the operation risk assessment method for a relay protection device in an embodiment of the present invention;

[0049] Fig.14 Schematic diagram of a curve used to calculate defect reliability score in an embodiment of the present invention;

[0050] Fig.15 This is the seventh flow chart of the operation risk assessment method for a relay protection device in an embodiment of the present invention;

[0051] Fig.16 This is a flowchart of an operation risk assessment method for a relay protection device according to an embodiment of the present invention.

[0052] Fig.17 This is a ninth flowchart of the method for evaluating the operating risk of a relay protection device in an embodiment of the present invention;

[0053] Fig.18 Schematic diagram of the structure of an operation risk assessment device for a relay protection device in an embodiment of the present invention;

[0054] Fig.19 The present invention is a block diagram of an electronic device used to implement the operation risk assessment method for a relay protection device according to an embodiment of the present application. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0055] To make the purpose, technical solution and advantages of the embodiments of the present invention more clear, the embodiments of the present invention are further described in detail below in conjunction with the accompanying drawings. Here, the exemplary embodiments of the present invention and their descriptions are used to explain the present invention, but are not intended to limit the present invention.

[0056] In production practice, the current operation risk assessment and life assessment of relay protection devices are mainly based on the age of the relay protection devices. The commonly used standard is to renovate after the operation life reaches 15 years, that is, to dismantle the old device and install a new one. In theory, the existing operation risk assessment technology of power grid relay protection devices mainly includes methods based on reliability theory.

[0057] The existing methods face the following problems:

[0058] (1) The method of using service life as the evaluation standard lacks scientific basis and will result in waste of resources in most cases. There is a lack of risk control measures for relay protection devices that have not reached their service life and have abnormalities.

[0059] (2) The method based on reliability theory mainly calculates and analyzes the reliability indicators of relay protection devices. The disadvantage is that it requires a large amount of historical data and statistical analysis, which may not be applicable to new relay protection devices.

[0060] In order to solve at least one of the above technical problems, Figure 1 As shown, an embodiment of the present application provides an operation risk assessment method for a relay protection device, wherein the relay protection device has multiple components, and the method includes:

[0061] Step 10: Acquire aging data of the plurality of components, and determine a hardware health score of the relay protection device according to the aging data of the plurality of components;

[0062] Step 20: Acquire the latest operating status data of the relay protection device, and determine the operating status score of the relay protection device according to the latest operating status data;

[0063] Step 30: Obtain the family defects, software design defects, and violations of technical standard design principles of the relay protection device, and determine the technical score of the relay protection device based on the family defects, software design defects, and violations of technical standard design principles;

[0064] Step 40: Determine a comprehensive score of the relay protection device according to the hardware health score, the operating status score and the technical score;

[0065] Step 50: Determine the operation risk level of the relay protection device according to the comprehensive score.

[0066] This method provides a set of relay protection device operation status evaluation models, including the main factors affecting the health status of the equipment. It mainly involves three aspects: the operating life of various components in the relay protection hardware, the aging process of components in individual devices and the overall operation of the device, and the protection principle, logic strategy and software design level, which are mainly reflected in family defects.

[0067] The present invention provides a method for evaluating the operating risk of a relay protection device, which can, firstly, promptly warn abnormal equipment or equipment with greater potential operating risks, and secondly, provide a basis for the retirement and transformation of old relay protection equipment.

[0068] The evaluation model of this method includes the following three aspects:

[0069] (1) Based on the aging data and service life data of various major components in the relay protection device, formulate the hardware health evaluation index of the relay protection device.

[0070] (2) Based on the operating status data of the relay protection device (including detection-type status quantity, reliability status quantity, risk-type status quantity, improvement-type status quantity and failure-type status quantity), formulate the relay protection device status evaluation index.

[0071] (3) Based on the data of family defects, software design defects, and violations of technical standard design principles (including safety regulations, anti-accident measures, etc.) of relay protection devices, formulate technical evaluation indicators for relay protection devices.

[0072] According to the corresponding evaluation rules for the evaluation items of each evaluation indicator, which reflects the importance of the indicator in the evaluation of device operation risk, an evaluation model including the above three evaluation indicators and their evaluation items is constructed. On the basis of obtaining the data of each indicator item, each item is evaluated and scored respectively, and finally the overall score of the device operation risk is obtained.

[0073] Below Figure 1 The steps are described in detail:

[0074] Step 10: Obtain aging data of the multiple components, and determine a hardware health score of the relay protection device based on the aging data of the multiple components.

[0075] In some optional embodiments of this embodiment, Figure 2 As shown, step 10 further includes:

[0076] Step 101: determining an aging sub-score of each component according to the aging data of each component and a preset aging scoring function;

[0077] Step 102: Determine the hardware health score of the relay protection device according to the aging sub-score and aging correction coefficient of each of the components.

[0078] In some optional embodiments of this embodiment, Figure 3 As shown, step 102 further includes:

[0079] Step 1021, determining the total aging score of the relay protection device according to the aging sub-score and aging correction coefficient of each component;

[0080] Step 1022: Determine the non-aging sub-score of each of the components according to the preset aging scoring function;

[0081] Step 1023: Determine the total non-aging score of the relay protection device according to the non-aging sub-score and the aging correction coefficient of each component;

[0082] Step 1024: Determine the hardware health score of the relay protection device according to the total aging score and the total non-aging score of the relay protection device.

[0083] In a specific example, the evaluation is conducted based on the aging data and service life data of various major components, including important single components (relays), combined components (device power supplies), PCB boards, input boards, etc. Considering the differences in aging process and service life of components from different manufacturers and different principles, correction coefficients are used to correct their aging degree. The equipment aging function can be expressed as:

[0084]

[0085] Among them, f n (X) is the aging function of a certain type of component over the operating years; k n is the corresponding correction coefficient; Y 1 (X) is the hardware health score of the evaluated relay protection device; M min、 M max They are component aging functions f n The upper and lower limits of (X).

[0086] Component aging function f n (X) should be able to reflect the actual aging degree of a component and reflect the aging of a certain aspect of the device. X can be the service life, frequency of use or probability of use of the component. Generally, the component manufacturer or equipment manufacturer is required to provide a curve that can reflect the aging change of the component. For example, Figure 4 As shown in the figure, taking X as the service life as an example, the lower limit of the average service life of the device specified in DL / T 587 is 12 years and the upper limit is 15 years. Figure 4 The curve shown can determine the aging function f of the component of this model. n (X).

[0087] At the same time, in order to eliminate the impact of different components of different equipment on the difference in the total evaluation score, the hardware health score Y 1 (x) Converted into percentage as the hardware health assessment value of the relay protection device:

[0088]

[0089] Where Y 1 (X a ) represents the hardware health score of a relay protection device when it has a components; Y 1 (0) is Y 1 (X) The value when X=0 represents the hardware health score of a certain relay protection device when the hardware is not aged.

[0090] Step 20: Acquire the latest operating status data of the relay protection device, and determine the operating status score of the relay protection device according to the latest operating status data.

[0091] In a specific example, the latest operating status data of the relay protection device is used to construct a relay protection device status evaluation function, thereby determining the operating status score of the relay protection device.

[0092] In some optional aspects of this embodiment, the latest operating status data includes detection status data, reliability status data and failure status data, such as Figure 5 As shown, step 20 further includes:

[0093] Step 201: Determine a detection type status score according to the detection type status data.

[0094] In some optional aspects of this embodiment, the detection type status data includes multiple detection type status quantities, such as Figure 6 As shown, determining the detection type status score according to the detection type status data includes:

[0095] Step 2011, determining the detection type state sub-score of each detection type state quantity according to a preset detection type state scoring function;

[0096] Step 2012: Determine the detection type state score according to the detection type state sub-score and the detection type state score influence coefficient of each of the detection type state quantities.

[0097] The detection status quantity in this application includes two parts: the operating status quantity of the equipment and the environmental status quantity. The operating status quantity can be automatically obtained through the online information monitoring system, or through operation inspections, power outages and regular tests, including protection action time, sampling accuracy, action time, secondary circuit insulation, relative fiber circuit power loss and CPU load rate. The environmental status quantity can be automatically obtained through the online information system or obtained through operation inspections, generally including the operating environment temperature, humidity and dust accumulation of the device body and auxiliary devices. It can be expressed as the function A(x):

[0098] A(x)=k A1 g 1 (x)+k A2 g 2 (x)+k A3 g 3 (x)+...+k An g n (x)

[0099] Where A(x) is the function used to determine the detection state score, k An is the influence coefficient of the corresponding state quantity, and the value is determined according to the influence of the corresponding state quantity on the detection state quantity; g n (x) is a scoring function of the detection type state quantity, that is, a preset detection type state scoring function, which can be given according to a state quantity scoring table.

[0100] In a specific example, g n (x) Satisfy:

[0101]

[0102] It should be noted that for the above g n See Table 1 for explanation of (x).

[0103] Table 1

[0104]

[0105]

[0106]

[0107] Further, see the following description:

[0108] (1) Operating environment temperature evaluation score K1 Figure 7 When the ambient temperature is between T1 and T2, the score is calculated according to Figure 7 The value increases linearly; when the ambient temperature is between T2 and T3, the score is 5 points; when the ambient temperature is between T3 and T4, the score is Figure 7The value decreases linearly. Figure 7 T1, T2, T3, and T4 are the boundary values ​​of the ambient temperature. The specific values ​​are as follows: T1: the lower limit of the ambient temperature of the microcomputer protection device installed in the switch cabinet according to DL / T 587; T2: the lower limit of the indoor ambient temperature of the microcomputer protection device according to DL / T 587; T3: the upper limit of the indoor ambient temperature of the microcomputer protection device according to DL / T 587; T4: the upper limit of the ambient temperature of the microcomputer protection device installed in the switch cabinet according to DL / T 587. Based on the temperature collection data, the operating environment temperature scoring method is as follows:

[0109]

[0110] Where: K 1 : Operating environment temperature evaluation score; K i : The single evaluation score corresponding to the collection; i: the number of collections; n: the total number of collections within the evaluation period.

[0111] (2) Operating environment humidity evaluation score K2 Figure 8 When the ambient humidity is between H1 and H2, the score is 5 points; when the ambient humidity is between H2 and H3, the score is Figure 8 The value decreases linearly; when it is greater than or equal to H3, the score is 3 points; Figure 8 H1, H2, and H3 are the boundary values ​​of environmental humidity, and the specific values ​​are as follows: H1: the lower limit of relative humidity in the normal working atmosphere of relay protection devices according to DL / T 478; H2: the upper limit of the maximum monthly relative humidity in indoor environments of microcomputer protection devices according to DL / T 587; H3: the upper limit of the maximum relative humidity in the environment of 10kV-66kV microcomputer protection devices installed in switch cabinets according to DL / T 587. Based on the humidity collection data, the operating environment humidity scoring method is as follows:

[0112]

[0113] Where: K 2 : Operating environment humidity evaluation score; K i : The single evaluation score corresponding to the collection; i: the number of collections; n: the total number of collections within the evaluation period.

[0114] (3) The device temperature evaluation score is based on Fig. 9 The calculation device measures the difference between the highest temperature and the ambient temperature as the current measurement value, and compares the measurement value with the measurement difference calculated when the ambient temperature was similar last time (the difference between the two ambient temperatures was within 10 degrees). If the two differences are within 5 degrees, it is considered a normal working state and full marks are awarded; if the two differences are within 5 to 10 degrees, the scores are based on Fig. 9The values ​​decrease linearly; if the difference between the two values ​​exceeds 10 degrees, no points will be awarded for this item; when the temperature difference changes in a consistent trend, the cumulative difference between the values ​​measured for three or more consecutive times during the evaluation period exceeds 10 degrees, no points will be awarded for this item.

[0115] (4) The analog error evaluation score is based on Fig.10 The specified implementation (score calculated by slope) is 20 when the sampling error is between 0% and 2.5%; when it is between 2.5% and 5% (excluding 5%), the score is calculated as follows: Fig.10 The slope shown can determine the expression of the score and the sampling error, and the score is determined based on the expression; when it is greater than or equal to 5%, the score is 0.

[0116] When the load current is less than 0.1In, the current analog quantity acquisition will not be scored. When the load current such as line empty charging cannot meet the scoring requirements, supplementary measurements can be performed in conjunction with changes in the system operation mode.

[0117] (5) Channel operation status evaluation score is based on Fig.11 The fiber channel operation status scoring standard is limited to the channel packet loss rate and bit error rate not exceeding the standard value. Fig.11 The regulations are implemented, where when the ratio of the channel packet loss rate and bit error rate to the standard value is between 0 and 0.5, the score is 20; when it is between 0.5 and 1 (excluding 1), the score is as follows: Fig.11 The slope shown can determine the expression of the score and the ratio, and based on the expression, the score is determined; when it is equal to 1, the score is 10 points.

[0118] When the Fibre Channel health score K i The lower score is taken. The standard values ​​of packet loss rate and bit error rate are taken from the device design alarm threshold. The evaluation score of the fiber channel operation status during the evaluation period is:

[0119]

[0120] Where: K 1 : Fibre Channel operation status evaluation score; K i : Single evaluation score corresponding to the operation status of the fiber channel; i: Number of collections; n: Total number of collections within the evaluation period.

[0121] (6) Single differential flow condition evaluation score K i Standard Press Fig.12 When the differential current allowable value multiple is between 0 and 0.5, the score is 30; when the differential current allowable value multiple is between 0.5 and 1 (excluding 1), the score is as follows: Fig.12 The slope shown can determine the expression of the score and the multiple, and based on the expression, the score is determined. When it is greater than or equal to 1, the score is 10 points.

[0122] (7) Voltage deviation evaluation score. The voltage deviation value is used as the evaluation reference. When the voltage deviation value does not reach the alarm value, the full score K is obtained. i =10; when the voltage exceeds the alarm value and an over-limit alarm is issued, no points will be awarded for this time. i =0; when the voltage deviation is found to exceed the allowable deviation of the device design for three consecutive inspections, no score will be given for this item during the evaluation period K=0; when the voltage deviation causes the device to be locked, K=0, and this indicator is included in the improved state quantity evaluation.

[0123] Step 202: Determine a reliability status score according to the reliability status data.

[0124] In some optional aspects of this embodiment, the reliability status data includes multiple reliability status quantities, such as Fig.13 As shown, determining the reliability status score according to the reliability status data includes:

[0125] Step 2021: Determine the reliability state sub-score of each reliability state quantity according to a preset reliability state scoring function;

[0126] Step 2022: Determine the reliability status score according to the reliability status sub-score and the reliability status score influence coefficient of each reliability status quantity.

[0127] In this application, the reliability state quantity represents the overall reliability level of a certain type of relay protection device. The overall reliability of a certain type of product can be judged based on the fault occurrence and correct operation of the product. It can be expressed by the function B(x):

[0128] B(y)=k B1 h 1 (y)+k B2 h 2 (y)+k B3 h 3 (y)+...+k Bn h n (y)

[0129] In the formula, k Bn h is the influence coefficient of the corresponding state quantity, and the value is determined according to the influence of the corresponding state quantity on the reliability state quantity; n (y) is the scoring function of the reliability state quantity, that is, the aforementioned reliability state scoring function, which can be given according to the state quantity scoring table. In a specific example:

[0130]

[0131] Where: K y1: defect reliability score of the same type of protection device of a certain manufacturer within the evaluation period; K y2 : The correct action reliability score of the same type of protection device of a certain manufacturer within the evaluation period;

[0132] (1) Defect reliability score K y1 : Press Fig.14 When the defect reliability ratio is between 0 and 0.5, the score is 100. When it is between 0.5 and 1, the score is calculated according to Fig.14 Linear decrease.

[0133] S: defect reliability ratio. Calculation method:

[0134]

[0135] μ: The weighted average defect score of the same model of products of a certain manufacturer in the same cumulative operating period within the evaluation period. Calculation method:

[0136]

[0137] Where: Q 1 : The number of general defects of the same model product within the evaluation period; Q 2 : The number of serious defects of the same model product during the evaluation period; Q 3 : Number of critical defects of the same model product within the evaluation period; A 1 : General defect weight factor, such as A 1 =1; A 2 : Severe defect weight factor, for example, A 2 =2; A 3 : Critical defect weight factor, for example, A 3 =5; N S :It is the number of products with the same model. The evaluation and statistical period is 1 year (12 months).

[0138] M: Reliability threshold criterion value. The reliability threshold M is calculated by the cumulative weighted average defect score of all devices over the same cumulative operating period. The calculation method is:

[0139]

[0140] Where: S 1 : The number of general defects of all devices over the years; S 2 : Number of serious defects of all devices over the years; S 3 : Number of critical defects of all devices over the years; N: Statistical number of all devices; D j : Operation time of the jth device (in months); D 1 : Evaluation cycle coverage time (in months).

[0141] (2) K y2 satisfy:

[0142]

[0143] Where: K t B: The initial correct action reliability score of the same type of protection equipment of a certain manufacturer in the same cumulative operating period within the evaluation period; B 1 : is the acceleration coefficient, B 1 =10, where:

[0144] K t =AT R ×100 / AT T

[0145] Where: AT R : The number of correct actions of the same type of protection equipment within the evaluation period; AT T : The total number of actions of the same type of protection equipment within the evaluation period.

[0146] Step 203: Determine a failure type status score according to the failure type status data.

[0147] In some optional aspects of this embodiment, the failure type status data includes multiple failure type status quantities, such as Fig.15 As shown, determining the failure type status score according to the failure type status data includes:

[0148] Step 2031, determining the failure type state sub-score of each failure type state quantity according to a preset failure type state scoring function;

[0149] Step 2032: Determine the failure type state score according to the failure type state sub-score and the failure type state score influence coefficient of each failure type state quantity.

[0150] In this application, the failure state quantity reflects the serious failure of the relay protection device, which may cause the protection function to exit or lock, and require immediate maintenance or replacement. The failure state quantity includes device failure, protection function lock, device alarm or other critical defects. It can be expressed by the function C(x):

[0151] C(z)=k C1 p 1 (z)+k C2 p 2 (z)+k C3 p 3 (z)+...+k Cn p n (z)

[0152] In the formula, kCn is the influence coefficient of the corresponding state quantity, and the value is determined according to the influence of the corresponding state quantity on the failure state quantity; p n (z) is the scoring function of the failure type state quantity, which can be given according to the state quantity scoring table.

[0153] In a specific example:

[0154]

[0155] Table 2 explains the above formula:

[0156] Table 2

[0157]

[0158]

[0159] Step 204: Determine the operating status score of the relay protection device according to the detection status score, the reliability status score, and the failure status score.

[0160] By integrating the evaluation indicators of detection state quantity, reliability state quantity and failure state quantity, the state evaluation index function of the relay protection device can be expressed as:

[0161] Y 2 (x,y,z)=[A(x)+B(y)]·C(z)

[0162] The hardware health score of the relay protection device is Y 2 (x, y, z) is converted into a percentage system as the evaluation index value of the status evaluation of the relay protection device:

[0163]

[0164] Where Y 2 (0) is Y 2 (x, y, z) represents the status evaluation index score of a certain relay protection device when the environment is normal and it operates reliably without defects.

[0165] Step 30: Obtain the family defects, software design defects and violations of technical standard design principles of the relay protection device, and determine the technical score of the relay protection device based on the family defects, software design defects and violations of technical standard design principles.

[0166] In some optional embodiments of this embodiment, Fig.16 As shown, according to the family defects, software design defects and violations of technical standard design principles, the technical score of the relay protection device is determined, including:

[0167] Step 301, determining a familial defect score according to the familial defect situation;

[0168] Step 302: Determine a software design defect score according to the software design defect situation;

[0169] Step 303: Determine a violation score of the technical standard design principle according to the violation of the technical standard design principle;

[0170] Step 304: Determine the technical score of the relay protection device according to the family defect score, the software design defect score, and the technical standard design principle violation score.

[0171] In a specific example, the data of family defects, software design defects, and violations of technical standard design principles (including safety regulations, anti-accident measures, etc.) of relay protection devices are used to formulate technical evaluation indicators of relay protection devices. 3 It is expressed as:

[0172] Y 3 =K 1 ·K 2 ·K 3

[0173] In the formula, K 1 , K 2 , K 3 Please refer to Table 3 for the value of .

[0174] Table 3

[0175]

[0176] Step 40: Determine a comprehensive score of the relay protection device according to the hardware health score, the operating status score, and the technical score.

[0177] In some optional embodiments of this embodiment, Fig.17 As shown, the comprehensive score of the relay protection device is determined according to the hardware health score, the operating status score and the technical score, including:

[0178] Step 401: Calculate the sum of the hardware health score and the operating status score;

[0179] Step 402: multiply the sum of the hardware health score and the operating status score by the technical score to obtain a product, and determine the product as the comprehensive score of the relay protection device.

[0180] In a specific example, based on the evaluation rules of the above evaluation indicators, an overall evaluation model for the operation risk of the relay protection device is constructed:

[0181] Y=(Y 1 +Y 2 )×Y 3

[0182] Step 50: Determine the operation risk level of the relay protection device according to the comprehensive score.

[0183] In some optional aspects of this embodiment, determining the operation risk level of the relay protection device according to the comprehensive score includes:

[0184] In response to determining that the comprehensive score is within a first preset score interval, determining that the operation risk level of the relay protection device is normal;

[0185] In response to determining that the comprehensive score is within a second preset score interval, determining that the operation risk level of the relay protection device is abnormal;

[0186] In response to determining that the comprehensive score is within a third preset score interval, it is determined that the operation risk level of the relay protection device is severe.

[0187] In a specific example, the correspondence between the overall evaluation score of the relay protection device and the equipment operating status is shown in Table 4.

[0188] Table 4

[0189] Points Corresponding operating status 80 < Score < 100 normal 50 < Score < 80 abnormal Score < 50 serious

[0190] The present application provides an operation risk assessment method for a relay protection device, which can determine the hardware health score, operation status score and technical score of the relay protection device through aging data, status data, family defects, software design defects and violations of technical standard design principles of components, and finally determine the comprehensive score of the relay protection device, thereby providing a scientific decision-making basis for power companies, timely discovering and handling potential faults and hidden dangers, optimizing equipment maintenance and management, reducing equipment failure rate and maintenance costs, avoiding the occurrence of power accidents, and ensuring the safe and stable operation of the power grid.

[0191] Based on the same inventive concept, the embodiments of the present application also provide an operation risk assessment device for a relay protection device, which can be used to implement the method described in the above embodiments, as described in the following embodiments. Since the principle of the problem solved by the operation risk assessment device for a relay protection device is similar to that of an operation risk assessment method for a relay protection device, the implementation of an operation risk assessment device for a relay protection device can refer to the implementation of an operation risk assessment method for a relay protection device, and the repeated parts will not be repeated. As used below, the term "unit" or "module" can be a combination of software and / or hardware that implements a predetermined function. Although the system described in the following embodiments is preferably implemented in software, the implementation of hardware, or a combination of software and hardware, is also possible and conceived.

[0192] like Fig.18 As shown, the relay protection device has multiple components, and the operation risk assessment device includes:

[0193] The hardware health score determination module 601 is configured to obtain aging data of the plurality of components and determine the hardware health score of the relay protection device according to the aging data of the plurality of components;

[0194] The operating status score determination module 602 is configured to obtain the latest operating status data of the relay protection device and determine the operating status score of the relay protection device according to the latest operating status data;

[0195] The technical score determination module 603 is configured to obtain the family defect situation, software design defect situation and violation of technical standard design principle of the relay protection device, and determine the technical score of the relay protection device according to the family defect situation, software design defect situation and violation of technical standard design principle;

[0196] A comprehensive score determination module 604 is configured to determine a comprehensive score of the relay protection device according to the hardware health score, the operating status score and the technical score;

[0197] The operation risk level determination module 605 is configured to determine the operation risk level of the relay protection device according to the comprehensive score.

[0198] In some optional aspects of this embodiment, determining the hardware health score of the relay protection device according to the aging data of the multiple components includes:

[0199] Determining an aging sub-score of each of the components according to the aging data of each of the components and a preset aging scoring function;

[0200] The hardware health score of the relay protection device is determined according to the aging sub-score and aging correction coefficient of each of the components.

[0201] In some optional aspects of this embodiment, determining the hardware health score of the relay protection device according to the aging sub-score and aging correction coefficient of each of the components includes:

[0202] Determining the total aging score of the relay protection device according to the aging sub-score and aging correction coefficient of each of the components;

[0203] Determining the non-aging sub-score of each of the components according to the preset aging scoring function;

[0204] Determining the total non-aging score of the relay protection device according to the non-aging sub-score and the aging correction coefficient of each of the components;

[0205] A hardware health score of the relay protection device is determined according to the total aging score and the total non-aging score of the relay protection device.

[0206] In some optional aspects of this embodiment, the latest operating status data includes detection status data, reliability status data, and failure status data, and determining the operating status score of the relay protection device according to the latest operating status data includes:

[0207] Determining a detection type status score according to the detection type status data;

[0208] Determining a reliability status score according to the reliability status data;

[0209] Determining a failure type status score according to the failure type status data;

[0210] An operating status score of the relay protection device is determined according to the detection-type status score, the reliability-type status score and the failure-type status score.

[0211] In some optional aspects of this embodiment, the detection type status data includes a plurality of detection type status quantities, and determining the detection type status score according to the detection type status data includes:

[0212] Determining a detection type state sub-score of each of the detection type state quantities according to a preset detection type state scoring function;

[0213] The detection type state score is determined according to the detection type state sub-score and the detection type state score influence coefficient of each of the detection type state quantities.

[0214] In some optional manners of this embodiment, the reliability status data includes a plurality of reliability status quantities, and determining the reliability status score according to the reliability status data includes:

[0215] Determining a reliability state sub-score of each of the reliability state quantities according to a preset reliability state scoring function;

[0216] The reliability status score is determined according to the reliability status sub-score and the reliability status score influence coefficient of each reliability status quantity.

[0217] In some optional aspects of this embodiment, the failure type status data includes a plurality of failure type status quantities, and determining the failure type status score according to the failure type status data includes:

[0218] Determining the failure type state sub-score of each failure type state quantity according to a preset failure type state scoring function;

[0219] The failure type state score is determined according to the failure type state sub-score and the failure type state score influence coefficient of each of the failure type state quantities.

[0220] In some optional methods of this embodiment, the technical score of the relay protection device is determined according to the family defect situation, the software design defect situation and the violation of the technical standard design principle, including:

[0221] Determine a familial defect score according to the familial defect situation;

[0222] Determine a software design defect score according to the software design defect situation;

[0223] Determine the technical standard design principle violation score based on the violation of the technical standard design principle;

[0224] The technical score of the relay protection device is determined based on the family defect score, the software design defect score and the technical standard design principle violation score.

[0225] In some optional aspects of this embodiment, determining the comprehensive score of the relay protection device according to the hardware health score, the operating status score, and the technical score includes:

[0226] Calculating the sum of the hardware health score and the operating status score;

[0227] The sum of the hardware health score and the operating status score is multiplied by the technical score to obtain a product, and the product is determined as the comprehensive score of the relay protection device.

[0228] In some optional aspects of this embodiment, determining the operation risk level of the relay protection device according to the comprehensive score includes:

[0229] In response to determining that the comprehensive score is within a first preset score interval, determining that the operation risk level of the relay protection device is normal;

[0230] In response to determining that the comprehensive score is within a second preset score interval, determining that the operation risk level of the relay protection device is abnormal;

[0231] In response to determining that the comprehensive score is within a third preset score interval, it is determined that the operation risk level of the relay protection device is severe.

[0232] According to an embodiment of the present application, the present disclosure also provides an electronic device, a readable storage medium and a computer program product.

[0233] An electronic device comprises: at least one processor; and a memory connected to the at least one processor in communication; wherein the memory stores instructions executable by the at least one processor, and the instructions are executed by the at least one processor so that the at least one processor can execute the steps of a method for evaluating the operation risk of a relay protection device of the aforementioned embodiment.

[0234] A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing computer instructions, wherein the computer instructions are used to cause a computer to execute the steps of a method for evaluating the operating risk of a relay protection device in the aforementioned embodiment.

[0235] A computer program product includes a computer program / instruction, which, when executed by a processor, implements the steps of a method for evaluating the operating risk of a relay protection device in the aforementioned embodiment.

[0236] Fig.19 A schematic block diagram of an example electronic device 900 that can be used to implement an embodiment of the present disclosure is shown. The electronic device is intended to represent various forms of digital computers, such as laptop computers, desktop computers, workstations, personal digital assistants, servers, blade servers, mainframe computers, and other suitable computers. The electronic device can also represent various forms of mobile devices, such as personal digital processing, cellular phones, smart phones, wearable devices, and other similar computing devices. The components shown herein, their connections and relationships, and their functions are merely examples and are not intended to limit the implementation of the present disclosure described and / or required herein.

[0237] like Fig.19As shown, the device 900 includes a computing unit 901, which can perform various appropriate actions and processes according to a computer program stored in a read-only memory (ROM) 902 or a computer program loaded from a storage unit 908 into a random access memory (RAM) 903. In the RAM 903, various programs and data required for the operation of the device 900 can also be stored. The computing unit 901, the ROM 902, and the RAM 903 are connected to each other via a bus 904. An input / output (I / O) interface 905 is also connected to the bus 904.

[0238] A number of components in the device 900 are connected to the I / O interface 905, including: an input unit 906, such as a keyboard, a mouse, etc.; an output unit 907, such as various types of displays, speakers, etc.; a storage unit 908, such as a disk, an optical disk, etc.; and a communication unit 909, such as a network card, a modem, a wireless communication transceiver, etc. The communication unit 909 allows the device 900 to exchange information / data with other devices through a computer network such as the Internet and / or various telecommunication networks.

[0239] The computing unit 901 may be a variety of general and / or special processing components with processing and computing capabilities. Some examples of the computing unit 901 include, but are not limited to, a central processing unit (CPU), a graphics processing unit (GPU), various dedicated artificial intelligence (AI) computing chips, various computing units running machine learning model algorithms, digital signal processors (DSPs), and any appropriate processors, controllers, microcontrollers, etc. The computing unit 901 performs the various methods and processes described above, such as an operation risk assessment method for a relay protection device.

[0240] For example, in some embodiments, a method for evaluating the operational risk of a relay protection device may be implemented as a computer software program, which is tangibly contained in a machine-readable medium, such as a storage unit 908. In some embodiments, part or all of the computer program may be loaded and / or installed on the device 900 via the ROM 902 and / or the communication unit 909. When the computer program is loaded into the RAM 903 and executed by the computing unit 901, one or more steps of the method for evaluating the operational risk of a relay protection device described above may be performed. Alternatively, in other embodiments, the computing unit 901 may be configured to execute a method for evaluating the operational risk of a relay protection device in any other appropriate manner (e.g., by means of firmware).

[0241] Various implementations of the systems and techniques described above herein can be implemented in digital electronic circuit systems, integrated circuit systems, field programmable gate arrays (FPGAs), application specific integrated circuits (ASICs), application specific standard products (ASSPs), systems on chips (SOCs), load programmable logic devices (CPLDs), computer hardware, firmware, software, and / or combinations thereof. These various implementations can include: being implemented in one or more computer programs that can be executed and / or interpreted on a programmable system including at least one programmable processor, which can be a special purpose or general purpose programmable processor that can receive data and instructions from a storage system, at least one input device, and at least one output device, and transmit data and instructions to the storage system, the at least one input device, and the at least one output device.

[0242] The program code for implementing the method of the present disclosure may be written in any combination of one or more programming languages. These program codes may be provided to a processor or controller of a general-purpose computer, a special-purpose computer, or other programmable data processing device, so that the program code, when executed by the processor or controller, enables the functions / operations specified in the flow chart and / or block diagram to be implemented. The program code may be executed entirely on the machine, partially on the machine, partially on the machine and partially on a remote machine as a stand-alone software package, or entirely on a remote machine or server.

[0243] In the context of the present disclosure, a machine-readable medium may be a tangible medium that may contain or store a program for use by or in conjunction with an instruction execution system, device, or equipment. A machine-readable medium may be a machine-readable signal medium or a machine-readable storage medium. A machine-readable medium may include, but is not limited to, an electronic, magnetic, optical, electromagnetic, infrared, or semiconductor system, device, or equipment, or any suitable combination of the foregoing. A more specific example of a machine-readable storage medium may include an electrical connection based on one or more lines, a portable computer disk, a hard disk, a random access memory (RAM), a read-only memory (ROM), an erasable programmable read-only memory (EPROM or flash memory), an optical fiber, a portable compact disk read-only memory (CD-ROM), an optical storage device, a magnetic storage device, or any suitable combination of the foregoing.

[0244] To provide interaction with a user, the systems and techniques described herein can be implemented on a computer having: a display device (e.g., a CRT (cathode ray tube) or LCD (liquid crystal display) monitor) for displaying information to the user; and a keyboard and pointing device (e.g., a mouse or trackball) through which the user can provide input to the computer. Other types of devices can also be used to provide interaction with the user; for example, the feedback provided to the user can be any form of sensory feedback (e.g., visual feedback, auditory feedback, or tactile feedback); and input from the user can be received in any form (including acoustic input, voice input, or tactile input).

[0245] The systems and techniques described herein may be implemented in a computing system that includes back-end components (e.g., as a data server), or a computing system that includes middleware components (e.g., an application server), or a computing system that includes front-end components (e.g., a user computer with a graphical user interface or a web browser through which a user can interact with implementations of the systems and techniques described herein), or a computing system that includes any combination of such back-end components, middleware components, or front-end components. The components of the system may be interconnected by any form or medium of digital data communication (e.g., a communication network). Examples of communication networks include: a local area network (LAN), a wide area network (WAN), and the Internet.

[0246] A computer system may include a client and a server. The client and the server are generally remote from each other and usually interact through a communication network. The relationship of client and server is generated by computer programs running on respective computers and having a client-server relationship with each other. The server may be a cloud server, a server of a distributed system, or a server combined with a blockchain.

[0247] It should be understood that the various forms of processes shown above can be used to reorder, add or delete steps. For example, the steps recorded in this disclosure can be executed in parallel, sequentially or in different orders, as long as the desired results of the technical solution of this disclosure can be achieved, and this document is not limited here.

[0248] The above specific implementations do not constitute a limitation on the protection scope of the present disclosure. It should be understood by those skilled in the art that various modifications, combinations, sub-combinations and substitutions can be made according to design requirements and other factors. Any modification, equivalent substitution and improvement made within the spirit and principle of the present disclosure shall be included in the protection scope of the present disclosure.

Claims

1. A method for evaluating the operating risk of a relay protection device, wherein the relay protection device comprises a plurality of components, characterized in that: include: Acquiring aging data of the plurality of components, and determining a hardware health score of the relay protection device according to the aging data of the plurality of components; Acquiring the latest operating status data of the relay protection device, and determining the operating status score of the relay protection device according to the latest operating status data; Obtaining the family defects, software design defects and violations of technical standard design principles of the relay protection device, and determining the technical score of the relay protection device based on the family defects, software design defects and violations of technical standard design principles; Determining a comprehensive score of the relay protection device according to the hardware health score, the operating status score, and the technical score; The operation risk level of the relay protection device is determined based on the comprehensive score.

2. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that Determining the hardware health score of the relay protection device according to the aging data of the multiple components includes: Determining an aging sub-score of each of the components according to the aging data of each of the components and a preset aging scoring function; The hardware health score of the relay protection device is determined according to the aging sub-score and aging correction coefficient of each of the components.

3. The method according to claim 2, characterized in that Determining the hardware health score of the relay protection device according to the aging sub-score and aging correction coefficient of each of the components includes: Determining the total aging score of the relay protection device according to the aging sub-score and aging correction coefficient of each of the components; Determining the non-aging sub-score of each of the components according to the preset aging scoring function; Determining the total non-aging score of the relay protection device according to the non-aging sub-score and the aging correction coefficient of each of the components; A hardware health score of the relay protection device is determined according to the total aging score and the total non-aging score of the relay protection device.

4. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that The latest operating status data includes detection status data, reliability status data and failure status data. Determining the operating status score of the relay protection device according to the latest operating status data includes: Determining a detection type status score according to the detection type status data; Determining a reliability status score according to the reliability status data; Determining a failure type status score according to the failure type status data; An operating status score of the relay protection device is determined according to the detection-type status score, the reliability-type status score and the failure-type status score.

5. The method according to claim 4, characterized in that The detection type state data includes a plurality of detection type state quantities, and determining the detection type state score according to the detection type state data includes: Determining a detection type state sub-score of each of the detection type state quantities according to a preset detection type state scoring function; The detection type state score is determined according to the detection type state sub-score and the detection type state score influence coefficient of each of the detection type state quantities.

6. The method according to claim 4, characterized in that The reliability status data includes a plurality of reliability status quantities, and determining the reliability status score according to the reliability status data includes: Determining a reliability state sub-score of each of the reliability state quantities according to a preset reliability state scoring function; The reliability status score is determined according to the reliability status sub-score and the reliability status score influence coefficient of each reliability status quantity.

7. The method according to claim 4, characterized in that The failure type state data includes a plurality of failure type state quantities, and determining the failure type state score according to the failure type state data includes: Determining the failure type state sub-score of each failure type state quantity according to a preset failure type state scoring function; The failure type state score is determined according to the failure type state sub-score and the failure type state score influence coefficient of each of the failure type state quantities.

8. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that Based on the family defects, software design defects and violations of technical standard design principles, the technical score of the relay protection device is determined, including: Determine a familial defect score according to the familial defect situation; Determine a software design defect score according to the software design defect situation; Determine the technical standard design principle violation score based on the violation of the technical standard design principle; The technical score of the relay protection device is determined based on the family defect score, the software design defect score and the technical standard design principle violation score.

9. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that: Determining the comprehensive score of the relay protection device according to the hardware health score, the operating status score, and the technical score includes: Calculating the sum of the hardware health score and the operating status score; The sum of the hardware health score and the operating status score is multiplied by the technical score to obtain a product, and the product is determined as the comprehensive score of the relay protection device.

10. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that Determining the operation risk level of the relay protection device according to the comprehensive score includes: In response to determining that the comprehensive score is within a first preset score interval, determining that the operation risk level of the relay protection device is normal; In response to determining that the comprehensive score is within a second preset score interval, determining that the operation risk level of the relay protection device is abnormal; In response to determining that the comprehensive score is within a third preset score interval, it is determined that the operation risk level of the relay protection device is severe.

11. An operation risk assessment device for a relay protection device, characterized in that: The relay protection device has multiple components, including: a hardware health score determination module, configured to obtain aging data of the plurality of components, and determine a hardware health score of the relay protection device according to the aging data of the plurality of components; An operation status score determination module is configured to obtain the latest operation status data of the relay protection device and determine the operation status score of the relay protection device according to the latest operation status data; A technical score determination module is configured to obtain the family defect situation, software design defect situation and violation of technical standard design principles of the relay protection device, and determine the technical score of the relay protection device according to the family defect situation, software design defect situation and violation of technical standard design principles; a comprehensive score determination module, configured to determine a comprehensive score of the relay protection device according to the hardware health score, the operating status score and the technical score; The operation risk level determination module is configured to determine the operation risk level of the relay protection device according to the comprehensive score.

12. An electronic device comprising a memory, a processor, and a computer program stored in the memory and executable on the processor, wherein: When the processor executes the computer program, the method for evaluating the operation risk of a relay protection device according to any one of claims 1 to 10 is implemented.

13. A computer-readable storage medium, characterized in that: The computer-readable storage medium stores a computer program, and when the computer program is executed by a processor, the method for evaluating the operating risk of a relay protection device according to any one of claims 1 to 10 is implemented.

14. A computer program product, characterized in that The computer program product comprises a computer program, and when the computer program is executed by a processor, the method for evaluating the operation risk of a relay protection device according to any one of claims 1 to 10 is implemented.

Images