Nuclear power plant simulator training and examination objective evaluation method based on digital technology

Abstract

The invention belongs to the technical field of nuclear power analog machine training and examination, and particularly relates to a nuclear power plant analog machine training and examination objective evaluation method based on the digital technology. Comprising the following steps: step 1, determining an overall evaluation dimension of analog machine training and examination; 2, refining and decomposing objective evaluation indexes of analog machine training and examination; 3, setting an objective evaluation method of strict monitoring; 4, setting an objective evaluation method for accurate control; 5, setting an objective evaluation method for conservative decision making; 6, setting an objective evaluation method of team cooperation; and 7, setting an objective evaluation method for knowledge mastering. The system has the beneficial effects that scientific auxiliary evaluation is carried out on the performance of the operator in the training and examination process, objective evaluation of part of observation and examination points is realized, simulation machine training and examination standards are further unified, and standardization, normalization, digitization and intelligentization of simulation machine training and examination are realized.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The invention belongs to the technical field of nuclear power simulator training and examination, and in particular relates to a nuclear power plant simulator training and examination objective evaluation method based on digital technology. Background Art

[0002] Simulator training and assessment for nuclear power plant operators is of great significance. It is not only a key step in cultivating and testing the operational capabilities of operators in the main control room, but also serves as an assessment tool for the National Energy Administration (NEA) in its qualification authorization management. The State Council's energy regulatory department is responsible for organizing the training and assessment of nuclear power plant operator licenses. Assessment standards are formulated by the State Council's energy regulatory department and approved by the nuclear safety regulatory authorities. In 2021, the NEA issued the "Implementation Rules for On-site Examinations for Nuclear Power Plant Operators" and the "Implementation Rules for Simulator Examinations for Nuclear Power Plant Operators" (Guo Neng Fa He Dian

[2021] No. 23) (collectively, the "Implementation Rules"). These Implementation Rules provide more standardized and clear management regulations for simulator examinations for nuclear power plant operators. To this end, all NPAs have established relatively comprehensive simulator training and assessment systems in accordance with the NEA's management requirements. However, the simulator examination scenarios developed based on these "Implementation Rules" have numerous observation points and subjective evaluation criteria, resulting in a heavy assessment burden for examiners. Summary of the invention

[0003] The purpose of the present invention is to provide an objective evaluation method for nuclear power plant simulator training and examination based on digital technology. This method establishes an auxiliary evaluation standard for simulator training and examination, utilizes digital technologies such as simulator information comparison and intelligent voice interaction, and scientifically evaluates the performance of operators during training and examination in a quantitative and measurable manner, thereby achieving objective evaluation of some observation and assessment points, thereby realizing standardization, normalization, digitization and intelligence of simulator training and examination.

[0004] The technical solution of the present invention is as follows: a method for objective evaluation of nuclear power plant simulator training and examination based on digital technology, characterized by comprising the following steps:

[0005] Step 1: Determine the overall evaluation dimensions of simulator training and examination;

[0006] Step 2: Refine and decompose the objective evaluation indicators of simulator training and examination;

[0007] Step 3: Establish a rigorously monitored objective evaluation method;

[0008] Step 4: Set up an objective evaluation method for precise control;

[0009] Step 5: Set up an objective evaluation method for conservative decision-making;

[0010] Step 6: Set an objective evaluation method for teamwork;

[0011] Step 7: Set an objective evaluation method for knowledge mastery.

[0012] 2. A method for objectively evaluating the training and examination of a nuclear power plant simulator based on digital technology as claimed in claim 1, wherein: in step 1, the overall dimensions for evaluating this method are selected according to the implementation rules, and the following 5 dimensions are determined: close monitoring, precise control, conservative decision-making, teamwork, and knowledge mastery.

[0013] 3. A method for objectively evaluating the training and examination of a nuclear power plant simulator based on digital technology as claimed in claim 2, wherein: in step 2, the evaluation dimensions determined in step 1 are refined and decomposed to determine the indicators for objective evaluation, as shown in Table 1

[0014] Table 1 Objective evaluation indicators

[0015]

[0016]

[0017] 4. A method for objectively evaluating the training and examination of a nuclear power plant simulator based on digital technology as claimed in claim 1, wherein step 3 includes the following:

[0018] Step 31: Set an evaluation method and criteria for the real-time performance of close monitoring

[0019] The evaluation indicator is the real-time performance of close monitoring: the time interval from the activation of a fault to the main control room team reporting the unit operating condition information through "group notification" or other means;

[0020] The evaluation criteria are that the operator can continuously and effectively monitor the power plant status based on the importance of parameters, discover and report fault information. The mean value of the real-time performance indicators in the simulator training and examination is used as the reference value, and points are deducted according to the deviation degree, or points are deducted if the response time is higher than the average, otherwise no points are deducted;

[0021] Step 32: Set an evaluation method and criteria for the accuracy of close monitoring

[0022] The evaluation indicator is the accuracy of close monitoring: the proportion of misjudging normal conditions as abnormal or vice versa;

[0023] The evaluation criteria are that the operator can correctly locate the direct cause of the transient through comprehensive diagnosis and report the unit operating condition information through "group notification" or other appropriate means, including but not limited to the direct cause of the fault, automatic actions or responses;

[0024] Step 33: The standardization of close monitoring

[0025] The evaluation index is strict monitoring compliance: the statistical count of the number of situations where the operator fails to comply with regulations, standards, or procedures when handling alarms in the main control room;

[0026] The evaluation criteria are that the operator can perform unit monitoring and alarm response in accordance with the power plant management procedures / regulations to ensure rapid, accurate, and effective response measures, and deductions are made based on the number of violations of alarm response.

[0027] 5. The objective evaluation method for nuclear power plant simulator training and examination based on digital technology as described in claim 1, characterized in that step 4 includes the following:

[0028] Step 41: Accuracy of operation execution

[0029] The evaluation index is the accuracy of operation execution: the operator accurately, completely, and timely completes the procedure operations, and the executed operations are consistent with the requirements and expected responses of the procedures;

[0030] The scoring criteria are that the operator can accurately retrieve the technical procedures and select the applicable sections to perform main control room operations, and is scored according to the number of errors or deviation degrees in the operations. A full score indicates complete accuracy; the operation execution accuracy index also applies to the situation where the operator does not immediately use the procedure to mitigate the transient consequences, but only uses work skills to intervene first or immediately intervenes when there is no available procedure;

[0031] Step 42: Completeness of procedure execution

[0032] The evaluation index is the completeness of procedure execution: all key operations of the procedure are covered, without missing steps or the execution order not conforming to the procedure;

[0033] The scoring criteria are that the operator completely executes the required steps in the procedure without skipping or omitting. Consecutive steps involving the operation order are marked with auxiliary identifiers as the order examination requirements, and deductions are made according to the number of missing or out-of-order steps. A full score indicates complete execution;

[0034] Step 43: Timeliness of operation execution

[0035] The evaluation index is the timeliness of operation execution: comparing the time required to complete the operation with the standard time expected in the training, and whether the key operations can be completed within the specified time in case of emergency;

[0036] The scoring criteria are that the operator can complete the operation tasks within the specified time and is scored according to the degree of exceeding or not reaching the specified time;

[0037] Step 44: Compliance of procedure execution

[0038] The evaluation index is the standardization of procedure execution: the statistical count of non - compliant situations that occur when executing established procedures, rules, or standards;

[0039] The scoring criteria is that the operator is familiar with the processes / regulations of the nuclear power plant regarding compliance and use of procedures, can strictly abide by the operation specifications when executing procedures, and deductions are made according to the number or degree of violations;

[0040] Step 45: Stability of parameter control

[0041] The evaluation index is the rate of change of parameter control: the statistical count of the rate of parameter change;

[0042] The fluctuation range of parameter control is the deviation between the actual value and the required value of the parameter recorded, and the maximum deviation and average deviation are statistically counted;

[0043] The scoring criteria is that when dynamically adjusting parameters, the operator can control the power plant parameters in a smooth and stable manner, and a comprehensive score is given according to the degree of deviation of the mean of the rate of change and the fluctuation range of the parameters in training and examinations;

[0044] Step 46: Response time of parameter control

[0045] The evaluation index is the response time of parameter control: the time from when the parameter deviation triggers an alarm to when the personnel or system responds, and the parameter returns to and stabilizes within the alarm threshold range;

[0046] The scoring criteria is that when the power plant parameters unexpectedly deviate from the target value, the operator can take adjustment measures to restore the parameters to the required value of the procedure, avoiding the expansion of the event caused by parameter deterioration, and the score is given according to the degree of deviation of the mean response time in training and examinations;

[0047] Step 47: Accuracy of parameter control

[0048] The evaluation index is the accuracy of parameter control: the statistical count of the time ratio or deviation range for the parameter to return to the target value control band after being perturbed;

[0049] The scoring criteria: After being adjusted by the operator, the parameter can finally stabilize near the target value, and the score is given according to the degree of deviation from the parameter target value in the event scenario;

[0050] Step 48: Achievement rate of parameter control target

[0051] The evaluation index is the statistical count of the proportion of successfully completed operations or the time to reach the standard;

[0052] The scoring criteria is that within the specified time, the operator can adjust the key parameters to within the target value range, and a comprehensive score is given according to the parameter control accuracy and response time indicators;

[0053] Step 49: Success rate of multi - parameter coordinated control

[0054] The evaluation index is the success rate of multi-parameter coordinated control: evaluate whether the changing trends of various parameters during the operation process meet the expected goals;

[0055] The scoring criterion is that under complex working conditions, when the operator can adjust multiple relevant parameters simultaneously, maintain the balance and stability among the parameters, and score according to the target achievement rate of each parameter control.

[0056] 6. A method for objectively evaluating the training and examination of a nuclear power plant simulator based on digital technology as described in claim 1, characterized in that step 5 includes the following:

[0057] Step 51: Decision accuracy

[0058] The evaluation index is decision accuracy: evaluate whether the decision is reasonable, effective, and meets the expected degree;

[0059] The evaluation criterion is that in case of sudden failure or emergency, the operator can timely place the unit in a known safe state, make an effective decision and solve the problem, and score according to the compliance degree of the decision-making;

[0060] Step 52: Decision compliance

[0061] The evaluation index is decision compliance: the degree of compliance between the decision and the execution process and the actual result;

[0062] The evaluation criterion is that the operator should perform operations according to the formulated decision, track the effective implementation of the decision, evaluate according to the decision compliance degree, the decision achieves the expected goal, complies with the procedures and regulations, and does not cause the accident to expand.

[0063] 7. A method for objectively evaluating the training and examination of a nuclear power plant simulator based on digital technology as described in claim 1, characterized in that step 6 includes the following:

[0064] Step 61: Clarity of communication

[0065] The evaluation index is the clarity of communication: whether the information is conveyed clearly, accurately pronounced, and with standard language;

[0066] The scoring criterion is the clarity of team members when expressing information, scoring according to the loudness of member communication, pronunciation and language standardization, and deducting points for non-compliance;

[0067] Step 62: Accuracy of communication

[0068] The evaluation index is the accuracy of communication: observe whether the information is conveyed comprehensively and clearly without error during the actual operation;

[0069] The scoring criteria are that team members can ensure the accuracy and comprehensiveness of the information they convey, and deductions are made according to errors or omissions in information transmission. A full score indicates complete transmission;

[0070] Step 63: Listening attention

[0071] The evaluation index is listening attention: during the communication process, the degree of attention and engagement of the information recipient towards the sender;

[0072] The scoring criteria are that in team communication, the information recipient should pay attention to the sender, avoid information omission, and be scored according to the attention level of the listener during information listening and the accuracy of the feedback after listening;

[0073] Step 64: Timeliness of communication

[0074] The evaluation index is timeliness of communication: during the information interaction process, the information sender can efficiently transmit information to the recipient or the main control team members in a timely manner;

[0075] Scoring criteria: After obtaining important information, the operator should immediately share the information with team members in a suitable way to ensure that the information can reach in a timely manner at the required moment;

[0076] Step 65: Standardization of team cooperation

[0077] The evaluation index is standardization of team cooperation: the number of times of assisting and communicating in accordance with the established operating procedures and term standards;

[0078] The scoring criteria are that the information communication process meets the requirements of the management procedure standards and specifications, and is scored according to the number of times of deviation from the procedure standards or incorrect application of terms.

[0079] 8. A method for objective evaluation of nuclear power plant simulator training and examination based on digital technology according to claim 1, characterized in that the step 7 includes the following:

[0080] Step 71: Comprehensiveness of knowledge mastery

[0081] The evaluation indexes are emergency response time and correct response rate;

[0082] The evaluation criteria are that the operator can quickly and accurately take response measures to prevent the accident from deteriorating further, can stop the normal operation being performed, place the unit in a safe state, and timely identify key alarms or retrieve the procedures that need to be used;

[0083] Step 72: Accuracy of precise diagnosis

[0084] The evaluation index is accuracy of precise diagnosis:

[0085] The evaluation criteria are that the operator should have strong information interpretation ability, be able to accurately identify the direct causes, locate key alarms and apply appropriate procedures based on information such as unit parameters, alarms, and indications, and have the ability to formulate solutions to the causes;

[0086] Step 73: Comprehensive risk control

[0087] The evaluation indicators are the comprehensiveness of risk control: the risk identification ratio and the coverage rate of risk prevention measures;

[0088] The evaluation criteria are that the operator can accurately identify potential risks and take targeted preventive measures during the decision-making process. Risk assessment includes but is not limited to nuclear safety, industrial safety, and radiation safety, and is evaluated according to the comprehensive risk control indicators.

[0089] The beneficial effects of the present invention are as follows: For the observation and assessment points in the simulator training and examination scenarios, objective evaluation indicators and criteria based on the basic skills dimension of the operator are proposed. Using digital technologies such as simulator information comparison and intelligent voice interaction, through quantitative and measurable methods, the performance of the operator during the training and examination processes is scientifically assisted in evaluation, realizing the objective evaluation of some observation and assessment points, which helps to further unify the simulator training and assessment criteria and achieve the standardization, normalization, digitization, and intelligence of simulator training and examinations. Detailed implementation manners

[0090] The present invention will be further described in detail below with reference to specific embodiments.

[0091] The present invention proposes an objective evaluation method for nuclear power plant simulator training and examinations based on digital technologies. For the observation and assessment points in the simulator training and examination scenarios, objective evaluation indicators and criteria based on the basic skills dimension of the operator are proposed. Using digital technologies such as simulator information comparison and intelligent voice interaction, through quantitative and measurable methods, the performance of the operator during the training and examination processes is scientifically evaluated, realizing the objective evaluation of some observation and assessment points, thereby achieving the standardization, normalization, digitization, and intelligence of simulator training and examinations.

[0092] This method establishes an auxiliary evaluation criterion for simulator training and assessment. Using digital technologies such as simulator information comparison and intelligent voice interaction, through quantitative and measurable methods, the performance of the operator during the training and examination processes is scientifically evaluated, realizing the objective evaluation of some observation and assessment points, thereby achieving the standardization, normalization, digitization, and intelligence of simulator training and examinations.

[0093] The technical solution for implementing the present invention is as follows: By establishing an auxiliary evaluation standard for simulator training and assessment, using digital technologies such as simulator information comparison and intelligent voice interaction, and through a quantitative and measurable method, the performance of operators during the training and examination processes is scientifically evaluated, realizing the objective evaluation of some observation and assessment points, thereby achieving the standardization, normalization, digitization, and intelligence of simulator training and examinations.

[0094] The objective evaluation standard is based on the standardization, structuring, and digitization of nuclear power plant simulator training and examinations in China. Relying on the "Simulator Intelligent Training and Assessment Platform", the observation points (or examination manual test points) set in the simulator training / examination scenarios are used as assessment elements, and the five aspects of strict monitoring, precise control, conservative decision-making, teamwork, and knowledge mastery specified in the operator's basic skills are used as assessment dimensions. Evaluation indicators are created for each assessment dimension, evaluation criteria are formulated, and a systematic evaluation system is constructed. At the same time, digital technologies such as simulator information comparison and intelligent voice interaction are integrated with the established indicator evaluation system to establish a quantitative and measurable method, realizing the objective evaluation of sub-observation and assessment points, more scientifically evaluating the performance of operators during the training and examination processes, and injecting new productive forces into the simulator training and examination work for nuclear power plant operators.

[0095] An objective evaluation method for nuclear power plant simulator training and examinations based on digital technologies includes the following steps:

[0096] Step 1: Determine the overall evaluation dimensions for simulator training and examinations;

[0097] Step 2: Refine and decompose the objective evaluation indicators for simulator training and examinations;

[0098] Step 3: Set the objective evaluation method for strict monitoring;

[0099] Step 4: Set the objective evaluation method for precise control;

[0100] Step 5: Set the objective evaluation method for conservative decision-making;

[0101] Step 6: Set the objective evaluation method for teamwork;

[0102] Step 7: Set the objective evaluation method for knowledge mastery.

[0103] Step 1: Determine the overall evaluation dimensions for simulator training and examinations

[0104] Select the overall dimensions for evaluation using this method according to the implementation rules, and determine the following 5 dimensions: strict monitoring, precise control, conservative decision-making, teamwork, and knowledge mastery.

[0105] Step 2: Refine and decompose the objective evaluation indicators for simulator training and examinations

[0106] Refine and decompose the evaluation dimensions determined in Step 1 to determine the indicators for objective evaluation, as shown in Table 1 for details.

[0107] Table 1: Objective evaluation indicators

[0108]

[0109]

[0110] Step 3: Set up an objectively evaluated method with strict monitoring

[0111] Step 31: Strict monitoring real-time performance

[0112] Evaluation indicator: Strict monitoring real-time performance: The time interval from fault activation to the main control room team reporting the unit operating condition information through "team notification" or other appropriate means.

[0113] Evaluation criteria: The operator can continuously and effectively monitor the power plant status based on the importance of parameters, discover and report fault information. The average value of the real-time performance indicators during simulator training and examinations is used as the benchmark value (dynamic evaluation indicator), and scores are given according to the deviation degree, or points are deducted for being higher than the average response time, and no points are deducted otherwise.

[0114] Step 32: Strict monitoring accuracy

[0115] Evaluation indicator: Strict monitoring accuracy: The proportion of misjudging normal conditions as abnormal or vice versa.

[0116] Evaluation criteria: The operator can correctly locate the direct cause leading to the transient through comprehensive diagnosis and report the unit operating condition information through "team notification" or other appropriate means, including but not limited to the direct cause of the fault, automatic actions or responses.

[0117] Step 33: Strict monitoring standardization

[0118] Evaluation indicator: Strict monitoring standardization: The statistical quantity of non-compliance with regulations, standards or procedures when the operator handles the main control room alarms.

[0119] Evaluation criteria: The operator can perform unit monitoring and alarm response in accordance with the power plant management procedure process / regulations to ensure rapid, accurate and effective countermeasures, such as reporting key alarm information in the form of read-back, silencing and confirming alarms in a timely manner, and verifying the authenticity of alarms using multiple information. Points are deducted according to the number of alarm response violations.

[0120] Step 4: Set up an objectively evaluated method with precise control

[0121] Step 41: Accuracy of Operation Execution

[0122] Evaluation Index: Accuracy of Operation Execution: The operator accurately, completely, and timely completes the procedure operations, and the executed operations are consistent with the requirements of the procedure and the expected responses.

[0123] Scoring Criteria: The operator can accurately retrieve the technical procedures and select the applicable sections to perform the main control room operations. Scoring is based on the number of errors or the degree of deviation occurred during the operations, with full marks indicating complete accuracy. The accuracy of operation execution index also applies to the situation where the operator does not immediately use the procedures to mitigate the transient consequences, but only uses work skills to intervene first or immediately intervenes when there is no available procedure.

[0124] Step 42: Completeness of Procedure Execution

[0125] Evaluation Index: Completeness of Procedure Execution: All key operations of the procedure are covered, without missing steps or the execution sequence not conforming to the procedure.

[0126] Scoring Criteria: The operator completely executes the required steps in the procedure without skipping or omitting. For consecutive steps involving the operation sequence, add auxiliary identifiers (S1 / S2) as the sequence test requirements. Deductions are made according to the number of missing or out-of-sequence steps, with full marks indicating complete execution.

[0127] Step 43: Timeliness of Operation Execution

[0128] Evaluation Index: Timeliness of Operation Execution: The time required to complete the operation is compared with the standard time expected in the training. In case of emergency, whether the key operations can be completed within the specified time.

[0129] Scoring Criteria: The operator can complete the operation tasks within the specified time, and scoring is based on the degree of exceeding or not reaching the specified time.

[0130] Step 44: Standardization of Procedure Execution

[0131] Evaluation Index: Standardization of Procedure Execution: Count the number of non-compliance situations occurred when executing the established procedures, rules, or standards.

[0132] Scoring Criteria: The operator is familiar with the processes / rules of the nuclear power plant regarding the compliance and use of procedures, and can strictly abide by the operation specifications when executing the procedures. For example, standardize the application of self-check / monitoring human factor prevention tools, and standardize the execution of procedure identification circles and bars. Deductions are made according to the number of violations or the degree of violations.

[0133] Step 45: Stability of Parameter Control

[0134] Evaluation Index: Rate of Change of Parameter Control: Statistically analyze the rate of change of parameters;

[0135] Parameter control fluctuation range: Record the deviation between the actual value of the parameter and the required value of the program, and statistically calculate the maximum deviation and the average deviation.

[0136] Scoring criteria: When dynamically adjusting parameters, the operator can control the power plant parameters (such as reactor power, reactivity, coolant inventory / temperature / pressure, generator power, etc.) in a smooth and stable manner, avoiding violent fluctuations. A comprehensive score is given according to the deviation degree of the mean value (dynamic evaluation index) of the parameter change rate and fluctuation range in training and examinations for the event.

[0137] Step 46: Parameter control response time

[0138] Evaluation index: Parameter control response time: The time from when the parameter deviation triggers an alarm to the response of the personnel or system, and the time when the parameter returns to and stabilizes within the alarm threshold range.

[0139] Scoring criteria: When the power plant parameters unexpectedly deviate from the target value, the operator can take adjustment measures as soon as possible to restore the parameters to the required value of the program, avoiding the expansion of the event caused by parameter deterioration. The score is given according to the deviation degree of the mean value (dynamic evaluation index) of the response time in training and examinations for the event.

[0140] Step 47: Parameter control accuracy

[0141] Evaluation index: Parameter control accuracy: Statistically calculate the time ratio or deviation range of the parameter returning to the target value control band after being perturbed.

[0142] Scoring criteria: After being adjusted by the operator, the parameter can finally stabilize near the target value (the fluctuation range is within the alarm threshold range), and the score is given according to the degree of deviation from the parameter target value in the event scenario.

[0143] Step 48: Parameter control target achievement rate

[0144] Evaluation index: Statistically calculate the proportion of successfully completed operations or the compliance time.

[0145] Scoring criteria: Within the specified time, the operator can adjust the key parameters to within the target value range. A comprehensive score is given according to the parameter control accuracy and response time indicators.

[0146] Step 49: Success rate of multi-parameter coordinated control

[0147] Evaluation index: Success rate of multi-parameter coordinated control: Evaluate whether the change trends of various parameters during the operation process meet the expected goals.

[0148] Scoring criteria: Under complex working conditions, when the operator can adjust multiple relevant parameters (such as primary loop temperature, SG water level, etc.) simultaneously, the balance and stability between various parameters should be maintained. Scoring is based on the achievement rate of the control objectives for each parameter.

[0149] Step 5: Set an objective evaluation method for conservative decision-making

[0150] Step 51: Decision-making accuracy

[0151] Evaluation index: Decision-making accuracy: Evaluate the degree to which the decision is reasonable, effective, and meets expectations.

[0152] Evaluation criteria: In case of sudden failures or emergencies, the operator should be able to promptly place the unit in a known safe state, make effective decisions and solve problems, with sufficient attention paid to nuclear safety, especially compliance with the terms of the technical specifications. Scoring is based on the degree of compliance of the decision-making.

[0153] Step 52: Decision-making compliance

[0154] Evaluation index: Decision-making compliance: The degree of compliance between the decision and the implementation process and actual results.

[0155] Evaluation criteria: The operator should perform operations according to the established decision and track the effective implementation of the decision. Evaluation is based on the degree of decision compliance. The decision achieves the expected goals, complies with procedures and regulations, and does not lead to the expansion of accidents.

[0156] Step 6: Set an objective evaluation method for teamwork

[0157] Step 61: Clarity of communication

[0158] Evaluation index: Clarity of communication: Whether the information is conveyed clearly, with accurate pronunciation and standard language.

[0159] Scoring criteria: The clarity of team members when expressing information. Scoring is based on the volume of members' voices, pronunciation, and language standardization during communication. Points will be deducted for non-compliance.

[0160] Step 62: Accuracy of communication

[0161] Evaluation index: Accuracy of communication: Observe whether the information is conveyed comprehensively and clearly without error during actual operations.

[0162] Scoring criteria: Team members should ensure the accuracy and comprehensiveness when expressing information. Points will be deducted according to errors or omissions in information transmission. A full score indicates complete transmission.

[0163] Step 63: Attention during listening

[0164] Evaluation Index: Listening Attention: During the communication process, the degree of attention and engagement of the information recipient towards the sender.

[0165] Scoring Criteria: In team communication, the information recipient should pay attention to the sender, avoid missing information, respond actively and raise relevant questions. The score is based on the attention level of the listener during information reception (such as pausing operations, raising hands to indicate) and the accuracy of the feedback after listening.

[0166] Step 64: Timeliness of Communication

[0167] Evaluation Index: Timeliness of Communication: During the information interaction process, the information sender can efficiently transmit information to the recipient or the main control team members in a timely manner.

[0168] Scoring Criteria: After obtaining important information, the operator should immediately share the information with team members in a suitable way to ensure that the information can reach in a timely manner when needed, so that relevant personnel can quickly make responses and decisions. For example, the response speed of abnormal situation reports, and the information notification needs to be completed before operating in the main control room according to the application procedures.

[0169] Step 65: Standardization of Teamwork

[0170] Evaluation Index: Standardization of Teamwork: The number of times of assisting communication following established operating procedures and terminology standards (such as three-way communication, information notification, group short meetings, etc.).

[0171] Scoring Criteria: The information exchange process meets the requirements of management procedure standards and norms, and the score is based on the number of times of deviation from the procedure standards or incorrect application of terminology.

[0172] Step 7: Knowledge Mastery

[0173] Step 71: Comprehensiveness of Knowledge Mastery

[0174] Evaluation Index: Emergency Response Time (the time interval from the occurrence of an abnormality to the start of taking response measures) and Correct Response Rate (the proportion of the number of times of correctly taking response measures in emergency situations to the total number of emergency situations)

[0175] Evaluation Criteria: The operator can quickly and accurately take response measures to prevent the accident from deteriorating further, can stop the normal operation being carried out, place the unit in a safe state, and promptly identify key alarms or access the required procedures.

[0176] Step 72: Accuracy of Precise Diagnosis

[0177] Evaluation Index: Accuracy of Precise Diagnosis:

[0178] Evaluation criteria: The operator should have strong information interpretation ability, be able to accurately identify the direct cause, locate the key alarms and apply appropriate procedures based on information such as unit parameters, alarms, and indications, and have the ability to formulate solutions for the cause.

[0179] Step 73: Comprehensiveness of risk control

[0180] Evaluation indicators: Comprehensiveness of risk control: Risk identification ratio and coverage rate of risk prevention measures

[0181] Evaluation criteria: During the decision-making process, the operator should be able to accurately identify potential risks and take targeted preventive measures. Risk assessment includes but is not limited to nuclear safety, industrial safety, and radiation safety. Evaluation is carried out according to the comprehensiveness index of risk control. For example, the key risk identification rate ≥ 90%, and the coverage rate of risk response plans ≥ 80%.

[0182] Example 1:

[0183] Steam water level control is an important content of the training and examination of nuclear power plant simulators for operators. The objective evaluation indicators and evaluation criteria created in the technical solution of Part 2 are used to deconstruct and evaluate the treatment process of a typical fault of high drift of the feed water flowmeter in the steam generator water level control system. Through the objective evaluation mechanism, a certain degree of quantitative scoring can be achieved for the fault treatment performance of the trainees, and the quantitative calibration of trainee training / examination can be carried out more standardly and systematically, as shown in Table 2 specifically.

[0184] Table 2

[0185]

[0186]

[0187]

[0188]

[0189] Finally, it should be noted that the above implementation cases are only used to illustrate the technical solutions of the present invention, rather than limiting them; although the present invention has been described in detail with reference to the foregoing implementation cases, those skilled in the art should understand that modifications made to the technical solutions recorded in the foregoing embodiments, or equivalent replacements of some or all of the technical features therein, do not cause the essence of the corresponding technical solutions to deviate from the scope of the technical solutions of the embodiments of the present invention.

Claims

1. An objective evaluation method for nuclear power plant simulator training and examination based on digital technology, characterized in that It includes the following steps: Step 1: Determine the overall evaluation dimensions of simulator training and examination; Step 2: Refine and decompose the objective evaluation indicators of simulator training and examination; Step 3: Set up an objectively evaluated method with strict monitoring; Step 4: Set up an objectively evaluated method with precise control; Step 5: Set up an objectively evaluated method with conservative decision-making; Step 6: Set up an objectively evaluated method for teamwork; Step 7: Set up an objectively evaluated method for knowledge mastery.

2. The objective evaluation method for nuclear power plant simulator training and examination based on digital technology according to claim 1, wherein: In Step 1, the overall dimensions for evaluation using this method are selected according to the implementing rules, and the following 5 dimensions are determined: strict monitoring, precise control, conservative decision-making, teamwork, and knowledge mastery.

3. The objective evaluation method for nuclear power plant simulator training and examination based on digital technology according to claim 2, characterized in that: In Step 2, the evaluation dimensions determined in Step 1 are refined and decomposed to determine the indicators for objective evaluation, as shown in Table 1 Table 1 Objective Evaluation Indicators 4. The objective evaluation method for nuclear power plant simulator training and examination based on digital technology according to claim 1, characterized in that Step 3 includes the following: Step 31: Set up an evaluation method and criteria for the real-time performance of strict monitoring The evaluation indicator is the real-time performance of strict monitoring: the time interval from fault activation to the main control room team reporting the unit operating conditions information through "group notification" or other means; The evaluation criteria are that the operator can continuously and effectively monitor the power plant status based on the importance of parameters, discover and report fault information. The average value of the real-time performance indicators in simulator training and examination is used as the reference value, and points are deducted according to the deviation degree, or points are deducted if it is higher than the average response time, otherwise no points are deducted; Step 32: Set up an evaluation method and criteria for the accuracy of strict monitoring The evaluation indicator is the accuracy of strict monitoring: the proportion of misjudging normal situations as abnormal or vice versa; The evaluation criteria are that the operator can correctly locate the direct cause of the transient through comprehensive diagnosis and report the unit operating conditions information through "group notification" or other appropriate means, including but not limited to the direct cause of the fault, automatic actions or responses; Step 33: The standardization of strict monitoring The evaluation indicator is the standardization of strict monitoring: the statistical quantity of the situations where the operator violates the regulations, standards or procedures when dealing with the main control room alarms; The evaluation criteria are that the operator can perform unit monitoring and alarm response in accordance with the power plant management procedures / regulations to ensure rapid, accurate and effective response measures, and points are deducted according to the number of alarm response violations.

5. A method for objective evaluation of nuclear power plant simulator training and examination based on digital technology as claimed in claim 1, characterized in that Step 4 includes the following: Step 41: The accuracy of operation execution The evaluation indicator is the accuracy of operation execution: the operator accurately, completely and timely completes the procedure operations, and the executed operations are consistent with the requirements and expected responses of the procedures; The scoring criteria are that the operator can accurately access the technical procedures and select the applicable sections to perform the main control room operations, and is scored according to the number of errors or deviation degrees in the operations, with full marks indicating complete accuracy; the operation execution accuracy indicator is also applicable to the situation where the operator does not immediately use the procedures to mitigate the consequences of the transient, but only uses work skills to intervene first or immediately intervenes without available procedures; Step 42: The integrity of program execution The evaluation indicator is the integrity of program execution: covering all key operations of the procedures, without missing steps or the execution order not conforming to the procedures; The scoring criteria are that the operator fully executes the required steps in the procedure without skipping or omitting any steps. For consecutive steps involving the operation sequence, auxiliary identifiers are added as requirements for the sequence test point. Deductions are made according to the number of omitted or out-of-order steps, and a full score indicates complete execution. Step 43: Timeliness of operation execution The evaluation index is the timeliness of operation execution: comparing the time required to complete the operation with the standard time expected in the training, and whether key operations can be completed within the specified time in case of an emergency. The scoring criteria are that the operator can complete the operation task within the specified time, and the score is given according to the degree of exceeding or not reaching the specified time. Step 44: Standardization of procedure execution The evaluation index is the standardization of procedure execution: counting the number of non-compliant situations that occur when executing established procedures, rules, or standards. The scoring criteria are that the operator is familiar with the procedures / regulations of the nuclear power plant regarding compliance and use, and can strictly abide by the operation specifications when executing the procedures. Deductions are made according to the number or degree of violations. Step 45: Stability of parameter control The evaluation index is the rate of change of parameter control: counting the rate of change of parameters. The fluctuation range of parameter control is the deviation between the actual value and the program requirement value of the recorded parameter, and the maximum deviation and average deviation are counted. The scoring criteria are that when dynamically adjusting parameters, the operator can control the plant parameters in a smooth and stable manner, and a comprehensive score is given according to the degree of deviation of the average value of the parameter change rate and fluctuation range in training and examinations for the event. Step 46: Response time of parameter control The evaluation index is the response time of parameter control: the time from when the parameter deviation triggers an alarm to when the personnel or system responds, and the parameter returns and stabilizes within the alarm threshold range. The scoring criteria are that when the plant parameters deviate from the target value unexpectedly, the operator can take adjustment measures to restore the parameters to the program requirement value, avoiding the expansion of the event caused by parameter deterioration, and the score is given according to the degree of deviation of the average response time of the event in training and examinations. Step 47: Accuracy of parameter control The evaluation index is the accuracy of parameter control: counting the time ratio or deviation range when the parameter returns to the target value control band after being disturbed. Scoring criteria: After being adjusted by the operator, the parameter can finally stabilize near the target value, and the score is given according to the degree of deviation from the parameter target value in the event scenario. Step 48: Achievement rate of parameter control target The evaluation index is to count the proportion of successfully completed operations or the compliance time. The scoring criteria are that within the specified time, the operator can adjust the key parameters to within the target value range, and a comprehensive score is given according to the parameter control accuracy and response time indicators. Step 49: Success rate of multi-parameter coordinated control The evaluation index is the success rate of multi-parameter coordinated control: evaluating whether the change trends of various parameters during the operation process meet the expected goals. The scoring criteria are that under complex working conditions, when the operator can adjust multiple related parameters simultaneously, maintain the balance and stability among the parameters, and the score is given according to the achievement rate of the control target of each parameter.

6. The objective evaluation method for nuclear power plant simulator training and examination based on digital technology according to claim 1, characterized in that The aforesaid step 5 includes the following: Step 51: Decision-making accuracy The evaluation index is decision-making accuracy: evaluating the degree to which the decision is reasonable, effective, and meets the expectations. The evaluation criteria are that in case of sudden failure or emergency, the operator can promptly place the unit in a known safe state, make effective decisions and solve problems, and the score is based on the degree of compliance of the decisions made; Step 52: Decision compliance The evaluation index is decision compliance: the degree of compliance between the decision-making, the implementation process and the actual results; The evaluation criteria are that the operator should perform operations according to the formulated decisions, track the effective implementation of the decisions, and evaluate according to the degree of decision compliance. The decisions achieve the expected goals, comply with procedures and regulations, and do not lead to the expansion of accidents.

7. The objective evaluation method for nuclear power plant simulator training and examination based on digital technology according to claim 1, wherein The said step 6 includes the following: Step 61: Clarity of communication The evaluation index is clarity of communication: whether the information is conveyed clearly, accurately pronounced, and with standard language use; The scoring criteria are the clarity of team members when expressing information, and the score is based on the loudness of members' voices, the standardization of pronunciation and language use, and deductions are made for non-compliance; Step 62: Accuracy of communication The evaluation index is accuracy of communication: observing whether the information is conveyed comprehensively and clearly without error in actual operations; The scoring criteria are that team members can ensure the accuracy and comprehensiveness when expressing information, and deductions are made according to errors or omissions in information transmission. A full score indicates complete transmission; Step 63: Attention during listening The evaluation index is attention during listening: during the communication process, the degree of attention and engagement of the information receiver to the transmitter; The scoring criteria are that in team communication, the information receiver should pay attention to the transmitter, avoid information omission, and the score is based on the attention of the listener during information listening and the accuracy of the feedback after listening; Step 64: Timeliness of communication The evaluation index is timeliness of communication: during the information interaction process, the information transmitter can promptly and efficiently transmit information to the receiver or the main control team members; The scoring criteria: after obtaining important information, the operator should immediately share the information with team members in a suitable way to ensure that the information can reach in time at the moment of need; Step 65: Standardization of team cooperation The evaluation index is standardization of team cooperation: the number of times of assisting and communicating in accordance with the established operating procedures and term standards; The scoring criteria are that the information exchange process complies with the management procedure standards and specification requirements, and the score is based on the number of deviations from the procedure standards or incorrect application of terms.

8. The objective evaluation method for nuclear power plant simulator training and examination based on digital technology according to claim 1, characterized in that, The said step 7 includes the following: Step 71: Comprehensiveness of knowledge mastery The evaluation indexes are emergency response time and correct response rate; The evaluation criteria are that the operator can promptly and accurately take response measures to prevent the accident from deteriorating further, can stop the normal operations being carried out, place the unit in a safe state, and promptly identify key alarms or access the procedures that need to be used; Step 72: Accuracy of precise diagnosis The evaluation index is accuracy of precise diagnosis: The evaluation criteria are that the operator should have strong information interpretation ability, can accurately identify the direct cause, locate key alarms and apply appropriate procedures according to information such as unit parameters, alarms, and indications, and the ability to formulate solutions for the cause; Step 73: Comprehensiveness of risk control The evaluation indexes are risk identification ratio and risk prevention measure coverage rate; The evaluation criteria are that the operators can accurately identify potential risks and take targeted preventive measures during the decision-making process. The risk assessment includes but is not limited to nuclear safety, industrial safety, and radiation safety, and is evaluated according to the comprehensive risk control indicators.

Images