Power grid infrastructure project group investment management whole process risk monitoring method

Abstract

The invention discloses a power grid infrastructure project group investment management whole process risk monitoring method comprising the following steps: carrying out project group division on a power grid infrastructure project based on an electrical connection principle to obtain an extra-high voltage project group and a matched project group thereof, and an electrified railway matched electric power project group for partially supplying power to the same railway; a project group investment management whole-process monitoring index system is established according to the whole life cycle of a power grid infrastructure project, wherein the monitoring index system comprises monitoring indexes of five stages, namely a feasibility research stage, a planning stage, a project early stage, a construction stage and a settlement stage; calculating an actual value of each monitoring index, comparing a calculation result with an early warning threshold value, and when the monitoring index cannot be calculated, displaying that the monitoring index is null; when the monitoring index calculation result exceeds an early warning threshold value, a prompt or an alarm is displayed; and when the monitoring index calculation result does not exceed the early warning threshold value, the display is normal. According to the invention, the early warning mechanism of the monitoring indexes is optimized, and the timeliness and accuracy of risk early warning are improved.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the technical field of power system engineering management, and in particular to a method for monitoring risks during the entire investment management process of a power grid infrastructure project group. Background Art

[0002] With the continuous expansion and increasing complexity of State Grid's infrastructure projects, traditional project management methods are no longer able to meet the needs of modern grid construction. While the existing "four-in-one" data monitoring and analysis system for grid infrastructure projects monitors the entire project process, using dynamic deviation warnings to monitor the matching degree of on-site construction progress, investment completion progress, financial accounting progress, and material supply progress (collectively referred to as the "four rates"), strengthening process control, deepening professional collaboration, and promoting the integration of the "four rates" trends, the existing technology has exposed significant shortcomings in the following areas as the demand for project group management increases:

[0003] First, the existing "four-in-one" monitoring system primarily monitors the progress and investment status of individual projects, lacking comprehensive monitoring capabilities for the overall investment management of a project group. In large-scale power grid infrastructure projects, multiple sub-projects often need to be coordinated and implemented, with complex dependencies and mutual influences between projects. Existing technologies make it difficult to effectively monitor and manage the investment execution process of the entire project group, making it difficult to promptly identify and address potential risks and deviations at the project group level.

[0004] Second, the existing monitoring system has limited risk warning capabilities. Although the "Four Rates in One" system can detect deviations in project progress by monitoring the completion rates of various indicators, its warning mechanism relies primarily on static threshold settings and lacks the ability to dynamically adjust and conduct intelligent analysis. In actual applications, project environmental, personnel, technical, and economic factors are constantly changing, and static thresholds are difficult to adapt to the dynamic needs of project management. This results in insufficient timeliness and accuracy in warnings, making it impossible to effectively support project management decisions.

[0005] Third, existing technologies lack understanding and application of multi-project management models. Power grid infrastructure projects typically involve multiple sub-projects, which are highly correlated in terms of time, resources, and objectives. The existing "four-rate integration" monitoring system focuses more on the independent operation of individual projects and lacks management tools for overall coordination and optimization of the project cluster. This isolated monitoring approach makes it difficult to fully reflect the synergy and mutual constraints between sub-projects within the project cluster, resulting in inefficient management at the project cluster level and insufficient risk identification and response capabilities.

[0006] Fourth, the existing monitoring system lacks a high level of intelligence in data processing and analysis. As the volume and complexity of data in power grid infrastructure projects increase, traditional data monitoring and analysis methods struggle to efficiently process and analyze large amounts of real-time data, impacting the timeliness and accuracy of monitoring results. The lack of advanced data processing technology and intelligent analysis tools makes it difficult for the existing monitoring system to provide effective support and assurance in complex and changing project environments.

[0007] 5. Existing technologies are insufficient in comprehensively covering the entire project life cycle. Although the "four rates in one" system demonstrates good monitoring capabilities during the project construction phase, there are imperfections in the setting and management of monitoring indicators during the project feasibility study phase, planning phase, pre-engineering phase, and final settlement phase. There is a lack of systematic monitoring and management methods for all stages of the project life cycle, making it difficult to identify and control risks and deviations at different stages of the project in a timely manner, thus affecting the overall management effectiveness and investment benefits of the project.

[0008] In summary, the existing "four-in-one" data monitoring and analysis system for power grid infrastructure has obvious shortcomings in project group management, dynamic risk warning, multi-project collaborative management, intelligent data processing and comprehensive monitoring of the project life cycle. It is urgently needed to improve the investment management efficiency and risk control capabilities of power grid infrastructure projects through technical improvements. Summary of the Invention

[0009] The purpose of this section is to summarize some aspects of the embodiments of the present invention and briefly introduce some preferred embodiments. Some simplifications or omissions may be made in this section and the abstract of the specification and the title of the invention of this application to avoid blurring the purpose of this section, the abstract of the specification and the title of the invention, and such simplifications or omissions cannot be used to limit the scope of the invention.

[0010] In view of the above existing problems, the present invention is proposed.

[0011] Therefore, the technical problem solved by the present invention is that it is difficult to achieve comprehensive monitoring and dynamic risk warning throughout the entire process and at all stages during the existing power grid infrastructure project group investment management process.

[0012] To solve the above technical problems, the present invention provides the following technical solutions: Step 1: Divide the power grid infrastructure projects into project groups based on the electrical connection principle to obtain the UHV and its supporting project groups and the electrified railway supporting power engineering groups that supply power to the same railway section;

[0013] Step 2: Establish a monitoring indicator system for the entire project group investment management process based on the entire life cycle of the power grid infrastructure project. The monitoring indicator system includes monitoring indicators for five stages: feasibility study stage, planning stage, pre-project stage, construction stage, and final settlement stage;

[0014] Step 3: Calculate the actual value of each monitoring indicator and compare the calculated result with the warning threshold, where:

[0015] When the monitoring indicator cannot be calculated, it will be displayed as empty;

[0016] When the calculated result of the monitoring indicator exceeds the warning threshold, a prompt or alarm is displayed;

[0017] When the calculation result of the monitoring indicator does not exceed the warning threshold, it is displayed as normal.

[0018] As an optimal solution for the whole-process risk monitoring method of power grid infrastructure project group investment management described in the present invention, when the monitoring intensity type of the monitoring indicator is strong monitoring, an alarm is displayed; when the monitoring intensity type of the monitoring indicator is weak monitoring, a prompt is displayed.

[0019] As a preferred solution of the method for monitoring the risk of the entire process of investment management of power grid infrastructure project groups according to the present invention, step 1 specifically includes:

[0020] Collect basic information of each project and establish a basic information database for power grid infrastructure projects;

[0021] The basic information of each project includes at least basic project attributes, electrical characteristics, geographic information and construction information;

[0022] The basic attributes of the project include the project number, project name, and construction nature; the electrical characteristics include voltage level, transformer capacity, and line capacity; the geographic information includes the project location and power supply range; and the construction information includes the planned start time and planned commissioning time.

[0023] The comprehensive correlation strength between projects is calculated through the electrical coupling degree EC and the power supply area connectivity degree SR.

[0024] As a preferred solution of the method for monitoring risk in the entire process of investment management of power grid infrastructure project groups according to the present invention, the method further includes:

[0025] Taking the UHV project as the core, calculate the comprehensive correlation strength between other projects and the core project, compare the comprehensive correlation strength with the classification criteria, and divide the UHV supporting project groups;

[0026] Identify power supply projects on the same railway line, calculate the comprehensive correlation strength of railway power supply between projects, compare the comprehensive correlation strength with the classification standard, and classify the electrified railway supporting power project groups.

[0027] As a preferred solution of the method for monitoring the risk of the entire process of investment management of power grid infrastructure project groups described in the present invention, the monitoring indicators of the feasibility study stage include the feasibility study approval time matching and the initial design approval time matching;

[0028] The monitoring indicators of the planning stage include the matching of the planned start time, the matching of the planned production time and the matching of the ERP project establishment time;

[0029] The monitoring indicators in the early stage of the project include the matching of the time for submission of demand projects and the matching of the time for contract fulfillment;

[0030] The monitoring indicators of the construction phase include the matching of actual start time, construction progress and actual production time;

[0031] The monitoring indicators of the settlement and final settlement stage include settlement time matching and final settlement time matching.

[0032] A preferred solution of the method for monitoring risk throughout the entire investment management process of power grid infrastructure project groups according to the present invention includes:

[0033] Determine whether the feasibility study approval times of n projects in the project group match based on the maximum difference in the feasibility study approval times of each project in the project group. If the maximum difference exceeds the warning threshold, the feasibility study approval times do not match; otherwise, they match.

[0034] Determine whether the initial review opinion obtaining times of n projects in the project group match based on the maximum difference in the initial review opinion obtaining times of each project in the project group; if the maximum difference exceeds the warning threshold, the initial review opinion obtaining times do not match; otherwise, they match;

[0035] Among the monitoring indicators in the feasibility study stage, the setting of the warning threshold includes: for non-inter-provincial project groups, the warning threshold is 6 months; for inter-provincial project groups, the warning threshold is 12 months;

[0036] The monitoring intensity types for the feasibility study approval time matching and the preliminary design approval time matching are both weak monitoring.

[0037] A preferred solution of the method for monitoring risk throughout the entire investment management process of power grid infrastructure project groups according to the present invention includes:

[0038] Determine whether the planned start times of n projects in the project group match based on the maximum difference between the planned start times of the projects in the project group. If the maximum difference exceeds a warning threshold, the planned start times do not match; otherwise, the planned start times match.

[0039] Determining whether the planned production times of the n projects in the project group match according to the maximum difference between the planned production times of the projects in the project group; if the maximum difference exceeds the warning threshold, the planned production times do not match; otherwise, the planned production times match;

[0040] Determine whether the ERP project creation times of n projects in the project group match based on the maximum difference in ERP project creation time of each project in the project group. If the maximum difference exceeds the warning threshold, the ERP project creation time does not match; otherwise, the ERP project creation time matches.

[0041] In the monitoring indicators of the planning stage, the setting of the warning threshold includes: for non-inter-provincial project groups, the warning threshold is 6 months; for inter-provincial project groups, the warning threshold is 12 months;

[0042] The monitoring intensity types of the matching of the planned start time, the matching of the planned production time and the matching of the ERP project establishment time are all strong monitoring.

[0043] A preferred solution of the method for monitoring risk throughout the entire investment management process of power grid infrastructure project groups according to the present invention includes:

[0044] Determine whether the demand submission times of n projects in the project group match based on the maximum difference in demand submission times of each project in the project group. If the maximum difference exceeds a warning threshold, the demand submission times do not match; otherwise, they match.

[0045] Determining whether the contract signing times of n projects in the project group match based on the maximum difference in the contract fulfillment times of the projects in the project group; if the maximum difference exceeds the warning threshold, the contract signing times do not match; otherwise, the contract signing times match;

[0046] In the monitoring indicators of the early stage of the project, the setting of the warning threshold includes: for non-inter-provincial project groups, the warning threshold is 6 months; for inter-provincial project groups, the warning threshold is 12 months;

[0047] The monitoring intensity types of the time matching of the demand project submission and the time matching of the contract satisfaction are both weak monitoring.

[0048] A preferred solution of the method for monitoring risk throughout the entire investment management process of power grid infrastructure project groups according to the present invention includes:

[0049] Determine whether the actual start times of n projects in the project group match based on the maximum difference between the actual start times of each project in the project group. If the maximum difference exceeds a warning threshold, the actual start times do not match; otherwise, the actual start times match.

[0050] Compare the difference between the load progress and the time progress of the project group to determine whether the actual construction progress of the n projects in the project group matches. If the difference exceeds the warning threshold, the actual construction progress does not match; otherwise, it matches.

[0051] Determine whether the actual production time of n projects in the project group matches according to the maximum difference between the actual production time of each project in the project group; if the maximum difference exceeds the warning threshold, the actual production time does not match; otherwise, the actual production time matches;

[0052] Among the monitoring indicators for the construction phase, the warning thresholds include: the actual start time matching indicator and the actual production time matching indicator. For non-inter-provincial project groups, the warning threshold is 6 months; for inter-provincial project groups, the warning threshold is 12 months; the warning threshold for the construction progress matching indicator is 20%;

[0053] The monitoring intensity types of the actual start time matching, the construction progress matching index and the actual production time matching index are all strong monitoring.

[0054] A preferred solution of the method for monitoring risk throughout the entire investment management process of power grid infrastructure project groups according to the present invention includes:

[0055] Determine whether the settlement times of n projects in the project group match based on the maximum difference in settlement time of each project in the project group. If the maximum difference exceeds the warning threshold, the settlement time does not match; otherwise, the settlement time matches.

[0056] Determining whether the final settlement times of n projects in the project group match according to the maximum difference in the final settlement times of the projects in the project group; if the maximum difference exceeds the warning threshold, the final settlement times do not match; otherwise, the final settlement times match;

[0057] Among the monitoring indicators in the settlement phase, the warning thresholds are set as follows: for non-inter-provincial project groups, the warning threshold is 6 months; for inter-provincial project groups, the warning threshold is 12 months;

[0058] The monitoring intensity types of the settlement time matching and the final accounting time matching are both weak monitoring.

[0059] The beneficial effects of the present invention are as follows: the present invention ensures collaborative management and optimal resource allocation among projects through systematic project group division, thereby improving the management efficiency and system reliability of the overall project group; through a full life cycle monitoring indicator system, detailed monitoring of different stages of the project is achieved, the systematic nature of investment management is enhanced, and risk identification and control capabilities are improved; through real-time monitoring and dynamic early warning, the timeliness and accuracy of risk response are improved, the visualization and ease of use of monitoring results are optimized, and the flexibility and adaptability of the monitoring system are enhanced. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0060] In order to more clearly illustrate the technical solutions of the embodiments of the present invention, the following briefly introduces the drawings required for describing the embodiments. Obviously, the drawings described below are only some embodiments of the present invention. Those skilled in the art can also derive other drawings based on these drawings without inventive effort. Among them:

[0061] Figure 1 Schematic diagram of the process of risk monitoring of the entire process of investment management of power grid infrastructure project groups shown in the present invention;

[0062] Figure 2 This is a schematic diagram of the first part of the early warning results of the entire process of investment management of UHV and its supporting project groups shown in the present invention;

[0063] Figure 3 This is a schematic diagram of the second part of the early warning results of the entire process of investment management of UHV and its supporting project groups shown in the present invention;

[0064] Figure 4 This is a schematic diagram of the first part of the early warning results of the entire process of investment management of the electrified railway project group shown in the present invention;

[0065] Figure 5 This is a schematic diagram of the second part of the early warning results of the entire process of investment management of the electrified railway project group shown in the present invention. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0066] In order to make the above-mentioned objects, features and advantages of the present invention more obvious and easy to understand, the specific implementation methods of the present invention are described in detail below in conjunction with the drawings. It is obvious that the described embodiments are only part of the embodiments of the present invention, but not all of the embodiments.

[0067] Based on the embodiments of the present invention, all other embodiments obtained by ordinary persons in this field without making any creative work should fall within the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0068] In the following description, many specific details are set forth to facilitate a full understanding of the present invention. However, the present invention may also be implemented in other ways different from those described herein. Those skilled in the art may make similar generalizations without violating the connotation of the present invention. Therefore, the present invention is not limited to the specific embodiments disclosed below.

[0069] According to an embodiment of the present invention, Figure 1 The flowchart shown is a method for monitoring the risk of the entire investment management process of a power grid infrastructure project group, which specifically includes the following steps:

[0070] Step 1: Divide the power grid infrastructure projects into project groups based on the electrical connection principle, and obtain the UHV and its supporting project groups, and the electrified railway supporting power engineering groups that supply power to the same railway section.

[0071] Collect basic information of each project and establish a basic information database for power grid infrastructure projects;

[0072] The basic information of each project shall at least include basic project attributes, electrical characteristics, geographical information and construction information;

[0073] Among them, basic project attributes include project number, project name, and construction nature; electrical characteristics include voltage level, transformer capacity, and line capacity; geographic information includes project location and power supply range; and construction information includes planned start time and planned commissioning time;

[0074] The comprehensive degree of correlation between projects is calculated through the electrical coupling degree EC and the power supply region connectivity degree SR, including:

[0075] The mathematical expression of electrical coupling is:

[0076] EC=α×V c +β×P c +γ×L c

[0077] Among them, V c is the voltage level matching coefficient (1.0 for the same level, 0.8 for the different level, and 0.5 for the difference of two levels), P c is the capacity matching coefficient, which is the smaller value of the capacity ratio of the two projects, L c is the line connection coefficient, which is inversely proportional to the length of the connection line. α, β, and γ are the electrical coupling weight coefficients, and α+β+γ=1;

[0078] The mathematical expression of the power supply area connectivity is:

[0079] SR=(N s / N t )×W

[0080] Among them, SR is the power supply business relevance, N s is the number of common power supply areas, N t is the total number of power supply areas, W is the power supply area connectivity weight coefficient;

[0081] The mathematical expression formula of comprehensive correlation strength is:

[0082] RS=EC×W1+SR×W2

[0083] Among them, W1 and W2 are comprehensive correlation strength weight coefficients, and the sum of the weights is 1;

[0084] Specifically, the division of the UHV supporting project group includes the following steps:

[0085] Taking the UHV project as the core, calculate the comprehensive correlation strength between other projects and the core project;

[0086] Set three-level classification standards based on association strength:

[0087] When the correlation strength is ≥0.7, it will be directly included in the UHV project group;

[0088] When the correlation strength is between 0.5 and 0.7, it is included in the candidate list and requires further evaluation;

[0089] When the correlation strength is less than 0.5, the project group will not be included;

[0090] Furthermore, the division of the supporting power engineering group for electrified railways includes the following steps:

[0091] Identify power supply projects on the same railway line and calculate the railway power supply correlation strength between projects;

[0092] Set three-level classification standards based on association strength:

[0093] When the correlation strength is ≥0.75, it will be directly included in the railway power supply project group;

[0094] When the correlation strength is between 0.6 and 0.75, it is included in the candidate list and requires further evaluation;

[0095] When the correlation strength is less than 0.6, it will not be included in the project group.

[0096] Step 2: Establish a monitoring indicator system for the entire project group investment management process based on the entire life cycle of the power grid infrastructure project. The monitoring indicator system includes monitoring indicators for five stages: feasibility study stage, planning stage, pre-project stage, construction stage, and final settlement stage. Among them, the following points need to be explained in this step:

[0097] Monitoring indicators during the feasibility study phase include feasibility study approval time matching and preliminary design approval time matching;

[0098] The monitoring indicators in the planning stage include the matching of planned start time, planned production time and ERP project construction time;

[0099] Monitoring indicators in the early stages of the project include the matching of demand project submission time and contract satisfaction time;

[0100] Monitoring indicators during the construction phase include matching of actual construction start time, construction progress and actual production start time;

[0101] The monitoring indicators in the settlement and final settlement stage include matching of settlement time and matching of final settlement time.

[0102] As an example, the maximum difference in the feasibility study approval time of each project in the project group is used to determine whether the feasibility study approval time of n projects in the project group matches. If the maximum difference exceeds the warning threshold, the feasibility study approval time does not match; otherwise, it matches.

[0103] Based on the maximum difference in the time of obtaining the initial review opinions of each project in the project group, it is judged whether the time of obtaining the initial review opinions of n projects in the project group matches. If the maximum difference exceeds the warning threshold, the time of obtaining the initial review opinions does not match; otherwise, it matches;

[0104] Among the monitoring indicators in the feasibility study stage, the early warning thresholds are set as follows: for non-inter-provincial project groups, the early warning threshold is 6 months; for inter-provincial project groups, the early warning threshold is 12 months;

[0105] The monitoring intensity types for feasibility study approval time matching and preliminary design approval time matching are both weak monitoring.

[0106] As an example, the maximum difference between the planned start times of the projects in the project group is used to determine whether the planned start times of n projects in the project group match. If the maximum difference exceeds the warning threshold, the planned start times do not match; otherwise, they match.

[0107] The maximum difference between the planned production times of the projects in the project group is used to determine whether the planned production times of the n projects in the project group match. If the maximum difference exceeds the warning threshold, the planned production times do not match; otherwise, they match.

[0108] The maximum difference in ERP project establishment time among projects in the project group is used to determine whether the ERP project establishment time of n projects in the project group matches. If the maximum difference exceeds the warning threshold, the ERP project establishment time does not match; otherwise, it matches.

[0109] In the monitoring indicators of the planning stage, the early warning thresholds are set as follows: for non-inter-provincial project groups, the early warning threshold is 6 months; for inter-provincial project groups, the early warning threshold is 12 months;

[0110] The monitoring intensity types of planned start time matching, planned production time matching and ERP project construction time matching are all strong monitoring.

[0111] As an example, the maximum difference in the demand submission time of each project in the project group is used to determine whether the demand submission time of n projects in the project group matches. If the maximum difference exceeds the warning threshold, the demand submission time does not match; otherwise, it matches.

[0112] Based on the maximum difference in the contract fulfillment time of each project in the project group, it is determined whether the contract signing time of n projects in the project group matches. If the maximum difference exceeds the warning threshold, the contract signing time does not match; otherwise, it matches;

[0113] In the early stage of the project monitoring indicators, the warning thresholds are set as follows: for non-inter-provincial project groups, the warning threshold is 6 months; for inter-provincial project groups, the warning threshold is 12 months;

[0114] The monitoring intensity types for the time matching of demand project submission and the time matching of contract satisfaction are both weak monitoring.

[0115] As an example, the maximum difference between the actual start times of each project in the project group is used to determine whether the actual start times of n projects in the project group match. If the maximum difference exceeds the warning threshold, the actual start times do not match; otherwise, they match.

[0116] Compare the difference between the project group's load progress and time progress to determine whether the actual construction progress of the n projects in the project group matches. If the difference exceeds the warning threshold, the actual construction progress does not match; otherwise, it matches.

[0117] Based on the maximum difference in the actual production time of each project in the project group, it is judged whether the actual production time of n projects in the project group matches. If the maximum difference exceeds the warning threshold, the actual production time does not match; otherwise, it matches;

[0118] Among the monitoring indicators during the construction phase, the warning thresholds include: the matching indicators of actual construction start time and actual production time. For non-inter-provincial project groups, the warning threshold is 6 months; for inter-provincial project groups, the warning threshold is 12 months; the warning threshold of the construction progress matching indicator is 20%;

[0119] The monitoring intensity types of the actual start time matching, construction progress matching indicators and actual production time matching indicators are all strong monitoring.

[0120] As an example, whether the settlement times of n projects in a project group match is determined based on the maximum difference in the settlement times of each project in the project group. If the maximum difference exceeds the warning threshold, the settlement times do not match; otherwise, they match.

[0121] Based on the maximum difference in the final settlement time of each project in the project group, it is determined whether the final settlement time of n projects in the project group matches. If the maximum difference exceeds the warning threshold, the final settlement time does not match; otherwise, it matches;

[0122] Among the monitoring indicators in the settlement phase, the warning thresholds are set as follows: for non-inter-provincial project groups, the warning threshold is 6 months; for inter-provincial project groups, the warning threshold is 12 months;

[0123] The monitoring intensity types of settlement time matching and final accounting time matching are both weak monitoring.

[0124] Step 3: Calculate the actual value of each monitoring indicator and compare the calculated result with the warning threshold.

[0125] Obtain key time node data for each project in each stage within the project group;

[0126] Determine the project phase to which each monitoring indicator belongs;

[0127] Dynamically determine and assign monitoring intensity types based on the impact scores of monitoring indicators;

[0128] For each monitoring indicator, calculate the maximum difference ΔT of the relevant time nodes within the project group;

[0129] If the key data of a monitoring indicator is missing, set its actual value to empty;

[0130] According to whether the project group is interprovincial, set the early warning threshold Θ of the monitoring indicators at each stage;

[0131] Compare the calculated ΔT with Θ;

[0132] If ΔT cannot be calculated, the display will be blank;

[0133] If ΔT>Θ:

[0134] If the monitoring intensity type is strong monitoring, an alarm is displayed;

[0135] If the monitoring intensity type is weak monitoring, a prompt will be displayed;

[0136] If ΔT≤Θ, the display is normal.

[0137] In an optional embodiment, dynamic determination of the monitoring intensity type is achieved through the following steps:

[0138] Determine the project life cycle stage to which each monitoring indicator belongs;

[0139] Based on the impact of the monitoring indicator, weak monitoring or strong monitoring is initially assigned;

[0140] Each monitoring indicator is assigned an impact score based on the following criteria:

[0141] Key stages (e.g., planning stage, construction stage): impact score is set to [3,5], and all monitoring indicators are set to strong monitoring;

[0142] Non-critical stages (such as feasibility study stage, pre-project stage, and final settlement stage): the impact score is set to [1, 2], and all monitoring indicators are set to weak monitoring.

[0143] It should be noted that the key time node data of all projects in the project group at the corresponding stage are collected. For example, in the feasibility study stage, the feasibility study approval time and the time of obtaining the preliminary design review opinion of each project are collected, and the maximum difference is calculated;

[0144] As an example, for monitoring indicators that require time matching, the maximum difference between all projects in the project group at that time point is calculated. The mathematical expression is:

[0145] ΔT=max(T1,T2,...,T n )-min(T1,T2,...,T n )

[0146] Among them, ΔT is the actual value of the monitoring indicator (maximum difference), T1, T2, ..., T n is the time value of each project in the project group at the corresponding time node, and n is the number of projects in the project group;

[0147] All time values ​​T i Stored in "year-month" or specific date format, it needs to be converted to a unified time unit (such as months) for calculation;

[0148] If some projects in the project group are missing key time data, resulting in the inability to calculate the maximum difference of the monitoring indicator, the actual value of the monitoring indicator is set to "null".

[0149] As an example, based on whether the project group spans provinces, set the warning threshold Θ for the corresponding stage:

[0150]

[0151] For construction progress matching, the warning threshold is set at 20%;

[0152] For each monitoring indicator, comparison is performed according to the following rules:

[0153]

[0154] The present invention realizes comprehensive monitoring of power grid infrastructure project groups in all stages of feasibility study, planning, pre-project, construction and settlement, improving the investment management and risk control capabilities at the project group level. At the same time, through the method of dynamically judging the monitoring intensity type, it optimizes the management and early warning mechanism of monitoring indicators, and improves the timeliness and accuracy of risk warning.

[0155] Preferably, this embodiment takes a project group consisting of an 800 kV DC project (hereinafter referred to as Project A) and its supporting 500 kV line project (hereinafter referred to as Project B) of a certain province as a specific embodiment, and describes in detail the application method of the risk monitoring model for the entire process of investment management of power grid infrastructure project groups;

[0156] The total investment in the feasibility study for the project cluster is RMB 14,062.39 million, with a transmission capacity of 8 million kilowatts and 1,005.2 kilometers of new and renovated lines. The 2024 investment plan is RMB 772.92 million, with construction scheduled to start on June 1, 2024, and commissioning scheduled for June 1, 2026. Project A is a ±800 kV DC transmission project, with a planned capacity of 8 million kilowatts and a line length of 762 kilometers, invested by a certain company. The total investment is RMB 13 billion, and construction is currently underway. Its supporting transmission project, Project B, is a 500 kV AC transmission line project. The project involves the construction and renovation of 243.2 kilometers of 500 kV lines, the expansion and renovation of four 500 kV substation bays and one 1000 kV substation bay, and the simultaneous construction of corresponding reactive power compensation equipment and secondary system engineering. The total investment is RMB 1.062 billion, and construction has not yet commenced.

[0157] According to the indicator calculation and early warning method of the present invention, the risk monitoring of the whole process of investment management of the project group is carried out. The early warning situation of the project group is as follows: Figure 2 、 Figure 3 As shown:

[0158] (1) Feasibility study stage

[0159] The feasibility study approval time matching indicator for the project group shows "normal" because the feasibility study approval time for Project A is October 1, 2023, and the feasibility study approval time for Project B is December 1, 2023. The time deviation is 2 months, which does not exceed the warning threshold of 6 months. Therefore, the feasibility study approval time matching indicator does not trigger a warning.

[0160] The project group's initial approval time matching indicator shows "normal" because the initial approval time for Project A is March 1, 2024, and the initial approval time for Project B is April 12, 2024. The time deviation is 1.4 months, which does not exceed the warning threshold of 6 months. Therefore, the initial approval time matching indicator does not trigger a warning.

[0161] (2) Planning stage

[0162] The matching of the project group's planned start times is displayed as "normal" because Project A's planned start time is June 1, 2024, and Project B's planned start time is April 1, 2024. The planned start time deviation is 2 months, which does not exceed the warning threshold of 6 months. Therefore, the planned start time matching indicator does not trigger a warning.

[0163] The project group's planned launch time compatibility indicator shows a "warning" warning. This is because Project A's planned launch time is June 1, 2026, while Project B's planned launch time is June 1, 2025. The planned launch time deviation is one year, far exceeding the threshold of six months. Therefore, the planned launch time compatibility indicator has issued an early warning.

[0164] The project group ERP project time compatibility indicator shows "normal" because the ERP project construction time of Project A is January 26, 2024, and the ERP project construction time of Project B is July 1, 2024. The time deviation is 5.2 months, which does not exceed the warning threshold of 6 months. Therefore, the ERP project construction time compatibility indicator does not trigger a warning.

[0165] (3) Early stage of the project

[0166] The project group's material demand submission time matching indicator shows "normal" because Project A's material demand submission time is January 26, 2024, and Project B's material demand submission time is July 1, 2024. The time deviation is 5.2 months, which does not exceed the warning threshold of 6 months. Therefore, the material demand submission time matching indicator does not trigger a warning.

[0167] The contract signing time matching indicator shows "warning" because the contract signing time of Project A is February 26, 2024, while the contract signing time of Project B is September 24, 2024. The contract signing time deviation is more than 7 months, exceeding the warning threshold of 6 months. Therefore, the contract signing time matching indicator has a warning.

[0168] (4) Construction phase

[0169] The project group's actual start time matching indicator shows "normal" because Project A's actual start time is June 12, 2024, Project B has not yet started, and Project A is less than six months from the current time (September 24, 2024), which does not exceed the six-month warning threshold. Therefore, the actual start time matching indicator does not trigger a warning.

[0170] Since neither Project A nor Project B has construction progress data, the weighted construction progress of the project group cannot be calculated. Therefore, the status of the project group construction progress matching indicator is empty.

[0171] Since both projects have not yet been put into production, the status of the project group's actual production time matching indicator is empty;

[0172] (5) Settlement stage

[0173] Since the project group has not yet reached the settlement and finalization stage, the status of the settlement time matching indicator and the final settlement time matching indicator is empty.

[0174] Preferably, a cross-provincial high-speed electrified railway project group is used as a specific example to explain in detail the application method of the risk monitoring model for the entire investment management process of the power grid infrastructure project group;

[0175] The actual start date of the high-speed railway project is March 22, 2022, and the planned commissioning date is June 2025. Currently under construction, the four electrified railway supporting power projects of the high-speed railway constitute the electrified railway project group. The total initial investment of the project group is RMB 550.22 million, and the investment plan for 2024 is RMB 244.31 million. It includes overhead transmission line projects, cable line projects, traction station interval expansion and renovation projects, and a total length of 222.28 kilometers of overhead lines. The planned start date is January 1, 2023, and the planned commissioning date is May 1, 2025. The project group includes the following four projects:

[0176] Table 1. Project information table of each project group

[0177]

[0178] According to the indicator calculation and early warning method of the present invention, the risk monitoring of the whole process of investment management of the project group is carried out. The project group displays "prompt", refer to Figure 4 、 Figure 5 As shown:

[0179] (1) Feasibility study stage

[0180] The feasibility study approval time matching indicator for the project group shows "normal" because the earliest feasibility study approval time for the four projects is January 11, 2022 (minimum value), and the latest is June 7, 2022 (maximum value). The time deviation (maximum value minus minimum value) is 4.9 months, which does not exceed the warning threshold of 12 months. Therefore, the feasibility study approval time matching indicator does not trigger a warning.

[0181] The project group's initial approval time matching indicator shows "normal" because the earliest initial approval time for the four projects is July 1, 2022 (minimum value), and the latest is October 15, 2022 (maximum value). The time deviation (maximum value minus minimum value) is 3.5 months, which does not exceed the warning threshold of 12 months. Therefore, the initial approval time matching indicator does not trigger a warning.

[0182] (2) Planning stage

[0183] The project group's planned start time matching indicator shows "normal" because the earliest of the four projects' planned start dates is January 1, 2023 (minimum), and the latest is November 1, 2023 (maximum). The time deviation (maximum minus minimum) is 10 months, which does not exceed the warning threshold of 12 months. Therefore, no warning is issued for the planned start time matching indicator.

[0184] The project group's planned launch time matching indicator shows "normal" because the earliest planned launch date of the four projects is June 1, 2024 (the minimum), and the latest is May 1, 2025 (the maximum). The time deviation (maximum minus minimum) is 11 months, which does not exceed the threshold of 12 months. Therefore, no alarm is generated for the planned launch time matching indicator.

[0185] The ERP project construction time matching indicator shows "normal" because the earliest ERP project construction time of the four projects is March 5, 2022 (minimum value), and the latest is February 6, 2023 (maximum value). The time deviation (maximum value minus minimum value) is 11.3 months, which does not exceed the threshold of 12 months. Therefore, the ERP project construction time matching indicator does not trigger an alarm.

[0186] (3) Early stage of the project

[0187] The project group material demand submission time matching indicator shows "normal" because the earliest material demand submission time for the four projects is March 9, 2022 (minimum value), and the latest is March 3, 2023 (maximum value). The time deviation (maximum value minus minimum value) is 12 months, which does not exceed the warning threshold of 12 months. Therefore, the material demand submission time matching indicator does not trigger an alarm.

[0188] The project group contract signing time matching indicator displays "Warning" because the earliest contract signing date for the four projects is March 9, 2022 (minimum value), and the latest is June 13, 2023 (maximum value). The time deviation (maximum value minus minimum value) is 15.4 months, exceeding the warning threshold of 12 months. Therefore, the contract signing time matching indicator triggers an alarm. Since the monitoring intensity of this indicator is weak, it displays "Warning";

[0189] (4) Construction phase

[0190] The project group's actual start time matching indicator shows "normal" because the earliest actual start time of the four projects is January 12, 2023 (minimum value) and the latest is June 13, 2023 (maximum value). The time deviation (maximum value minus minimum value) is 10.2 months, which does not exceed the warning threshold of 12 months. Therefore, the actual start time matching indicator does not trigger a warning.

[0191] The project group's actual construction progress matching indicator shows "normal". The actual construction progress of the four projects is 60.57%, 89.31%, 78.28% and 73.30% respectively. The initial total investment is RMB 172.13 million, RMB 116.84 million, RMB 109.02 million and RMB 152.23 million respectively. The weighted construction progress of the project group is 73.70%. As of September 25, 2024, the time progress is 74.05%. Since the deviation between the weighted construction progress of the project group and the time supervision is only 0.35%, which does not exceed the warning threshold of 20%, no warning is issued for this indicator.

[0192] Since none of the four projects in the project group have been put into production, the actual production time matching indicator status is empty;

[0193] (5) Settlement stage

[0194] Since the project group has not yet reached the settlement and finalization stage, the status of the settlement time matching indicator and the final settlement time matching indicator is empty.

[0195] It should be noted that the above embodiments are only used to illustrate the technical solutions of the present invention and are not intended to limit the present invention. Although the present invention has been described in detail with reference to the preferred embodiments, those skilled in the art should understand that the technical solutions of the present invention may be modified or replaced by equivalents without departing from the spirit and scope of the technical solutions of the present invention, which should all be included in the scope of the claims of the present invention.

Claims

1. A method for monitoring the risk of the entire investment management process of a power grid infrastructure project group, characterized in that: include: Step 1: Divide the power grid infrastructure projects into project groups based on the electrical connection principle, obtaining the UHV and its supporting project groups, and the electrified railway supporting power engineering groups that supply power to the same railway section; Step 2: Establish a monitoring indicator system for the entire project group investment management process based on the entire life cycle of the power grid infrastructure project. The monitoring indicator system includes monitoring indicators for five stages: feasibility study stage, planning stage, pre-project stage, construction stage, and final settlement stage; Step 3: Calculate the actual value of each monitoring indicator and compare the calculated result with the warning threshold, where: When the monitoring indicator cannot be calculated, it will be displayed as empty; When the calculated result of the monitoring indicator exceeds the warning threshold, a prompt or alarm is displayed; When the calculation result of the monitoring indicator does not exceed the warning threshold, it is displayed as normal.

2. The method for monitoring the risk of the entire process of investment management of power grid infrastructure project groups according to claim 1 is characterized in that: When the monitoring intensity type of the monitoring indicator is strong monitoring, an alarm is displayed; when the monitoring intensity type of the monitoring indicator is weak monitoring, a prompt is displayed.

3. The method for monitoring the risk of the entire process of investment management of power grid infrastructure project groups according to claim 1 is characterized in that: The step 1 specifically includes: Collect basic information of each project and establish a basic information database for power grid infrastructure projects; The basic information of each project includes at least basic project attributes, electrical characteristics, geographic information and construction information; The basic attributes of the project include the project number, project name, and construction nature; the electrical characteristics include voltage level, transformer capacity, and line capacity; the geographic information includes the project location and power supply range; and the construction information includes the planned start time and planned commissioning time. The comprehensive correlation strength between projects is calculated through the electrical coupling degree EC and the power supply area connectivity degree SR.

4. The method for monitoring the risk of the entire process of investment management of power grid infrastructure project groups according to claim 3 is characterized in that: Also includes: Taking the UHV project as the core, calculate the comprehensive correlation strength between other projects and the core project, compare the comprehensive correlation strength with the classification criteria, and divide the UHV supporting project groups; Identify power supply projects on the same railway line, calculate the comprehensive correlation strength of railway power supply between projects, compare the comprehensive correlation strength with the classification standard, and classify the electrified railway supporting power project groups.

5. The method for monitoring the risk of the entire process of investment management of power grid infrastructure project groups according to claim 1 is characterized in that: The monitoring indicators of the feasibility study stage include the matching of the feasibility study approval time and the matching of the initial design approval time; The monitoring indicators of the planning stage include the matching of the planned start time, the matching of the planned production time and the matching of the ERP project establishment time; The monitoring indicators in the early stage of the project include the matching of the time for submission of demand projects and the matching of the time for contract fulfillment; The monitoring indicators of the construction phase include the matching of actual start time, construction progress and actual production time; The monitoring indicators of the settlement and final settlement stage include settlement time matching and final settlement time matching.

6. The method for monitoring the risk of the entire process of investment management of power grid infrastructure project groups according to claim 5 is characterized in that: include: Determine whether the feasibility study approval times of n projects in the project group match based on the maximum difference in the feasibility study approval times of each project in the project group. If the maximum difference exceeds the warning threshold, the feasibility study approval times do not match; otherwise, they match. Determine whether the initial review opinion obtaining times of n projects in the project group match based on the maximum difference in the initial review opinion obtaining times of each project in the project group; if the maximum difference exceeds the warning threshold, the initial review opinion obtaining times do not match; otherwise, they match; Among the monitoring indicators in the feasibility study stage, the setting of the warning threshold includes: for non-inter-provincial project groups, the warning threshold is 6 months; for inter-provincial project groups, the warning threshold is 12 months; The monitoring intensity types for the feasibility study approval time matching and the preliminary design approval time matching are both weak monitoring.

7. The method for monitoring the risk of the entire process of investment management of power grid infrastructure project groups according to claim 5, characterized in that: include: Determine whether the planned start times of n projects in the project group match based on the maximum difference between the planned start times of the projects in the project group. If the maximum difference exceeds a warning threshold, the planned start times do not match; otherwise, the planned start times match. Determining whether the planned production times of the n projects in the project group match according to the maximum difference between the planned production times of the projects in the project group; if the maximum difference exceeds the warning threshold, the planned production times do not match; otherwise, the planned production times match; Determine whether the ERP project creation times of n projects in the project group match based on the maximum difference in ERP project creation time of each project in the project group. If the maximum difference exceeds the warning threshold, the ERP project creation time does not match; otherwise, the ERP project creation time matches. In the monitoring indicators of the planning stage, the setting of the warning threshold includes: for non-inter-provincial project groups, the warning threshold is 6 months; for inter-provincial project groups, the warning threshold is 12 months; The monitoring intensity types of the matching of the planned start time, the matching of the planned production time and the matching of the ERP project establishment time are all strong monitoring.

8. The method for monitoring the risk of the entire process of investment management of power grid infrastructure project groups according to claim 5, characterized in that: include: Determine whether the demand submission times of n projects in the project group match based on the maximum difference in demand submission times of each project in the project group. If the maximum difference exceeds a warning threshold, the demand submission times do not match; otherwise, they match. Determining whether the contract signing times of n projects in the project group match based on the maximum difference in the contract fulfillment times of the projects in the project group; if the maximum difference exceeds the warning threshold, the contract signing times do not match; otherwise, the contract signing times match; In the monitoring indicators of the early stage of the project, the setting of the warning threshold includes: for non-inter-provincial project groups, the warning threshold is 6 months; for inter-provincial project groups, the warning threshold is 12 months; The monitoring intensity types of the time matching of the demand project submission and the time matching of the contract satisfaction are both weak monitoring.

9. The method for monitoring risk during the entire investment management process of power grid infrastructure project groups according to claim 5, characterized in that: include: Determine whether the actual start times of n projects in the project group match based on the maximum difference between the actual start times of each project in the project group. If the maximum difference exceeds a warning threshold, the actual start times do not match; otherwise, the actual start times match. Compare the difference between the load progress and the time progress of the project group to determine whether the actual construction progress of the n projects in the project group matches. If the difference exceeds the warning threshold, the actual construction progress does not match; otherwise, it matches. Determine whether the actual production time of n projects in the project group matches according to the maximum difference between the actual production time of each project in the project group; if the maximum difference exceeds the warning threshold, the actual production time does not match; otherwise, the actual production time matches; Among the monitoring indicators for the construction phase, the warning thresholds include: the actual start time matching indicator and the actual production time matching indicator. For non-inter-provincial project groups, the warning threshold is 6 months; for inter-provincial project groups, the warning threshold is 12 months; the warning threshold for the construction progress matching indicator is 20%; The monitoring intensity types of the actual start time matching, the construction progress matching index and the actual production time matching index are all strong monitoring.

10. The method for monitoring the risk of the entire process of investment management of power grid infrastructure project groups according to claim 5, characterized in that: include: Determine whether the settlement times of n projects in the project group match based on the maximum difference in settlement time of each project in the project group. If the maximum difference exceeds the warning threshold, the settlement time does not match; otherwise, the settlement time matches. Determining whether the final settlement times of n projects in the project group match according to the maximum difference in the final settlement times of the projects in the project group; if the maximum difference exceeds the warning threshold, the final settlement times do not match; otherwise, the final settlement times match; Among the monitoring indicators in the settlement phase, the warning thresholds are set as follows: for non-inter-provincial project groups, the warning threshold is 6 months; for inter-provincial project groups, the warning threshold is 12 months; The monitoring intensity types of the settlement time matching and the final accounting time matching are both weak monitoring.

Images