Evaluation method and system for supply guarantee capability and power business environment of regional power grid

Abstract

The invention relates to the technical field of power system planning and management, and relates to an evaluation method and system for the supply guarantee capability and the power business environment of a regional power grid, and the method comprises the steps: constructing a six-dimension multi-level evaluation index system, and decomposing each dimension into a second-level quantitative index; collecting data of a regional power grid to be evaluated to obtain original parameters required for calculating secondary quantitative indexes, calculating a single score of each secondary quantitative index through a preset scoring rule and a weighting model, and performing weighted summation in combination with the weight coefficient of each secondary quantitative index to obtain a comprehensive evaluation score of the regional power grid; and comparing the comprehensive evaluation score with a preset five-level echelon threshold, and generating a level evaluation result of the supply insurance capability and the business environment of the regional power grid, so as to realize digital management and control of the development quality of the regional power grid. According to the invention, the weak link of the power grid can be accurately quantified and diagnosed, the planning investment and differentiated strategy can be effectively guided, and the power grid supply guarantee capability and the power business environment can be significantly improved.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of power system planning and management technology, and more specifically, to an evaluation method and system for regional power grid supply capacity and the power business environment. Background Technology

[0002] With the accelerating pace of urbanization, regional economic development is increasingly reliant on electricity supply, making power grid construction a core component of urban infrastructure development. The planning, construction, and operation of regional power grids involve multiple dimensions, including the construction of the grid topology, the selection and layout of main and distribution network equipment, the development of disaster prevention and mitigation capabilities for power facilities, and user-side access services. To ensure urban energy security and optimize the electricity business environment, power management departments need to systematically monitor and analyze the power grid's supply capacity. This typically includes monitoring operational data of main transformer sections and transmission sections at voltage levels from 500kV to 35kV, analyzing the interconnection rate and interconnection capacity of distribution network lines, and managing the progress of planned projects throughout their entire lifecycle from approval to commissioning. Simultaneously, with the deepening of power system reform, the efficiency of electricity access, electricity costs, and perceived reliability of power supply for low-voltage and high-voltage users have become important factors in evaluating the quality of regional power grid development. Using multi-dimensional parameter collection and quantitative analysis to guide power grid investment and construction is a key path to achieving coordinated development of regional power grids.

[0003] Currently, existing power grid evaluation methods often focus on a single dimension of main grid resilience, overemphasizing the analysis and resolution of individual issues such as performance evaluation, failure rates, or user complaints. This makes it difficult to objectively and comprehensively assess the overall power supply capacity and business environment of a regional power grid. On the one hand, there is a lack of a scientific and reasonable quantitative system to horizontally compare the power grid development levels of different administrative regions. This makes it impossible to accurately identify the specific weaknesses in planning implementation, construction quality and efficiency, and service levels in each region, leading to deviations in the focus of work by district and county governments and easily creating local power supply bottlenecks. On the other hand, existing systems are mostly ex-post evaluations, making it difficult to plan ahead and make advance arrangements. This makes it impossible to effectively assess the potential risks in urban power grid construction, resulting in an unreasonable power supply structure and slow improvement in power supply reliability, which is insufficient to meet the increasingly complex needs of urban development. Summary of the Invention

[0004] The purpose of this invention is to provide an evaluation method and system for regional power grid supply capacity and the electricity business environment. It establishes a multi-dimensional panoramic evaluation system for regional power grids, which can not only accurately quantify and diagnose weak links in the power grid and achieve horizontal benchmarking of the development level of each region, but also effectively guide planning investment and differentiated policies, significantly improving the power grid supply capacity and the electricity business environment.

[0005] This invention is achieved through the following technical solution:

[0006] An evaluation method for regional power grid supply capacity and the electricity business environment, comprising the following steps: A multi-level evaluation index system is constructed, including the main grid supply capacity and security dimensions, the distribution network power supply reliability dimension, the execution quality and efficiency dimension of planned projects, the execution quality and efficiency dimension of construction projects, the power access service dimension, and the customer-side security dimension, and each dimension is decomposed into secondary quantitative indicators; Collect power grid topology data, equipment operation logs, project investment reports, and customer service work order data of the power grid in the area to be evaluated in order to obtain the raw parameters required to calculate the secondary quantitative indicators; Based on the original parameters, the individual scores of each secondary quantitative indicator are calculated through preset scoring rules and weighted models, and the comprehensive evaluation score of the regional power grid is obtained by weighted summation in combination with the weight coefficients of each secondary quantitative indicator. The comprehensive evaluation score is compared with the preset five-tier threshold to generate a rating result of the power grid supply capacity and business environment in the region, so as to realize digital management and control of the development quality of the regional power grid.

[0007] Optionally, the calculation steps for the main network supply guarantee capability and security dimension include: Extract the load data of the main transformer at the set voltage level, the power flow data of the transmission section, the fire protection facility ledger of the substation, and the data on hidden dangers in the passageway; Based on the extracted data, the following solution is performed: The ratio of the number of sections that do not overload under the N-1 fault condition to the total number of sections is used to calculate the N-1 pass rate for each voltage level, which is used to characterize the main grid resilience index. Based on the load factor and capacity-to-load ratio data of the main transformer, the degree of heavy or light load of the main transformer is quantified, and the load-bearing capacity score is obtained by combining the main equipment safety evaluation deduction items to characterize the load-bearing capacity index of the main distribution network equipment. The fire safety registration rate and water connection rate of substations are statistically analyzed, and combined with the risk of power facilities in flooded areas, scores are obtained by comparing with preset standards to represent the level of power disaster prevention. The number and risk level of potential hazards in cable channels and power transmission channels are statistically analyzed to obtain channel risk scores, which are represented as channel risk indices. The scores of the main grid resilience index, the main and distribution network equipment carrying capacity index, the power disaster prevention level index, and the channel risk index are summed to obtain the evaluation results of the main grid supply guarantee capacity and security dimensions.

[0008] Optionally, the calculation steps for the power distribution network reliability dimension include: Obtain data on the topology, switch status, power supply radius, and number of users of the lines within the area; Based on the obtained line data within the region, the following solution is performed: The line tie rate is calculated by comparing the total length of the lines equipped with tie switches with the total length of the lines in the area. This ratio is then combined with the line N-1 throughput rate to characterize the interconnection and mutual supply capability. The power supply radius, number of single radial lines, and average number of power supply users of the line are normalized and weighted to represent the level indicators of the distribution line itself. Statistical analysis of voltage deviation data from client-side voltage monitoring points is conducted to calculate the voltage qualification rate, which serves as a quality indicator of the power supply voltage. The scores of the interconnection and mutual supply capability index, the power distribution line body level index, and the power supply voltage quality index are weighted and summed to obtain the evaluation result of the power distribution network reliability dimension.

[0009] Optionally, the calculation steps for the project execution quality and efficiency dimension include: Obtain the total planned investment, approved project investment, commenced project investment, and operational project investment from the project planning database; Based on the investment data obtained from the planning project database, the following solution is performed: Calculate the percentage of approved project investment to the total planned investment, as a quality and efficiency indicator of approval. Calculate the percentage of investment in projects that have commenced to the total planned investment, as a performance indicator of the quality and efficiency of project commencement; Calculate the percentage of investment in projects already in operation relative to the total planned investment, as a performance indicator for the quality and efficiency of production. The scores of the approved quality and efficiency indicators, the commencement quality and efficiency indicators, and the production quality and efficiency indicators are summed to obtain the evaluation results of the execution quality and efficiency dimension of the planned project.

[0010] Optionally, the calculation steps for the project execution quality and efficiency dimension include: The total number of projects in the statistical planning project database, the number of projects actually started, and the number of projects actually put into operation; Based on the statistical count of projects in the planning project database, the following solution is performed: The percentage of actual projects started relative to the total number of projects is calculated to represent the approved project commencement rate. The percentage of projects actually put into operation is calculated as the percentage of projects put into operation, which is used as the indicator of the commissioning rate of projects under construction. The scores of the approved project commencement rate and the commenced project commissioning rate are summed to obtain the evaluation result of the project execution quality and efficiency dimension.

[0011] Optionally, the calculation steps for obtaining the electricity service dimension include: Retrieve data on the entire process of business expansion and installation applications for both low-voltage and high-voltage users, including timeline data and access scheme data. Based on the retrieved data, the following solution is performed: Calculate the average time from application to power connection for low-voltage users, and obtain a score by comparing it with the preset time limit standard, which is used as an indicator of low-voltage power supply efficiency. Calculate the average processing time for high-voltage single-power supply users with rated capacity at or below a set threshold, and statistically analyze the average power supply radius length of high-voltage customer access points. Compare the results with preset standards to obtain a score, which will be used as a high-voltage power service indicator. The scores of the low-voltage power supply efficiency index and the high-voltage power supply service index are summed to obtain the evaluation result of the power service acquisition dimension.

[0012] Optionally, the calculation steps for the client-side security dimension include: Establish a field verification checklist that includes newly connected community power distribution configurations, general high-voltage user equipment operation and maintenance, and dual power supply configurations for important power users within the statistical period; Based on the on-site verification checklist, the following solution is performed: The number of newly connected communities that meet the requirements for dual power supply configuration and self-provided emergency power supply during the statistical period is calculated as the proportion of the total number of samples inspected, which is used as an indicator of the effectiveness of the configuration in newly built communities. The implementation status of equipment operation and maintenance and rectification of safety hazards for general high-voltage users and important power users is statistically analyzed and quantified into safety scores, which are respectively represented as the power safety indicators for ordinary high-voltage customers and the power safety indicators for important customers. The scores of the newly built community configuration effectiveness index, the ordinary high-voltage customer electricity safety index, and the important customer electricity safety index are summed to obtain the evaluation result of the customer-side safety dimension.

[0013] Optionally, the line connectivity rate is calculated using the following formula:

[0014] in, For line connectivity, The total length of the line equipped with the tie switch. This represents the total length of the lines within the region.

[0015] Optionally, the specific execution logic for comparing the comprehensive evaluation score with the preset five-tier threshold is as follows: If the comprehensive evaluation score It is classified as grade S, representing the first level; like It is classified as Grade A, representing the second level; like It is classified as grade B, representing the third level; like It is classified as grade C, representing the fourth level; like It is classified as grade D, representing level five; The levels, arranged from highest to lowest, are: Level 1, Level 2, Level 3, Level 4, and Level 5. Output a bottleneck analysis report for the corresponding gear level results, which is represented as the evaluation results of the power grid supply capacity and business environment of the region.

[0016] An evaluation system for regional power grid supply capacity and the electricity business environment includes: The indicator construction module is used to establish an evaluation indicator system that includes six dimensions: main grid supply guarantee, distribution network reliability, planning execution, construction execution, power service, and customer safety. The data calculation module is used to access power grid operation and management data, execute specific calculation steps for each dimension, and obtain the values ​​and dimension scores of each secondary quantitative indicator. The comprehensive evaluation module is used to weight and aggregate the scores of each dimension according to a preset weighting strategy to generate a comprehensive score for the regional power grid. The graded output module is used to map the comprehensive score to a preset five-level evaluation tier from S to D, and output a digital evaluation report that includes grade determination and shortcoming diagnosis.

[0017] The technical solution of the present invention has at least the following advantages and beneficial effects: This invention constructs a multi-level evaluation system covering six dimensions: main grid supply security, distribution network reliability, planning and construction execution quality and efficiency, power service, and customer safety. This system not only achieves comprehensive, digital control over the quality of regional power grid development but also transforms complex grid data into intuitive evaluation results through a scientific weighted model. On one hand, this invention breaks through the limitations of traditional single-dimensional systems, enabling horizontal benchmarking and vertical analysis across administrative regions. It accurately identifies specific shortcomings such as deviations in grid planning execution, insufficient equipment capacity, or low service efficiency, providing a scientific basis for differentiated planning objectives. On the other hand, by dividing the evaluation results into five tiers (S to D), this invention not only helps governments and power companies clearly understand the true level and potential risks of each region but also effectively guides subsequent precise investment and rectification measures, thereby promoting coordinated development of power grids at all levels and significantly improving the resilience of regional power grids and the level of the power business environment. Attached Figure Description

[0018] Figure 1 This is a flowchart illustrating the evaluation method for regional power grid supply capacity and the electricity business environment provided by the present invention. Figure 2 This is a schematic diagram illustrating the principle of the evaluation system for regional power grid supply capacity and the electricity business environment provided by the present invention. Detailed Implementation

[0019] To make the objectives, technical solutions, and advantages of the embodiments of the present invention clearer, the technical solutions of the embodiments of the present invention will be clearly and completely described below with reference to the accompanying drawings. Obviously, the described embodiments are only some embodiments of the present invention, and not all embodiments. The components of the embodiments of the present invention described and shown in the accompanying drawings can generally be arranged and designed in various different configurations.

[0020] The core inventive concept of this invention lies in the following: First, constructing a multi-level, quantifiable evaluation index system covering six dimensions: main grid supply guarantee capacity, distribution network power supply reliability, planning and construction execution quality and efficiency, access to electricity services, and customer-side security, to comprehensively reflect the current development status of the regional power grid. Second, by accessing massive operational and management data from various power grid business systems, automatically calculating and scoring each secondary quantitative indicator in the index system to form individual scores for each dimension. Then, using a preset weighting strategy, weighted aggregation of the scores for each dimension is performed to generate a comprehensive evaluation score that can comprehensively characterize the regional power grid's supply guarantee capacity and the electricity business environment. Finally, this comprehensive score is mapped to a preset five-level evaluation hierarchy (S to D), not only outputting an intuitive level determination but also simultaneously generating a shortcoming analysis report including low-scoring indicators. This approach aims to overcome the technical difficulties of existing evaluation methods, such as their single-dimensionality and lack of horizontal comparability, providing power management departments and local governments with a scientific, objective, and executable digital management tool. This enables precise diagnosis and differentiated policy implementation for the development quality of the regional power grid, ultimately improving the overall resilience and service level of the power grid.

[0021] Example 1 Reference Figure 1 This embodiment provides an evaluation method for regional power grid supply capacity and the electricity business environment. The method aims to provide an objective and comprehensive quantitative assessment of the power grid development level in various administrative regions of a city through systematic data analysis and modeling. The specific process of this method includes the following steps: Step S110: Construct a multi-level evaluation index system including the main grid supply capacity and security dimension, the distribution network power supply reliability dimension, the planning project execution quality and efficiency dimension, the construction project execution quality and efficiency dimension, the power access service dimension, and the customer-side security dimension, and decompose each dimension into secondary quantitative indicators.

[0022] It should be explained that step S110 is the foundational framework construction stage of the entire evaluation method. Its core lies in designing a comprehensive and thorough health check-up system to reflect the overall health of the regional power grid. This indicator system is designed in two levels. The first level consists of six core evaluation dimensions, considering different aspects of the power grid and different stages of business operations. The main grid supply capacity and security dimension focuses on the strength and reliability of the grid's "backbone"; the distribution network power supply reliability dimension focuses on the smooth operation of the "capillaries" directly connected to users; the planning and construction project execution quality and efficiency dimension focuses on the implementation of the power grid development blueprint; the electricity service access dimension focuses on the service experience and satisfaction of electricity users; and the customer-side security dimension focuses on the user's own ability to ensure electricity safety. The second level further decomposes each first-level dimension into several directly calculable and quantifiable second-level indicators. For example, under the main grid supply capacity dimension, indicators such as the main grid resilience index and the carrying capacity of main and distribution network equipment are set. This hierarchical structure gives the evaluation system both macro-level comprehensiveness and micro-level operability.

[0023] Step S120: Collect power grid topology data, equipment operation logs, project investment reports, and customer service work order data of the power grid in the area to be evaluated, in order to obtain the raw parameters required to calculate the secondary quantitative indicators.

[0024] Specifically, this step is the data preparation phase, the purpose of which is to provide accurate and reliable input for subsequent calculations. Data sources are diverse, typically involving multiple business systems within the power company. For example, grid topology data and equipment operation logs are primarily obtained from the power grid geographic information system (GIS) and production management system (PMS), containing physical information such as transformer capacity, line length, and switch locations. Project investment reports are extracted from the project management system or financial system, recording the planned investment amount, actual investment amount and quantity for projects started and put into operation. Customer service work order data comes from the marketing business system or the 95598 service system, containing information such as user application time, connection completion time, and complaint records. By establishing interfaces with these systems, the automated and periodic collection of raw parameters can be achieved, ensuring the timeliness and accuracy of the evaluation.

[0025] Step S130: Based on the original parameters, calculate the individual scores of each secondary quantitative indicator through preset scoring rules and weighted models, and combine the weight coefficients of each secondary quantitative indicator to obtain the comprehensive evaluation score of the regional power grid by weighted summation.

[0026] This step is the core calculation stage of the evaluation method. For each secondary quantitative indicator, a set of clear scoring rules is pre-defined. These rules may be linear percentage calculations, such as the project commissioning rate being directly equal to the number of commissioned projects divided by the total number of projects; or they may be tiered deductions or additions, such as deducting points when the power supply radius exceeds a certain threshold. After calculating the individual scores for all secondary indicators, weighted aggregation is required based on preset weight coefficients. First, within each primary dimension, the scores of its respective secondary indicators are weighted and summed to obtain the score for that dimension. Then, the scores of the six primary dimensions are weighted and summed again to finally obtain a comprehensive evaluation score between 0 and 100. The setting of weight coefficients is crucial, reflecting the degree of importance attached to different evaluation dimensions at the current stage of development, and can be dynamically adjusted according to the strategic guidance of local governments and the actual needs of power grid development.

[0027] Step S140: Compare the comprehensive evaluation score with the preset five-tier threshold to generate the evaluation results of the power grid supply capacity and business environment of the region, so as to realize digital management and control of the development quality of the regional power grid.

[0028] This step is the output and presentation stage of the evaluation results. To make the evaluation results more intuitive and easy to understand, this method introduces a grading mechanism. Specifically, the comprehensive evaluation score is compared with a set of pre-set thresholds, dividing the results into five levels: S, A, B, C, and D. For example, a score of 90 or above is in the S level, representing an internationally leading level; while a score below 60 is in the D level, indicating that only partial needs are met and there are widespread problems. Finally, the system generates a digital evaluation report, which not only includes the final comprehensive score and corresponding level, but more importantly, it includes a weakness analysis report. This report clearly displays the scores of each secondary indicator through visualization methods such as radar charts or bar charts, allowing managers to see at a glance which are the strengths and which are the weaknesses that urgently need improvement, thus providing decision support for subsequent precise policy implementation and resource allocation.

[0029] As described above, the evaluation method provided by this invention first ensures the breadth and depth of the assessment by constructing a scientific and comprehensive multi-dimensional evaluation index system. Then, by automatically collecting multi-source heterogeneous data and executing standardized calculation models, the objectivity and repeatability of the evaluation process are guaranteed. Finally, through intuitive level classification and visualized bottleneck analysis, the complex power grid assessment problem is transformed into a clear diagnostic report, effectively supporting the digital and refined management of regional power grid development quality, and providing a powerful technical means to promote the coordinated development of regional power grids and optimize the power business environment.

[0030] Example 2 Based on Embodiment 1 above, as an optional implementation, the calculation process for the evaluation results of the main grid supply guarantee capability and security dimension involved in step S130 is described in detail. This dimension's evaluation aims to measure the robustness of the regional power grid backbone, the equipment's load-bearing capacity, and its ability to withstand natural disasters and external risks. The specific calculation steps include: First, extract multi-source data related to this dimension. Specifically, extract historical load data of main transformers at 500kV, 220kV, and 110kV voltage levels and real-time power flow data of transmission sections from the SCADA and EMS systems. Obtain configuration lists, registration certificates, and water connection test records of substation fire protection facilities from the Asset Management System (AMS) or equipment ledger. Retrieve periodic inspection reports of cable channels and overhead transmission corridors from the transmission operation and maintenance management system, especially the recorded data on the types, quantities, and risk level assessments of potential hazards.

[0031] Secondly, based on the data extracted above, the scores of the four secondary quantitative indicators are calculated in parallel.

[0032] The first indicator is the Main Grid Resilience Index. The core of this index is to assess the self-healing capability of the power grid when encountering a single equipment failure (i.e., N-1 fault condition). Specifically, for each critical transmission section, simulation calculations are used to analyze whether the power flow will exceed stability limits under the N-1 fault condition. The number of sections with no power flow overload in all preset N-1 fault scenarios is counted, and the ratio of this number to the total number of sections is calculated, thus obtaining the N-1 pass rate for each voltage level (500kV, 220kV, and 110kV). These pass rates are then weighted and averaged to map to the final score of the "Main Grid Resilience Index," directly reflecting the redundancy and reliability of the main grid.

[0033] The second indicator is the load-bearing capacity index of the main distribution network equipment. This indicator focuses on whether critical equipment in the backbone network is overworked or idle. Specifically, it analyzes the historical load rate curves of main transformers, statistically analyzing the duration and frequency of heavy loads (e.g., load rate consistently above 80%) or light loads (e.g., load rate consistently below 30%). Simultaneously, combined with regional load forecasting, the substation's capacity-to-load ratio, i.e., the ratio of the total transformer capacity to the maximum load it carries, is calculated. Furthermore, safety evaluation deductions for main equipment are introduced, such as the degree of equipment aging and defect records. Combining this data, a pre-set scoring model is used to quantify the load-bearing health of the main transformers, resulting in a load-bearing capacity score.

[0034] The third indicator is the power disaster prevention level indicator. This indicator assesses the ability of power facilities to cope with natural disasters such as fires and floods. Specifically, it calculates the percentage of all substations in the region that have completed fire protection design filing (fire protection filing rate) and the percentage that have completed fire water supply connection testing (fire water connection rate). Simultaneously, based on local hydrological and geographical information, it identifies areas that have historically experienced flooding or are at high risk, and checks whether power facilities (such as cable wells and prefabricated substations) in these areas have implemented effective flood prevention measures. Based on the completion rate and compliance rate of these inspection items, a score is calculated against the standard to determine the power disaster prevention level indicator score.

[0035] The fourth indicator is the transmission corridor risk index. This indicator measures the safety status of the power transmission lifeline. Specifically, for cable corridors, the focus is on whether there are potential hazards such as external damage, crossings, and insufficient soil cover. For overhead transmission corridors, the focus is on whether there are risks such as excessively tall trees, illegal buildings, and crane operations. All hazards are classified into different risk levels according to their degree of threat to the power grid operation and assigned different weights. By calculating the total risk score of all corridors using weighted averages, a corridor risk score is obtained. The higher the score, the less safe the corridor is, and the lower the score in the evaluation system.

[0036] Finally, the scores of the main grid resilience index, main and distribution network equipment carrying capacity index, power disaster prevention level index and channel risk index calculated above are accumulated according to preset weights to obtain the final evaluation results of the main grid supply guarantee capacity and security dimension.

[0037] Example 3 Based on Embodiment 1 above, as an optional implementation, the calculation process for the evaluation results of the distribution network power supply reliability dimension involved in step S130 is described in detail. As a network directly facing end users, the reliability level of the distribution network directly affects users' electricity consumption experience. The evaluation of this dimension aims to comprehensively assess the health status of the distribution network from three aspects: network structure, physical characteristics, and power quality. The specific calculation steps include: First, acquire basic data related to the distribution network characteristics. Extract detailed topology maps of all 10kV lines within the region from the power grid GIS system, including the geographical direction of the lines, total length, and the location and status information of various switches installed on the lines (such as sectionalizing switches and tie switches). Obtain the list of users supplied by each 10kV line and their quantity from the marketing business system. Collect historical voltage deviation data from each monitoring point from the distribution automation system or power quality monitoring terminal.

[0038] Secondly, based on the acquired data, the following three secondary quantitative indicators are calculated: The first indicator is the interconnection and interoperability capability indicator. This indicator reflects the flexibility of the distribution network in restoring power supply through network reconfiguration when a local fault occurs. It consists of two sub-indicators. The first is the 10kV line interconnection rate, the specific calculation formula of which is: ,in, For line connectivity, This refers to the total length of the 10kV line equipped with the tie switch. The first is the total length of 10kV lines within the region. A higher ratio indicates a stronger interconnection and power transfer capability of the distribution network. The second is the N-1 pass rate of 10kV lines, which is defined similarly to the main grid, i.e., the percentage of 10kV distribution lines that meet the N-1 safety criterion out of the total number of lines. Weighting the scores of these two sub-indicators yields the final score for the interconnection and power transfer capability index.

[0039] The second indicator is the power distribution line itself level indicator. This indicator assesses the rationality of the line design and whether there are inherent reliability shortcomings from a physical perspective. It consists of three inverse sub-indicators, with higher values ​​resulting in lower scores. The first is the average power supply radius of a 10kV line, which is the arithmetic mean of the power supply radii of all 10kV lines. A longer power supply radius indicates poorer voltage quality at the line's end and a higher probability of failure. The second is the number of 10kV single-radial lines, i.e., the number of disconnected lines without any connection to other lines. A failure on such a line will cause a complete power outage for downstream users, making resupply impossible. The third is the average number of users served by a 10kV line, i.e., the average number of users served by each line. A higher value indicates a wider impact from a single failure. The statistical values ​​of these three sub-indicators are normalized, mapped inversely to a score, and then weighted to obtain the score for the power distribution line itself level indicator.

[0040] The third indicator is the power supply voltage quality indicator. This indicator directly reflects the user's power consumption experience. Specifically, it involves collecting voltage data from all customer-side voltage monitoring points within the evaluation period. Based on national standards, each data point is judged to be within the acceptable voltage deviation range (e.g., -10% to +7% for 220V users). The proportion of acceptable data points out of the total number of data points is calculated to obtain the voltage compliance rate. This compliance rate is directly used as the score for the power supply voltage quality indicator.

[0041] Finally, the scores of the interconnection and mutual supply capability index, the power distribution line level index, and the power supply voltage quality index obtained above are weighted and summed according to the preset weights to obtain the final evaluation result of the power supply reliability dimension of the distribution network.

[0042] Example 4 Based on Embodiment 1 above, as an optional implementation method, the calculation process of the evaluation results of the planning project execution quality and efficiency dimension involved in step S130 is described in detail. The evaluation of this dimension aims to monitor the efficiency of the transformation of power grid development planning from blueprint to reality, ensuring that power grid construction can keep pace with socio-economic development. The specific calculation steps include: First, obtain information on all projects included in the power grid development plan within the region to be evaluated from the company's project management system or annual investment plan database. Key data fields include: the total planned investment for each project, the project status (e.g., planned, approved, started, put into operation), and the corresponding investment amount for each status.

[0043] Secondly, based on the obtained investment data, the following three secondary quantitative indicators are calculated. These three indicators together constitute a full-chain monitoring of the project's execution progress: The first indicator is the approval efficiency indicator. This indicator measures the efficiency of the preliminary work in transforming a planned project into a legal and executable project. It is calculated as follows: The investment amounts of all projects with a status of "approved" within the evaluation period are summed to obtain the total investment amount of approved projects. Then, this total is divided by the total planned investment amount of all projects in the project pool, and multiplied by 100%. The higher this percentage, the smoother the progress of the project's preliminary feasibility studies, project initiation, and obtaining approvals.

[0044] The second indicator is the commencement efficiency indicator. This indicator reflects the execution efficiency of a project from meeting the conditions for commencement to actually breaking ground. Its calculation method is as follows: The investment amounts of all projects whose status is updated to "commended" during the evaluation period are summed to obtain the total investment amount of projects already commenced. Then, this total is divided by the planned total investment amount of all projects in the project database, and multiplied by 100%. This indicator is a key intermediate node for measuring project construction progress.

[0045] The third indicator is the commissioning quality and efficiency indicator. This indicator is the ultimate reflection of the effectiveness of the plan's implementation and is directly related to the substantial enhancement of the power grid's supply capacity. Its calculation method is as follows: The investment amounts of all projects whose status has been updated to "commissioned" and successfully connected to the grid during the evaluation period are summed to obtain the total investment amount of the commissioned projects. Then, this total amount is divided by the planned total investment amount of all projects in the project database, and then multiplied by 100%.

[0046] Finally, the scores of the approved quality and efficiency indicators, the commencement quality and efficiency indicators, and the production quality and efficiency indicators calculated above (usually their percentage values ​​can be directly used as scores or converted proportionally) are accumulated or weighted to obtain the final evaluation results of the project execution quality and efficiency dimension.

[0047] Example 5 Based on Embodiment 1 above, as an optional implementation method, the calculation process of the evaluation results of the construction project execution quality and efficiency dimension involved in step S130 is described in detail. Unlike Embodiment 4, which focuses on the completion rate of investment amount, the evaluation of this dimension focuses more on the completion of the number of projects, aiming to evaluate the implementation efficiency of construction tasks from another perspective. Its calculation steps specifically include: First, from the project full-process management system, we count the total number of projects in the planning project library, as well as the number of projects whose actual status changed to "started" and "put into production" during the evaluation period.

[0048] Secondly, based on the number of projects mentioned above, the following two secondary quantitative indicators are calculated: The first indicator is the approved project commencement rate. This indicator is used to assess the conversion rate of projects that have completed the preliminary approval process to actual construction. It is calculated as follows: the number of projects actually started during the evaluation period is divided by the total number of all approved projects awaiting commencement in the project database, and then multiplied by 100%. This ratio directly reflects the efficiency of moving from theoretical discussion to concrete implementation.

[0049] The second indicator is the project commissioning rate. This indicator assesses the percentage of projects that have commenced construction and are ultimately completed and put into operation. It is calculated by dividing the number of projects actually put into operation within the evaluation period by the total number of all projects in the project database that are under construction but awaiting commissioning, and then multiplying by 100%. This indicator is an important measure of project construction process management capabilities and engineering quality.

[0050] Finally, the scores of the approved project commencement rate and the commenced project production rate obtained above (their percentage values ​​can be directly used as scores) are accumulated or weighted summed to obtain the final evaluation result of the project execution quality and efficiency dimension.

[0051] Example 6 Based on Embodiment 1 above, as an optional implementation, the calculation process for the evaluation results of the electricity service acquisition dimension involved in step S130 is described in detail. This dimension is the core of measuring the electricity business environment and is directly related to the user's experience and satisfaction. The specific calculation steps include: First, the system retrieves all users' business expansion application data from the marketing business system. For each application, the system records the timeline of key stages, from user application submission, power supply plan response, external engineering construction, meter installation, and power connection. Simultaneously, the system retrieves user profile information to differentiate their voltage level and power capacity.

[0052] Secondly, based on the retrieved data, the following two secondary quantitative indicators are calculated: The first indicator is the low-voltage electricity connection efficiency indicator. This indicator mainly targets the large number of residents and small businesses. Specifically, it selects all users belonging to the low-voltage level and all connection applications completed within the evaluation period. For each application, the total time from formal application acceptance to final meter installation and connection is calculated. Then, the arithmetic mean of these times is calculated to obtain the average connection time for low-voltage users. This average time is compared with a preset benchmark time limit (e.g., a commitment time limit required by national or local governments); the shorter the time, the higher the score. The scoring rule can be designed as linear or tiered, for example, adding a certain number of points for each day shorter than the benchmark time limit.

[0053] The second indicator is the high-voltage power connection service indicator. This indicator primarily targets enterprise users, especially small and medium-sized enterprises. Specifically, it selects all high-voltage single-power supply users with a rated capacity of 1250kVA and below, and records all connection applications completed within the evaluation period. The average processing time for these applications is calculated and compared with a preset benchmark time limit to obtain a score for processing time. In addition, this indicator introduces another consideration: the average connection radius for high-voltage customers. From the GIS system and user files, the average power supply radius from the connection point to the boundary line of each high-voltage customer's premises is calculated. The shorter this radius, the shorter the connection engineering work the power company needs to construct for the user, and the lower the user's investment cost is likely to be. The average power supply radius is compared with regional standards; the shorter the radius, the higher the score. Finally, the processing time score and the radius score are weighted to obtain the comprehensive score for the high-voltage power connection service indicator.

[0054] Finally, the scores of the low-voltage power supply efficiency index and the high-voltage power supply service index calculated above are summed or weighted to obtain the final evaluation result of the power service dimension.

[0055] Example 7 Based on Embodiment 1 above, as an optional implementation, the calculation process for the evaluation results of the customer-side security dimension involved in step S130 is described in detail. This dimension's evaluation extends the perspective from the grid side to the user side, aiming to assess the security configuration and operation and maintenance management level of the user's internal power facilities, which is a crucial link in ensuring the safe and stable operation of the entire power grid. The specific calculation steps include: First, establish a set of on-site verification checklists covering different user types. This checklist forms the basis for data collection in this dimension of evaluation. The checklist content is customized according to user type: for newly built residential communities, the checklist focuses on verifying whether their dual power supply configuration is compliant and whether their backup emergency power supply is configured as required by design and regularly maintained; for general high-voltage users, the checklist focuses on their internal power distribution equipment's regular inspection records, preventive test reports, and the closed-loop rectification of safety hazards; for important power users (such as hospitals, government agencies, large data centers, etc.), in addition to the inspection items for general high-voltage users, the checklist also emphasizes whether their dual or multiple power supply automatic switching devices are functioning properly and whether the backup power supply can start and operate under load within the specified time.

[0056] Secondly, organize professional personnel or use digital means to conduct on-site verification of the sampled users, and based on the verification results, calculate the following three secondary quantitative indicators: The first indicator is the effectiveness of new residential community power supply. Specifically, it involves counting all newly connected and powered residential communities during the evaluation period. A certain percentage of these communities are randomly selected as a sample and inspected according to a checklist. The number of communities in the sample that fully comply with the regulations regarding dual power supply configuration, backup emergency power capacity, and maintenance is counted. This compliant number is divided by the total number of sampled communities to obtain a compliance rate, which is the score for the effectiveness of new residential community power supply.

[0057] The second indicator is the electricity safety index for ordinary high-voltage customers. Specifically, a sample is randomly selected from all ordinary high-voltage users in the area for on-site inspection. Each item on the inspection checklist (e.g., whether equipment is defective, whether records are complete, whether potential hazards have been rectified) is scored, with a maximum score of 100. The scores of all sampled users are averaged to obtain a safety score that characterizes the overall electricity safety management level of ordinary high-voltage users in the area; this is the score for the electricity safety index for ordinary high-voltage customers.

[0058] The third indicator is the electricity safety indicator for key customers. Similar to the previous indicator, the sampling is limited to key electricity users as defined in national or local standards. Because these users have extremely high requirements for power supply reliability, the verification standards are more stringent, and the scoring weight may be higher. Through on-site verification, a safety score is assigned to each sampled key electricity user, and the average score is calculated as the overall score for the key customer electricity safety indicator.

[0059] Finally, the scores of the newly built community configuration effectiveness index, ordinary high-voltage customer electricity safety index and important customer electricity safety index calculated above are accumulated or weighted summed to obtain the final evaluation result of the customer-side safety dimension.

[0060] Example 8 Based on any one of the above embodiments 1 to 7, as an optional implementation method, the specific execution logic of comparing the comprehensive evaluation score with the preset five-level tier threshold in step S140 is described in detail.

[0061] After calculating the comprehensive evaluation score S of the regional power grid, the system will automatically perform the following logical judgments to determine its evaluation level: If the comprehensive evaluation score S is greater than or equal to 90, the power grid's supply guarantee capacity and electricity business environment in the region are judged to be at the S level. The S level represents the international leading level, indicating that the region has performed excellently in all aspects of power grid planning, construction, operation and maintenance, and service, and serves as a benchmark for other regions to learn from.

[0062] If the comprehensive evaluation score S is less than 90 but greater than or equal to 80, it is classified as Grade A. Grade A indicates a high level, which can well meet the electricity needs of regional economic and social development, and the performance of various indicators is balanced and excellent.

[0063] If the comprehensive evaluation score S is less than 80 but greater than or equal to 75, it is classified as Grade B. Grade B represents a medium level, which can basically meet the region's electricity demand, but may have shortcomings in certain dimensions or indicators, which need further improvement.

[0064] If the comprehensive evaluation score S is less than 75 but greater than or equal to 60, it is classified as Grade C. Grade C indicates horizontal lag, meaning that the power grid development is no longer fully adapted to the regional development needs in some aspects, and there may be problems such as the power supply structure needing optimization and the power supply reliability being low in some areas, which require high attention.

[0065] If the comprehensive evaluation score S is less than 60, it is judged as Grade D. Grade D indicates that it only meets local needs, indicating that there are general problems in the development of the power grid, the power supply bottleneck is relatively prominent, and there is an urgent need for systematic planning and large-scale investment for transformation and upgrading.

[0066] After determining the appropriate level, the system will output the corresponding level result and automatically generate a shortcoming analysis report. This report uses radar charts and other formats to compare the region's scores on all secondary quantitative indicators with the full score or benchmark value. Indicators with significantly low scores will be highlighted. The report will also include textual explanations, detailing the specific problems reflected by these low-scoring indicators. For example, a low score for the power distribution line itself may stem from historical issues such as an excessive number of single-radial lines and excessively long power supply radii in the region, providing specific directions for subsequent rectification work.

[0067] Example 9 Reference Figure 2This embodiment provides an evaluation system for regional power grid supply capacity and the electricity business environment. This system is the hardware carrier and software implementation of the above method embodiment, and its structural design closely corresponds to the method flow. The system specifically includes: The indicator construction module 10 is configured to establish a structured and configurable evaluation indicator system. Specifically, this module provides a user interface that allows managers to predefine or modify the evaluation model. In this embodiment, it is configured to solidify an evaluation indicator system encompassing six dimensions: main grid supply capacity and security, distribution network power supply reliability, planning project execution quality and efficiency, construction project execution quality and efficiency, and access to electricity services and customer safety. Simultaneously, this module is also configured to store the secondary quantitative indicators for each dimension, along with their corresponding calculation formulas, scoring rules, and weighting coefficients.

[0068] The data calculation module 20 is the core computing unit of the system. It is configured to automatically access real-time and historical data from multiple business systems, such as the power grid GIS, SCADA, PMS, and marketing systems, via standardized data interfaces. This data constitutes the raw parameters required for evaluation. After data access, the engine is configured to strictly execute the specific calculation steps for each dimension described in Examples 2 to 7. For example, it calls the N-1 simulation algorithm to calculate the main grid resilience index, executes SQL queries to statistically analyze the average low-voltage power supply duration, and applies formulas to calculate the 10kV line interconnection rate, etc. Through a series of complex calculations, the engine ultimately derives the values ​​of all secondary quantitative indicators and the scores for the six primary dimensions.

[0069] The comprehensive evaluation module 30 is configured to aggregate and evaluate the output of the data calculation engine. Specifically, based on the pre-defined weighting strategy in the indicator construction module, it performs weighted aggregation calculations on the scores of the six primary dimensions to generate a unique comprehensive score representing the overall level of the regional power grid. The design of this module ensures the authority and consistency of the final score.

[0070] The graded output module 40 is the system's result display and report generation unit. It is configured to automatically map the comprehensive score generated by the comprehensive evaluation module to a preset five-level evaluation tier (S to D) to complete the grade determination. Furthermore, this module is also configured to call a data visualization component to generate a richly illustrated digital evaluation report. This report not only clearly indicates the comprehensive score and final grade but also includes detailed analysis of the scores for each dimension and secondary indicators, particularly the visually intuitive display of shortcomings through radar charts and other formats, providing decision support for managers.

[0071] In summary, the evaluation system provided by this invention, through modular design, achieves closed-loop management of the entire process, from indicator system construction, multi-source data fusion, automated calculation, comprehensive evaluation to visual report output. This system not only significantly improves the efficiency and accuracy of power grid evaluation work, but more importantly, it transforms complex power grid management problems into measurable, diagnosable, and traceable digital indicators, providing a powerful technical platform for the scientific planning and lean management of regional power grids.

[0072] The above are merely preferred embodiments of the present invention and are not intended to limit the present invention. Various modifications and variations can be made to the present invention by those skilled in the art. Any modifications, equivalent substitutions, improvements, etc., made within the spirit and principles of the present invention should be included within the scope of protection of the present invention.

Claims

1. An evaluation method for regional power grid supply capacity and the electricity business environment, characterized in that, The steps of this method include: A multi-level evaluation index system is constructed, including the main grid supply capacity and security dimensions, the distribution network power supply reliability dimension, the execution quality and efficiency dimension of planned projects, the execution quality and efficiency dimension of construction projects, the power access service dimension, and the customer-side security dimension, and each dimension is decomposed into secondary quantitative indicators; Collect power grid topology data, equipment operation logs, project investment reports, and customer service work order data of the power grid in the area to be evaluated in order to obtain the raw parameters required to calculate the secondary quantitative indicators; Based on the original parameters, the individual scores of each secondary quantitative indicator are calculated through preset scoring rules and weighted models, and the comprehensive evaluation score of the regional power grid is obtained by weighted summation in combination with the weight coefficients of each secondary quantitative indicator. The comprehensive evaluation score is compared with the preset five-tier threshold to generate a rating result of the power grid supply capacity and business environment in the region, so as to realize digital management and control of the development quality of the regional power grid.

2. The evaluation method for regional power grid supply capacity and the electricity business environment according to claim 1, characterized in that, The calculation steps for the main network supply guarantee capability and security dimension include: Extract the load data of the main transformer at the set voltage level, the power flow data of the transmission section, the fire protection facility ledger of the substation, and the data on hidden dangers in the passageway; Based on the extracted data, the following solution is performed: The ratio of the number of sections that do not overload under the N-1 fault condition to the total number of sections is used to calculate the N-1 pass rate for each voltage level, which is used to characterize the main grid resilience index. Based on the load factor and capacity-to-load ratio data of the main transformer, the degree of heavy or light load of the main transformer is quantified, and the load-bearing capacity score is obtained by combining the main equipment safety evaluation deduction items to characterize the load-bearing capacity index of the main distribution network equipment. The fire safety registration rate and water connection rate of substations are statistically analyzed, and combined with the risk of power facilities in flooded areas, scores are obtained by comparing with preset standards to represent the level of power disaster prevention. The number and risk level of potential hazards in cable channels and power transmission channels are statistically analyzed to obtain channel risk scores, which are represented as channel risk indices. The scores of the main grid resilience index, the main and distribution network equipment carrying capacity index, the power disaster prevention level index, and the channel risk index are summed to obtain the evaluation results of the main grid supply guarantee capacity and security dimensions.

3. The evaluation method for regional power grid supply capacity and the electricity business environment according to claim 1, characterized in that, The calculation steps for the power distribution network reliability dimension include: Obtain data on the topology, switch status, power supply radius, and number of users of the lines within the area; Based on the obtained line data within the region, the following solution is performed: The line tie rate is calculated by comparing the total length of the lines equipped with tie switches with the total length of the lines in the area. This ratio is then combined with the line N-1 throughput rate to characterize the interconnection and mutual supply capability. The power supply radius, number of single radial lines, and average number of power supply users of the line are normalized and weighted to represent the level indicators of the distribution line itself. Statistical analysis of voltage deviation data from client-side voltage monitoring points is conducted to calculate the voltage qualification rate, which serves as a quality indicator of the power supply voltage. The scores of the interconnection and mutual supply capability index, the power distribution line body level index, and the power supply voltage quality index are weighted and summed to obtain the evaluation result of the power distribution network reliability dimension.

4. The evaluation method for regional power grid supply capacity and the electricity business environment according to claim 1, characterized in that, The calculation steps for the project execution quality and efficiency dimension include: Obtain the total planned investment, approved project investment, commenced project investment, and operational project investment from the project planning database; Based on the investment data obtained from the planning project database, the following solution is performed: Calculate the percentage of approved project investment to the total planned investment, as a quality and efficiency indicator of approval. Calculate the percentage of investment in projects that have commenced to the total planned investment, as a performance indicator of the quality and efficiency of project commencement; Calculate the percentage of investment in projects already in operation relative to the total planned investment, as a performance indicator for the quality and efficiency of production. The scores of the approved quality and efficiency indicators, the commencement quality and efficiency indicators, and the production quality and efficiency indicators are summed to obtain the evaluation results of the execution quality and efficiency dimension of the planned project.

5. The evaluation method for regional power grid supply capacity and the electricity business environment according to claim 1, characterized in that, The calculation steps for the aforementioned project execution quality and efficiency dimension include: The total number of projects in the statistical planning project database, the number of projects actually started, and the number of projects actually put into operation; Based on the statistical count of projects in the planning project database, the following solution is performed: The percentage of actual projects started relative to the total number of projects is calculated to represent the approved project commencement rate. The percentage of projects actually put into operation is calculated as the percentage of projects put into operation, which is used as the indicator of the commissioning rate of projects under construction. The scores of the approved project commencement rate and the commenced project commissioning rate are summed to obtain the evaluation result of the project execution quality and efficiency dimension.

6. The evaluation method for regional power grid supply capacity and the electricity business environment according to claim 1, characterized in that, The calculation steps for the dimension of obtaining electricity services include: Retrieve data on the entire process of business expansion and installation applications for both low-voltage and high-voltage users, including timeline data and access scheme data. Based on the retrieved data, the following solution is performed: Calculate the average time from application to power connection for low-voltage users, and obtain a score by comparing it with the preset time limit standard, which is used as an indicator of low-voltage power supply efficiency. Calculate the average processing time for high-voltage single-power supply users with rated capacity at or below a set threshold, and statistically analyze the average power supply radius length of high-voltage customer access points. Compare the results with preset standards to obtain a score, which will be used as a high-voltage power service indicator. The scores of the low-voltage power supply efficiency index and the high-voltage power supply service index are summed to obtain the evaluation result of the power service acquisition dimension.

7. The evaluation method for regional power grid supply capacity and the electricity business environment according to claim 1, characterized in that, The calculation steps for the client-side security dimension include: Establish a field verification checklist that includes newly connected community power distribution configurations, general high-voltage user equipment operation and maintenance, and dual power supply configurations for important power users within the statistical period; Based on the on-site verification checklist, the following solution is performed: The number of newly connected communities that meet the requirements for dual power supply configuration and self-provided emergency power supply during the statistical period is calculated as the proportion of the total number of samples inspected, which is used as an indicator of the effectiveness of the configuration in newly built communities. The implementation status of equipment operation and maintenance and rectification of safety hazards for general high-voltage users and important power users is statistically analyzed and quantified into safety scores, which are respectively represented as the power safety indicators for ordinary high-voltage customers and the power safety indicators for important customers. The scores of the newly built community configuration effectiveness index, the ordinary high-voltage customer electricity safety index, and the important customer electricity safety index are summed to obtain the evaluation result of the customer-side safety dimension.

8. The evaluation method for regional power grid supply capacity and electricity business environment according to claim 3, characterized in that, The line connectivity rate is calculated using the following formula: in, For line connectivity, The total length of the line equipped with the tie switch. This represents the total length of the lines within the region.

9. The evaluation method for regional power grid supply capacity and electricity business environment according to any one of claims 1-7, characterized in that, The specific execution logic for comparing the comprehensive evaluation score with the preset five-tier threshold is as follows: If the comprehensive evaluation score It is classified as grade S, representing the first level; like It is classified as Grade A, representing the second level; like It is classified as grade B, representing the third level; like It is classified as grade C, representing the fourth level; like It is classified as grade D, representing level five; The levels, in descending order of difficulty, are: Level 1, Level 2, Level 3, Level 4, and Level 5. Output a bottleneck analysis report for the corresponding gear level results, which is represented as the evaluation results of the power grid supply guarantee capacity and business environment of the region.

10. An evaluation system for regional power grid supply capacity and the electricity business environment, characterized in that, include: The indicator construction module is used to establish an evaluation indicator system that includes six dimensions: main grid supply guarantee, distribution network reliability, planning execution, construction execution, power service, and customer safety. The data calculation module is used to access power grid operation and management data, execute specific calculation steps for each dimension, and obtain the values ​​and dimension scores of each secondary quantitative indicator. The comprehensive evaluation module is used to weight and aggregate the scores of each dimension according to a preset weighting strategy to generate a comprehensive score for the regional power grid. The graded output module is used to map the comprehensive score to a preset five-level evaluation tier from S to D, and output a digital evaluation report that includes grade determination and weakness diagnosis.

Images