Power distribution cabinet wiring confirmation method and system

Abstract

The invention discloses a power distribution cabinet wiring confirmation method and system, and relates to the technical field of intelligent power distribution systems. The method comprises the following steps: pre-constructing an operation baseline data set and an operation boundary condition set; on the basis of the operation baseline data set, enumerating a feasible wiring path adjustment combination to obtain a wiring candidate scheme set, and calculating a coupling influence prediction result set; based on the operation boundary condition set and the coupling influence prediction result set, screening the wiring candidate scheme set to obtain an executable wiring scheme set; generating a governance linkage parameter set for the executable wiring scheme set, binding the governance linkage parameter set with wiring actions in the executable wiring scheme set, and submitting the bound wiring actions; in the submitting process, an evidence chain is generated in real time, and the evidence chain is used for judging whether backspacing is triggered or not; the problem of out-of-control coupling of wiring control and electric energy quality management in the prior art is effectively solved, and orderliness and reliability of cooperative execution of wiring and management actions in various scenes are guaranteed.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of intelligent power distribution system technology, and more specifically, to a method and system for verifying wiring in a power distribution cabinet. Background Technology

[0002] In various power distribution scenarios such as urban and rural power distribution networks and industrial plants, distribution cabinets have gradually integrated core functions such as load management, power quality management, and line loss calculation, becoming key equipment supporting the refined management and efficient operation of power distribution networks. Their design aims to meet the comprehensive requirements of power distribution networks for power supply reliability, power quality, and operational economy through multi-functional collaborative operation. The distribution cabinet's wiring control function achieves reasonable load distribution and line optimization by adjusting internal wiring paths, thereby reducing line losses. Power quality management relies on built-in reactive power compensation components and harmonic suppression devices to improve the power factor of the grid, suppress harmonic pollution, balance three-phase loads, and ensure the stable operation of electrical equipment. These two types of functions work collaboratively within the overall design framework of the distribution cabinet to jointly support the safe and efficient operation of the power distribution network.

[0003] However, in actual operation, there is a significant coupling relationship between wiring control and power quality management. Changes in wiring paths can cause abrupt changes in the topology and impedance distribution of the power distribution system, resulting in corresponding adjustments to the transmission paths of harmonic currents. Originally dispersed harmonic components may concentrate on specific busbars or lines. At the same time, the compensation effect of reactive power compensation devices is highly dependent on the current load characteristics and topology parameters of the circuit. Changes in load distribution and circuit parameters caused by wiring switching can lead to a mismatch between the original compensation parameters and the new operating state, resulting in a decrease or even failure of reactive power compensation effect. In addition, wiring switching can also disrupt the originally relatively balanced three-phase load distribution, leading to an aggravation of three-phase imbalance and an abnormal increase in neutral line current. Ultimately, this forms a coupling relationship in which power quality management and wiring control influence and restrict each other.

[0004] This uncontrolled coupling relationship can trigger a series of effects. The concentration of harmonic components can cause the harmonic distortion rate of the local busbar to exceed the allowable range, leading to equipment overheating, insulation aging and other faults, and shortening the service life of the equipment. An abnormal increase in neutral current will increase line losses and may even trigger the malfunction of protection devices, causing unplanned power outages. The failure of reactive power compensation will lead to a decrease in the power factor of the power grid, which will not only increase the cost of power supply, but also affect the voltage stability of the distribution network, causing voltage fluctuations or low voltage. In the long run, these problems will reduce the overall power supply reliability and power quality of the distribution network, and affect the safe and stable operation of various electrical equipment.

[0005] In view of this, the present invention proposes a method and system for verifying wiring in a power distribution cabinet to solve the above problems. Summary of the Invention

[0006] To overcome the aforementioned deficiencies of the prior art and achieve the above objectives, the present invention provides the following technical solution: a method for confirming wiring in a power distribution cabinet, comprising:

[0007] Pre-build the running baseline dataset and the running boundary condition set;

[0008] Based on the running baseline dataset, feasible wiring path adjustment combinations are enumerated to obtain a set of wiring candidate schemes, and the set of coupling effect prediction results is calculated.

[0009] Based on the set of operational boundary conditions and the set of coupling effect prediction results, the set of wiring candidate schemes is screened to obtain the set of executable wiring schemes;

[0010] Generate a set of governance linkage parameters for the executable wiring scheme set, and then bind the set of governance linkage parameters with the wiring actions in the executable wiring scheme set before submitting it;

[0011] During the submission process, an evidence chain is generated in real time, which is used to determine whether a rollback is triggered.

[0012] Furthermore, when binding the governance linkage parameter set with the wiring action, a version object is constructed, and the binding structure between the version objects is associated.

[0013] Furthermore, the version objects are divided into three categories: wiring action version, governance parameter version, and linkage binding package version.

[0014] Furthermore, computable consistency constraint rules are designed to constrain version objects to determine whether the wiring action version matches the governance parameter version.

[0015] Furthermore, the consistency constraint rules include topology adaptation checks, device capability checks, and risk interlock checks;

[0016] The topology adaptation check compares the wiring action version with the governance parameter version to determine whether each expected harmonic accumulation loop is covered by the corresponding governance device, and whether the connection relationship and capacity meet the requirements. It also determines whether the reactive power compensation capacity matches the reactive power demand range under the expected topology. The equipment capacity check performs static verification on the equipment hard constraints before the governance parameter version is issued. If the parameter settings of the governance parameter version exceed the equipment hard constraints, the corresponding linkage binding package version is rejected. The risk interlock check requires that the wiring action submission must not be earlier than the governance parameter preparation. The governance parameter preparation is defined as having been issued, confirmed as received, and in an activation-waiting state.

[0017] Furthermore, the submission process is divided into a preparation stage and a submission stage;

[0018] During the preparation phase, governance parameters are issued to the corresponding devices but not activated. The submission phase begins only when all devices return confirmation receipts and the preparation status is ready.

[0019] During the submission phase, operations are performed according to the switching sequence template. The switching sequence template includes a governance-before-switching mode and a switch-before-governance mode. In the governance-before-switching mode, the harmonic suppression device and reactive power compensation component are adjusted first, then the wiring action is performed, and finally the governance parameters are adjusted back to the optimal level. In the switch-before-governance mode, after the wiring switch is completed and the topology is confirmed, the governance parameters are activated, and the harmonic suppression device and reactive power compensation component are put into operation in batches in a preset order within the preset monitoring period after the wiring switch is completed.

[0020] Furthermore, each step of the submission process collects corresponding evidence and generates an evidence chain. If the evidence of any step does not meet the judgment requirements agreed upon in the pre-built indicator contract, the executed wiring action and the switched governance parameters will be rolled back to the initial state corresponding to the running baseline dataset.

[0021] Furthermore, the chain of evidence includes command evidence, state evidence, electrical parameter evidence, and integrity evidence.

[0022] Furthermore, the indicator contract sets three thresholds: a hard threshold, a prediction consistency threshold, and the corresponding statistical window period and stabilization waiting time.

[0023] Based on the three-stage threshold, combined with the electrical parameter evidence and the prediction indicators in the set of coupling effect prediction results, it is determined whether a rollback is triggered; if a rollback is triggered, the current risk level is determined, and the corresponding rollback action is executed based on the risk level.

[0024] A wiring verification system for power distribution cabinets, comprising:

[0025] The data building module is used to pre-build the running baseline dataset and the running boundary condition set;

[0026] The data enumeration module, based on the running baseline dataset, enumerates feasible wiring path adjustment combinations to obtain a set of wiring candidate schemes and calculates the set of coupling effect prediction results.

[0027] The data filtering module filters the set of candidate wiring schemes based on the set of running boundary conditions and the set of coupling effect prediction results to obtain a set of executable wiring schemes.

[0028] The data submission module is used to generate a set of governance linkage parameters for the executable wiring scheme set, and then submit the set of governance linkage parameters after binding it with the wiring actions in the executable wiring scheme set.

[0029] The data rollback module is used to generate a chain of evidence in real time during the submission process. The chain of evidence is used to determine whether a rollback is triggered.

[0030] Compared with the prior art, the technical effects and advantages of the distribution cabinet wiring confirmation method and system of the present invention are as follows:

[0031] This invention pre-constructs an operational baseline dataset and an operational boundary condition set. Based on the operational baseline dataset, it enumerates feasible wiring path adjustment combinations and calculates the coupling impact prediction result set. Combined with the operational boundary condition set, it filters to obtain an executable wiring scheme set. For the executable wiring scheme set, it generates a governance linkage parameter set and binds three types of version objects: wiring action version, governance parameter version, and linkage binding package version. It ensures matching and security through consistency constraint rules composed of topology adaptation check, equipment capability check, and risk interlock check. It uses a two-phase commit and barrier mechanism and two switching timing templates to execute the commit operation. It collects command evidence, status evidence, electrical parameter evidence, and integrity evidence in real time to generate a complete evidence chain. It relies on the three-stage threshold and three-layer judgment logic of the indicator contract to achieve precise hierarchical rollback. If the wiring cannot be completely rolled back, the governance parameters are adjusted synchronously and the system enters a safe state.

[0032] This invention effectively solves the problem of uncontrolled coupling between wiring control and power quality management in the prior art, avoiding consequences such as equipment overheating, insulation aging, malfunction of protection devices, unplanned power outages, and increased power supply costs. It ensures that the power quality before and after wiring switching meets the preset requirements, realizes the traceability, verifiability, and safety of the operation process, adapts to different power distribution conditions and risk types, and effectively ensures the orderly and reliable coordinated execution of wiring and management actions in various scenarios. Attached Figure Description

[0033] Figure 1 This is a schematic diagram of a power distribution cabinet wiring verification system according to an embodiment of the present invention;

[0034] Figure 2 This is a flowchart of a power distribution cabinet wiring confirmation method according to an embodiment of the present invention;

[0035] Figure 3 This is a schematic diagram illustrating the stages of the submission process in an embodiment of the present invention. Detailed Implementation

[0036] The technical solutions of the embodiments of the present invention will be described in detail, clearly, and completely below with reference to the accompanying drawings. It should be particularly noted that the specific embodiments described below are only for better illustrating and explaining the technical solutions of the present invention, and are intended to enable those skilled in the art to better understand and implement the present invention, and should not be construed as limiting the scope of protection of the present invention. Without departing from the spirit and substance of the present invention, those skilled in the art can modify, adjust, or make equivalent substitutions based on the content disclosed in the present invention, and these should all be considered within the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0037] Example 1:

[0038] Please see Figure 1 As shown in the figure, this embodiment discloses a power distribution cabinet wiring confirmation system, including a data construction module, a data enumeration module, a data filtering module, a data submission module, and a data return module. Each module is connected by wired and / or wireless means to realize data transmission.

[0039] The data building module is used to pre-build the running baseline dataset and the running boundary condition set.

[0040] The method for establishing the operational baseline dataset is as follows: taking the power distribution system where the integrated distribution cabinet is located as the data collection object, synchronously collect and record the power distribution topology, impedance characteristics of each circuit, harmonic current distribution of each circuit, switching status of reactive power compensation components, three-phase load data and neutral line current data of the power distribution system, perform consistency verification and correction processing on abnormal sampling data that occur during the collection process, and construct an operational baseline dataset with full-process traceability based on the complete data after verification and correction.

[0041] The method for constructing the set of operating boundary conditions is as follows: based on the rated operating parameters of the integrated distribution cabinet and its associated power distribution lines, construct a set of operating boundary conditions including the upper limit of harmonic distortion, the upper limit of neutral current, the upper limit of busbar temperature rise, the allowable range of voltage deviation, and the lower limit of power factor.

[0042] The data enumeration module, based on the running baseline dataset, enumerates feasible wiring path adjustment combinations to obtain a set of wiring candidate schemes and calculates the set of coupling effect prediction results.

[0043] Methods for enumerating feasible wiring path adjustment combinations based on the operating baseline dataset include:

[0044] First, the distribution topology, impedance characteristics of each circuit, and equipment constraint information are extracted from the operational baseline dataset. This identifies the core components in the distribution system that can participate in wiring path adjustments, such as circuit breakers, disconnectors, busbar sectionalizing switches, and load connection terminals, and their operational constraints. Then, using circuit on / off state adjustment, load phase sequence allocation adjustment, and busbar sectionalizing connection adjustment as adjustment dimensions, and based on the connectivity rules of the distribution topology and equipment interlock constraints, all possible wiring path adjustment combinations are enumerated sequentially. During enumeration, a specific adjustment dimension is fixed to adjust parameters, and all other adjustment dimensions are fully combined and traversed. Then, the fixed adjustment dimension is switched sequentially to complete the multi-adjustment dimension combination coverage. Each combination is verified in real-time to ensure it meets the circuit rated capacity constraints, equipment action interlock constraints, and topology connectivity requirements. Invalid combinations that exceed the circuit's carrying capacity, violate equipment interlock rules, or cause topology disconnection are eliminated. The remaining combinations that meet the constraints undergo uniqueness deduplication, i.e., duplicate combinations with equivalent wiring logic are removed. Finally, a candidate wiring scheme set containing all feasible wiring path adjustment schemes is formed.

[0045] Methods for constructing the prediction result set of coupling effects include:

[0046] Based on the basic parameters of the operating baseline dataset and the wiring adjustment logic of the candidate wiring scheme set, a set of coupled impact prediction results containing multiple quantifiable predictable indicators is calculated. These predictable indicators include harmonic accumulation location, total harmonic distortion rate increment, amplitude change of harmonics from the 2nd to the nth order, reactive power compensation mismatch, three-phase imbalance change, neutral current change, and busbar temperature rise change. Each predictable indicator is clearly marked with the baseline quantity on which its derivation depends. The value of n is determined by referring to the highest harmonic order that needs to be monitored or controlled as specified in the power quality-related standards. It is also determined by combining the harmonic frequency range generated by the harmonic sources in the power distribution system and the upper limit of the effective control frequency of the harmonic suppression device, ensuring coverage of the main harmonic orders that have a significant impact on power quality.

[0047] The specific calculation methods for each prediction indicator include: The location of harmonic concentration is derived from the impedance characteristics of each circuit, the distribution of harmonic currents in each circuit, and the topology adjustment logic of candidate wiring schemes in the operating baseline dataset, combined with the node voltage method and impedance matrix calculations. This clearly predicts the specific circuits and nodes where harmonic energy will concentrate after the execution of each candidate wiring scheme. The increment of total harmonic distortion and the amplitude changes of the 2nd to nth harmonics are derived from the effective values ​​of voltage and current, the distribution of harmonic currents in each circuit, and the impedance changes of the circuits corresponding to the candidate wiring schemes, as well as the superposition effect of harmonic sources, using the superposition theorem and harmonic power flow calculation methods. The baseline dependent quantities are the distribution topology, the impedance characteristics of each circuit, and the distribution of harmonic currents in each circuit. The reactive power compensation mismatch is calculated from the reactive power, the switching status of reactive power compensation components, and the three-phase load changes corresponding to the candidate wiring schemes in the operating baseline dataset, combined with the reactive power balance equation. The baseline quantities for annotation are: three-phase load data, switching status of reactive power compensation components, and impedance characteristics of each circuit; the three-phase imbalance change is calculated using the symmetrical component method based on the three-phase load data, neutral current data, and phase sequence allocation adjustment logic of candidate wiring schemes in the operating baseline dataset; the baseline quantities for annotation are: three-phase load data, neutral current data, and distribution topology; the neutral current change is derived from the neutral current data in the operating baseline dataset and the three-phase imbalance change corresponding to the candidate wiring schemes; the baseline quantities for annotation are: three-phase load data, neutral current data, and impedance characteristics of each circuit; the busbar temperature rise change is calculated based on the busbar temperature rise data, current distribution of each circuit, and current adjustment of the circuits corresponding to the candidate wiring schemes in the operating baseline dataset, combined with Joule's law and heat conduction model; the baseline quantities for annotation are: impedance characteristics of each circuit, three-phase load data, and busbar temperature rise data.

[0048] The data filtering module is used to filter the candidate wiring scheme set based on the set of running boundary conditions and the set of coupling effect prediction results to obtain the set of executable wiring schemes.

[0049] First, a one-to-one mapping relationship between prediction indicators and boundary conditions is established. The mapping is based on the consistency of the physical meaning of the indicators and the boundary conditions and the logic of the safety of the power distribution system operation. Each prediction indicator in the set of coupled influence prediction results is mapped to the relevant constraint parameters in the set of operating boundary conditions. Among them, the increment of total harmonic distortion rate and the change of amplitude of the 2nd to nth harmonics correspond to the upper limit of harmonic distortion, the change of neutral current corresponds to the upper limit of neutral current, the change of busbar temperature rise corresponds to the upper limit of busbar temperature rise, the voltage-related prediction indicators correspond to the voltage allowable deviation range, the reactive power compensation mismatch is associated with the lower limit of power factor, and the mapping is established through the conversion relationship between reactive power and power factor. The change of three-phase imbalance corresponds to the preset three-phase imbalance allowable threshold, which is derived based on the safety constraints of the set of operating boundary conditions. During the mapping process, an indicator-boundary mapping table is first constructed to clarify the boundary parameters and conversion rules corresponding to each predicted indicator. For example, indicators with indirect correlation need to be converted through physical formulas before mapping. Then, for each scheme in the candidate wiring scheme set, the predicted values ​​of each indicator in its coupling influence prediction results are extracted. According to the correspondence in the mapping table, the predicted values ​​are quantitatively compared with the corresponding constraint parameters in the set of running boundary conditions.

[0050] The method for screening candidate wiring schemes includes a dual judgment logic: direct elimination due to hard boundary exceedance and elimination triggered by a high-risk threshold. First, hard boundary checks are performed on the predicted values ​​of various indicators for each candidate wiring scheme. If any predicted value exceeds the upper limit or falls below the lower limit of the corresponding boundary constraint parameter (e.g., the increase in total harmonic distortion exceeds the upper limit of harmonic distortion, or the change in neutral current exceeds the upper limit of neutral current), the corresponding scheme is considered to have reached the boundary and is directly eliminated from the candidate wiring scheme set. Second, schemes that have not reached the boundary are subject to high-risk judgment, for example, a preset high-risk threshold is set at the corresponding boundary constraint parameter. The 90% high-risk threshold is set based on power quality standard margins and engineering operation experience. If the predicted value of any prediction indicator reaches 90% or more of the corresponding boundary constraint parameter, or if the predicted values ​​of multiple prediction indicators simultaneously reach 80% or more of their respective corresponding boundary constraint parameters, there is a possibility of risk superposition. The corresponding scheme is judged as a high-risk candidate and is also eliminated. Finally, the candidate wiring schemes that have not been eliminated after the above two rounds of verification are checked again to confirm that the predicted values ​​of all their prediction indicators are within the safe operating range, that is, below the high-risk threshold and not exceeding the limit. These schemes are then integrated to form an executable wiring scheme set.

[0051] The data submission module is used to generate a set of governance linkage parameters for the executable wiring scheme set, and then submit the set of governance linkage parameters after binding it with the wiring actions in the executable wiring scheme set.

[0052] The method for generating a governance linkage parameter set for an executable wiring scheme set includes: the governance linkage parameter set is a structured set that adapts to the executable wiring scheme and contains various parameters and rules required for power quality governance. Specifically, it consists of the target switching sequence of reactive power compensation components, the target operating conditions and priorities of harmonic suppression devices, three-phase load redistribution rules, protection and alarm linkage thresholds, and equipment mapping tables. The equipment mapping tables specify the equipment, protocol, registers, and logic nodes corresponding to the parameter distribution.

[0053] For each feasible wiring scheme, first extract the predicted indicators from the corresponding coupling effect prediction result set, such as harmonic accumulation location, total harmonic distortion rate increment, amplitude change of 2nd to nth harmonics, reactive power compensation mismatch, three-phase imbalance change, neutral current change, and busbar temperature rise change. Combined with baseline quantities from the operating baseline dataset, such as the distribution topology, impedance characteristics of each circuit, three-phase load data, switching status of reactive power compensation components, and busbar temperature rise data, the relevant parameters are calculated in the following way:

[0054] The target switching sequence of reactive power compensation components is based on the reactive power compensation mismatch in the coupling effect prediction result set and the reactive power and rated capacity of the reactive power compensation components in the operating baseline dataset. A reactive power balance algorithm is used to calculate the capacitor bank capacity to be switched and the switching sequence at each time point. Simultaneously, the impact of the switching action on the equipment temperature rise is verified by combining the busbar temperature rise change to ensure that the switching process meets the thermal capacity constraint. The target operating conditions and priorities of the harmonic suppression device are based on the harmonic aggregation location, total harmonic distortion increment, and harmonic amplitude change in the coupling effect prediction result set, combined with the values ​​of each circuit in the operating baseline dataset. The circuit impedance characteristics and harmonic current distribution are used to calculate target operating conditions such as filter level and bypass status through the harmonic suppression effectiveness optimization model. Priorities are set according to the degree of harmonic distortion hazard and the difficulty of suppression, giving priority to ensuring the suppression effect on high-order harmonics and harmonic accumulation circuits. The necessary three-phase load redistribution rules are based on the three-phase imbalance change in the coupling effect prediction result set and the three-phase load data and distribution topology in the operating baseline dataset. The symmetrical component method is used to decompose and calculate the load adjustment of each phase, clarify the load transfer circuit, terminal and adjustment sequence, and ensure that the three-phase imbalance is controlled within the preset range after adjustment.

[0055] To address the coupled effects of harmonic accumulation, reactive power mismatch, and three-phase imbalance that may be caused by wiring switching, a power quality management strategy is formulated. Specific methods include: based on the prediction results of coupled effects, for harmonic accumulation, a filtering activation strategy matching the target operating conditions of harmonic suppression devices is developed to ensure that harmonic accumulation circuits are covered by the corresponding filtering levels before and after switching; for reactive power mismatch, a switching timing strategy adapted to the target switching sequence of reactive power compensation components is developed, combining switching timing templates to determine the sequential logic of switching actions and wiring actions, avoiding over-compensation or under-compensation; for three-phase imbalance, a load adjustment execution strategy corresponding to the three-phase load redistribution rules is developed, clarifying the triggering conditions and execution steps of adjustment actions; simultaneously, protection and alarm linkage thresholds are quantitatively set according to the constraint relationship between predicted indicators and operating boundary condition sets to ensure that protection actions and alarms are triggered promptly when indicators exceed limits or equipment malfunctions occur during the management process. The overall strategy must consider the continuity of power quality before and after switching, ensuring that power quality always meets the preset operating boundary requirements through the coordinated adaptation of parameters and rules.

[0056] Three types of version objects are constructed: wiring action version, governance parameter version, and linkage binding package version, and the binding structure between the three types of version objects is associated. The wiring action version contains wiring actions derived from an executable wiring scheme set, specifically including a version identifier, a step list, and the expected topology hash value after execution. The step list clearly defines the device identifier, action type, target status, preconditions, timeout settings, and retry strategies for each execution object. Even in manual wiring replacement scenarios, the work order steps and acceptance points must be structured and entered into the step list. The governance parameter version includes a version identifier, a parameter set, and a device mapping table. The parameter set covers the target switching sequence of reactive power compensation components, the target operating conditions and priorities of harmonic suppression devices, necessary three-phase load redistribution rules, and alarm linkage thresholds. The device mapping table clearly defines the devices, protocols, registers, and logical nodes corresponding to the parameter distribution. The linkage binding package version, as the core carrier of the binding relationship, includes a version identifier, a strongly bound wiring action version identifier and governance parameter version identifier, a consistency constraint set, a switching timing template, a rollback strategy, and integrity verification information. The integrity verification information is generated by hashing the content of the linkage binding package version, and a signature is added when necessary to ensure that the version is tamper-proof and traceable.

[0057] Based on this, calculable consistency constraint rules are set to ensure the compatibility between the wiring action version and the governance parameter version, the safety of equipment operation, and the orderliness of the switching process, so as to avoid power quality problems or equipment failures caused by mismatch between the two or disordered operation sequence. The consistency constraint rules include topology adaptation checks, equipment capacity checks, and risk interlock checks. Topology adaptation checks compare the expected topology set, phase of each circuit, and key load distribution of the wiring action version with the circuit range, target frequency, and capacity included in compensation, filtering, and monitoring in the governance parameter version. This ensures that each circuit with expected harmonic accumulation is covered by the corresponding governance device, and that the connection relationship and capacity meet the requirements. It also ensures that the reactive power compensation capacity matches the reactive power demand range under the topology, avoiding significant over-compensation or under-compensation trends. Equipment capacity checks perform static verification of hard constraints such as maximum switching frequency, rated filter current, and thermal capacity limits before the governance parameter version is issued. If the parameter settings exceed the equipment capacity, the linked binding package version is directly rejected. Risk interlock checks stipulate that wiring action submissions cannot be earlier than governance parameter readiness. Governance parameter readiness requires that it has been issued, received, and is in an activation-pending state.

[0058] Please see Figure 3 As shown, the synchronous switching sequence adopts a two-phase commit and barrier mechanism, dividing the commit process into a preparation phase and a commit phase. In the preparation phase, a change lock is first set to prevent concurrent operations, and the current stable linkage binding package version is recorded. Then, governance parameters are sent to the corresponding devices but not activated. The accuracy of reception is verified by the confirmation receipts returned by the devices and the parameter hash values. Only when all devices return confirmation receipts and the preparation status is ready can the commit phase begin. In the commit phase, operations are executed according to the switching sequence template, which includes two types: governance before switching and switching before governance. The core difference between the two types lies in the different relationships between the adjustment and activation sequence of the filtering function of the harmonic suppression device and the compensation function of the reactive power compensation component and the wiring actions. In the governance before switching mode, the governance function status is adjusted before the wiring actions are executed, while in the switching before governance mode, the governance parameters are activated and the governance device is put into operation only after the wiring actions are completed and the topology is confirmed. The two modes are designed to adapt to different power distribution conditions and risk types, each with its own corresponding adaptation advantages.

[0059] The "treatment first, switching later" mode first adjusts the filtering function of the harmonic suppression device and the compensation function of the reactive power compensation component to preemptively enhance harmonic suppression and increase reactive power compensation capacity to cope with power quality fluctuations that may be caused by wiring switching, then executes the wiring action, and finally adjusts the treatment parameters back to the optimal level. The "treatment first, switching later" mode can pre-establish a protective power quality treatment state, effectively avoiding problems such as harmonic accumulation and reactive power imbalance directly caused by topology changes during wiring switching, and is suitable for operating conditions where wiring switching easily triggers high power quality risks. The "switching first, treatment later" mode, on the other hand, activates the treatment parameters after the wiring switching is completed and the topology is confirmed, and then puts the harmonic suppression device and reactive power compensation component into operation in batches according to a preset sequence within a preset monitoring period after the wiring switching is completed. The "switching first, treatment later" mode can accurately activate the treatment parameters based on the actual confirmed topology state, avoiding malfunctions of the treatment device due to an uncertain topology, and is suitable for operating conditions where the treatment device is prone to erroneous switching due to an unclear topology.

[0060] The differentiated design of the two modes can achieve precise coverage of risks in different power distribution scenarios, and ensure the safety and effectiveness of the coordinated execution of wiring actions and governance actions under various operating conditions. Regardless of the template used, after each step is executed, it is necessary to verify that the actual circuit connection is consistent with the expected topology of the wiring action version, check that the operating status of the equipment after the action meets the target status, and obtain key operating data such as current, voltage, and phase before and after the action as evidence of the effectiveness of the execution before proceeding to the next step.

[0061] The data rollback module is used to generate a chain of evidence in real time during the submission process. The chain of evidence is used to determine whether a rollback is triggered.

[0062] Clearly define rollback semantics to achieve transactional rollback. The rollback target is set as the current stable linkage binding package version marked as stable or the previous stable linkage binding package version. The stable state needs to be confirmed through evidence chain acceptance. Rollback actions maintain atomicity. Wiring rollback restores the original topology in reverse order of the step list of wiring action versions in the stable linkage binding package version, or in a predefined safe reverse order. Governance rollback switches the parameter pointer back to the governance parameter version corresponding to the stable linkage binding package version and cancels the switching status of the new version. If wiring cannot be completely rolled back due to physical reasons, the system will enter a safe state. At this time, the governance parameters need to be rolled back to the governance parameter version corresponding to the stable linkage binding package version or adjusted to the safe adaptation parameters adapted to the safe state topology. Then, ensure operational safety by disconnecting relevant branches, retaining power supply to critical loads, isolating suspected faulty circuits by power-off, and triggering manual intervention to avoid secondary power quality problems caused by mismatch between the governance device and the faulty topology. By defining the complete version object, designing the binding structure, implementing consistency constraints, setting the synchronization switching timing and rollback semantics, the governance parameters and wiring actions are bound to the same indivisible solution version. This avoids adaptation errors caused by independent modification of wiring actions and governance parameters, reduces the risk of human operation, and ensures the traceability, verifiability, and security of the entire operation process.

[0063] A complete evidence chain system is constructed and precise rollback is achieved based on the evidence chain. Each step of the submission process collects corresponding evidence and generates an evidence chain. If the evidence collected in any step does not meet the judgment requirements agreed in the indicator contract, a rollback is triggered according to the preset rules, and the executed wiring actions and switched governance parameters are rolled back to the initial state corresponding to the running baseline dataset.

[0064] The execution evidence chain requires the storage of four core types of evidence to ensure traceability and integrity. The first type is command evidence, which records the specific command executed, execution time, sender and receiver information, device confirmation receipt, failure code, and number of retries. Furthermore, the version identifiers of the linkage binding package, wiring action, and governance parameters must be written to the log header for full-process traceability. The second type is status evidence, which collects data such as switch on / off status, interlock status, capacitor bank switching position, and filter bypass or operating position to corroborate the actual occurrence of the synchronization switching operation. The third type is electrical parameter evidence, which collects and couples predictive indicators. The corresponding electrical parameter data includes the effective values ​​of phase voltage and current, total harmonic distortion rate of voltage and current, amplitude of 2nd to nth harmonics, negative sequence and unbalance of voltage and current, neutral current, reactive power, power factor, temperature rise or hot spot data of busbars, terminals and key contacts. This type of evidence is the core basis for triggering rollback. The fourth type is integrity evidence, which requires generating a hash value for each data block and using a chain hashing method to write the hash value of the previous data block into the header of the next data block. At the same time, the time synchronization source and deviation data, sampling device number and calibration information are recorded to ensure that the chain of evidence is irrefutable and tamper-proof.

[0065] To achieve a one-to-one correspondence between evidence and predicted indicators, an indicator contract needs to be constructed. This contract binds each predicted indicator to its corresponding evidence field, threshold, window period, judgment logic, and triggering action. The indicator contract must clearly define the source of the evidence field corresponding to each predicted indicator in the prediction result set, the statistical method of the baseline data before execution, and the statistical window period of the data after execution. Simultaneously, a three-stage threshold is set: first, a hard threshold derived from a preset threshold table in power quality standards or enterprise operating procedures; second, a prediction consistency threshold, obtained by superimposing measurement errors and model errors. Measurement errors include the accuracy and sampling errors of current transformers and voltage transformers, while model errors are values ​​obtained based on historical deviation sample statistics; and third, the corresponding statistical window period and stabilization waiting time. After switching, a preset stabilization period must be waited before statistical analysis of the data within the window period, including mean, 95th percentile, maximum value, or continuous over-limit duration, to complete the judgment.

[0066] After constructing the indicator contract, various prediction indicators in the coupled impact prediction result set can be structurally bound to the evidence fields, judgment criteria, and response actions in the execution evidence chain. This achieves standardization, reproducibility, and accuracy of the judgment logic, avoiding false triggering or missed triggering caused by ambiguous judgment criteria, single threshold settings, or chaotic evidence association. At the same time, it provides clear and quantifiable decision-making basis for subsequent accurate rollback. The indicator contract plays a key role in solving the technical problems of difficulty in accurately controlling power quality fluctuations and lack of clear triggering conditions for rollback actions during distribution line switching. Through standardized field binding, three-stage threshold setting, and statistical analysis rules, it ensures that the judgment of coupled impacts on power quality not only meets the constraints of safe operation but also adapts to the deviation between model predictions and actual operation, ensuring the safety and reliability of the coordinated execution of distribution line switching and governance actions.

[0067] The evidence assessment employs a three-tiered logic of hard triggering, soft triggering, and hysteresis debounce to avoid false triggers. The hard triggering logic determines a Level 3 risk and immediately triggers corresponding rollback actions when any predicted indicator in the coupled impact prediction result set exceeds a hard threshold for a preset duration, or when the exceedance exceeds the emergency margin. The soft triggering logic determines a Level 1 risk and executes downgrade actions when no predicted indicator in the coupled impact prediction result set exceeds the hard threshold, but the difference between the predicted value of the corresponding indicator in the coupled impact prediction result set and the measured data of the corresponding evidence field in the evidence chain exceeds the prediction consistency threshold for a preset duration, or when multiple predicted indicators in the coupled impact prediction result set simultaneously approach the hard threshold. If the requirements cannot be met after downgrading the filtering level, limiting capacitor switching, pausing subsequent wiring actions, or extending the observation window, the risk level will be upgraded to level two and the corresponding rollback action will be triggered. The hysteresis debouncing logic requires that the determination of the risk level must follow the rules of setting the statistical window period and the stabilization waiting time. After the wiring action or the switching of the management parameters is completed, the system will first wait for the preset stabilization waiting time to allow the system operation to become stable, and then enter the preset statistical window period. The risk level will only be determined when the statistical quantity meets the conditions of continuous over-limit or window statistical over-limit, so as to avoid false triggering caused by single-point peak data. To resume or continue execution, the prediction indicators in the coupled influence prediction result set must continuously return to normal for more than the preset recovery time and the risk level must fall back to the risk-free range.

[0068] Example 2:

[0069] Please see Figure 2 As shown, this embodiment provides a method for confirming the wiring of a power distribution cabinet, including:

[0070] Pre-build the running baseline dataset and the running boundary condition set;

[0071] Based on the running baseline dataset, feasible wiring path adjustment combinations are enumerated to obtain a set of wiring candidate schemes, and the set of coupling effect prediction results is calculated.

[0072] Based on the set of operational boundary conditions and the set of coupling effect prediction results, the set of wiring candidate schemes is screened to obtain the set of executable wiring schemes;

[0073] Generate a set of governance linkage parameters for the executable wiring scheme set, and then bind the set of governance linkage parameters with the wiring actions in the executable wiring scheme set before submitting it;

[0074] During the submission process, an evidence chain is generated in real time, which is used to determine whether a rollback is triggered.

[0075] The above description is merely a specific embodiment of the present invention, but the scope of protection of the present invention is not limited thereto. Any variations or substitutions that can be easily conceived by those skilled in the art within the technical scope disclosed in the present invention should be included within the scope of protection of the present invention. Therefore, the scope of protection of the present invention should be determined by the scope of the claims.

[0076] In conclusion, the above description is only a preferred embodiment of the present invention and is not intended to limit the present invention. Any modifications, equivalent substitutions, improvements, etc., made within the spirit and principles of the present invention should be included within the protection scope of the present invention.

Claims

1. A method for confirming wiring in a power distribution cabinet, characterized in that, include: Pre-build the running baseline dataset and the running boundary condition set; Based on the running baseline dataset, feasible wiring path adjustment combinations are enumerated to obtain a set of wiring candidate schemes, and the set of coupling effect prediction results is calculated. Based on the set of operational boundary conditions and the set of coupling effect prediction results, the set of wiring candidate schemes is screened to obtain the set of executable wiring schemes; Generate a set of governance linkage parameters for the executable wiring scheme set, and then bind the set of governance linkage parameters with the wiring actions in the executable wiring scheme set before submitting it; During the submission process, an evidence chain is generated in real time, which is used to determine whether a rollback is triggered.

2. The method for confirming wiring in a power distribution cabinet according to claim 1, characterized in that, When binding the governance linkage parameter set with the wiring action, a version object is constructed, and the binding structure between the version objects is associated.

3. The method for confirming wiring in a power distribution cabinet according to claim 2, characterized in that, Version objects are divided into three categories: wiring action version, governance parameter version, and linkage binding package version.

4. The method for confirming wiring in a power distribution cabinet according to claim 3, characterized in that, Design computable consistency constraint rules to constrain version objects in order to determine whether the wiring action version matches the governance parameter version.

5. The method for confirming wiring in a power distribution cabinet according to claim 4, characterized in that, Consistency constraint rules include topology adaptation checks, device capability checks, and risk interlock checks; The topology adaptation check compares the wiring action version with the governance parameter version to determine whether each expected harmonic accumulation loop is covered by the corresponding governance device, and whether the connection relationship and capacity meet the requirements. It also determines whether the reactive power compensation capacity matches the reactive power demand range under the expected topology. The equipment capacity check performs static verification on the equipment hard constraints before the governance parameter version is issued. If the parameter settings of the governance parameter version exceed the equipment hard constraints, the corresponding linkage binding package version is rejected. The risk interlock check requires that the wiring action submission must not be earlier than the governance parameter preparation. The governance parameter preparation is defined as having been issued, confirmed as received, and in an activation-waiting state.

6. The method for confirming wiring in a power distribution cabinet according to claim 4, characterized in that, The submission process is divided into a preparation phase and a submission phase. During the preparation phase, governance parameters are issued to the corresponding devices but not activated. When all devices return confirmation receipts and the preparation status is ready, the submission phase begins. During the submission phase, operations are performed according to the switching sequence template. The switching sequence template includes a governance-before-switching mode and a switch-before-governance mode. In the governance-before-switching mode, the harmonic suppression device and reactive power compensation component are adjusted first, then the wiring action is performed, and finally the governance parameters are adjusted back to the optimal level. In the switch-before-governance mode, after the wiring switch is completed and the topology is confirmed, the governance parameters are activated, and the harmonic suppression device and reactive power compensation component are put into operation in batches in a preset order within the preset monitoring period after the wiring switch is completed.

7. The method for confirming wiring in a power distribution cabinet according to claim 1, characterized in that, Each step of the submission process collects corresponding evidence and generates an evidence chain. If the evidence for any step does not meet the judgment requirements agreed upon in the pre-built indicator contract, the executed wiring action and the switched governance parameters will be rolled back to the initial state corresponding to the running baseline dataset.

8. The method for confirming wiring in a power distribution cabinet according to claim 7, characterized in that, The chain of evidence includes command evidence, status evidence, electrical parameter evidence, and integrity evidence.

9. The method for confirming wiring in a power distribution cabinet according to claim 8, characterized in that, The indicator contract sets three thresholds: a hard threshold, a prediction consistency threshold, and the corresponding statistical window period and stabilization waiting time. Based on the three-segment threshold, combined with the electrical parameter evidence and the prediction index in the set of coupling effect prediction results, it is determined whether to trigger a rollback. If a rollback is triggered, the current risk level is determined, and the corresponding rollback action is executed based on the risk level.

10. A distribution cabinet wiring verification system, used to implement the distribution cabinet wiring verification method according to any one of claims 1-9, characterized in that, include: The data building module is used to pre-build the running baseline dataset and the running boundary condition set; The data enumeration module, based on the running baseline dataset, enumerates feasible wiring path adjustment combinations to obtain a set of wiring candidate schemes and calculates the set of coupling effect prediction results. The data filtering module filters the set of candidate wiring schemes based on the set of running boundary conditions and the set of coupling effect prediction results to obtain a set of executable wiring schemes. The data submission module is used to generate a set of governance linkage parameters for the executable wiring scheme set, and then submit the set of governance linkage parameters after binding it with the wiring actions in the executable wiring scheme set. The data rollback module is used to generate a chain of evidence in real time during the submission process. The chain of evidence is used to determine whether a rollback is triggered.

Images