Test method of nuclear power station simulation system and computer program product

Abstract

The invention discloses a test method of a nuclear power station simulation system and a computer program product. The test method covers the full life cycle of new construction and / or reconstruction of the nuclear power station simulation system, and a corresponding stage test scheme set is set in combination with the characteristics of each stage and a'five-longitudinal six-transverse 'test mode. Therefore, the comprehensiveness of the test in each stage can be ensured, and targeted adjustment can be carried out according to the characteristics of each stage. According to the'five longitudinal and six transverse 'test mode, a verification matrix is constructed by using six tools from five angles to form a plurality of verification units, so that the risk of a common mode phenomenon in the test process can be reduced, and the independence and complementarity between different stages and the test tools are fully utilized. Meanwhile, through omnibearing coverage, the breadth and depth of the test can be improved, systematic and comprehensive verification is realized, and the safety and controllability of the digital new construction / reconstruction project of the nuclear power unit are effectively guaranteed.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This application belongs to the field of nuclear power distributed system technology, and in particular relates to a test method and computer program product for a nuclear power plant simulation system. Background Technology

[0002] With the development of nuclear power technology, digital simulation systems, due to their high reliability, intelligence, and maintainability, have gradually replaced traditional instrumentation and control simulation systems, becoming the main direction for the construction and operation of nuclear power plants. Currently, some in-service nuclear power units still use instrumentation and control simulation systems, which suffer from aging equipment, spare parts outages, and rising failure rates, leading to reduced system safety and economic efficiency. Therefore, it is necessary to carry out the construction or renovation of digital simulation systems.

[0003] However, whether newly built or upgraded, current digital simulation systems still have shortcomings in testing, especially in terms of limited testing coverage, which makes it difficult to fully reflect the system's operating status, resulting in higher implementation risks and difficulty in ensuring project progress and quality.

[0004] Therefore, there is an urgent need to establish a comprehensive and systematic digital simulation system testing method to improve test coverage and ensure the safety and controllability of digital new construction / renovation projects for nuclear power units. Summary of the Invention

[0005] This application provides a testing method and computer program product for a nuclear power plant simulation system, which can effectively improve test coverage and thus effectively ensure the safety and controllability of digital new construction / renovation projects of nuclear power plants.

[0006] Firstly, this application provides a testing method for a nuclear power plant simulation system, the life cycle of which includes four phases for new construction and / or retrofitting of the nuclear power plant simulation system; the testing method includes: At each stage, the corresponding stage features are combined with each verification unit in the preset verification matrix to design a corresponding stage test scheme set; the corresponding stage test is completed based on the stage test scheme set. The four lifecycle phases include the design phase, manufacturing phase, installation and commissioning phase, and operation and maintenance phase. Each verification unit in the verification matrix is ​​constructed based on verification dimensions × verification tools. The verification dimensions include design and verification, equipment manufacturing and testing, on-site implementation verification, independent operation verification, and independent maintenance verification. The verification tools include an interface verification system, a minimum system, the DCS systems of Unit 1 and Unit 2, a virtual main control room, and a full-range simulator.

[0007] Furthermore, the stage test plan set for the manufacturing stage includes forward test plans; forward test plans are key test plans selected from the stage test plan set corresponding to the preset stage, and are used to move to the manufacturing stage for factory testing and verification; the preset stage is some or all of the installation and commissioning stage and the operation and maintenance stage; the key test plans are tested and verified on-site in the preset stage.

[0008] Furthermore, the key testing plan includes: The requalification test protocol is used to verify the functional integrity, consistency and compliance of the nuclear power plant simulation system under the target engineering configuration and operating conditions; The program test plan was adjusted to verify the executability and correctness of the commissioning process and related control logic of the nuclear power plant simulation system. The operation control test plan is used to verify the correctness of the response behavior and control function of the nuclear power plant simulation system to operation commands during operation. The maintenance operation test plan is used to verify the control behavior, state switching, and safety assurance capabilities of the nuclear power plant simulation system under maintenance-related operation conditions. Transient testing schemes are used to verify the dynamic response characteristics and stability of nuclear power plant simulation systems under disturbance or state change conditions; In addition, supplementary test schemes based on operation and maintenance procedures are used to verify the comprehensive behavior of the nuclear power plant simulation system driven by operation and maintenance procedures and its adaptability to actual operation and maintenance activities.

[0009] Furthermore, each stage of the test plan set includes a subset of manufacturing plant test plans and a subset of field test plans based on the test location; For every two adjacent stages, an iterative test is performed: the manufacturing plant test scheme subset and field test scheme subset of the next stage are iterated based on the test results corresponding to the manufacturing plant test scheme subset and field test scheme subset of the previous stage.

[0010] Furthermore, each round of iterative testing includes some or all of the following iterative tests: Interface iteration testing is used to verify and correct the interface compatibility and envelope capability between the nuclear power plant simulation system and field equipment and external interfaces; Communication interface iterative testing is used to verify and correct the adaptability of communication configuration, data interaction, and communication logic between the nuclear power plant simulation system and external systems. Simulated dynamic response iterative testing is used to verify and correct the consistency between the response characteristics of the nuclear power plant simulation system under dynamic operating conditions and the design requirements. Logic dynamic testing and iterative testing are used to verify and correct the correctness of the behavior of the control logic of the nuclear power plant simulation system under different operating states and operating conditions. Range iteration testing is used to adjust and expand the test content and test boundaries of manufacturing plant testing and field testing based on test results.

[0011] Furthermore, the verification tools also include engineering prototypes and closed-loop verification systems, which are used to conduct intermediate-state tests based on actual equipment, between full simulation tests and full actual tests.

[0012] Furthermore, the combined testing of the test scheme sets at each stage will cover the target testing scope, which includes: single DCS cabinet testing, joint commissioning testing of all DCS cabinets, multiple related new and / or modified projects within the same period, DCS system and external interface connection testing, power plant process logic testing based on the DCS system, power plant dynamic characteristic verification testing based on the DCS system, operation testing based on the DCS system, and maintenance operation testing.

[0013] Furthermore, the test products in the test schemes for each stage will cover the target test products, which include the software and hardware of the DCS system, the software and hardware of third-party systems used in new construction and / or renovation, interface systems, and field equipment layer products.

[0014] Furthermore, the test elements in the test scheme set at each stage will cover the target test elements, which include key test elements for the construction and / or renovation of the DCS system, as well as typical test elements for the DCS system. Both key and typical test elements are determined through digital systems engineering methods.

[0015] Secondly, this application provides a computer program product, which includes a computer program that, when executed by one or more processors, implements the steps of the method described in the first aspect.

[0016] The advantages of this application compared to existing technologies are as follows: The verification matrix covers the entire lifecycle of a nuclear power plant simulation system's new construction and / or retrofit, which can be divided into four phases: design, manufacturing, installation and commissioning, and operation and maintenance. The verification matrix is ​​constructed based on various verification dimensions and tools to ensure the relevance and comprehensiveness of the test plan for each phase. Verification dimensions include design and verification, equipment manufacturing and testing, on-site implementation verification, independent operation verification, and independent maintenance verification, ensuring comprehensive verification from all aspects of the system. Verification tools include interface verification systems, minimum systems, the DCS systems of Unit 1 and Unit 2, a virtual control room, and a full-range simulator; each tool has unique functions, providing different levels of verification support at different phases. By combining phase characteristics with each verification unit in the verification matrix, a test plan highly matched to actual conditions can be formed, comprehensively covering the verification needs of different phases. This testing method, through a hierarchical and systematic verification mechanism, improves the comprehensiveness, accuracy, and safety of testing, thereby ensuring the smooth implementation and controllability of digital new construction / retrofit projects for nuclear power units.

[0017] It is understood that the beneficial effects of the second to fifth aspects mentioned above can be found in the relevant descriptions in the first aspect mentioned above, and will not be repeated here. Attached Figure Description

[0018] To more clearly illustrate the technical solutions in the embodiments of this application, the drawings used in the description of the embodiments or the prior art will be briefly introduced below. Obviously, the drawings described below are only some embodiments of this application. For those skilled in the art, other drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without creative effort.

[0019] Figure 1 This is a flowchart illustrating a testing method for a nuclear power plant simulation system provided in an embodiment of this application; Figure 2 This is a schematic diagram of the structure of a verification matrix provided in an embodiment of this application; Figure 3 This is an example diagram of a testing method for the entire life cycle during the construction and / or renovation of a nuclear power plant simulation system provided in this application embodiment. Detailed Implementation

[0020] In the following description, specific details such as particular system architectures and techniques are set forth for illustrative purposes and not for limitation, in order to provide a thorough understanding of the embodiments of this application. However, those skilled in the art will understand that this application may also be implemented in other embodiments without these specific details. In other instances, detailed descriptions of well-known systems, apparatuses, circuits, and methods have been omitted so as not to obscure the description of this application with unnecessary detail.

[0021] In related technologies, whether newly built or upgraded, current digital simulation systems still have shortcomings in testing, especially in terms of limited testing coverage, which makes it difficult to fully reflect the system's operating status, resulting in higher implementation risks and difficulty in ensuring project progress and quality.

[0022] Therefore, there is an urgent need to establish a comprehensive and systematic digital simulation system testing method to improve test coverage and ensure the safety and controllability of digital new construction / renovation projects for nuclear power units.

[0023] To address this issue, this application proposes a testing method for a nuclear power plant simulation system. By cross-covering all stages of the entire lifecycle of the nuclear power plant simulation system's construction and / or renovation from two levels—different verification dimensions and different verification tools—this testing method systematically eliminates the limitations of a single verification perspective or method, thereby significantly improving the breadth of testing coverage and the depth of verification. Introducing multi-dimensional and multi-tool combined verification at each stage helps to identify and expose potential design deviations, interface inconsistencies, and operational logic chaos in advance, reducing the risk accumulation caused by common testing models, thus enhancing the reliability and credibility of test results. Therefore, this testing method can provide more comprehensive and robust technical support for the digital construction and / or renovation of nuclear power units, effectively ensuring the safety and controllability of the project implementation process. The control method proposed in this application will be described below through specific embodiments.

[0024] The testing method for nuclear power plant simulation systems provided in this application is applicable to the entire lifecycle of new construction and / or renovation projects of nuclear power plant simulation systems. Its execution environment includes both manufacturing plant testing environments and nuclear power plant field testing environments. The testing method is implemented by the nuclear power plant simulation system testing and verification entity under a unified testing system and process management. This testing and verification entity may include engineering and technical personnel engaged in the design and verification of the nuclear power plant simulation system, testing personnel responsible for equipment manufacturing and factory testing, engineering personnel participating in on-site implementation and commissioning, and operation and maintenance personnel undertaking operational verification and maintenance verification.

[0025] During the execution process, the testing and verification entities select appropriate verification dimensions and tools based on the life cycle stage of the nuclear power plant simulation system, and conduct phase testing, forward testing, and iterative testing in the manufacturing plant testing environment and the field testing environment to achieve comprehensive verification of the nuclear power plant simulation system at different stages and under different operating conditions.

[0026] It is understood that the newly built or renovated nuclear power plant simulation system tested in this application essentially refers to a digital simulation system for nuclear power plants. To maintain consistency and conciseness in terminology, the term "nuclear power plant simulation system" will continue to be used in the following descriptions.

[0027] To illustrate the technical solutions proposed in this application, the following descriptions of various embodiments are provided.

[0028] Figure 1 A schematic flowchart of the testing method for the nuclear power plant simulation system provided in this application is shown. The testing method for the nuclear power plant simulation system includes: Step 110: In each stage, combine the corresponding stage features with each verification unit in the preset verification matrix to design the corresponding stage test scheme set.

[0029] The lifecycle of a new nuclear power plant simulation system and / or its retrofit can be broadly divided into four main phases: design, manufacturing, installation and commissioning, and operation and maintenance. The design phase includes preliminary and detailed design, aiming to develop clear technical solutions and implementation plans to ensure the system design meets project requirements and specifications. The manufacturing phase refers to the equipment manufacturing process in the factory, including the production, assembly, and testing of all equipment. The installation and commissioning phase involves the installation and commissioning of the equipment, ensuring it can be put into operation smoothly according to design requirements. The operation and maintenance phase refers to the actual operation of the equipment, performance evaluation and optimization based on operational data, and regular inspections, maintenance, and troubleshooting after the equipment is put into operation.

[0030] To ensure the feasibility of new and / or retrofitted nuclear power plant projects, the lifecycle also includes a feasibility study phase. The feasibility study phase mainly assesses the feasibility of the design scheme and the feasibility of product implementation, laying the foundation for subsequent design and implementation.

[0031] This is understandable, because feasibility studies mainly focus on verifying the feasibility of a solution. Typically, it is only necessary to complete subsequent testing if the feasibility is proven. Therefore, the feasibility is assumed to be proven, and testing is focused on the actual system performance and problems, especially the design, manufacturing, implementation, and operation and maintenance phases. This ensures that subsequent testing can more effectively verify the actual feasibility of the design and ensure the system's security, stability, and operability.

[0032] Therefore, in this test plan, the testing mainly focuses on the subsequent four phases. To ensure the comprehensiveness and relevance of the testing, please refer to... Figure 2 A verification matrix can be constructed based on various verification dimensions and verification tools, as shown in the figure. "" represents a verification unit. For each stage of the lifecycle, the corresponding stage characteristics are combined with each verification unit in the verification matrix to design a corresponding stage test scheme set. To ensure the comprehensiveness of the test, the test in each stage covers each verification unit in the verification matrix; at the same time, to improve the relevance and overall efficiency of the test, the verification focus is different in different stages during the test implementation process.

[0033] For example, during the manufacturing phase, testing primarily focuses on the production quality and unit function verification of the equipment. Preliminary testing can be conducted using interface verification systems and minimum systems to confirm that each component meets basic functional and interface requirements during the manufacturing phase. Upon entering the installation and commissioning phase, the testing focus shifts to system integration and interface adaptation. Engineering prototypes and closed-loop verification systems are used to verify the equipment's operation under actual installation and commissioning conditions. During the operation phase, testing emphasizes the system's performance and stability under different operating conditions. Dynamic response-related tests can be conducted using the DCS systems of Units 1 and 2, as well as tools such as virtual control rooms. Upon entering the maintenance phase, the testing focus further shifts to the system's maintainability and long-term reliability. Full-range simulators are typically used to verify the system's behavior under maintenance-related and extreme operating conditions.

[0034] Through the above-mentioned phased test scheme design based on the verification matrix, the characteristics and verification requirements of each phase can be systematically covered, effectively reducing test blind spots and improving the overall test coverage and the reliability of verification results.

[0035] Step 120: Complete the corresponding phase tests based on the phase test scheme set.

[0036] After obtaining the set of phased test plans, corresponding phased tests can be implemented for each phase to ensure that testing activities are consistent with the system's lifecycle stage. By conducting targeted verification at different stages, it can be ensured that key issues of concern at each stage are fully tested. Unified planning and implementation based on the set of phased test plans helps to systematically cover various verification requirements, reduce omissions and duplicate tests, improve the controllability and consistency of the testing process, thereby enhancing the reliability of test results and providing a stable and reliable technical foundation for the advancement of subsequent phases.

[0037] In this embodiment, a verification matrix covers all stages of the entire lifecycle of a nuclear power plant simulation system's construction and / or retrofit. This verification matrix, built upon various verification dimensions and tools, ensures the relevance and comprehensiveness of the test plan for each stage. Verification dimensions include design and verification, equipment manufacturing and testing, on-site implementation verification, independent operation verification, and independent maintenance verification, ensuring comprehensive verification from all aspects of the system. Verification tools include interface verification systems, minimum systems, the DCS systems for Unit 1 and Unit 2, a virtual control room, and a full-range simulator; each tool has unique functions, providing different levels of verification support at different stages. By combining stage characteristics with each verification unit in the verification matrix, a test plan highly matched to actual conditions can be formed, comprehensively covering the verification needs of different stages. This testing method, through a hierarchical and systematic verification mechanism, improves the comprehensiveness, accuracy, and safety of testing, thereby ensuring the smooth implementation and controllability of digital construction / retrofit projects for nuclear power units.

[0038] In some embodiments, to ensure the comprehensiveness of the test, the verification tool also includes an engineering prototype and a closed-loop verification system, which is used to perform intermediate-state testing based on actual equipment, between full simulation testing and full actual testing.

[0039] The introduced engineering prototype and closed-loop verification system form an intermediate-state test, which can verify the key functions and behaviors of the system without relying entirely on the full simulation model or being completely limited by actual field conditions. This intermediate-state test combines actual equipment with the simulation model, giving the test both the controllability and repeatability of simulation testing, while also incorporating the physical characteristics and interface features of real equipment. This helps to expose problems that might only occur under physical conditions. After incorporating this verification system into the overall testing framework, the testing methods cover three forms: full simulation testing, semi-simulation testing, and full field testing, forming a hierarchical and progressive verification model. This allows the system to be repeatedly verified at different levels of realism, thereby enhancing the mutual verification between test results and improving the completeness, consistency, and credibility of the overall testing.

[0040] Based on this, the verification matrix will be constructed from five different perspectives and combined with six different types of testing tools, forming a systematic testing model, which can be called the "five vertical and six horizontal" testing model. The "five verticals" refer to conducting independent testing of the same object from five different testing roles or verification angles. These include: independent verification and testing of the design itself from the designer's perspective; factory testing activities related to manufacturing from the equipment manufacturer's perspective, such as functional testing, factory acceptance testing, and reliability testing; re-qualification and related testing during on-site implementation from the installation and commissioning personnel's perspective, and moving some on-site procedures to the factory for verification; independent verification of the operational behavior and functions before and after system modification based on the operating procedures from the user's perspective; and independent verification of the operational process and functions before and after system modification based on the maintenance user's perspective based on the maintenance procedures. This multi-role, multi-angle vertical verification helps to identify potential problems from different user and responsibility perspectives, avoiding verification blind spots caused by a single perspective.

[0041] The "six horizontal" approach refers to employing six different testing methods, approaches, or systems to provide horizontal coverage of the same verification object, thereby reducing the risk of common modeling and improving test coverage. These testing tools include interface verification systems for real-world field interface verification; minimum systems for simulating actual systems and conducting digital system comparison verification; engineering prototypes and closed-loop verification systems for full closed-loop verification of the DCS platform and control system; actual unit systems for conducting full-cycle actual verification and testing of Units 1 and 2; a virtual control room for logic testing and operational control verification based on simulation models and virtual DCS; and a full-range simulator for simulation comparison verification of new and old models and control logic. Through the horizontal combination of multiple testing tools, the same object can be repeatedly verified under different levels of realism and different implementation paths, enhancing the mutual verification between test results.

[0042] By combining the "five vertical" multi-angle independent verification with the "six horizontal" multi-tool cross-verification, the "five vertical and six horizontal" testing mode can simultaneously achieve diversity in verification perspectives and verification methods throughout the entire testing process. This effectively reduces test commonality and verification omissions, improves the breadth and depth of test coverage, and thus forms a systematic and three-dimensional verification system, providing more comprehensive and reliable technical support for the digital construction and / or renovation of nuclear power plants.

[0043] In some embodiments, to achieve full-range testing of new construction and / or renovation projects of nuclear power plant simulation systems, the phased testing scope is designed by combining test schemes for each phase, enabling testing to cover a preset target testing scope. This target testing scope not only covers the verification of a single object or a single scenario, but also addresses comprehensive testing needs at the system and engineering levels.

[0044] Specifically, the target testing scope includes functional and performance testing of a single DCS cabinet, joint commissioning testing of all DCS cabinets, and collaborative verification and testing of new and / or retrofitted groups of multiple related new and / or retrofitted projects formed during the same period; it also includes connection testing between the DCS system and external interfaces, verification of the process logic of power plants newly built and / or retrofitted based on the DCS system, verification of the dynamic characteristics of power plants newly built and / or retrofitted based on the DCS system, and operation and maintenance operation testing around the DCS system.

[0045] By systematically dividing and combining the above-mentioned test scope, verification can be achieved at multiple levels, from equipment level and system level to engineering level. This avoids testing being limited to local functions or single scenarios, and enables test results to truly reflect the comprehensive performance of the system under complex engineering conditions and actual operating environments. As a result, full-scope verification of the digital construction and / or renovation of nuclear power plants can be achieved.

[0046] In some embodiments, to ensure that all types of equipment related to the construction and / or renovation of the nuclear power plant simulation system can be fully covered by the test scheme set at each stage, a target test product range is pre-defined to achieve full-range verification of products related to the digital construction and / or renovation of nuclear power plants. The target test products include not only the software and hardware of the nuclear power plant simulation system itself, but also the software and hardware of third-party systems introduced during the construction and / or renovation process, as well as interface systems and field equipment layer products connected to the nuclear power plant simulation system.

[0047] By uniformly incorporating and combining different levels and types of test products in each stage of testing, it is possible to avoid limiting the test objects to a single system or a single product. This allows the test results to reflect the overall performance of the nuclear power plant simulation system and its related products under engineering implementation and actual operating conditions, thereby supporting the comprehensive verification of the overall consistency, integration, and reliability of the system.

[0048] In some embodiments, to ensure that all types of equipment related to the construction and / or renovation of the nuclear power plant simulation system can be fully covered by the test scheme set at each stage, a target test product range can be pre-defined to achieve full-range verification of products related to the digital construction and / or renovation of nuclear power plants. The target test products include not only the software and hardware of the nuclear power plant simulation system itself, but also the software and hardware of third-party systems introduced during the construction and / or renovation process, as well as interface systems and field equipment layer products connected to the nuclear power plant simulation system.

[0049] The testing products cover different levels and types of objects involved in the digital construction and / or retrofitting of nuclear power plants. Specifically, the hardware testing products for nuclear power plant simulation systems include comprehensive verification of the control system hardware. Testing content covers hardware design compliance, procurement and selection of key components, aging mechanism analysis, typical failure mode identification, and hardware functional design, among other hardware-related aspects, to achieve comprehensive verification of the control system hardware characteristics. The software testing products for nuclear power plant simulation systems include comprehensive verification of the control system software. Testing content covers platform basic code, basic system function blocks, secondary development functions, operating system functions, and compatibility with the hardware platform, among other related aspects, to verify the integrity and consistency of the software functions.

[0050] Third-party hardware testing products include external hardware devices introduced during new construction and / or renovation. Where conditions permit, these devices undergo testing with requirements and depth comparable to the nuclear power plant simulation system's own hardware to verify their design characteristics, functional behavior, and reliability. Third-party software testing products include the operating system, third-party auxiliary software, and communication-related software used in the system. Testing covers software compatibility, configuration management, operational stability, and fault tolerance capabilities to verify their suitability for the nuclear power plant simulation system.

[0051] Interface system testing products include interface products used to enable data interaction between the nuclear power plant simulation system and third-party systems. Through actual connection tests with third-party interface products, the interface functionality, data interaction behavior, and interface stability are verified. Field (LEVEL 0) device layer testing products include field device layer products that directly connect to the nuclear power plant simulation system. Through actual connection tests with LEVEL 0 devices, signal acquisition, control output, and interaction behavior are verified. Furthermore, envelope analysis is used to verify their adaptability under different operating conditions.

[0052] By uniformly incorporating and combining different levels and types of test products in each stage of testing, it is possible to avoid limiting the test objects to a single system or a single product. This allows the test results to reflect the overall performance of the nuclear power plant simulation system and its related products under engineering implementation and actual operating conditions, thereby supporting the comprehensive verification of the overall consistency, integration, and reliability of the system.

[0053] In some embodiments, in addition to full-scope testing and full-product testing requirements, full-element testing and verification can also be carried out based on digital systems engineering methods. This involves systematically identifying key elements related to the nuclear power plant simulation system and, combined with practical experience and technical characteristics from existing engineering retrofitting fields, extracting critical requirements that significantly impact the construction and / or retrofitting of the DCS system as test content. Testing these elements from multiple verification dimensions helps to comprehensively verify key functions, key interfaces, and potential risk points, avoiding systemic risks introduced due to insufficient element coverage.

[0054] The test elements in each stage of the test plan cover the pre-set target test elements, which include key test elements involved in the construction and / or renovation of the nuclear power plant simulation system, as well as typical test elements of the nuclear power plant simulation system. Both key and typical test elements are identified and determined using digital systems engineering methods.

[0055] For example, Table 1 below shows a list of key elements for the transformation of a non-security-grade DCS, and Table 2 below shows typical test elements for a non-security-grade DCS platform.

[0056] Table 1: List of Key Elements for Non-Security-Level DCS Upgrade

[0057] Table 2. List of Typical Test Elements for Non-Security-Grade DCS Platforms

[0058] By systematically covering the target test elements, it is possible to conduct full-element testing and verification of the core elements that affect the safety, reliability and controllability of the system, thereby providing more comprehensive and robust technical support for the construction and / or renovation of nuclear power plant simulation systems.

[0059] In some embodiments, the "five vertical and six horizontal" testing model, where the "five vertical" dimensions represent multiple verification dimensions, covers the entire industry chain related to the construction and / or renovation of nuclear power plant simulation systems. Based on this, and considering the characteristics of each lifecycle stage, corresponding stage test schemes are designed to achieve systematic coverage of the entire scope, all products, and all elements of the test.

[0060] Full-scope testing focuses on the completeness of the test scenarios and test object coverage levels. By combining and designing test schemes for each stage, the test scope covers different levels from individual devices and system integration to engineering-level applications. This ensures that the testing is not limited to local functionalities or single-scenario verification, but also reflects the comprehensive performance of the system under complex engineering conditions and real-world operating environments, thereby reducing test blind spots and improving the representativeness and reliability of test results.

[0061] Full-product testing focuses on comprehensive coverage of the test objects across all product dimensions. By pre-setting the target product range for testing and uniformly incorporating and combining products of different levels and types for verification in each stage of testing, the test objects cover the software and hardware of the nuclear power plant simulation system itself, the software and hardware of third-party systems, interface systems, and field equipment products. This avoids limiting the test objects to a single system or a single product and supports comprehensive verification of the overall consistency and integration of the system.

[0062] Full-element testing focuses on the systematic coverage of test content across the dimensions of requirements and risks. Based on digital systems engineering methodologies and combined with experience and technical characteristics in the field of engineering modification, it identifies and extracts key and typical test elements that have a significant impact on the construction and / or modification of nuclear power plant simulation systems, and covers these target test elements in the test plans at each stage. By conducting testing and verification of key elements from multiple dimensions, it helps to comprehensively verify key functions, key interfaces, and potential risk points, further enhancing the testing's ability to support system safety, reliability, and controllability.

[0063] In some embodiments, to better align with the characteristics of new construction and / or renovation processes, comprehensive testing at the manufacturing stage is achieved through activities such as Functional Testing (FT) / Factory Acceptance Testing (FAT), reliability assessment, and engineering prototype testing. This stage, while inheriting design results, also considers early verification of key activities in the downstream installation and commissioning phase. Upon entering the installation and commissioning phase, activities such as quality assessment, channel testing, reassessment, and transient testing are used to verify the system's design correctness and field applicability, ensuring that the system meets field application requirements. During the operation and maintenance phase, comprehensive verification of all operation and maintenance activities continuously examines the system's operational behavior throughout its entire lifecycle, ensuring reliable and stable system operation.

[0064] To achieve the above goals, each stage can be further subdivided into more specific sub-stages to more accurately reflect the engineering activities and testing priorities of different stages. For example, the design stage includes three sub-stages: preliminary design, detailed system design, and detailed construction design. Preliminary design clarifies the overall system plan and technical roadmap; detailed system design refines the system architecture, functional configuration, and interface relationships; and detailed construction design generates technical documents that directly guide equipment manufacturing, installation, and on-site construction, thus providing clear and executable design basis for subsequent manufacturing, implementation, and testing stages. The manufacturing stage can be divided into two sub-stages: equipment manufacturing and testing and verification. Equipment manufacturing includes activities such as preliminary design, platform development, engineering development, detailed design, and system integration; testing and verification includes FT, FAT, reliability assessment, and simulation, used to verify the system design and implementation results in the factory stage.

[0065] The installation and commissioning phase can be divided into two aspects: installation implementation and on-site verification. Installation implementation mainly includes equipment installation and quality assessment; on-site verification focuses on the compatibility of the system with the site conditions and may include channel testing, single-device commissioning, single-system commissioning, system integration testing, large-scale system integration testing, and functional verification, to verify the integration integrity and correctness of the system under site conditions.

[0066] The operation and maintenance phase can be divided into two aspects: operation verification and maintenance verification. Operation verification mainly focuses on the system's behavior under actual operating conditions and may include power operation tests, operational verification, periodic tests, and DCS operation and maintenance verification to confirm the system's performance and stability under different operating states. Maintenance verification, on the other hand, focuses on the system's adaptability during maintenance activities and strategy adjustments. It may include periodic maintenance tests, reliability assessments, modification strategy verification, aging strategy verification, and maintenance program verification to verify the system's maintainability and reliability throughout its entire lifecycle.

[0067] In some embodiments, to avoid introducing unnecessary redundant testing by excessively pursuing comprehensive testing, it is not necessary to apply all verification roles and tools in the verification matrix in each lifecycle stage. Instead, appropriate verification roles and tools are selected in a targeted manner according to the characteristics of different stages, and the stage activities are implemented in specific verification units in the verification matrix, thereby improving the overall testing efficiency while ensuring the effectiveness of testing.

[0068] During the manufacturing phase, equipment manufacturing and testing verification activities are primarily mapped to verification dimensions from both design and manufacturing perspectives. Testing is conducted using verification tools such as interface verification systems, minimum systems, engineering prototypes, and closed-loop verification systems. For example, activities like preliminary design, platform development, and system integration are independently verified from design and equipment perspectives, while functional testing, factory acceptance testing, reliability assessment, and simulation are implemented using engineering prototypes, minimum systems, and simulation tools. This allows for multi-dimensional verification of system design results and implementation outcomes at the factory stage.

[0069] During the installation and commissioning phase, installation implementation and on-site verification activities are primarily mapped to verification dimensions from the perspective of installation and commissioning, and are conducted in conjunction with interface verification systems, engineering prototypes and closed-loop verification systems, as well as actual unit systems. Among these, equipment installation and quality assessment activities focus on verification from the perspectives of equipment and installation and commissioning, while channel testing, single-system commissioning, system integration testing, and functional verification activities use tools such as interface verification systems and engineering prototypes to verify the system's compatibility with on-site conditions and the correctness of integration.

[0070] During the operation and maintenance phase, operation verification and maintenance verification activities are mapped to verification dimensions from the operation and maintenance perspectives, respectively, and are conducted using verification tools such as actual unit systems, virtual control rooms, and full-range simulators. Power operation tests, operation verification, and periodic tests are mainly implemented through actual unit systems and virtual control rooms, while periodic maintenance tests, aging strategy verification, and maintenance program verification are supplemented by full-range simulators and simulation environments to cover the operation and maintenance scenarios throughout the system's entire lifespan.

[0071] Through the above mapping relationship, testing activities at different lifecycle stages can obtain a clear and definite implementation path in the "five vertical and six horizontal" verification matrix, so that the stage activities, verification roles and verification tools form a relationship of mutual correspondence and cross-support, thereby building a systematic testing and verification system covering the entire lifecycle, multiple roles and multiple tools, and improving the effectiveness and overall consistency of verification while controlling the scale of testing.

[0072] In some embodiments, to control on-site implementation risks while ensuring the comprehensiveness of testing and verification, the set of stage test schemes in the manufacturing stage may include forward test schemes; the forward test schemes are key test schemes selected from the set of stage test schemes corresponding to the preset stage, and are used to move to the manufacturing stage for factory testing and verification; the preset stage is some or all of the installation and commissioning stage and the operation and maintenance stage; the key test schemes are tested and verified on-site in the preset stage.

[0073] According to the lifecycle model of digital systems engineering, different lifecycle phases correspond to different technical objectives, engineering activities, and verification requirements. Testing at each phase typically only provides an envelope verification of the functionality, performance, and risks within that phase, and cannot completely eliminate risks that may be exposed in subsequent phases. Therefore, relying solely on on-site testing during the installation, commissioning, and operation / maintenance phases can easily lead to a concentrated exposure of problems later in the project, increasing the uncertainty of on-site implementation and operation / maintenance.

[0074] Based on the above understanding, this embodiment introduces a test-shifting strategy while adhering to the lifecycle phase division. Specifically, it further introduces forward-shifted test schemes into the set of phase test schemes for the manufacturing phase. These forward-shifted test schemes do not add new test content, but rather select test schemes with critical impact on system security, stability, and controllability from the set of phase test schemes corresponding to preset phases, and move them forward to the factory environment of the manufacturing phase for verification. The preset phases may include some or all of the installation and commissioning phase and the operation and maintenance phase. The selected key test schemes would originally have required on-site verification in the corresponding preset phase.

[0075] By moving the aforementioned key testing solutions forward to the manufacturing stage for factory testing and verification, potential key risks can be identified and assessed in advance before the system enters the field or is put into large-scale operation. This reduces the reliance on field testing in subsequent stages without changing the responsibilities of each stage, alleviates the concentrated exposure of risks during field implementation, operation, and maintenance, and provides a more robust technical foundation for the smooth conduct of testing in subsequent stages.

[0076] Understandably, even if the pre-testing scheme has been verified during the manufacturing phase, due to differences in the system's environment, configuration, and operational constraints at different stages, corresponding tests still need to be conducted again in specific pre-defined stages. That is, by re-verifying the same type of critical test scheme in pre-defined stages, the applicability and consistency of the pre-testing conclusions under actual stage conditions can be confirmed. Simultaneously, the final performance of the system in real-world scenarios can be verified, thereby achieving mutual verification between pre-testing and stage testing. This avoids introducing new risks due to changes in stage conditions and further ensures the reliability of test results and the safety and controllability of engineering implementation.

[0077] In some embodiments, the key testing scheme includes: a requalification test scheme for verifying the functional integrity, consistency, and compliance of the nuclear power plant simulation system under target engineering configuration and operating conditions; a tuning procedure test scheme for verifying the executability and correctness of the nuclear power plant simulation system's commissioning process and related control logic; an operation control test scheme for verifying the correctness of the nuclear power plant simulation system's response to operation commands and control functions during operation; a maintenance operation test scheme for verifying the nuclear power plant simulation system's control behavior, state switching, and safety assurance capabilities under maintenance-related operation conditions; a transient test scheme for verifying the dynamic response characteristics and stability of the nuclear power plant simulation system under disturbance or state change conditions; and a supplementary test scheme based on operation and maintenance procedures for verifying the comprehensive behavior of the nuclear power plant simulation system driven by operation and maintenance procedures and its adaptability to actual operation and maintenance activities.

[0078] The aforementioned key testing schemes were originally verified through on-site testing during the installation, commissioning, operation, or maintenance phases. However, due to limitations imposed by unit condition, safety requirements, and project schedule, on-site testing often suffers from short testing windows, limited adjustment space, and high trial-and-error costs. Therefore, it is necessary to move testing schemes that have a critical impact on system safety, stability, and controllability to the engineering testing environment during the manufacturing phase.

[0079] Among these, the requalification test plan and debugging procedure test plan, which were originally important verification activities during the on-site installation and commissioning phase, are moved to the engineering testing phase for verification. This helps to verify the functional integrity of the system and the feasibility of the debugging process under the target engineering configuration in advance. On the one hand, it can enhance the foresight of related activities during the installation and commissioning phase; on the other hand, it can also serve as a supplementary verification method to factory testing, reducing the risk of concentrated problem exposure during on-site requalification and commissioning.

[0080] Operational control test plans, maintenance test plans, and transient test plans typically need to be implemented after the system has met the requirements for field operation. These tests place high demands on system status and field safety. By moving these test plans to the factory testing phase, and validating operational, maintenance, and typical transient conditions in a controlled engineering testing environment, potential problems in operational logic, control strategies, and dynamic response can be exposed in advance without affecting the safety and schedule of the on-site unit. This effectively reduces the risks associated with implementing on-site operational and transient tests.

[0081] Furthermore, supplementary testing schemes based on operation and maintenance procedures transform power operation-related operational and maintenance activities into test cases and conduct verification in a forward-looking manner in the factory environment. This allows critical operations that would normally occur during the unit's operation and maintenance phase to be verified earlier. This approach helps to verify the compatibility between operation and maintenance procedures and the control system, identify inconsistencies between procedures and system design in advance, and provide a more reliable technical foundation for the unit's long-term operation and maintenance.

[0082] In this embodiment, by implementing the aforementioned key testing schemes in advance, key risks in subsequent stages can be identified and mitigated in advance without replacing on-site testing responsibilities, thereby improving the foresight of the overall testing system and the safety and controllability of the project implementation.

[0083] In some embodiments, considering the objective differences between the simulation model used in the actual unit, the field interface conditions, and the actual field operation, and that these differences may change continuously at different stages, it is necessary to suppress or eliminate the potential risks introduced by a systematic testing strategy. Meanwhile, since the manufacturing plant environment and the field environment are constantly changing during the engineering process, a single test cannot cover the entire evolution of these differences. Therefore, an iterative testing mechanism combining factory and field testing is introduced into the testing methodology.

[0084] Based on this, the test plan set for each stage is divided into a manufacturing plant test plan subset and a field test plan subset according to the test location. For any two adjacent lifecycle stages, an iterative test is performed to correct, supplement, and optimize the manufacturing plant test plan subset and the field test plan subset for the next stage based on the test results of the corresponding test plan subset in the previous stage. Through continuous iteration between the stages, the test plan can dynamically adapt to changes in system state and field conditions, thereby continuously reducing the risks brought by model differences and interface differences to the implementation and operation of subsequent stages, and improving the effectiveness and reliability of the overall testing system.

[0085] In some embodiments, each round of iterative testing includes some or all of the following iterative tests: interface iterative testing, used to verify and correct the interface adaptability and envelope capability between the nuclear power plant simulation system and field equipment and external interfaces; communication interface iterative testing, used to verify and correct the adaptability of communication configuration, data interaction and communication logic between the nuclear power plant simulation system and external systems; simulation dynamic response iterative testing, used to verify and correct the consistency between the response characteristics of the nuclear power plant simulation system under dynamic operating conditions and design requirements; logic dynamic test iterative testing, used to verify and correct the correctness of the behavior of the control logic of the nuclear power plant simulation system under different operating states and operating condition changes; and range iterative testing, used to adjust and expand the test content and test boundaries of the manufacturing plant test and field test based on the test results.

[0086] The aforementioned iterative tests are based on the combination of manufacturing plant testing and field testing. They are carried out in a closed loop of "acquiring real information on-site - scaling up and correcting verification in the factory - feeding back to the field". This fully leverages the advantages of the controllable, repeatable, and scalable factory testing environment, while introducing the real operating conditions and real constraints reflected in field testing to continuously mitigate system differences and risks.

[0087] Specifically, in interface iterative testing, real-world acquisition of interface signals and regulation characteristic parameters on-site provides reliable data for factory testing. The interface device is then used to perform actual load-bearing or drive tests on the nuclear power plant simulation system and LEVEL 0 equipment on-site. Building upon this, factory testing, combining on-site test results and product capabilities, iteratively expands the interface testing scheme. This not only covers conventional operating conditions but also allows for extreme load-bearing or drive capability tests exceeding the range of on-site parameters. This ensures thorough verification of interface compatibility and envelope capabilities without increasing on-site risks.

[0088] In the iterative testing of communication interfaces, continuous adaptation and verification of existing, newly added, and optimized communication interfaces are carried out through a combination of on-site communication tests and joint debugging tests with third-party systems in the manufacturing plant. Simultaneously, through iterative modifications to the simulation model and the counterpart system, the communication configuration list and communication logic function tests are continuously improved, which helps to identify and eliminate potential problems in communication configuration and data interaction before the system is officially put into operation.

[0089] In simulated dynamic response iterative testing, the actual dynamic response characteristics and related hardware characteristics of the simulated system are first acquired in the field and used as important inputs for factory testing. Based on these inputs, expanded-scale dynamic response tests are then conducted in the factory environment to verify the consistency between the field dynamic test results and design requirements. When the disturbance test results implemented in the field do not meet the requirements, the proposed modification scheme can be iteratively verified in the factory system first. This allows for an assessment of its rationality before implementation, reducing the uncertainty risks associated with direct adjustments in the field.

[0090] In the iterative dynamic logic testing, the factory testing environment is used to conduct full-coverage verification of the control logic, while the field uses requalification tests and unit startup processes to actually verify the logic functionality. When logic-related issues are discovered on-site, the factory system can be used to review the issues and test and iteratively verify the modification solutions, thereby avoiding repeated modifications to the logic directly on-site and improving the efficiency and safety of problem handling.

[0091] During the iterative testing of the test scope, the selection of field test content is determined based on system analysis results and factory test conclusions, making field testing a natural extension of factory test results. When there are discrepancies between field test results and factory test results, further verification can be carried out by expanding the scope of factory testing first, and then combined with necessary supplementary field tests, gradually adjusting and expanding the content and boundaries of factory testing and field testing, thereby ensuring the sufficiency of field testing while maintaining the credibility of factory testing.

[0092] In this embodiment, the multi-dimensional, multi-round iterative testing mechanism described above allows the testing scheme to continuously evolve with changes in system state and engineering conditions, avoiding omissions and deviations caused by one-time testing. It fully leverages the complementary advantages of factory testing and field testing, ultimately forming a testing system with controllable risks, reliable results, and comprehensive coverage. This iterative testing approach is a crucial guarantee for the safe implementation and stable operation of digital new construction and / or retrofitting projects in nuclear power plants.

[0093] In some embodiments, if a design change occurs during factory testing, targeted iterative testing and compensation verification can be carried out based on the scope of the design change and the corresponding testing requirements to confirm that the functions and performance after the design adjustment meet the established requirements. If the field test results are inconsistent with the expected results during field testing, the relevant design can be re-verified through iterative methods, and a decision can be made based on the analysis results to add field tests or expand the test scope to compensate for the unexpected results. This ensures that the verification scheme and verification scope are always under control and can meet the design requirements during the design modification process.

[0094] In some embodiments, see Figure 3 , Figure 3 This paper presents an example of a testing methodology covering the entire lifecycle of a nuclear power plant simulation system during its construction and / or renovation. Based on this methodology, by integrating testing activities throughout the design, manufacturing, implementation, operation, and maintenance phases, and combining a verification matrix constructed with multiple verification dimensions and tools, it is possible to achieve testing of the entire industry chain, scope, products, and elements of the nuclear power plant simulation system. This avoids testing being limited to a single phase, object, or scenario, thereby improving the systematic nature and completeness of the testing coverage.

[0095] Meanwhile, this testing method introduces multi-level verification tools, forming a progressive verification path from full simulation, semi-simulation, to full real-world testing. Full simulation testing, based on simulation models and virtual systems, is used for rapid verification of design schemes, control logic, and system behavior in the early stages. Semi-simulation testing, based on engineering prototypes and closed-loop verification systems, combines actual equipment with simulation models to verify the system's real interface characteristics and dynamic behavior in a controlled environment. Full real-world testing, based on actual units and field systems, is used for final verification of the system's overall performance and applicability under real-world operating conditions. Through the combined application of these multiple levels of realism, the same test object can be repeatedly verified under different verification depths and constraints, enhancing the mutual corroboration of test results.

[0096] On the other hand, by adopting a test-forward strategy, key test programs that originally needed to be completed on-site during the installation, commissioning, operation, or maintenance phases can be moved to the manufacturing phase or engineering test environment. This allows for the identification and mitigation of potential risks before the system enters the field and is actually put into operation, reducing the uncertainty of on-site testing and the possibility of concentrated risk exposure.

[0097] Furthermore, by combining factory testing with field testing through a multi-round iterative mechanism, the test plan can be continuously modified and improved as the system state and engineering conditions change, thereby ensuring the sufficiency of testing while improving the controllability of the testing process and the reliability of the test results.

[0098] In summary, this testing method forms a comprehensive testing system that covers the entire life cycle, integrates full simulation, semi-simulation, and full real-world testing, and possesses the ability to shift risks forward and continuously iterate, providing strong support for the safe implementation and long-term stable operation of digital new construction and / or renovation projects of nuclear power plants.

[0099] It should be understood that the sequence number of each step in the above embodiments does not imply the order of execution. The execution order of each process should be determined by its function and internal logic, and should not constitute any limitation on the implementation process of the embodiments of this application.

[0100] This application also provides a computer-readable storage medium storing a computer program that, when executed by a processor, implements the steps described in the various method embodiments above.

[0101] This application provides a computer program product that, when run on an electronic device, enables the electronic device to perform the steps described in the various method embodiments above.

[0102] If the integrated unit is implemented as a software functional unit and sold or used as an independent product, it can be stored in a computer-readable storage medium. Based on this understanding, all or part of the processes in the methods of the above embodiments can be implemented by a computer program instructing related hardware. The computer program can be stored in a computer-readable storage medium, and when executed by a processor, it can implement the steps of the various method embodiments described above. The computer program includes computer program code, which can be in the form of source code, object code, executable files, or certain intermediate forms. The computer-readable medium can include at least: any entity or device capable of carrying the computer program code to a photographic device / electronic device, a recording medium, a computer memory, a read-only memory (ROM), a random access memory (RAM), an electrical carrier signal, a telecommunication signal, and a software distribution medium, such as a USB flash drive, a portable hard drive, a magnetic disk, or an optical disk.

[0103] In the above embodiments, the descriptions of each embodiment have different focuses. For parts that are not described in detail or recorded in a certain embodiment, please refer to the relevant descriptions of other embodiments.

[0104] Those skilled in the art will recognize that the units and algorithm steps of the various examples described in conjunction with the embodiments disclosed herein can be implemented in electronic hardware, or a combination of computer software and electronic hardware. Whether these functions are implemented in hardware or software depends on the specific application and design constraints of the technical solution. Those skilled in the art can use different methods to implement the described functions for each specific application, but such implementation should not be considered beyond the scope of this application.

[0105] The above embodiments are only used to illustrate the technical solutions of this application, and are not intended to limit them. Although this application has been described in detail with reference to the foregoing embodiments, those skilled in the art should understand that modifications can still be made to the technical solutions described in the foregoing embodiments, or equivalent substitutions can be made to some of the technical features. Such modifications or substitutions do not cause the essence of the corresponding technical solutions to deviate from the spirit and scope of the technical solutions of the embodiments of this application, and should all be included within the protection scope of this application.

Claims

1. A testing method for a nuclear power plant simulation system, characterized in that, The lifecycle of the new construction and / or renovation of the nuclear power plant simulation system includes four phases; the testing methods include: In each stage, the corresponding stage features are combined with each verification unit in the preset verification matrix to design a corresponding stage test scheme set. Complete the corresponding phase tests based on the aforementioned phase test scheme set; The four phases of the lifecycle include the design phase, manufacturing phase, installation and commissioning phase, and operation and maintenance phase; each verification unit in the verification matrix is ​​constructed based on verification dimension × verification tool; the verification dimension includes design and verification, equipment manufacturing and testing, on-site implementation verification, independent operation verification, and independent maintenance verification; the verification tool includes interface verification system, minimum system, DCS system of Unit 1 and Unit 2, virtual main control room, and full-range simulator.

2. The test method as described in claim 1, characterized in that, The set of stage test schemes for the manufacturing phase includes forward test schemes; The forward testing scheme is a key test scheme selected from the set of stage test schemes corresponding to the preset stage, and is used to move forward to the manufacturing stage for factory testing and verification. The preset stage is part or all of the installation and commissioning stage and the operation and maintenance stage; The key testing scheme is tested and verified on-site during the preset phase.

3. The test method as described in claim 2, characterized in that, The key testing scheme includes: The requalification test protocol is used to verify the functional integrity, consistency and compliance of the nuclear power plant simulation system under the target engineering configuration and operating conditions; The program test plan was adjusted to verify the executability and correctness of the commissioning process and related control logic of the nuclear power plant simulation system. The operation control test plan is used to verify the correctness of the response behavior and control function of the nuclear power plant simulation system to operation commands during operation. The maintenance operation test plan is used to verify the control behavior, state switching, and safety assurance capabilities of the nuclear power plant simulation system under maintenance-related operation conditions. Transient testing schemes are used to verify the dynamic response characteristics and stability of nuclear power plant simulation systems under disturbance or state change conditions; In addition, supplementary test schemes based on operation and maintenance procedures are used to verify the comprehensive behavior of the nuclear power plant simulation system driven by operation and maintenance procedures and its adaptability to actual operation and maintenance activities.

4. The test method as described in claim 1, characterized in that, Each of the aforementioned phase test scheme sets includes a manufacturing plant test scheme subset and a field test scheme subset based on the test location; For every two adjacent stages, an iterative test is performed: the next stage's manufacturing plant test scheme subset and the next stage's field test scheme subset are iterated based on the test results corresponding to the previous stage's manufacturing plant test scheme subset and the previous stage's field test scheme subset.

5. The test method as described in claim 4, characterized in that, Each round of iterative testing includes some or all of the following iterative tests: Interface iteration testing is used to verify and correct the interface compatibility and envelope capability between the nuclear power plant simulation system and field equipment and external interfaces; Communication interface iterative testing is used to verify and correct the adaptability of communication configuration, data interaction, and communication logic between the nuclear power plant simulation system and external systems. Simulated dynamic response iterative testing is used to verify and correct the consistency between the response characteristics of the nuclear power plant simulation system under dynamic operating conditions and the design requirements. Logic dynamic iterative testing is used to verify and correct the correctness of the behavior of the control logic of the nuclear power plant simulation system under different operating states and operating conditions. Range iteration testing is used to adjust and expand the test content and test boundaries of manufacturing plant testing and field testing based on test results.

6. The test method according to any one of claims 1 to 5, characterized in that, The verification tool also includes an engineering prototype and a closed-loop verification system, which is used to perform intermediate-state testing between full simulation testing and full actual testing based on actual equipment.

7. The test method according to any one of claims 1 to 5, characterized in that, The combined testing of each of the aforementioned stage test scheme sets will cover the target test scope, which includes: The scope of the phased testing includes testing of a single DCS cabinet, joint commissioning testing of all DCS cabinets, multiple related newly built and / or renovated projects within the same period, DCS system connection testing with external interfaces, process logic testing of power plants newly built and / or renovated based on the DCS system, dynamic characteristic verification testing of power plants newly built and / or renovated based on the DCS system, operation testing of newly built and / or renovated based on the DCS system, and maintenance operation testing.

8. The test method according to any one of claims 1 to 5, characterized in that, The test products in each stage of the test scheme set will cover the target test products, which include the software and hardware of the DCS system, the software and hardware of third-party systems used during new construction and / or renovation, interface systems, and field equipment layer products.

9. The test method according to any one of claims 1 to 5, characterized in that, The test elements in each stage test scheme set will cover the target test elements, which include the key test elements for the construction and / or renovation of the DCS system, as well as the typical test elements of the DCS system. Both the key test elements and the typical test elements are determined by digital systems engineering methods.

10. A computer program product, the computer program product comprising a computer program, characterized in that, When the computer program is executed by the processor, it implements the test method for the nuclear power plant simulation system as described in any one of claims 1 to 7.

Images