An evaluation method applied to emergency organization watch of a nuclear power plant and a computer readable storage medium

Abstract

The application discloses an evaluation method applied to emergency organization watch of a nuclear power plant and a computer readable storage medium, and the method comprises the following steps: obtaining emergency watch information from an emergency plan and an execution program of the nuclear power plant; arranging the emergency watch information into a standardized watch information table; comparing the standardized watch information table with a pre-constructed compliance verification system according to the number of units of the nuclear power plant, and outputting a compliance score according to a comparison result; performing multi-dimensional comprehensive evaluation on the standardized watch information table and outputting a corresponding score; and collecting scores of all evaluation items in the above steps, outputting an overall evaluation grade of the emergency organization watch of the nuclear power plant according to a preset four-grade score segment division standard. The application can effectively improve the efficiency of the evaluation of the emergency organization watch of the nuclear power plant, help to comprehensively improve the overall level of the emergency watch of the nuclear power plant, and maintain the safe and stable operation of the nuclear power unit.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of nuclear accident emergency response, and in particular to an evaluation method and computer-readable storage medium for emergency response team on-duty personnel in nuclear power plants. Background Technology

[0002] In the operation and management practice of nuclear power plants, emergency response systems and duty arrangements have been established, and the basic responsibilities and duty requirements of emergency positions have been clearly defined. However, the development of evaluation technologies for nuclear power plant emergency response organizations is relatively lagging behind.

[0003] Current evaluation work mainly relies on human experience and subjective judgment, resulting in low evaluation efficiency, poor accuracy, and a lack of comparability of results. It is unable to identify weaknesses in the emergency duty system in a timely manner, cannot objectively reflect the actual level of emergency organization and duty at nuclear power plants, and cannot provide clear and operable guidance for nuclear power plants to continuously optimize their emergency duty arrangements. Summary of the Invention

[0004] The technical problem to be solved by this invention is to address at least one deficiency of the related technologies mentioned in the background: existing evaluation work mainly relies on human experience and subjective judgment, resulting in low evaluation efficiency, poor accuracy, and a lack of comparability of results. It is unable to identify weaknesses in the emergency duty system in a timely manner, cannot objectively reflect the actual level of emergency organization and duty at nuclear power plants, and cannot provide clear and operable guidance for the continuous optimization of emergency duty arrangements at nuclear power plants. This invention provides an evaluation method and computer-readable storage medium for emergency organization and duty at nuclear power plants.

[0005] The technical solution adopted by this invention to solve its technical problem is: to construct an evaluation method for emergency response organization and duty in nuclear power plants, comprising the following steps: S1: Obtain emergency duty information from the on-site emergency plans and execution procedures of the nuclear power plant; S2: Organize the emergency duty information into a standardized duty information table; S3: Based on the number of units in the nuclear power plant, compare the standardized duty information table with the pre-built compliance verification system, and output a compliance score based on the comparison results; S4: Perform a multi-dimensional comprehensive evaluation of the standardized duty information table and output the corresponding score; S5: Summarize the scores of all evaluation items in steps S3 and S4, and output the overall evaluation level of the nuclear power plant emergency response team based on the preset four-level score range division standard.

[0006] In the evaluation method applied to emergency organization duty in nuclear power plants, preferably, when the nuclear power plant has two units, the emergency duty information includes the emergency organization structure and job settings, the configuration of duty personnel and substitute personnel, the duty method and the time limit for arrival.

[0007] In the evaluation method applied to emergency organization duty at nuclear power plants, preferably, when the nuclear power plant has multiple units, the emergency duty information also includes emergency plans for multiple units.

[0008] In the evaluation method applied to emergency organization duty at nuclear power plants, step S1 preferably includes: automatically obtaining the emergency duty information from the on-site emergency plan and execution procedures of the nuclear power plant through a keyword matching algorithm.

[0009] In the evaluation method applied to emergency response duty at nuclear power plants, preferably, the compliance verification system includes requirements for the number of positions, the number of personnel, and the time limit for arrival at the post. The required number of positions refers to the minimum number of emergency positions that should be set up according to the classification regulations for the number of nuclear power plant units. The personnel requirement refers to the minimum number of on-duty personnel that should be assigned to each of the aforementioned emergency positions. The aforementioned on-duty time limit requirement is the maximum allowable on-duty time limit for emergency positions that are not on duty 24 hours a day.

[0010] In the evaluation method applied to emergency response teams at nuclear power plants, preferably, the step of outputting a compliance score based on the comparison results includes: When none of the standardized duty information tables meet the requirements for the number of positions, the number of personnel, and the arrival time limit, the first compliance score is output. When the standardized duty information table meets any one of the requirements for the number of positions, the number of personnel, and the time limit for arrival, a second compliance score is output. When the standardized duty information table meets the requirements for the number of positions and the number of personnel but does not meet the requirements for the time limit for arrival at the post, a third compliance score is output. When the standardized duty information table meets the requirements for the number of positions and the time limit for arrival at the post, but does not meet the requirements for the number of personnel, a fourth compliance score is output. When the standardized duty information table meets the personnel quantity requirements and the on-duty time requirements but does not meet the job quantity requirements, the fifth compliance score is output.

[0011] In the evaluation method applied to emergency response team duty at nuclear power plants, preferably, step S3 further includes: An automatic identification algorithm for redundant positions and overlapping responsibilities is adopted. Through personnel configuration overlap analysis and job responsibility keyword matching, the algorithm automatically identifies hidden problems such as redundant positions, overlapping responsibilities, or blank responsibilities, and automatically generates and outputs a rectification list based on the hidden problems.

[0012] In the evaluation method applied to emergency response team duty at nuclear power plants, preferably, the multi-dimensional comprehensive evaluation includes duty arrangement and verification evaluation, related equipment and material support evaluation, duty on-duty training and drill evaluation, and support evaluation.

[0013] In the evaluation method applied to emergency organization duty at nuclear power plants, preferably, the duty arrangement and verification assessment is conducted from six dimensions: duty arrangement and 24-hour duty coverage, regular updating of duty arrangements, implementation of verification mechanism, verification records and problem rectification closure, reserve duty setup, and the qualifications of shift personnel. The assessment of related equipment and material support is conducted from nine dimensions: communication equipment configuration, vehicles and transportation plans, emergency tools and equipment and operational capabilities, logistical support, commuting time limit guarantee, special situation contingency plans, remote post support, clear post interfaces and compliance of information transmission processes. The evaluation of on-duty training and drills is conducted from three dimensions: the implementation of general training for emergency positions, the effectiveness of on-duty drills, and the closed-loop management of drill records and problem rectification. The support assessment is evaluated from two dimensions: the ability of personnel to expand their capabilities in batches under typical scenarios and the soundness of external support mechanisms.

[0014] The present invention also provides a computer-readable storage medium having a computer program stored thereon, which, when executed by a processor, implements the evaluation method for emergency response organization duty at nuclear power plants as described in any of the preceding claims.

[0015] By implementing this invention, the following beneficial effects are achieved: This invention constructs a complete evaluation method for nuclear power plant emergency response teams. First, it acquires and standardizes nuclear power plant emergency response information. Then, it sequentially performs compliance checks and multi-dimensional comprehensive assessments, outputting corresponding scores for each. Finally, it summarizes the scores and outputs the overall evaluation level based on tiered evaluation standards. This method can be directly applied to the evaluation of nuclear power plant emergency response teams, effectively improving the efficiency of evaluation, significantly saving manual evaluation time, ensuring objective and accurate evaluation results with horizontal comparability, and contributing to a comprehensive improvement in the overall level of nuclear power plant emergency response. This ensures the speed and effectiveness of emergency response in the event of a nuclear accident and maintains the safe and stable operation of nuclear power units. Attached Figure Description

[0016] The present invention will be further described below with reference to the accompanying drawings and embodiments. In the accompanying drawings: Figure 1 A flowchart is shown as an embodiment of the evaluation method of the present invention applied to emergency response team duty at nuclear power plants. Detailed Implementation

[0017] To provide a clearer understanding of the technical features, objectives, and effects of the present invention, specific embodiments of the present invention will now be described in detail with reference to the accompanying drawings.

[0018] It should be noted that the flowcharts shown in the accompanying drawings are merely illustrative and do not necessarily include all content and operations / steps, nor do they necessarily have to be performed in the described order. For example, some operations / steps can be broken down, while others can be combined or partially combined; therefore, the actual execution order may change depending on the specific circumstances.

[0019] The block diagrams shown in the accompanying drawings are merely functional entities and do not necessarily correspond to physically independent entities. That is, these functional entities can be implemented in software, in one or more hardware modules or integrated circuits, or in different network and / or processor devices and / or microcontroller devices.

[0020] like Figure 1 As shown, some embodiments of the present invention disclose an evaluation method for emergency response team on-duty status in nuclear power plants, comprising the following steps: S1: Obtain emergency duty information from the on-site emergency plans and execution procedures of the nuclear power plant; S2: Organize emergency duty information into a standardized duty information table; S3: Based on the number of units in a nuclear power plant, compare the standardized duty information sheet with the pre-built compliance verification system, and output a compliance score based on the comparison results; S4: Conduct a multi-dimensional comprehensive evaluation of the standardized duty information form and output the corresponding score; S5: Summarize the scores of all evaluation items in steps S3 and S4, and output the overall evaluation level of the nuclear power plant emergency response team based on the preset four-level score range classification standard.

[0021] Specifically, the four-level score range is divided as follows: 90 points and above is excellent; 80-89 points is good; 70-79 points is satisfactory; and below 70 points is unsatisfactory. This example of the four-level score range is merely illustrative and not intended to be the sole limitation for this application; other ranges may also apply.

[0022] The complete nuclear power plant emergency organization duty evaluation method constructed in this invention is a key hub connecting emergency command, technical support, and on-site operation. Its function is to ensure that the emergency response mechanism can be quickly activated, emergency instructions can be accurately transmitted, emergency resources can be efficiently dispatched, and emergency measures can be implemented in a timely manner in the event of an accident through reasonable job setting, personnel allocation, duty mode arrangement, and support system construction. It effectively improves the efficiency of nuclear power plant emergency organization duty evaluation, significantly saves manual evaluation time, ensures that the evaluation results are objective, accurate, and comparable across different regions, and helps to comprehensively improve the overall level of nuclear power plant emergency duty, ensure the speed and effectiveness of emergency response in the event of a nuclear accident, and maintain the safe and stable operation of nuclear power units.

[0023] In some embodiments, when the nuclear power plant has two units, the emergency duty information includes the emergency organization structure and job positions, the configuration of on-duty personnel and substitute personnel, the duty method and the time limit for arrival at the post; when the nuclear power plant has multiple units, the emergency duty information also includes the emergency plan for multiple units.

[0024] Specifically, when a nuclear power plant has two units, the standardized duty information form should include at least the following items: emergency organization and job positions, on-duty personnel and replacement personnel configuration, duty methods (24-hour on-duty / shift duty / base dormitory standby / city standby) and on-duty time requirements; when a nuclear power plant has multiple units, the standardized duty information form should also include multi-unit emergency plans.

[0025] In some embodiments, step S1 includes: automatically obtaining emergency duty information from the on-site emergency plans and execution procedures of the nuclear power plant using a keyword matching algorithm. Specifically, the keyword matching algorithm includes: locating predefined keywords (such as emergency commander-in-chief, technical support team leader) in the text, and performing a traversal search based on string matching to quickly obtain emergency duty information. This solves the problems of rapid text retrieval, accurate filtering, and relevance, achieving the technical effect of rapid, accurate, and complete acquisition of emergency duty information.

[0026] In some embodiments, the compliance verification system includes requirements for the number of positions, the number of personnel, and the time limit for arrival at the workplace.

[0027] The required number of emergency positions refers to the minimum number of emergency positions that should be set up according to the classification regulations for the number of nuclear power plant units. For example, a nuclear power plant with two units should have a minimum of 28 emergency positions, and a nuclear power plant with multiple units should have a minimum of 30 emergency positions. The example number of emergency positions here is only an example and is not intended to be the only limitation of this application; other examples are also possible.

[0028] The personnel requirement specifies the minimum number of on-duty personnel required for each emergency position. For example, the minimum number of on-duty personnel required for the senior operator emergency position is one. This example of the required number of on-duty personnel is merely illustrative and not the sole limitation of this application; other examples may also apply.

[0029] The on-duty time requirement specifies the maximum allowable on-duty time for emergency positions that are not on 24-hour duty. For example, the maximum allowable on-duty time for an electrical maintenance team leader (team member) is 30 minutes. This example of the maximum allowable on-duty time is merely illustrative and is not intended to be the sole limitation of this application; other examples are also possible.

[0030] In some embodiments, a compliance score is output based on the comparison results, including: When the standardized duty information form fails to meet the requirements for the number of positions, the number of personnel, and the arrival time limit, the first compliance score is output; when the standardized duty information form meets any one of the requirements for the number of positions, the number of personnel, and the arrival time limit, the second compliance score is output; when the standardized duty information form meets the requirements for the number of positions and the number of personnel but fails to meet the arrival time limit, the third compliance score is output; when the standardized duty information form meets the requirements for the number of positions and the arrival time limit but fails to meet the number of personnel, the fourth compliance score is output; when the standardized duty information form meets the requirements for the number of personnel and the arrival time limit but fails to meet the requirements for the number of positions, the fifth compliance score is output.

[0031] For example, the first compliance score is 0; the second compliance score is 10; the third compliance score is 18-19; the fourth compliance score is 15; and the fifth compliance score is 16-17. These examples are merely illustrative and are not intended to limit this application; other examples may also be used.

[0032] In some embodiments, step S3 further includes: An automatic identification algorithm for redundant positions and overlapping responsibilities is adopted. Through personnel configuration overlap analysis and job responsibility keyword matching, the algorithm automatically identifies hidden problems such as redundant positions, overlapping responsibilities, or blank responsibilities, and automatically generates and outputs a rectification list based on the hidden problems.

[0033] Specifically, overlap analysis involves grouping and counting the number of overlapping positions among all emergency response roles (such as radiation monitoring experts, radiation assessment personnel, monitoring personnel, and technical support team leaders) according to their functions, and then conducting an overlap analysis. If the number of overlapping positions corresponding to the same function exceeds a preset value, such as more than two, a detailed analysis is conducted to determine whether this is reasonable and whether there are redundant positions or overlapping responsibilities.

[0034] Redundant positions refer to emergency positions that can still meet all the requirements of the compliance verification system even if they are removed; overlapping responsibilities refer to the overlapping responsibilities of different emergency positions. For example, if position A has the responsibility of radiation monitoring and position B also has the responsibility of radiation monitoring, then there is an overlap in responsibilities between positions A and B; and a gap in responsibilities refers to the situation where there is a problem that no emergency position in the standardized duty information table clearly and completely undertakes the responsibilities in the compliance verification system.

[0035] Specifically, when the standardized duty information table has redundant positions, a rectification list for streamlining redundant positions is output; when the standardized duty information table has overlapping responsibilities, a rectification list for avoiding overlapping responsibilities is output; when the standardized duty information table has blank responsibilities, a recommended position is output to assume the responsibility.

[0036] In some embodiments, the multi-dimensional comprehensive assessment includes assessment of duty arrangements and verification, assessment of related equipment and material support, assessment of on-duty training and drills, and assessment of support.

[0037] In some embodiments, the duty arrangement and verification assessment are evaluated from six dimensions: duty arrangement and 24-hour duty coverage, regular updates of duty arrangements, implementation of verification mechanisms, verification records and problem rectification closure, reserve duty setup, and the qualifications of shift personnel.

[0038] The assessment of relevant equipment and material support is conducted from nine dimensions: communication equipment configuration, vehicle and transportation plan, emergency tools and equipment and operational capabilities, logistical support, commuting time limit guarantee, special situation contingency plan, remote post support, clear post interface and compliance of information transmission process.

[0039] The evaluation of on-duty training and drills is conducted from three dimensions: the implementation of general training for emergency positions, the effectiveness of on-duty drills, and the status of drill records and problem rectification.

[0040] The support assessment is conducted from two dimensions: the ability of personnel to expand their capabilities in batches under typical scenarios and the soundness of external support mechanisms.

[0041] Specifically, the duty arrangement and verification assessment will be conducted from the following dimensions: (1) whether there is a clear duty arrangement and 24-hour duty coverage; (2) whether the duty arrangement is updated monthly or weekly through the emergency duty platform; (3) whether monthly SMS or telephone verification and irregular location verification are carried out; (4) whether the verification records are complete and whether the problem rectification is closed-loop; (5) whether a reserve duty is set up to cope with personnel rotation and expansion; (6) whether the qualifications of the shift personnel meet the standards. The total score for this assessment is 12 points, as follows: A complete job list with full coverage of duty personnel earns 2 points; an incomplete list deducts 1 point; and gaps in duty personnel deduct 2 points. Regularly updating the duty roster earns 2 points; failing to update or updating in a timely manner deducts 1-2 points. 2 points are awarded for conducting verification as required, 2 points are deducted for failure to conduct verification, and 1 point is deducted for insufficient verification frequency; 2 points for complete records and closed-loop rectification; 1 point deducted for missing records; 2 points deducted for failure to rectify. Setting a pre-set value earns 2 points; failing to set one deducts 2 points. 2 points are awarded for qualified shift workers, and 2 points are deducted for workers who have not received training.

[0042] The assessment of related equipment and material support will be conducted from the following dimensions: (1) Material and facility support assessment; (2) Commuting and on-duty support assessment; (3) Communication and interface support assessment. The total score for this assessment is 18 points, as detailed below: 2 points are awarded for having all communication equipment; 1 point is deducted for each missing item. 2 points are awarded for having vehicles and a transportation plan, 1 point is deducted for not having vehicles, and 1 point is deducted for not having a special transportation plan when there are special transportation needs. 2 points are awarded for having complete emergency tools and equipment and personnel who know how to operate them; 1 point is deducted for missing equipment and 1 point is deducted for unfamiliarity with operation. 2 points are awarded for adequate logistical support, and 2 points are deducted for inadequate support.

[0043] 2 points are awarded for meeting the scheduled commuting time limit; 2 points are deducted for not meeting the time limit and without a valid ID. A complete contingency plan for special circumstances earns 2 points; no contingency plan deducts 2 points; and an incomplete contingency plan deducts 1 point. 2 points are awarded for adequate support for remote work positions; 1-2 points are deducted for missing equipment or lack of training.

[0044] A clearly defined job description earns 2 points; a vague description deducts 1-2 points. A compliant information transmission process earns 2 points, a missing process deducts 2 points, and untimely transmission deducts 1 point.

[0045] For the evaluation of on-duty training and drills, the total score for this evaluation is 6 points, as detailed below: 2 points are awarded for conducting general emergency response training; 2 points are deducted for not conducting such training. 2 points are awarded for valid personnel duty attendance drills; 2 points are deducted for not conducting drills; and 1 point is deducted for drills that fail to verify core functions. 2 points are awarded for complete exercise records and a closed-loop rectification process; 2 points are deducted for missing records or failure to rectify them.

[0046] For the support assessment, the total score is 4 points, as detailed below: 2 points are awarded for having the ability to expand in batches in typical scenarios, and 2 points are deducted for having no expansion plan. A sound external support mechanism earns 2 points; failure to establish one deducts 2 points; and an imperfect mechanism deducts 1 point.

[0047] It should be noted that the scores mentioned above are merely examples and are not intended to be the only limitation of this application; other scores may also apply.

[0048] Some embodiments of the present invention also disclose a computer-readable storage medium storing a computer program that, when executed by a processor, implements the evaluation method for emergency organization duty at a nuclear power plant as described in any of the above embodiments, which will not be repeated here.

[0049] It is understood that the above embodiments only illustrate some implementation methods of the present invention, and their descriptions are relatively specific and detailed, but they should not be construed as limiting the scope of the present invention. It should be noted that those skilled in the art can freely combine the above embodiments or technical features without departing from the concept of the present invention, and can also make several modifications and improvements, all of which fall within the protection scope of the present invention. That is, the embodiments described "in some embodiments" can be freely combined with any of the preceding and following embodiments. Therefore, all equivalent transformations and modifications made within the scope of the claims of the present invention should be covered by the claims of the present invention.

Claims

1. An evaluation method for emergency response team duty at nuclear power plants, characterized in that, Includes the following steps: S1: Obtain emergency duty information from the on-site emergency plans and execution procedures of the nuclear power plant; S2: Organize the emergency duty information into a standardized duty information table; S3: Based on the number of units in the nuclear power plant, compare the standardized duty information table with the pre-built compliance verification system, and output a compliance score based on the comparison results; S4: Perform a multi-dimensional comprehensive evaluation of the standardized duty information table and output the corresponding score; S5: Summarize the scores of all evaluation items in steps S3 and S4, and output the overall evaluation level of the nuclear power plant emergency response team based on the preset four-level score range division standard.

2. The evaluation method for emergency response organization and duty in nuclear power plants according to claim 1, characterized in that, When the nuclear power plant has two units, the emergency duty information includes the emergency organization and job positions, the configuration of on-duty personnel and substitute personnel, the duty method and the time limit for arrival.

3. The evaluation method for emergency response organization and duty in nuclear power plants according to claim 2, characterized in that, When the nuclear power plant has multiple units, the emergency duty information also includes emergency plans for multiple units.

4. The evaluation method for emergency response organization and duty in nuclear power plants according to claim 1, characterized in that, Step S1 includes: automatically obtaining the emergency duty information from the on-site emergency plan and execution procedures of the nuclear power plant through a keyword matching algorithm.

5. The evaluation method for emergency response organization and duty in nuclear power plants according to claim 1, characterized in that, The compliance verification system includes requirements for the number of positions, the number of personnel, and the time limit for arrival at work; The required number of positions refers to the minimum number of emergency positions that should be set up according to the classification regulations for the number of nuclear power plant units. The personnel requirement refers to the minimum number of on-duty personnel that should be assigned to each of the aforementioned emergency positions. The aforementioned on-duty time limit requirement is the maximum allowable on-duty time limit for emergency positions that are not on duty 24 hours a day.

6. The evaluation method for emergency response organization and duty at nuclear power plants according to claim 5, characterized in that, The process of outputting a compliance score based on the comparison results includes: When none of the standardized duty information tables meet the requirements for the number of positions, the number of personnel, and the arrival time limit, the first compliance score is output. When the standardized duty information table meets any one of the requirements for the number of positions, the number of personnel, and the time limit for arrival, a second compliance score is output. When the standardized duty information table meets the requirements for the number of positions and the number of personnel but does not meet the requirements for the time limit for arrival at the post, a third compliance score is output. When the standardized duty information table meets the requirements for the number of positions and the time limit for arrival at the post, but does not meet the requirements for the number of personnel, a fourth compliance score is output. When the standardized duty information table meets the personnel quantity requirements and the on-duty time requirements but does not meet the job quantity requirements, the fifth compliance score is output.

7. The evaluation method for emergency response organization and duty at nuclear power plants according to claim 1, characterized in that, Step S3 also includes: An automatic identification algorithm for redundant positions and overlapping responsibilities is adopted. Through personnel configuration overlap analysis and job responsibility keyword matching, the algorithm automatically identifies hidden problems such as redundant positions, overlapping responsibilities, or blank responsibilities, and automatically generates and outputs a rectification list based on the hidden problems.

8. The evaluation method for emergency response organization and duty at nuclear power plants according to claim 1, characterized in that, The multi-dimensional comprehensive assessment includes assessment of duty arrangements and verification, assessment of related equipment and material support, assessment of on-duty training and drills, and assessment of support.

9. The evaluation method for emergency response organization and duty in nuclear power plants according to claim 8, characterized in that, The duty arrangement and verification assessment are evaluated from six dimensions: duty arrangement and 24-hour duty coverage, regular updates of duty arrangements, implementation of verification mechanisms, verification records and closed-loop rectification of problems, reserve duty setup, and qualifications of shift personnel. The assessment of related equipment and material support is conducted from nine dimensions: communication equipment configuration, vehicles and transportation plans, emergency tools and equipment and operational capabilities, logistical support, commuting time limit guarantee, special situation contingency plans, remote post support, clear post interfaces and compliance of information transmission processes. The evaluation of on-duty training and drills is conducted from three dimensions: the implementation of general training for emergency positions, the effectiveness of on-duty drills, and the closed-loop management of drill records and problem rectification. The support assessment is evaluated from two dimensions: the ability of personnel to expand their capabilities in batches under typical scenarios and the soundness of external support mechanisms.

10. A computer-readable storage medium having a computer program stored thereon, characterized in that, When the computer program is executed by the processor, it implements the evaluation method for emergency organization duty at nuclear power plants as described in any one of claims 1-9.

Images