Apparatus and method for establishing asset management strategy

Abstract

The present invention relates to an apparatus and a method for establishing an asset management strategy, the apparatus comprising: a memory including at least one instruction; and at least one processor for executing the at least one instruction stored in the memory, wherein the processor selects a target facility for which an asset management strategy is to be established, on the basis of an asset health index (AHI) for each item according to at least one power facility, and identifies a plurality of action levels sorted according to individual probability of failure (PoF) grades for each item of the selected target facility. Other embodiments are also applicable.

Description

Device and method for establishing asset management strategies

[0001] The present invention relates to an apparatus and method for establishing an asset management strategy.

[0002] Generally, power facilities assess their current condition and implement corrective measures through asset health assessments. The items used for asset health assessment are called the Asset Health Index (AHI) and are defined in technical documents such as those from the International Council on Large Electric Systems (CIGRE).

[0003] Currently, various soundness assessment methods, such as simple score summation and weighted score summation, are used as needed.

[0004] The simple score summation method is a method for calculating a soundness index by assigning an evaluation grade to each component of power facilities based on evaluation items, assigning a soundness score to the evaluation grade of each item, and summing them up. In this case, the evaluation items may be various inspection / analysis data, and may include, for example, statistical data such as insulation quality, aging, and frequency of defects; condition data; operational data; equipment age; equipment installation environment items; appearance inspection items; and characteristic measurement items such as voltage and current.

[0005] Evaluation grades are typically divided into five levels (very high, high, normal, low, very low), and it can be understood that the lower the evaluation grade level, the higher the probability of failure of the corresponding component. Health scores are assigned as 4, 3, 2, 1, and 0 depending on the evaluation grade. Ultimately, health scores are calculated for each evaluation item and summed to determine the health index, but this method has limitations in that it can only verify the overall health (condition) of the entire power facility, and thus cannot identify the existence of items with low condition evaluation grades—that is, items that are likely to fail if urgent measures are not taken—based solely on the health index.

[0006] The weighted summation method assigns weights to the simple summation method, assigning higher weights to evaluation items that are more important. Weights can be values ​​between 0 and 1 (inclusive), and the method is set so that the sum of all weights equals 1. However, this weighted summation method also has the limitation that it cannot confirm the existence of items with low status evaluation grades.

[0007] The indexed score summation method calculates a soundness index by indexing and summing the soundness scores from the simple score summation method, assigning higher scores as power facilities become less sound. However, even with the use of this method, there is a limitation in that it cannot determine whether emergency measures are necessary.

[0008] As such, while conventional methods for evaluating the health of power facilities calculate individual health indices, they share a common limitation in that they are restricted in verifying the facility's condition using these calculated indices. Furthermore, conventional methods require specialized knowledge in the relevant field, and problems arise in that the results can vary depending on the person evaluating and judging the health.

[0009] Embodiments of the present invention for solving these conventional problems provide an apparatus and method for establishing an asset management strategy that can appropriately establish maintenance and replacement strategies based on a condition assessment of power facilities to prevent failures and accidents of power facilities.

[0010] In addition, embodiments of the present invention provide an asset management strategy formulation device and method capable of minimizing deviations in strategy formulation by algorithmizing the formulation of maintenance and replacement strategies for power facilities.

[0011] A strategy formulation device according to an embodiment of the present invention includes a memory for storing at least one instruction; and at least one processor for executing the at least one instruction stored in the memory, wherein the processor determines whether a power facility is subject to action and determines a first priority for a plurality of action levels for the power facility, wherein a plurality of individual PoF grades are determined in correspondence with the health score for each evaluation item of the power facility, and the first priority can be determined according to a predetermined ranking in correspondence with the plurality of individual PoF grades (probability of failure) of the power facility.

[0012] In one embodiment of the present invention, the evaluation items may include a condition item, a deterioration item, and an operating period item.

[0013] In one embodiment of the present invention, the processor determines a second priority, which is a priority of action for the power facility in relation to other power facilities, wherein the processor determines the overall PoF grade based on the plurality of individual PoF grades, and determines the second priority by comparing at least one of the overall PoF grade of the power facility and the CoF (consequence of failure) grade of the power facility with other power facilities, and the CoF grade may be pre-set for each power facility.

[0014] In one embodiment of the present invention, the processor can determine the risk level of the power facility based on the overall PoF level and the CoF level, and determine the second priority based on the risk level.

[0015] In one embodiment of the present invention, the processor can determine the second priority by comparing the CoF grades when the risk grades are the same.

[0016] In one embodiment of the present invention, the processor can determine the overall PoF grade based on the result of averaging the health scores for each evaluation item.

[0017] In one embodiment of the present invention, the processor determines whether to activate each of the plurality of action levels for each of the evaluation items, and if at least one of the plurality of evaluation items of any action level is activated, the corresponding action level may be determined to be the final activation target.

[0018] In one embodiment of the present invention, the first priority may be determined differently depending on the individual PoF grade of the operational years item.

[0019] In one embodiment of the present invention, the processor determines the overall PoF grade based on the plurality of individual PoF grades, determines the primary target power equipment based on the risk grade determined by the overall PoF grade of the power equipment and the CoF (consequence of failure) grade of the power equipment, determines the secondary target power equipment by comparing the PoF grades of each power equipment among the primary target power equipment, and determines the final target power equipment determined among the secondary target power equipment as the target for the action.

[0020] An asset management strategy establishment device characterized in that, in one embodiment of the present invention, the processor determines the final target power facility by comparing the individual PoF grades for the condition item and the deterioration item of each power facility among the secondary target power facilities.

[0021] In addition, the method for establishing an asset management strategy according to an embodiment of the present invention comprises: a step of determining a plurality of individual PoF (probability of failure) grades corresponding to soundness scores for each evaluation item of the power facility; a step of determining whether the power facility is subject to action; and a step of determining a first priority for a plurality of action levels for the power facility; wherein the first priority may be determined according to a predetermined ranking corresponding to the plurality of individual PoF grades (probability of failure) of the power facility.

[0022] As described above, the device and method for establishing an asset management strategy according to the present invention have the effect of preventing failures and accidents of power facilities to the maximum extent by appropriately establishing maintenance and replacement strategies based on the condition assessment of power facilities.

[0023] In addition, the device and method for establishing an asset management strategy according to the present invention have the effect of enabling the derivation of consistent strategy establishment results without specialized knowledge by algorithmizing the establishment of maintenance and replacement strategies for power facilities and minimizing deviations in strategy establishment.

[0024] FIG. 1 is a diagram schematically showing the main configuration of an electronic device for establishing an asset management strategy according to an embodiment of the present invention.

[0025] FIG. 2 is a flowchart illustrating a method for establishing an asset management strategy according to an embodiment of the present invention.

[0026] FIG. 3 is a table showing the level of action mapped according to the state of the power equipment according to an embodiment of the present invention.

[0027] FIG. 4 is a table for explaining evaluation items corresponding to inspection items of power facilities and action levels corresponding to evaluation items according to an embodiment of the present invention.

[0028] FIG. 5 is a diagram showing a risk matrix according to an embodiment of the present invention.

[0029] FIG. 6 is a table for explaining a method to verify the level of action according to inspection items and evaluation items of power equipment according to an embodiment of the present invention.

[0030] FIG. 7 is a table for explaining the action levels aligned according to individual PoF grades according to an embodiment of the present invention.

[0031] Hereinafter, preferred embodiments according to the present invention will be described in detail with reference to the accompanying drawings. The detailed description disclosed below, together with the accompanying drawings, is intended to describe exemplary embodiments of the present invention and is not intended to represent the only embodiment in which the present invention can be practiced. In order to clearly explain the present invention in the drawings, parts unrelated to the description may be omitted, and the same reference numerals may be used for identical or similar components throughout the specification.

[0032] FIG. 1 is a diagram schematically showing the main configuration of an electronic device for establishing an asset management strategy according to an embodiment of the present invention.

[0033] Referring to FIG. 1, the electronic device (100) according to the present invention may include a communication unit (110), an input unit (120), a display unit (130), a memory (140), and a processor (150).

[0034] The communication unit (110) can collect data related to power equipment through communication with at least one server (not shown) located outside the electronic device (100). At this time, the server located outside may include a server that manages data related to power equipment at the operator when power equipment is installed at the operator, and a server of the power equipment manufacturer, etc.

[0035] To this end, the communication unit (110) has at least one server and 5G (5 th It can perform communication such as (generation communication), LTE-A (long term evolution-advanced), LTE, and Wi-Fi (wireless fidelity).

[0036] The input unit (120) generates input data in response to user input of the electronic device (100). The input unit (120) includes at least one input means. To this end, the input unit (120) may include a keyboard, mouse, keypad, dome switch, touch panel, touch key and button, etc.

[0037] The display unit (130) outputs output data according to the operation of the electronic device (100). To this end, the display unit (130) may include a liquid crystal display (LCD), a light emitting diode (LED) display, an organic light emitting diode (OLED) display, a micro electro mechanical systems (MEMS) display, and an electronic paper display. The display unit (130) may be combined with the input unit (120) to be implemented as a touch screen.

[0038] The memory (140) stores operation programs of the electronic device (100). In particular, the memory (140) can store algorithms for establishing strategies related to measures such as maintenance and replacement. For example, the memory (140) can store algorithms for calculating the asset health index (AHI) for each evaluation item of the power equipment, algorithms for calculating the individual PoF grade corresponding to the evaluation item and the overall PoF grade of the power equipment based on the asset health score, algorithms for generating a risk matrix based on the overall PoF grade and the CoF (consequence of failure) grade, and algorithms for determining the priority of the final target requiring action.

[0039] The processor (150) calculates an asset health index (AHI) for each evaluation item of multiple power facilities. For example, multiple power facilities may include transformers, GIS, switchboards, cables, circuit breakers, etc., and the evaluation items may include condition items, degradation items, and strategy items. The condition item may be a detected value such as voltage, current, temperature, and resistance detected from the components of the power facilities. The degradation item may be an inspection item of the insulation performance of the power facilities and the appearance of the components. The strategy item may refer to the number of years the power facilities have actually been operated.

[0040] The processor (150) sets the probability of failure (PoF) based on the soundness score. The processor (150) can convert the soundness score for the evaluation items of the soundness score, namely the condition item, the deterioration item, and the operating years item, based on a 100-point standard, and divide the converted soundness score equally based on a 20-point standard to set individual PoF grades having grades A to E. Then, the processor (150) can set the overall PoF grade for all evaluation items of the soundness score by summing the soundness scores converted for each evaluation item and calculating the average value.

[0041] The processor (150) can map each problem by setting an action level that can be taken when a problem occurs for each evaluation item. At this time, the action level can be set to multiple levels, such as level 1 to level 6, and each level can be set according to the action item required when a problem occurs in the power equipment. In addition, the processor (150) can identify an evaluation item corresponding to each of the multiple inspection items required when inspecting the power equipment and set an action level corresponding to each inspection item.

[0042] The processor (150) generates a risk matrix. At this time, the risk matrix is ​​generated using PoF grades and CoF grades, and can be generated in the form of a matrix having an x-axis with CoF grades and a y-axis with PoF grades. The CoF grade is a grade of the economic loss cost in the event of a failure of power equipment, and can be graded into grades A to E depending on the magnitude of the loss cost, and each section can be set differently depending on the workplace or power equipment. The PoF grade is set based on the health score, and in the risk matrix, the PoF grade may refer to the entire PoF grade.

[0043] The processor (150) selects power facilities corresponding to risk grades C to E as primary targets based on the risk matrix. At this time, the conditions for selecting primary targets, namely grades C to E, can be changed. The risk grades can be used that are matched to PoF grades and CoF grades and are stored in memory (140) in advance. For example, referring to FIG. 5, the risk grade for PoF grade D and CoF grade E may be grade E.

[0044] The processor (150) selects the final targets requiring action from among the power facilities selected as primary targets. More specifically, the processor (150) selects power facilities among the power facilities selected as primary targets that have an overall PoF grade of C or E as secondary targets. The processor (150) checks the individual PoF grades of the condition and deterioration items of the power facilities selected as secondary targets and selects only the power facilities with an individual PoF grade of D or E as final targets. At this time, the conditions for selecting secondary targets, i.e., the overall PoF grade being C or E, and the conditions for selecting final targets, i.e., the individual PoF grade being D or E, can be applied differently.

[0045] The processor (150) determines the priority of measures, namely maintenance and replacement, for the power facilities selected as final targets. For example, if the risk grades of all power facilities selected as final targets are the same, the processor (150) can check the overall PoF grade and CoF grade and sort the power facilities by assigning priority to the power facilities with a higher CoF grade.

[0046] The processor (150) checks the individual PoF grades for each evaluation item, such as condition item, deterioration item, and operating years item, for the aligned power facilities according to priority. The processor (150) checks a plurality of aligned action levels according to the individual PoF grades confirmed for each power facility. The processor (150) displays the aligned plurality of action levels on the display unit (130).

[0047] FIG. 2 is a flowchart illustrating a method for establishing an asset management strategy according to an embodiment of the present invention.

[0048] Referring to FIG. 2, in step 201, the processor (150) calculates an asset health index (AHI) for each evaluation item of a plurality of power facilities. For example, the plurality of power facilities may include transformers, GIS, switchboards, cables, circuit breakers, etc., and the evaluation items may include condition items, degradation items, and strategy items. The condition item may be a detected value such as voltage, current, temperature, or resistance detected from the components of the power facilities. The degradation item may be an inspection item of the insulation performance of the power facilities or the appearance of the components. The strategy item may refer to the number of years the power facilities have actually been operated.

[0049] More specifically, the processor (150) can classify evaluation grades for each condition item into five levels—very good, good, medium, bad, and very bad—to calculate the health score of the condition item, and determine the evaluation grade by comparing the condition items with a reference value to determine where the condition item belongs to the reference value. The processor (150) assigns scores of 4, 3, 2, 1, and 0 according to the confirmed evaluation grade. The processor (150) checks each condition item, and if there is a condition item with a health score below the medium grade, it selects the lowest health score among the health scores of each condition item. Conversely, if there is no health score below the medium grade, that is, if all health scores are medium grade or higher, the processor (150) assigns a weight to each health score according to the individual importance of the condition evaluation item, and calculates the sum of the weighted condition item health scores. The processor (150) can determine the lowest health score or the sum of health scores as the health score of the condition item.

[0050] Additionally, the processor (150) classifies each deterioration item into five evaluation grades as previously described to calculate the soundness score of the deterioration item, and assigns soundness scores of 4, 3, 2, 1, and 0 according to the confirmed evaluation grade. The processor (150) may assign weights according to the relative importance of the deterioration item. At this time, the weights are to be values ​​greater than or equal to 0 and less than 1, and the sum of all weights can be 1. The processor (150) sums all values ​​calculated by assigning weights to the soundness scores and can confirm the sum result as the soundness score of the deterioration item that can verify the degree of deterioration of the power equipment.

[0051] The processor (150) can determine the soundness score of the operating years by calculating an evaluation grade and assigning a soundness score for each evaluation grade to calculate the soundness score of the operating years.

[0052] In step 203, the processor (150) sets the probability of failure (PoF) based on the soundness score. The processor (150) can convert the soundness score for the evaluation items of the soundness score, namely the condition item, the deterioration item, and the operating years item, based on a 100-point standard, and divide the converted soundness score equally based on a 20-point standard to set individual PoF grades ranging from Grade A to Grade E. Then, the processor (150) can set the overall PoF grade for all evaluation items of the soundness score by summing the soundness scores converted for each evaluation item and calculating the average value.

[0053] In step 205, the processor (150) can map each problem by setting a level of action that can be taken when a problem occurs for each evaluation item. At this time, the level of action can be set to multiple levels, such as level 1 to level 6, and each level can be set according to the item of action required when a problem occurs in the power equipment. In addition, the processor (150) can identify the evaluation item corresponding to each of the multiple inspection items required when inspecting the power equipment, and set a level of action corresponding to each inspection item.

[0054] In step 207, the processor (150) generates a risk matrix. At this time, the risk matrix is ​​generated using PoF grades and CoF (consequence of failure) grades, and can be generated in the form of a matrix having an x-axis with CoF grades and a y-axis with PoF grades. The CoF grade is a grade of the economic loss cost in the event of a failure of power equipment, and can be graded from A to E depending on the magnitude of the loss cost, and each section can be set differently depending on the workplace or power equipment. The PoF grade is set based on the health score, and in the risk matrix, the PoF grade may refer to the entire PoF grade.

[0055] The CoF rating may be matched according to the workplace or power facility and stored in memory (140) in advance.

[0056] In step 209, the processor (150) selects power facilities corresponding to risk grades C to E as primary targets based on the risk matrix. At this time, the conditions for selecting primary targets, namely grades C to E, can be changed.

[0057] In step 211, the processor (150) selects the final targets requiring action from among the power facilities selected as primary targets. More specifically, the processor (150) selects power facilities among the power facilities selected as primary targets that have an overall PoF grade of C or E as secondary targets. The processor (150) checks the individual PoF grades of the condition and deterioration items of the power facilities selected as secondary targets and selects only the power facilities with an individual PoF grade of D or E as final targets. At this time, the conditions for selecting secondary targets, i.e., the overall PoF grade being C or E, and the conditions for selecting final targets, i.e., the individual PoF grade being D or E, can be applied differently.

[0058] In step 213, the processor (150) determines the priority of measures, namely maintenance and replacement, for the power facilities selected as final targets. For example, if the risk grades of all power facilities selected as final targets are the same, the processor (150) can check the overall PoF grade and CoF grade and sort the power facilities by assigning priority to the power facilities with a higher CoF grade.

[0059] In step 215, the processor (150) checks the individual PoF grades for each evaluation item, such as condition item, deterioration item and operating years item, for the aligned power facilities according to priority, and performs step 217. In step 217, the processor (150) checks multiple action levels aligned according to the individual PoF grades confirmed for each power facility, and in step 219, the processor (150) displays this on the display unit (130).

[0060] FIG. 3 is a table showing the level of action mapped according to the state of the power equipment according to an embodiment of the present invention.

[0061] Referring to FIG. 3, the action levels that can be taken depending on the condition of the power equipment can be set from Level 1 (Lv.1) to Level 6 (Lv.6). For example, Level 1 (Lv.1) is a state where no separate action is required, Level 2 (Lv.2) is a state where simple action and simple inspection are required, Level 3 (Lv.3) is a state where precision work and ordinary inspection are required, Level 4 (Lv.4) is a state where overhaul, update, modification, or replacement of some components and precision inspection are required, Level 5 (Lv.5) is a state where continuous monitoring is required, and Level 6 (Lv.6) is a state where the entire power equipment needs to be replaced. As shown in FIG. 3, the cost incurred according to the action level for each power equipment can be set.

[0062] Additionally, the third power facility may be configured to perform Lv.5 or Lv.6 measures immediately without Lv.3 and Lv.4 measures when the cost of performing Lv.3 and Lv.4 measures is higher than the cost of performing Lv.5 measures or when Lv.3 and Lv.4 measures are not required. The fourth power facility may be configured to perform Lv.6 measures immediately without performing Lv.5 measures, and the fifth power facility may be configured to perform Lv.6 measures immediately without performing Lv.4 and Lv.5 measures. This corresponds to step 205 of FIG. 2.

[0063] FIG. 4 is a table for explaining evaluation items corresponding to inspection items of power facilities and action levels corresponding to evaluation items according to an embodiment of the present invention.

[0064] Referring to FIG. 4, evaluation items containing each of the multiple inspection items required for power equipment inspection can be identified, and action levels for each inspection item can be set. At this time, the action levels according to the state of the inspection items are as described in FIG. 3. More specifically, the inspection items of the power equipment may include major categories A through D, and at least one medium category may be included in each major category. Additionally, although not illustrated, at least one small category may be included in each medium category.

[0065] For example, inspection item A may represent the history of the power equipment, and Aa may represent the number of fault current interruptions. The history of the power equipment is identified as being included in the degradation item in the evaluation items and may be set to degradation. That is, when a fault current interruption occurs in the power equipment, the processor (150) may be set to activate (1) measures corresponding to Lv.1, Lv.3, Lv.4, and Lv.6, and to deactivate (0) measures corresponding to Lv2 and Lv.5.

[0066] Inspection item B may include medium-classification inspection items of Ba and Bb, and inspection items of Ba and Bb may be set as condition items as they are confirmed to be included in the condition items in the evaluation items. That is, if a problem corresponding to Ba or Bb occurs in the power equipment, the processor (150) may be set to activate (1) measures corresponding to Lv.1, Lv.2, and Lv.4, and set to deactivate (0) measures corresponding to Lv.3, Lv.5, and Lv.6.

[0067] Inspection item C may include a medium-classification inspection item of Ca, and the inspection item of Ca may be confirmed to be included in the condition item in the evaluation item and set as a condition. That is, if a problem corresponding to Ca occurs in the power equipment, the processor (150) may be set to activate (1) measures corresponding to Lv.1 and Lv.3, and set to deactivate (0) measures corresponding to Lv.2, Lv.4 to Lv.6.

[0068] Inspection item D may include a medium-classification inspection item of Da, and the inspection item of Da may be set as degradation as it is confirmed to be included in the degradation item in the evaluation item. That is, if a problem corresponding to Da occurs in the power equipment, the processor (150) may be set to activate (1) the measure corresponding to Lv.1 and to deactivate (0) the measures corresponding to Lv.2 to Lv.6.

[0069] Inspection item E may include the medium-classification inspection item of Ea, and the inspection item of Ea may be identified as being included in the operational years item in the evaluation item and set as a strategy. That is, if a problem corresponding to Ea occurs in the power equipment, for example, depending on whether the operational years have reached the pre-set lifespan of the power equipment, the processor (150) may be set to activate (1) measures corresponding to Lv.1 and Lv.6 and to deactivate (0) measures corresponding to Lv.2 to Lv.5. This corresponds to step 205 of FIG. 2.

[0070] In addition, for convenience of explanation, the embodiment of the present invention describes setting action levels for five major categories as an example, but it is not necessarily limited thereto, and major, medium, and small categories can be extended and applied according to the user's needs. Furthermore, when the activation (1) and deactivation (0) set for each level are ORed, 1, 1, 1, 0, and 1 are produced for each level, so FIG. 4 can be understood as illustrating inspection items for the fourth power facility among the power facilities shown in FIG. 3. However, inspection items are not necessarily limited thereto and may have different inspection items depending on the type of power facility.

[0071] FIG. 5 is a diagram showing a risk matrix according to an embodiment of the present invention.

[0072] Referring to Fig. 5, the risk matrix is ​​generated using the probability of failure (PoF) grade and the consequence of failure (CoF) grade, and can be generated in the form of a matrix having an x-axis with the CoF grade and a y-axis with the PoF grade. The CoF grade is a grade based on the economic loss cost in the event of a failure of power equipment, divided into five equal parts of 20 points each based on a scale of 100 points. It can be graded into grades A through E depending on the magnitude of the loss cost, and each section can be set differently depending on the workplace or power equipment. The PoF grade is a grade based on the soundness score, divided into five equal parts of 20 points each based on a scale of 100 points, and can represent the overall PoF grade.

[0073] More specifically, the risk grade refers to grades A through E set based on the overall PoF grade and CoF grade, and can be set to be displayed in different colors for each grade. The processor (150) can set risk judgment criteria and risk mitigation methods corresponding to the risk grade according to the input of the input unit (120).

[0074] For example, if the risk level is A, the power equipment can be configured as a new asset within the warranty period, and the time for replacement review has not yet arrived. If the risk level is B, the power equipment can be configured as capable of reliable long-term operation as there are no signs of poor condition or deterioration. If the risk level is C, the power equipment can be configured as being in an acceptable condition, despite having signs of poor condition or deterioration, and the time for replacement review can be set, for example, within 5 years, and the time for additional inspection, for example, within 2 years. If the risk level is D, the power equipment can be configured as being in poor condition or showing clear signs of deterioration, requiring consideration for repair or replacement within 3 years, and requiring online monitoring at regular intervals, for example, every 3 months. If the risk level is E, the power equipment can be configured as having a very high probability of failure or having reached the replacement age due to the end of component lifespan, requiring repair or replacement within 1 year, and requiring online monitoring to be performed more frequently than in the case of a D level.

[0075] In addition, even if the overall PoF grade is E, if the CoF grade is A, the risk grade can be D, and even if the overall PoF grade is D, if the CoF grade is E, the risk grade can be E. This corresponds to step 207 in Fig. 2.

[0076] The processor (150) selects power facilities corresponding to risk grades C to E as primary targets (501) based on a risk matrix such as FIG. 5, and selects final targets requiring action from among the power facilities selected as primary targets (501). More specifically, the processor (150) selects power facilities with an overall PoF grade of C to E from among the power facilities selected as primary targets (501) as secondary targets (503). The processor (150) checks the individual PoF grades of the condition and deterioration items of the power facilities selected as secondary targets (503) and selects only the power facilities corresponding to grade D or E as final targets.

[0077] For example, the processor (150) can select power facilities with a risk grade of E in FIG. 5 as final targets after checking the individual PoF grades of the condition and deterioration items of the power facilities selected as secondary targets (503). At this time, the selection of only power facilities with a risk grade of E as final targets is for convenience of explanation only and is not necessarily limited thereto; it is to be clarified that power facilities corresponding to grades D or E in the individual PoF grades of the condition and deterioration items are selected as final targets, as described above. The processor (150) determines the priority of measures, namely maintenance and replacement, for the power facilities selected as final targets.

[0078] The processor (150) can confirm that the risk grade of all power facilities selected as final targets is Grade E. For example, the first power facility may have an overall PoF grade and CoF grade of Grade E, the second power facility may have an overall PoF grade of Grade E and a CoF grade of Grade D, the third power facility may have an overall PoF grade of Grade E and a CoF grade of Grade D, the fourth power facility may have an overall PoF grade of Grade E and a CoF grade of Grade B, and the fifth power facility may have an overall PoF grade of Grade D and a CoF grade of Grade E. At this time, when determining the priority of the power facilities, the processor (150) considers both the overall PoF grade and the CoF grade, but if the risk grades are the same, it may assign priority to the power facility with the higher CoF grade.

[0079] For example, if the second power facility has an overall PoF grade of E and a CoF grade of D, and the fifth power facility has an overall PoF grade of D and a CoF grade of E, the processor (150) can assign priority to the fifth power facility, which has a higher CoF grade. Accordingly, the priorities of the first to fifth power facilities can be arranged in the order of the first power facility, the fifth power facility, the second power facility, the third power facility, and the fourth power facility. In this way, since the priority of the facilities requiring action can be identified by facility or by site where the power facilities are installed, an asset management strategy based on priority can be established. This corresponds to steps 209 to 213 of FIG. 2.

[0080] FIG. 6 is a table for explaining a method for verifying the action level according to inspection items and evaluation items of power equipment according to an embodiment of the present invention. FIG. 7 is a table for explaining the action level sorted according to individual PoF grades according to an embodiment of the present invention. In this case, FIG. 6a to 6d may be tables for action levels according to inspection items and evaluation items verified in various situations of the same power equipment, e.g., the fourth power equipment. The sub-categories, evaluation items, and action levels shown in FIG. 6a to 6d are identical to the inspection items, evaluation items, and action levels shown in FIG. 4. However, for convenience of explanation, FIG. 6a to 6d will use only a few sub-categories among the common inspection items shown in FIG. 4 for explanation. Furthermore, the sorting of action levels shown in FIG. 7 may be action levels pre-set and sorted by the user, and it is clarified that changes can be applied based on the history of maintenance and replacement of power equipment occurring at the site where the power equipment is installed.

[0081] Referring to FIGS. 6 and 7, as in FIG. 6a, the processor (150) can confirm that the inspection item Aa of the fourth power facility is included in the deterioration item and that the individual PoF grade is Grade D. The processor (150) can confirm that the action levels activated (1) in response to Aa are Lv.1, Lv.3, Lv.4, Lv.6, and the action levels deactivated (0) are Lv.2, Lv.5. The processor (150) can confirm that the inspection item Ba of the fourth power facility is included in the condition item and that the individual PoF grade is Grade E. The processor (150) can confirm that the action levels activated (1) in response to Ba are Lv.1, Lv.2, Lv.4, and the action levels deactivated (0) are Lv.3, Lv.5, Lv.6. Additionally, the processor (150) can confirm that the Ea inspection item of the fourth power facility is included in the operating years item and that the individual PoF grade is Grade A. The processor (150) can confirm that the activated (1) action level corresponding to Ea is Lv.1, Lv.6 and the deactivated (0) action level is Lv.2 to Lv.5.

[0082] The processor (150) can perform an OR combination of activated and deactivated action levels for each level to produce a total value for each level as 1, 1, 1, 1, 0, 1. Here, the OR combination may mean that if any one item has an activated value, it is determined as the final activated action level.

[0083] Additionally, the processor (150) can align the action levels corresponding to FIG. 6a in FIG. 7. At this time, since the individual PoF grade for the condition or deterioration item of the fourth power facility corresponding to FIG. 6a is grade D or grade E, and the individual PoF grade for the operating years item is grade A, it can be confirmed that the action levels of the fourth power facility are aligned as shown in reference numeral 703 of FIG. 7. Since Lv.5 in the total value of FIG. 6a is a deactivated (0) action, Lv.5 can be ignored in the aligned action levels.

[0084] As shown in FIG. 6b, the processor (150) can confirm that the inspection item Aa of the fourth power facility is included in the deterioration item and that the individual PoF grade is Grade D. The processor (150) can confirm that the activated (1) action levels corresponding to Aa are Lv.1, Lv.3, Lv.4, Lv.6, and the deactivated (0) action levels are Lv.2, Lv.5. The processor (150) can confirm that the inspection item Ba of the fourth power facility is included in the condition item and that the individual PoF grade is Grade E. The processor (150) can confirm that the activated (1) action levels corresponding to Ba are Lv.1, Lv.2, Lv.4, and the deactivated (0) action levels are Lv.3, Lv.5, Lv.6. Additionally, the processor (150) can confirm that the inspection item Ea is included in the operating years item and that the individual PoF grade is Grade E. The processor (150) can confirm that the action level activated (1) in response to Ea is Lv.1, Lv.6 and the action level deactivated (0) is Lv.2 to Lv.5.

[0085] The processor (150) can perform an OR combination of the activated and deactivated action levels for each level to produce a total value for each level as 1, 1, 1, 1, 0, 1.

[0086] Additionally, the processor (150) can align the action levels corresponding to Fig. 6b in Fig. 7. At this time, since the individual PoF grade for the condition or deterioration item of the fourth power facility is grade D or grade E, and the individual PoF grade for the operating years item is grade E, it can be confirmed that the action levels of the fourth power facility are aligned as shown in reference numeral 701 of Fig. 7. Since Lv.5 in the total value of Fig. 6b is a deactivated (0) action, Lv.5 can be ignored in the aligned action levels.

[0087] As shown in FIG. 6c, the processor (150) can confirm that the Bb inspection item of the fourth power facility is included in the condition item and that the individual PoF grade is Grade D. The processor (150) can confirm that the activated (1) action level corresponding to Bb is Lv.1, Lv.2, Lv.4, and the deactivated (0) action level is Lv.3, Lv.5, Lv.6. The processor (150) can confirm that the Ca inspection item of the fourth power facility is included in the condition item and that the individual PoF grade is Grade E. The processor (150) can confirm that the activated (1) action level corresponding to Ca is Lv.1, Lv.3, and the deactivated (0) action level is Lv.2, Lv.4 to Lv.6. The processor (150) can confirm that the Da inspection item of the fourth power facility is included in the deterioration item and that the individual PoF grade is Grade D. The processor (150) can confirm that the activated (1) action level corresponding to Da is Lv.1 and the deactivated (0) action level is Lv.2 to Lv.6. Additionally, the processor (150) can confirm that the Ea inspection item of the fourth power facility is included in the operating years item and that the individual PoF grade is Grade E. The processor (150) can confirm that the activated (1) action level corresponding to Ea is Lv.1 and Lv.6 and the deactivated (0) action level is Lv.2 to Lv.5.

[0088] The processor (150) can perform an OR combination of the activated and deactivated action levels for each level to produce a total value for each level as 1, 1, 1, 1, 0, 1.

[0089] Additionally, the processor (150) can align the action levels corresponding to Fig. 6c in Fig. 7. At this time, since the individual PoF grade for the condition or deterioration item corresponding to the fourth power facility is grade D or grade E, and the individual PoF grade for the operating years item is grade E, it can be confirmed that the action levels of the fourth power facility are aligned as shown in reference numeral 701 of Fig. 7.

[0090] As shown in FIG. 6d, the processor (150) can confirm that the inspection item Aa of the fourth power facility is included in the deterioration item and that the individual PoF grade is Grade D. The processor (150) can confirm that the activated (1) action levels corresponding to Aa are Lv.1, Lv.3, Lv.4, Lv.6, and the deactivated (0) action levels are Lv.2, Lv.5. The processor (150) can confirm that the inspection item Bb of the fourth power facility is included in the condition item and that the individual PoF grade is Grade E. The processor (150) can confirm that the activated (1) action levels corresponding to Bb are Lv.1, Lv.2, Lv.4, and the deactivated (0) action levels are Lv.3, Lv.5, Lv.6. The processor (150) can confirm that the inspection item Da of the fourth power facility is included in the deterioration item and that the individual PoF grade is Grade D. The processor (150) can confirm that the activated (1) action level corresponding to Da is Lv.1 and the deactivated (0) action level is Lv.2 to Lv.6. Additionally, the processor (150) can confirm that the Ea inspection item of the fourth power facility is included in the operation period item and that the individual PoF grade is Grade A. The processor (150) can confirm that the activated (1) action level corresponding to Ea is Lv.1 and Lv.6 and the deactivated (0) action level is Lv.2 to Lv.5.

[0091] The processor (150) can perform an OR combination of the activated and deactivated action levels for each level to produce a total value for each level as 1, 1, 1, 1, 0, 1.

[0092] Additionally, the processor (150) can align the action levels corresponding to Fig. 6d in Fig. 7. At this time, since the individual PoF grade for the condition or deterioration item of the fourth power facility is grade D or grade E, and the individual PoF grade for the operating years item is grade A, it can be confirmed that the action levels of the fourth power facility are aligned as shown in reference numeral 703 of Fig. 7. This corresponds to steps 215 and 217 of Fig. 2.

[0093] At this time, since it can be confirmed that only Lv.5 is deactivated (0) in the total value for each level, it can be confirmed that FIG. 6 is the measure level corresponding to the fourth power facility shown in FIG. 3. In the case of Lv.0, it is a measure that does not consume cost, that is, a measure that does not take any action, so it is clear that it does not matter at all even if the total value for each level is in an activated (1) state.

[0094] The above-described action level alignment information may be pre-stored in memory (140) by matching the overall PoF grade, condition or deterioration PoF grade and the operating years PoF grade.

[0095] Information including priority of selection, maintenance and replacement, and aligned measures for power equipment according to an embodiment of the present invention may be transmitted to a user terminal (not shown) that intends to utilize it or displayed on a display unit (130).

[0096] The embodiments of the invention disclosed in this specification and drawings are provided merely as specific examples to facilitate the explanation of the technical content of the invention and to aid in understanding the invention, and are not intended to limit the scope of the invention. Accordingly, the scope of the invention should be interpreted to include all modifications or variations derived based on the technical concept of the invention, in addition to the embodiments disclosed herein.

Claims

1. Memory storing at least one instruction; and It includes at least one processor that executes at least one instruction stored in the memory, The above processor is, Determine whether the power facilities are subject to measures, and Determine the first priority for a plurality of measure levels for the above power facilities, A plurality of individual PoF grades are determined in correspondence with the soundness scores for each evaluation item of the above power facility, and Determining the first priority according to a predetermined order corresponding to the plurality of individual PoF grades (probability of failure) of the power facility Asset management strategy formulation device.

2. In Paragraph 1, An asset management strategy formulation device characterized by the above evaluation items including condition items, deterioration items, and years of operation items.

3. In Paragraph 1, The above processor determines a second priority, which is the priority of action for the said power facility in relation to other power facilities, and The processor determines the overall PoF grade based on the plurality of individual PoF grades, determines the second priority by comparing at least one of the overall PoF grade of the power equipment and the CoF (consequence of failure) grade of the power equipment with other power equipment, and the CoF grade is pre-set for each power equipment. An asset management strategy formulation device characterized by 4. In Paragraph 3, The above processor is, Determining the risk grade of the power facility based on the overall PoF grade and the CoF grade, and An asset management strategy formulation device characterized by determining the second priority based on the above risk grade.

5. In Paragraph 4, The above processor is, An asset management strategy formulation device characterized by determining the second priority by comparing the CoF grades when the above risk grades are identical.

6. In Paragraph 1, The above processor is, An asset management strategy formulation device characterized by determining the overall PoF grade based on the result of averaging the soundness scores for each evaluation item.

7. In Paragraph 1, The above processor is, For each of the above evaluation items, determine whether to activate each of the above multiple action levels, and An asset management strategy formulation device characterized by determining that an action level is the final activation target when at least one of the multiple evaluation items of a certain action level is activated.

8. In Paragraph 2, An asset management strategy formulation device characterized in that the above first priority is determined differently according to the individual PoF grade of the above operational years item.

9. In Paragraph 2, The above processor is, The overall PoF grade is determined based on the plurality of individual PoF grades mentioned above, and The primary target power facility is determined based on the risk grade determined by the overall PoF grade of the power facility and the CoF (consequence of failure) grade of the power facility, and Determine the secondary target power facilities by comparing the PoF grades of each power facility among the above primary target power facilities, and An asset management strategy formulation device characterized by determining the final target power facility among the above secondary target power facilities as the target for the above action.

10. In Paragraph 9, The above processor is, An asset management strategy formulation device characterized by determining the final target power facility by comparing the individual PoF grades for the condition item and the deterioration item of each power facility among the second target power facilities.

11. A method for establishing an asset management strategy by executing at least one instruction stored in memory by a processor, A step of determining multiple individual PoF (probability of failure) grades corresponding to the soundness scores for each evaluation item of the power facility; A step of determining whether the above-mentioned power facility is subject to action; and The method includes the step of determining a first priority for a plurality of action levels for the above-mentioned power facility; A method for establishing an asset management strategy characterized in that the above-mentioned first priority is determined according to a predetermined ranking corresponding to a plurality of individual PoF grades (probability of failure) of the power facility.

Images