Facility Modification Assessment Using TERA and Monte Carlo Analysis
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Modernizing facilities such as nuclear power plants is challenging due to the intricate and interconnected nature of these systems, making it difficult to accurately predict the technical, economic, risk, and adoption implications of modifications, which are complicated by conflicting schedules, regulatory compliance issues, and safety concerns, especially when multiple personnel groups are involved.
Innovation Solution
A systematic framework using a Technical, Economic, Risk, and Adoption (TERA) assessment framework to objectively manage facility modifications by developing a candidate pool, determining quantitative assessment metrics, and selecting processes based on these metrics, incorporating stochastic modeling and Monte Carlo analysis to evaluate technical, economic, and risk implications.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Productivity
If facility modifications are implemented to modernize operations, then operational efficiency and cost-effectiveness are improved, but technical complexity and risk of unforeseen implications increase
Solution Approach 1:
The patent segments the facility modification evaluation into four distinct assessment dimensions (technical, economic, risk, and adoption), each evaluated separately through quantitative metrics. This segmentation allows complex modifications to be broken down into manageable assessment components, enabling systematic evaluation without being overwhelmed by overall complexity.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent performs preliminary quantitative assessment and modeling before implementation decisions are made. By conducting stochastic modeling, Monte Carlo simulations, and sensitivity analyses in advance, the system predicts potential outcomes and risks before modifications are implemented, allowing for informed decision-making that anticipates technical challenges.
2Adaptability or versatility
If multiple personnel groups are involved in modification evaluation, then diverse perspectives are incorporated, but subjectivity and resistance to change increase
Solution Approach 1:
The patent incorporates feedback mechanisms where quantitative assessment results are systematically fed back into the decision-making process. Multiple personnel groups can input their perspectives, which are then processed through standardized quantitative models, ensuring that diverse viewpoints are considered while maintaining objectivity through mathematical rigor rather than subjective debate.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent transforms qualitative judgments from multiple personnel groups into quantitative parameters that can be objectively measured and compared. By converting subjective assessments into numerical metrics within the TERA framework, the system maintains measurement precision while still incorporating diverse perspectives through standardized parameter transformations.
3Reliability
If comprehensive assessment of facility modifications is conducted, then decision-making quality is improved, but time and resource requirements increase
Solution Approach 1:
The patent allows for partial assessment approaches where not all four TERA dimensions need to be evaluated in full detail for every modification. The framework enables prioritization of assessment depth based on modification significance, allowing decision-makers to conduct comprehensive assessments only when necessary while using streamlined evaluations for routine modifications, thus balancing thoroughness with time constraints.
Data Source
AI summary
The present disclosure describes aspects of systems and methods for managing modifications to processes of a facility such as a power plant or the like. An assessment module determines a baseline assessment of the facility, which may comprise determining technical, economic, and risk metrics for existing facility processes. Candidate processes are formulated to address identified improvement targets. Candidates may be selected for implementation based on technical, economic, risk, and/or adoption characteristics of the candidates relative to one another and/or corresponding facility baselines.