CN106779280B - A decision-making determination method and system for the overhaul of secondary equipment - Google Patents

Abstract

The invention discloses a decision-making method and a system for the overhaul of secondary equipment. The method includes: obtaining a predetermined strategy parameter value from a state information processing analysis result and a health state evaluation result of a predetermined secondary equipment in the system; according to the predetermined strategy parameter Calculate the decision index value under the decision of the scheduled secondary equipment overhaul and the decision index value under the technical transformation decision; wherein, the decision index value includes the LCC equivalent annual average cost value, equipment risk value and equipment efficiency value; The normalized value of the decision-making index is used as a parameter for calculation using the cost-risk-benefit model to obtain the average annual cost and comprehensive benefit value of different strategies in different decision-making years; The average annual cost and comprehensive benefit value of the company can determine the optimal decision-making plan for the overhaul and technical transformation of the secondary equipment; it can provide a decision-making basis for the project approval of the overhaul and technical transformation, and realize the scientific project approval.

Description

A decision-making determination method and system for the overhaul of secondary equipment

technical field

The invention relates to the field of electrical technology, in particular to a decision-making determination method and system for overhauling of secondary equipment.

Background technique

As an important basic industry related to the national economy and people's livelihood, the power industry provides an important foundation for economic and social development. From the daily life of the people to the production and operation activities of all walks of life, the reliable supply of electricity is related to all aspects of the development of the national economy. With the further deepening of the reform of the power market system, the monopoly pattern of the power industry has been broken, and the traditional management methods of power enterprises have been unable to meet the needs of enterprise modernization. In order to improve the competitiveness of enterprises, the electric power industry has gradually placed the economic and social comprehensive benefits in the same important position, and the evaluation of the management planning scheme based on the life cycle cost (Life Cycle Cost, LCC) emphasizes the implementation of continuous, continuous and Coordinate and unified management, comprehensively consider the problems of each stage, ensure the consistency of the activities and decision-making in each stage, and achieve the best technology, the most reliable quality, the lowest cost, the best service and the best environmental protection in the whole life cycle of the project. , more in line with the requirements of sustainable development.

However, due to the complexity and particularity of the secondary equipment itself, it is quite different from the primary equipment in terms of operating characteristics, cost division, operation and maintenance, and technical transformation strategies and methods. However, in the existing power supply enterprises, the decision-making of secondary equipment overhaul and technical transformation mainly relies on the method of regular overhaul and replacement and on-time technical transformation. It can not effectively implement the requirements of the network province company's secondary system management and asset life cycle management to deepen the pioneering work, cannot fundamentally improve the health level and use efficiency of secondary equipment, so that secondary equipment cannot reach the level of lean management. Therefore, how to improve the accuracy of decision-making for the overhaul of the secondary equipment is a technical problem that needs to be solved by those skilled in the art.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The purpose of the present invention is to provide a decision-making method and system for the overhaul of secondary equipment, and to improve the current decision-making method for periodic overhaul, due technical modification and subjective qualitative decision based on secondary equipment management in power grid enterprises, and to improve the decision-making method for overhauled technical modification. The project approval provides quantitative analysis and decision-making basis.

In order to solve the above-mentioned technical problems, the present invention provides a decision-making method for overhauling the secondary equipment, including:

Obtain the predetermined strategy parameter value from the state information processing and analysis result of the predetermined secondary device in the system and the health state evaluation result of the predetermined secondary device;

According to the predetermined strategy parameter value, the decision index value under the predetermined secondary equipment overhaul decision and the decision index value under the technical transformation decision are respectively calculated; wherein, the decision index value includes the LCC equivalent annual average cost value, the equipment risk value value and equipment performance value;

Normalize the decision index value;

Using the normalized decision-making index value as a parameter to use the cost-risk-benefit model to calculate, to obtain the annual average cost comprehensive benefit value of the overhaul decision and the annual average cost comprehensive benefit value of the technical transformation decision under different decision years for the predetermined secondary equipment value;

The optimal decision-making plan for the major overhaul of the predetermined secondary equipment is determined by comparing the annual average cost and comprehensive benefit value of the overhaul decision and the technical transformation decision in the same decision-making period.

Optionally, according to the predetermined strategy parameter value, calculate the LCC equivalent annual average cost value under the predetermined secondary equipment overhaul decision and the LCC equivalent annual average cost value under the technical transformation decision, including:

计算所述预定二次设备大修决策下的LCC等额年均成本值NPVA_dx；Use the formula

Calculate the LCC equivalent annual average cost value NPVA _dx under the predetermined secondary equipment overhaul decision;

计算所述预定二次设备技改决策下的LCC等额年均成本值NPVA_jg；Use the formula

Calculate the LCC equivalent annual average cost value _NPVA under the described predetermined secondary equipment technical transformation decision;

K＝C_原值-C_残值-T_运行×C_年折旧，T_dx、T_jg分别表示设备进行大修技改后所剩余的使用寿命；CI_dx、CI_jg分别表示对设备进行大修估算以及设备技改的初始总投资，CO，CM，CF，CD分别表示大修和技改对应的运行成本，检修维护成本，故障损失成本，退役处置成本；i为银行利率；r为通货膨胀率；n为计算年均费用的设计年限与决策所在年的差异年值；(A/F,i,T)为按年度投资费用年值折算系数；K为设备净值。in,

K = C _{original value} - C _{residual value} - T _operation × C _{year depreciation} , T _dx and T _jg respectively represent the remaining service life after the equipment is overhauled and technically modified; CI _dx and CI _jg respectively represent the overhaul estimate and equipment The initial total investment of technical renovation, CO, CM, CF, and CD respectively represent the operating cost, maintenance cost, failure loss cost, and decommissioning disposal cost corresponding to overhaul and technical renovation; i is the bank interest rate; r is the inflation rate; n is the Calculate the annual value of the difference between the design life of the annual average cost and the year in which the decision is made; (A/F, i, T) is the conversion factor based on the annual value of the annual investment cost; K is the net value of the equipment.

Optionally, according to the predetermined strategy parameter value, calculate the equipment risk value under the predetermined secondary equipment overhaul decision and the equipment risk value under the technical transformation decision, including:

Use the formula R(t)=LE(t)×P(t) to calculate the equipment risk value under the predetermined secondary equipment overhaul decision and the equipment risk value under the technical renovation decision;

Among them, LE=w ₁ × equipment importance+w ₂ × equipment possible loss+w ₃ × user influence, LE(t) is the risk loss value, P(t) is the risk probability value, w is the weight value, and w ₁ +w ₂ +w ₃ =1, w ₁ , w ₂ , and w ₃ take values according to the classification of the predetermined secondary equipment, and R(t) is the equipment risk value.

Optionally, according to the predetermined strategy parameter value, calculate the equipment performance value under the predetermined secondary equipment overhaul decision and the equipment performance value under the technical transformation decision, including:

Use the ADC analysis model E=ADC to calculate the equipment efficiency value under the predetermined secondary equipment overhaul decision and the equipment efficiency value under the technical transformation decision;

Among them, E is the equipment effectiveness value, A is the availability vector, D is the credibility matrix, and C is the inherent capability vector.

Optionally, normalize the decision indicator values, including:

C_N∈[0,1]对LCC等额年均成本值进行归一化处理；Use the formula

C _N ∈ [0,1] normalizes the LCC equivalent annual average cost value;

R_N∈[0,1]对设备风险值进行归一化处理；Use the formula

R _N ∈ [0,1] normalizes the equipment risk value;

Use the formula E _N =E, E _N ∈[0,1] to normalize the device performance value;

Among them, C _N , R _N , and _EN are the quantified values of the normalized values of each decision-making index, CI _max is the maximum initial investment cost in the same type of equipment; R _max is the risk maximum value of the risk assessment mode.

Optionally, use the normalized decision index value as a parameter for calculation using a cost-benefit model, including:

进行计算，得到不同决策年限下的年均成本综合效益值REC。The quantified value C _{N of the normalized LCC equivalent annual average cost value, the quantified value R N of the equipment risk value and the quantified value E N of the} equipment efficiency value are used as parameters to use the cost-risk-benefit model

Calculation is carried out to obtain the annual average cost comprehensive benefit value REC under different decision-making years.

Optionally, the optimal decision-making plan for the major overhaul of the predetermined secondary equipment is determined by comparing the annual average cost and comprehensive benefit value of the overhaul decision and the technical transformation decision in the same decision-making year, including:

When the annual average cost comprehensive benefit value of the overhaul decision is not less than the annual average cost comprehensive benefit value of the technical renovation decision, the overhaul project shall be approved;

When the annual average cost comprehensive benefit value of the overhaul decision is less than the annual average cost comprehensive benefit value of the technical renovation decision, the technical renovation project will be approved.

Optionally, before obtaining the predetermined strategy parameter value from the state information processing analysis result of the predetermined secondary device and the health state evaluation result of the predetermined secondary device in the system, the method further includes:

From the status information processing and analysis results of the predetermined secondary equipment in the system and the health status evaluation results of the predetermined secondary equipment, and according to the judgment criteria to determine whether major revisions are required;

If not, run it after normal maintenance.

The present invention also provides a decision-making and determination system for the overhaul of the secondary equipment, including:

a parameter obtaining module, configured to obtain a predetermined strategy parameter value from the state information processing and analysis result of the predetermined secondary device in the system and the health state evaluation result of the predetermined secondary device;

The decision index value calculation module is used to calculate the decision index value under the predetermined secondary equipment overhaul decision and the decision index value under the technical transformation decision respectively according to the predetermined strategy parameter value; wherein, the decision index value includes LCC Equivalent annual cost value, equipment risk value and equipment performance value;

The normalization processing module is used to normalize the decision index value;

The annual average cost comprehensive benefit value calculation module is used to calculate the normalized decision index value as a parameter using the cost risk benefit model to obtain the annual average cost comprehensive benefit of the overhaul decision for the predetermined secondary equipment under different decision years. value and the annual average cost and comprehensive benefit value of technological transformation decisions;

The decision-making module is used to determine the optimal decision-making scheme for the major overhaul of the predetermined secondary equipment by comparing the annual average cost and comprehensive benefit value of the overhaul decision and the technical transformation decision in the same decision-making period.

Optionally, the annual average cost comprehensive benefit value calculation module includes:

进行计算，得到不同决策年限下大修决策的年均成本综合效益值REC_dx；The unit for calculating the comprehensive benefit value of the annual average cost of the overhaul decision is used to calculate the quantified value C _N of the LCC equivalent annual average cost value after normalization under the overhaul decision, the quantified value of the equipment risk value R _N and the quantified value of the equipment efficiency value E _N as a parameter using cost-risk-benefit model

Calculation is carried out to obtain the annual average cost comprehensive benefit value REC _dx of overhaul decision under different decision years;

进行计算，得到不同决策年限下技改决策的年均成本综合效益值REC_jg。The calculation unit for the comprehensive benefit value of the annual average cost of technical renovation decision-making is used to calculate the quantified value C _N of the LCC equivalent annual average cost value after normalization under the technical renovation decision, the quantified value of the equipment risk value R _N and the equipment efficiency value. The quantified value E _N is used as a parameter in the cost-risk-benefit model

Calculation is carried out to obtain the annual average cost comprehensive benefit value REC _jg of the technological transformation decision under different decision-making years.

The present invention provides a decision-making method for overhauling technical renovation of secondary equipment. The method includes: obtaining a predetermined strategy parameter value from the state information processing and analysis results of the predetermined secondary equipment in the system and the health state evaluation result; according to the predetermined strategy parameter value Calculate the decision index value under the decision of the scheduled secondary equipment overhaul and the decision index value under the technical transformation decision; wherein, the decision index value includes the LCC equivalent annual average cost value, the equipment risk value and the equipment efficiency value; the decision index value Carry out normalization processing; use the normalized decision-making index value as a parameter to calculate with the cost-risk-benefit model, and obtain the annual average cost and comprehensive benefit value of the overhaul decision and the year of the technical transformation decision under different decision-making years for the scheduled secondary equipment. Average cost comprehensive benefit value; compare the annual average cost comprehensive benefit value of the two decision-making schemes (overhaul decision/technical transformation decision) to determine the optimal decision-making scheme for scheduled secondary equipment overhaul and technical transformation;

This method comprehensively considers the whole life cycle cost of secondary equipment to build a multi-faceted and comprehensive cost-benefit model, so as to realize the comprehensive optimization of the whole life cycle cost, risk and performance of assets, and reasonably manage the technical renovation project of secondary equipment. , enhance the ability of value creation; provide scientific and effective decision-making basis for overhaul and technical transformation; indirectly improve the economic benefits of enterprises, and ensure the safety and reliability of power grid operation. Improve the current decision-making methods of power grid enterprises based on the periodic overhaul of secondary equipment management, due technical transformation and subjective qualitative decision. The present invention also provides a decision-making and determination system for the overhaul of secondary equipment, which has the above beneficial effects, and will not be repeated here.

Description of drawings

In order to explain the embodiments of the present invention or the technical solutions in the prior art more clearly, the following briefly introduces the accompanying drawings that need to be used in the description of the embodiments or the prior art. Obviously, the accompanying drawings in the following description are only It is an embodiment of the present invention. For those of ordinary skill in the art, other drawings can also be obtained according to the provided drawings without creative work.

FIG. 1 is a flowchart of a decision-making method for overhauling a secondary equipment provided by an embodiment of the present invention;

FIG. 2 is a schematic diagram of a full-life-cycle life cost tree suitable for major revision technical transformation decisions provided by an embodiment of the present invention;

3 is a schematic diagram of a secondary equipment risk assessment model provided by an embodiment of the present invention;

4 is a schematic diagram of a typical failure rate distribution (bath bath curve) provided by an embodiment of the present invention;

FIG. 5 is a bar chart of the average annual cost of technical renovation and overhaul provided by an embodiment of the present invention;

FIG. 6 is a structural block diagram of a decision-making and determination system for a major overhaul of a secondary equipment provided by an embodiment of the present invention.

Detailed ways

The core of the present invention is to provide a decision-making method and system for the overhaul of secondary equipment, and to improve the current decision-making method of periodic overhaul, due technical modification and subjective qualitative decision based on the management of secondary equipment in power grid enterprises. The project approval provides quantitative analysis and decision-making basis.

In order to make the purposes, technical solutions and advantages of the embodiments of the present invention clearer, the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention will be clearly and completely described below with reference to the accompanying drawings in the embodiments of the present invention. Obviously, the described embodiments These are some embodiments of the present invention, but not all embodiments. Based on the embodiments of the present invention, all other embodiments obtained by those of ordinary skill in the art without creative efforts shall fall within the protection scope of the present invention.

At present, the traditional methods for the overhaul of power grid secondary equipment mainly include: cost-benefit method, fixed-benefit method, fixed-cost method, trade-off analysis method, probability analysis method and statistical theory, NPV (Net Present Value) and NCF ( Net Cash Flow) method, but these methods all consider the decision of major revision project as a separate individual, so it is a process optimization management. Each method can only take into account one major aspect of the process. Therefore, they have the following disadvantages:

First, the scope is narrow, and the whole life cycle cost management is not considered from the perspective of the entire value chain. It includes the feasibility study and demonstration of equipment, research and development, procurement, installation, operation, maintenance, and later scrap recycling, etc. the entire value chain process. The traditional method only considers the immediate project decision-making, only pays attention to the initial project investment in the early stage, and ignores the cost management during the entire project operation and maintenance period. Therefore, its decision-making has certain defects.

Second, the decision-making cycle is too short to fully reflect the risk of management; that is, a large-scale project must undergo a rigorous preliminary demonstration, and after the feasibility study and demonstration, it must be monitored from time to time to control the operation of the current project and timely to make new improvements. The traditional models and methods do not fully pay attention to the entire process control. The results of the previous feasibility study and demonstration stage are used to make decisions on future project management. The decision-making cycle is too short, and the risks that may exist in the later stage of project operation and maintenance are not fully evaluated. This is the fundamental reason why many projects are feasible in the feasibility study and demonstration stage, but face greater pressure of loss once they are put into production.

Third, the evaluation process is relatively simple and cannot fully and accurately reflect the cost in the entire life cycle. Modern equipment management mostly adopts more complex calculation models and information-based simulation calculations, especially for large-scale power equipment projects, which completely pass the feasibility study and demonstration stage. Therefore, the equipment management should not only focus on the initial investment cost, procurement cost, and installation cost, but also consider the later social and economic cost, environmental protection cost, etc. The traditional method pays too much attention to the cost of materialization, while ignoring the potential social cost and environmental impact cost of the project, which is a major defect of the traditional model and method.

Fourth, it does not meet the characteristics of the power supply enterprises. The power industry has its own unique characteristics of project management due to its long time period, large scope of influence, slow capital turnover and complex assets. Considering its inherent characteristics, establish an applicable full life cycle cost model, and quantify each cost branch in a refined manner, instead of blindly using models and methods such as financial or probabilistic analysis. The traditional method is mainly based on the development of other industries. Most of its decision-making methods are single and non-dynamic. Therefore, most of its decision-making models focus on the current initial investment and do not fully meet the characteristics of the power industry, especially the power supply enterprises themselves. Such as institutional issues, conceptual issues, social issues, environmental issues and so on.

In order to solve the above problems, in this embodiment, under the premise of taking into account the safety and reliability of the power grid and equipment, the full life cycle analysis method of assets can be used to analyze the full life cycle cost of secondary equipment, and comprehensive performance risk indicators can be carried out for major revision projects. Quantitative solution not only ensures the comprehensiveness and reliability of project decision-making basis, but also controls the entire life cycle cost of assets as a whole, and improves the overall efficiency of the company. There is a big difference between life cycle cost management and previous cost management methods and project decision-making. The main difference is that life cycle cost management is based on the awareness of comprehensive management to manage the entire project process, that is, it is not a major revision project. Decisions are considered as individual individuals, so it is a process of optimal management. Carry out full life cycle management of assets for all secondary equipment in the power grid, including equipment planning, design, procurement, construction, operation, maintenance, repair and update, and decommissioning, to achieve the full life cycle cost of assets. , comprehensive optimization of risk and efficiency, and enhance the ability to create value. Specifically, please refer to FIG. 1, which is a flowchart of a method for determining a decision for a secondary equipment overhaul provided by an embodiment of the present invention; the method for determining a decision may include:

S100. Obtain a predetermined strategy parameter value from a state information processing analysis result of a predetermined secondary device in the system and a health state evaluation result of the predetermined secondary device;

Specifically, the status information processing and analysis result is obtained by performing information processing and analysis on the collected status information. In order to improve the comprehensiveness and rationality of subsequent calculation, the acquisition of status information here may include online monitoring information of predetermined secondary equipment, historical ledger data information, and environmental factor information.

The predetermined secondary equipment here refers to the calculation object selected by the user, which can refer to any secondary equipment, but the same secondary equipment should be targeted for each time the overhaul and technical transformation comparison decision is made.

S110. According to the predetermined strategy parameter value, respectively calculate the decision index value under the predetermined secondary equipment overhaul decision and the decision index value under the technical transformation decision; wherein, the decision index value includes the LCC equivalent annual average cost value, Equipment risk value and equipment performance value;

Specifically, the decision-making index is the parameter for the subsequent decision-making of major revision and technical renovation, and the accuracy of the decision-making index directly affects the accuracy of the quantitative analysis and decision-making of the project approval of the major revision and technical renovation project. The purpose of the cost-benefit assessment of the secondary equipment in this embodiment is to synthesize the full-life-cycle risk, efficiency, and cost information of the secondary equipment, to conduct multi-dimensional assessments for the performance of the secondary equipment, and to perform major technical renovations on the current secondary equipment. basis for decision-making. To sum up the above factors, the comprehensive benefit value of the annual average cost can be calculated according to the relationship between the risk efficiency and cost as the decision objective function for selecting the best overhaul technical transformation project.

Specifically, the quantification process of the LCC equivalent annual average cost value is as follows:

The cost evaluation system of secondary equipment is mainly to decompose the whole life cycle cost of secondary equipment, and determine the cost of each stage of secondary equipment. The dimension of the value information about the secondary equipment in the system determines the division of the cost of each stage of the whole life cycle of the secondary equipment. Among them, LCC (full life cycle cost, Life Cycle Cost, LCC for short), also known as full life cycle cost. It refers to all costs related to the product during the effective use of the product, including product design costs, manufacturing costs, procurement costs, use costs, maintenance costs, and decommissioning disposal costs.

The LCC cost composition of secondary equipment is: LCC=CI+CO+CM+CF+CD

Among them, LCC—full life cycle cost; CI—initial investment cost; CO—operation cost; CM—overhaul and maintenance cost; CF—failure loss cost; CD—decommissioning disposal cost.

Due to the different life cycles of different technological transformation strategies, in order to overcome the problem of comparison caliber caused by different life cycles, the indicators selected for the annual average cost model of technological transformation decision-making are annual value indicators. The calculation model is as follows:

计算所述预定二次设备大修决策下的LCC等额年均成本值NPVA_dx；Use the formula

Calculate the LCC equivalent annual average cost value NPVA _dx under the predetermined secondary equipment overhaul decision;

计算所述预定二次设备技改决策下的LCC等额年均成本值NPVA_jg；Use the formula

Calculate the LCC equivalent annual average cost value _NPVA under the described predetermined secondary equipment technical transformation decision;

K＝C_原值-C_残值-T_运行×C_年折旧，T_dx、T_jg分别表示设备进行大修技改后所剩余的使用寿命；CI_dx、CI_jg分别表示对设备进行大修估算以及设备技改的初始总投资，CO，CM，CF，CD分别表示大修和技改对应的运行成本，检修维护成本，故障损失成本，退役处置成本，即CO_dxj为大修运行成本，CO_jgj为技改运行成本；i为银行利率(折现率8％)；r为通货膨胀率(3％)；n为计算年均费用的设计年限与决策所在年的差异年值；(A/F,i,T)为按年度投资费用年值折算系数；K为设备净值。in,

K = C _{original value} - C _{residual value} - T _operation × C _{year depreciation} , T _dx and T _jg respectively represent the remaining service life after the equipment is overhauled and technically modified; CI _dx and CI _jg respectively represent the overhaul estimate and equipment The initial total investment of technical renovation, CO, CM, CF, and CD respectively represent the operating cost, maintenance cost, failure loss cost, and decommissioning disposal cost corresponding to the overhaul and technical renovation, that is, CO _dxj is the operating cost of the overhaul, and CO _jgj is the technical renovation Operating cost; i is the bank interest rate (discount rate 8%); r is the inflation rate (3%); n is the annual difference between the design year for calculating the average annual cost and the year in which the decision is made; (A/F,i, T) is the conversion factor based on the annual value of the annual investment cost; K is the net value of the equipment.

The quantification process of equipment risk value is as follows:

Risk assessment is carried out before and after the implementation of the secondary equipment overhaul technical transformation strategy by means of quantified risk value. Risk assessment takes the risk value as an indicator, and comprehensively considers the roles of secondary equipment risks, social and environmental hazards and equipment risk probability. details as follows:

Use the formula R(t)=LE(t)×P(t) to calculate the equipment risk value under the predetermined secondary equipment overhaul decision and the equipment risk value under the technical renovation decision;

Among them, LE=w ₁ × equipment importance+w ₂ × equipment possible loss+w ₃ × user influence, LE(t) is the risk loss value, P(t) is the risk probability value, w is the weight value, and w ₁ +w ₂ +w ₃ =1, w ₁ , w ₂ , and w ₃ take values according to the classification of the predetermined secondary equipment, and R(t) is the equipment risk value.

The composition of the parameters can refer to Figure 3. The risk loss value is the possible loss of assets LE, which is related to the importance of equipment such as the substation level, the social environmental impact, that is, the possible loss of equipment, and the attribute of the affected object, that is, user influence. The average failure rate can be calculated from the collected state information and the analysis of the collected state information in combination with the health state evaluation information of the secondary equipment (ie, the predetermined secondary equipment). Finally, the equipment risk value R is obtained by using the above formula.

The following example illustrates the above process:

For example, China Southern Power Grid Corporation's "Safety Production Risk Management System" points out that the China Southern Power Grid operation safety risk (hereinafter referred to as "grid risk") assessment is to comprehensively consider the three aspects of power grid security, social environment and benefits after the evaluation results of equipment status. , determine the degree of risk existing in equipment operation, and provide a basis for the formulation of maintenance strategies and emergency plans. The solution of the risk loss value is obtained according to the classification of the importance of equipment and the weight value of various device types in the "Guangdong Power Grid Corporation's Equipment Condition Evaluation and Risk Assessment Technical Guidelines", and the probability value is based on the risk probability value evaluation index. System and bathtub curve acquisition: The entire bathtub curve in Figure 4 can be divided into three stages.

The first stage is the early failure period IM (1nfant Mortality): when the product is first used, the difference in equipment quality is mainly reflected in the failure rate. The failure rate of equipment with poor quality is generally higher than that of equipment with better quality, and the failure rate is very high. However, as the working time of the product increases, the failure rate decreases rapidly, and most of the reasons for failure at this stage are caused by defects in the design, raw materials and manufacturing process.

The second stage is the random failure period RF (Random Failures): during this period, the failure occurs randomly, the failure rate is the lowest, and it is roughly in a stable state, which can be approximately regarded as a constant. This period is the good use stage of the product. The reliability index expresses this period. During the occasional equipment failure period, the difference in equipment quality is mainly manifested in two aspects: first, the length of the equipment occasional failure period, and second, the failure rate. Equipment with better quality has a longer period of occasional failure and a lower failure rate. During the period of equipment wear and tear, the difference in equipment quality is mainly reflected in whether the equipment has entered the period of wear and tear in advance.

The third stage is WO (Wear Out): in the middle and late stages of equipment use, due to the wear, aging, corrosion and other reasons of equipment parts, the failure rate increases rapidly with the extension of time, and the failure rate continues to rise. The equipment with better quality only enters the equipment wear failure period in the last stage of the equipment life cycle, while the equipment with poor quality often enters the equipment wear failure period in the middle stage of the equipment life cycle. In the actual application of secondary equipment, it is found that when the wear-out period begins, that is, point P in the figure, it is often faced with the choice of replacing the equipment or continuing to use it after overhaul, that is, whether to implement technical transformation. Use LCC management theory to study the best time point for overhauling technical reform strategies.

The risk assessment method can refer to the "Technical Specification for Quantitative Assessment of Operational Safety Risk of China Southern Power Grid", and the impact and degree of harm of the secondary equipment in the grid risk can be distinguished according to the size of the risk value, which is divided into 6 risk levels as shown in the following table:

Table 1 Risk assessment criteria for secondary equipment

Among them, class I risk (red): risk value ≥ 5; class II risk (orange): 3≤ risk value <5; class III risk (pink): 1≤ risk value <3; class IV risk (yellow): 0.5 ≤Risk<1; V-level risk (green): 0.1≤Risk<0.5; Level VI risk (blue): 0≤Risk<0.1. That is, the equipment risk level can be known according to the equipment risk value.

The quantification process of equipment effectiveness value is as follows:

According to the efficacy ADC analysis method, namely the ADC analysis model, the efficacy evaluation index system was established. At present, most of the secondary equipment in the power system has a single function such as a protection device or two functions such as a measurement and control device. According to the above characteristics of the secondary equipment, the performance evaluation of the secondary equipment conforms to the characteristics of the application of the ADC analysis method. The expression for this model is as follows:

E=ADC

Among them, E is the equipment effectiveness value, A is the availability vector, D is the credibility matrix, and C is the inherent capability vector.

Finally, according to the ADC analysis method, the performance results are graded and expressed as shown in Table 2:

Table 2 Efficiency Grading Table

efficacy value 0-0.6 0.6-0.8 0.8-0.95 0.95-1 performance class Difference lower balanced efficient

Wherein, this embodiment does not limit the specific calculation process of the specific decision index value, and only needs to use the calculation model to obtain the accurate decision index value.

S120, normalize the decision index value;

Specifically, when evaluating the predetermined secondary equipment, a more comprehensive evaluation of the equipment can be achieved from the three dimensions of equipment cost, risk, and efficiency. In order to avoid the problem of comparison between different dimensions and different calibers, the three major indicators can be unified into the same dimension for comparison through normalization. Optionally, normalizing the decision index value may include:

C_N∈[0,1]对LCC等额年均成本值进行归一化处理；Use the formula

C _N ∈ [0,1] normalizes the LCC equivalent annual average cost value;

R_N∈[0,1]对设备风险值进行归一化处理；Use the formula

R _N ∈ [0,1] normalizes the equipment risk value;

Use the formula E _N =E, E _N ∈[0,1] to normalize the device performance value;

Among them, C _N , R _N , and _EN are the quantified values of the normalized values of each decision-making index, CI _max is the maximum initial investment cost in the same type of equipment; R _max is the risk maximum value of the risk assessment mode.

S130, using the normalized decision-making index value as a parameter to calculate by using a cost-risk-benefit model, to obtain the annual average cost comprehensive benefit value of the overhaul decision and the annual average cost of the technical renovation decision under different decision years for the predetermined secondary equipment Comprehensive benefit value; the overhaul decision here is the overhaul plan, and the technical transformation decision is the technical transformation plan.

进行计算，得到不同决策年限下的年均成本综合效益值REC。Specifically, the quantified value C _{N of the normalized LCC equivalent annual average cost value, the quantified value R N of the equipment risk value and the quantified value E N of the} equipment efficiency value are used as parameters to use the cost-risk-benefit model

Calculation is carried out to obtain the annual average cost comprehensive benefit value REC under different decision-making years.

Among them, each decision-making index value has a certain range, and each decision-making index has its normal operation or prohibited operation range in the process of project implementation. Therefore, the allowable range of each decision-making index value can also be set here. If there is a decision index value that exceeds the set allowable range, it indicates that the project has major hidden dangers, or it is not necessary to continue. That is, preferably, the cost-risk-benefit model can also be:

Among them: REC (Risk Effectiveness Cost) is the annual average cost comprehensive benefit value, that is, the cost-risk benefit model; _CK is the maximum value of the secondary equipment input cost acceptable to the power grid company. The initial input cost is the base value of the proportional coefficient; R _t is the highest tolerable risk value; E _t is the lowest tolerable efficacy value. The numerical values in the above formula are only specific examples, and the present embodiment does not limit the specific numerical values of _CK , R _t and E _t . For example, when the numerical calculation is performed before the project is executed and the _EN is 0.3, the project can be abandoned.

S140. Determine an optimal decision-making plan for the major overhaul of the predetermined secondary equipment by comparing the annual average cost and comprehensive benefit value of the overhaul decision and the technical transformation decision in the same decision-making period.

Specifically, when the average annual cost comprehensive benefit value of the overhaul plan (that is, the overhaul decision), that is, REC _dx , is not less than the annual average cost comprehensive benefit value of the technical renovation plan (that is, the technical renovation decision), that is, the value in REC _jg , then Carry out major repair project; when the annual average cost comprehensive benefit value of the major repair plan is less than the annual average cost comprehensive benefit value of the technical transformation plan, the technical transformation project will be approved. That is, according to the principle of the comprehensive benefit value of the average annual cost: when REC _jg > REC _dx , priority is given to the establishment of equipment technical renovation; when REC _jg ≤ REC _dx , priority is given to the establishment of equipment overhaul.

Based on the above technical solutions, the method for decision-making and determination of the overhaul of the secondary equipment proposed in the embodiment of the present invention can be realized from the three dimensions of the cost, risk, and efficiency of the secondary equipment when the method evaluates the secondary equipment and collects data. A more comprehensive evaluation of the equipment. Through normalization processing, the three major indicators are unified into the same dimension of numerical value for comparison, so as to avoid the comparison problem of different dimensions and different calibers. That is to say, it integrates all-round information about the risks, efficiency and cost of the secondary equipment in the whole life cycle, conducts multi-dimensional evaluation for the performance of the secondary equipment, and provides a decision-making basis for the current major revision of the secondary equipment.

Based on the above-mentioned embodiment, the above-mentioned decision-making method for overhauling the secondary equipment can be calculated at any time when the project exists, or can be calculated when it is determined that the system needs to be overhauled. In order to save manpower and reduce the number of calculations, before making the above decision-making determination, it can be determined whether the system needs to be overhauled and technically modified, and the above-mentioned calculation is performed when a major modification and technical modification decision is required. Specifically, the process of determining whether the system needs major revisions may include:

From the status information processing and analysis results of the predetermined secondary equipment in the system and the health status evaluation results of the predetermined secondary equipment, and according to the judgment criteria to determine whether major revisions are required;

Among them, the judgment standard can be "China Southern Power Grid Overhaul Technical Reform Access Guidelines";

If so, the decision to carry out the technical overhaul of the secondary equipment determines the calculation process.

If not, run it after normal maintenance.

Among them, the state information sources of the secondary equipment may include historical ledger data, online monitoring information and environmental factor information.

Further, this method can directly calculate the year in which the average annual cost and comprehensive benefit value of major revisions are balanced, and can predict the best year for technical renovation projects. It is not difficult to find that the P point of the bathtub curve appears around this time, that is, the equipment applies for technical renovation. , that is, REC _jg =REC _dx . When making predictions, the acquisition method of the fixed parameters or the parameters with fixed changes refers to the above calculation process, and the acquisition of real-time parameters can be obtained by prediction according to historical data. For example, to obtain the failure rate in the formula, you can directly perform data fitting according to the historical failure rate data recorded in the historical ledger data to obtain the failure rate trend graph, and obtain the system failure rate at each time according to the graph.

Based on the above technical solution, the decision-making method for the overhaul of the secondary equipment proposed in the embodiment of the present invention has the following advantages:

First, in view of the narrow cost range selected by the traditional method, this method learns from each other's strengths and complements its weaknesses, takes advantage of the benefit-cost method, and considers the full life cycle cost of secondary equipment from the perspective of the entire value chain, so that the entire life cycle cost of secondary equipment used for major revisions is reduced. The life cycle cost tree of life is an analysis of the whole process of secondary equipment in all dimensions. It not only considers the entire life cycle from planning and design to scrapping, avoiding temporary thinking, but also requires the system to ensure the application of the LCC method.

Second, for the problems that the decision-making cycle of the traditional method is too short and the evaluation process is relatively simple, the use of the LCC cost model shows more of the characteristics of the whole system, breaking the boundaries of functional departments, and considering different stages such as planning, design, infrastructure, and operation. Based on the overall efficiency of the enterprise, we seek the best solution. This method fully evaluates the possible risks in the later stage of project operation and maintenance, and greatly reduces the risk of loss pressure after the secondary equipment is put into production.

Third, through the analysis and research on the concept of full life cycle cost management, from the perspective of the characteristics of the secondary equipment itself, a full-dimensional life cycle cost model suitable for the overhaul of the secondary equipment is constructed. It is truly in line with the characteristics of the power supply enterprises. The power industry has its own unique characteristics of project management due to its long time period, large scope of influence, slow capital turnover and complex assets. Track evaluation, formulate scientific and reasonable objective functions and constraints.

Fourth, combine the NPV and NCF methods to comprehensively consider the time value of the equipment, but because the equipment overhaul requires a lot of people, money, and materials, and the operation time of the secondary equipment after the overhaul is limited by the remaining years of the secondary equipment . The technical transformation and replacement of new secondary equipment requires a huge one-time investment, and the new equipment can operate safely for a long time. It can be seen that the service life of the equipment after the overhaul and the technical transformation is different, and the present value and the future value are very different and cannot be directly compared. Therefore, this method comprehensively combines the time value theory, incorporates the inflation rate and the bank discount rate, and obtains the overhaul. And the annual average value model of the entire life cycle of the technical renovation project, by calculating the annual average value of the overhaul and technical renovation as the cost index basis for the decision-making of the overhaul and technical renovation.

The above calculation process is described below through a specific example of a power supply company:

The calculation example takes the transformation of a 220kV single busbar protection device (one set) in a power supply bureau as an example. The batch protection device was produced and put into use in 2007. The unit price of each equipment plug-in is 10,000 yuan. The equipment can be used directly for backup in case of failure. Plugin replacement. According to the requirements of the maintenance guide and the manufacturer's maintenance manual, the overhaul period is 8 years. According to the equipment status and operation ledger data from 2007 to 15, the whole life cycle cost is used for modeling and calculation, and the annual average cost-benefit improvement of LCC overhaul and technical transformation of the protection device is simulated, and then the two are compared and calculated. Determine the technical transformation strategy and provide reference opinions for similar major revision technical transformation decisions.

Option 1: Overhaul the protection device in 2015, replace the faulty plug-in, continue to operate for 4 years, when the operating life reaches the designed operating life, and then carry out technical renovation;

Option 2: In 2015, the new protection device will be directly technically transformed and replaced, and it will run for 12 years according to the designed service life.

Calculation of the average annual cost: According to the annual average cost value, the annual average cost of the protective device can be obtained by obtaining the method shown in Table 3. According to the data in Table 3, the bar chart of the annual average cost of overhaul technical renovation is drawn as shown in Figure 5:

Table 3 The annual average cost of each scheme after the decision-making maintenance

Calculation of risk quantification value:

The 220kV single bus protection device is evaluated according to the risk probability value, and the risk probability of the protection device is known as:

(Plan 1) 9th year overhaul: the overall risk probability and risk value of the protection device are:

P=0.06032×[1+0.03×(90-85)]=0.069368

R(t) _dx = (0.6×6.2+0.4×7)×0.069368=0.452

(Plan 2) 9th year technical renovation: The overall estimated failure rate and risk value of the protection device are:

P=0.0058×[0.9+0.02×(100-95)]=0.058

R(t) _jg = (0.6×6.2+0.4×7)×0.058=0.37816

Referring to the secondary equipment risk assessment standard, it can be seen that the equipment risk value after overhaul and technical transformation decision is controlled within 0.5 green risk, which is in line with the actual situation.

Calculation of efficacy quantification value:

The guideline for the overhaul of the secondary equipment is "to improve the health level, reliability and availability of the equipment". According to the risk calculation, the failure rate of the equipment at this time is: λ _dx = 0.06032, λ _jg = 0.058, The 220kV single busbar protection device can be seen from the value table of the repair rate of the secondary equipment that μ=0.8, and the ADC analysis method of the efficiency quantification formula shows that:

Since the overhaul technical transformation takes into account the familial defects of the equipment at the time of the equipment manufacturer's own manufacture, as well as uncontrollable factors such as installation and operation, manual misoperation, data loss, etc., through the final result of the calculation, it can be seen from the comparison of the efficiency grading table that the state of the measurement and control device after the overhaul is balanced. status, in line with reality.

Major revision of technical transformation plan decision:

Through the cost comparison of the two models of the above major revision and technical transformation, combined with the efficiency risk cost index, the risk efficiency cost index is normalized. According to the risk level evaluation standard of China Southern Network, the maximum risk is 10, and the maximum initial investment cost of similar equipment of the measurement and control device is 94,366.6 yuan. Using the normalization formula, it can be known that:

Normalized value at risk:

Overhaul R _dx = 0.452/10 = 0.0452

Technical transformation R _jg = 0.37816/10 = 0.037816

Normalized efficacy values:

Overhaul E _dx = 0.8688

Technical transformation E _dx = 0.8999

Normalize the cost value:

Overhaul C _dx = 35777.98/94366.6 = 0.379

Technical transformation C _jg = 33922.06/94366.6 = 0.359

Combined with the equipment characteristics of the protection device in the integrated system of the whole station, and in the environment of whether the total funds of the project plan library are surplus, the overall cost-risk-efficiency constraint coefficient of the device is weighed. It is not difficult to find that each index factor satisfies the constraints condition. Through the technical method decision-making formula, according to the principle of the level of the comprehensive benefit value of the average annual cost:

After comparison, it can be seen that REC _jg > REC _dx , it can be seen that the average annual cost and comprehensive benefit value of the protection equipment after the technical transformation decision is greater than the overhaul decision, that is, in the ninth year, the second option should be prioritized for the technical transformation project. Through calculation, the average annual benefit improvement of the equipment in the 8th year is calculated as:

Through analysis and comparison, it can be seen that although the average annual consumption cost of overhaul in the 8th year is 34,327.04 yuan, which is less than the average annual cost of 34,499.8 yuan for the technical renovation decision, the comprehensive benefit value of the annual average cost of the entire protection device technical renovation decision is still greater than that of the overhaul decision. In the 8th year, priority should be given to the second plan to carry out technical transformation projects. In order to enhance the persuasiveness of the technical method, the average annual benefit improvement of the available equipment in the seventh year is:

Through analysis and comparison, it can be seen that the average annual consumption cost of the overall overhaul of the protection equipment in the seventh year is lower than the annual average cost of the technical transformation decision, and the average annual benefit improvement is greater than that of the equipment technical transformation decision. Plan 1 should be prioritized for major overhaul in 7 years.

To sum up, it can be predicted that the 8th year is the best year to carry out technical renovation projects. It is not difficult to find that the P point of the bathtub curve appears around this time, that is, the best time for equipment to apply for technical renovation. Practical suggestions can be given as follows: the average annual cost of replacing plug-ins for this batch of 220kV protection devices during overhaul increases with the increase in production years, but the benefit improvement is smaller and smaller, which is contrary to the technical transformation strategy. Through calculation and analysis, if the equipment fails in the 7th year of operation and before, the comprehensive benefit value of the annual average cost of replacing the equipment in the overhaul is better than that of the technical transformation. If the protection device fails in the 8th year and after the equipment is put into operation, the technical transformation strategy will replace the equipment. The annual average cost comprehensive benefit value is better than the overhaul plug-in replacement strategy.

Therefore, in the verification of this example, it can be seen that the technical method in the scheme is obviously more practical, persuasive and operable than other traditional methods.

The following is an introduction to the decision-determining system for the technical overhaul of the secondary equipment provided by the embodiments of the present invention. The decision-determination system for the overhaul of the secondary equipment described below and the decision-determination method for the overhaul of the secondary equipment described above are mutually compatible with each other. corresponding reference.

Please refer to FIG. 6, which is a structural block diagram of a decision-making and determination system for a secondary equipment major overhaul provided by an embodiment of the present invention; the system may include:

The parameter acquisition module 100 is configured to acquire the predetermined strategy parameter value from the state information processing and analysis result of the predetermined secondary device in the system and the health state evaluation result of the predetermined secondary device;

The decision index value calculation module 200 is configured to calculate the decision index value under the predetermined secondary equipment overhaul decision and the decision index value under the technical transformation decision respectively according to the predetermined strategy parameter value; wherein, the decision index value includes LCC equivalent annual average cost value, equipment risk value and equipment efficiency value;

The normalization processing module 300 is used for normalizing the decision index value;

The annual average cost comprehensive benefit value calculation module 400 is used for calculating the normalized decision index value as a parameter using a cost risk benefit model to obtain the comprehensive annual average cost of the overhaul decision for the predetermined secondary equipment under different decision years. Benefit value and comprehensive benefit value of annual average cost of technological transformation decision;

The decision determination module 500 is configured to determine the optimal decision plan for the major overhaul of the predetermined secondary equipment by comparing the annual average cost and comprehensive benefit value of the overhaul decision and the technical transformation decision in the same decision-making period.

Optionally, the annual average cost comprehensive benefit value calculation module 400 may include:

进行计算，得到不同决策年限下大修决策的年均成本综合效益值REC_dx；The unit for calculating the comprehensive benefit value of the annual average cost of the overhaul decision is used to calculate the quantified value C _N of the LCC equivalent annual average cost value after normalization under the overhaul decision, the quantified value of the equipment risk value R _N and the quantified value of the equipment efficiency value E _N as a parameter using cost-risk-benefit model

Calculation is carried out to obtain the annual average cost comprehensive benefit value REC _dx of overhaul decision under different decision years;

进行计算，得到不同决策年限下技改决策的年均成本综合效益值REC_jg。The calculation unit for the comprehensive benefit value of the annual average cost of technical renovation decision-making is used to calculate the quantified value C _N of the LCC equivalent annual average cost value after normalization under the technical renovation decision, the quantified value of the equipment risk value R _N and the equipment efficiency value. The quantified value E _N is used as a parameter in the cost-risk-benefit model

Calculation is carried out to obtain the annual average cost comprehensive benefit value REC _jg of the technological transformation decision under different decision-making years.

Based on the above embodiments, the system may further include:

The judging module is used to process the analysis result of the state information of the predetermined secondary equipment in the system and the evaluation result of the health state of the predetermined secondary equipment to determine whether a major revision is required; if not, it is operated after normal maintenance.

The various embodiments in the specification are described in a progressive manner, and each embodiment focuses on the differences from other embodiments, and the same and similar parts between the various embodiments can be referred to each other. For the system disclosed in the embodiment, since it corresponds to the method disclosed in the embodiment, the description is relatively simple, and the relevant part can be referred to the description of the method.

Professionals may further realize that the units and algorithm steps of each example described in conjunction with the embodiments disclosed herein can be implemented in electronic hardware, computer software, or a combination of the two, in order to clearly illustrate the possibilities of hardware and software. Interchangeability, the above description has generally described the components and steps of each example in terms of functionality. Whether these functions are performed in hardware or software depends on the specific application and design constraints of the technical solution. Skilled artisans may implement the described functionality using different methods for each particular application, but such implementations should not be considered beyond the scope of the present invention.

The steps of a method or algorithm described in connection with the embodiments disclosed herein may be directly implemented in hardware, a software module executed by a processor, or a combination of the two. The software module can be placed in random access memory (RAM), internal memory, read only memory (ROM), electrically programmable ROM, electrically erasable programmable ROM, registers, hard disk, removable disk, CD-ROM, or any other in the technical field. in any other known form of storage medium.

The decision-making method and system for the overhaul of the secondary equipment provided by the present invention are described above in detail. The principles and implementations of the present invention are described herein by using specific examples, and the descriptions of the above embodiments are only used to help understand the method and the core idea of the present invention. It should be pointed out that for those skilled in the art, without departing from the principle of the present invention, several improvements and modifications can also be made to the present invention, and these improvements and modifications also fall within the protection scope of the claims of the present invention.

Claims (6)

1. a decision-making determination method for the overhaul of secondary equipment is characterized in that, comprising: Obtain the predetermined strategy parameter value from the state information processing and analysis result of the predetermined secondary device in the system and the health state evaluation result of the predetermined secondary device; According to the predetermined strategy parameter value, the decision index value under the predetermined secondary equipment overhaul decision and the decision index value under the technical transformation decision are respectively calculated; wherein, the decision index value includes the LCC equivalent annual average cost value, the equipment risk value value and equipment performance value; Normalize the decision index value; Using the normalized decision-making index value as a parameter to use the cost-risk-benefit model to calculate, to obtain the annual average cost comprehensive benefit value of the overhaul decision and the annual average cost comprehensive benefit value of the technical transformation decision under different decision years for the predetermined secondary equipment value; Determine the optimal decision-making plan for the major overhaul of the predetermined secondary equipment by comparing the annual average cost and comprehensive benefit value of the overhaul decision and the technical transformation decision in the same decision-making year; Wherein, according to the predetermined strategy parameter value, calculate the LCC equivalent annual cost value under the predetermined secondary equipment overhaul decision and the LCC equivalent annual cost value under the technical transformation decision, including: Use the formula

Calculate the LCC equivalent annual average cost value NPVA _dx under the predetermined secondary equipment overhaul decision; Use the formula

Calculate the LCC equivalent annual average cost value _NPVA under the described predetermined secondary equipment technical transformation decision; in,

K = C _{original value} - C _{residual value} - T _operation × C _{year depreciation} , T _dx and T _jg respectively represent the remaining service life after the equipment is overhauled and technically modified; CI _dx and CI _jg respectively represent the overhaul estimate and equipment The initial total investment of technical renovation, CO, CM, CF, and CD respectively represent the operating cost, maintenance cost, failure loss cost, and decommissioning disposal cost corresponding to overhaul and technical renovation; i is the bank interest rate; r is the inflation rate; n is the Calculate the annual value of the difference between the design life of the annual average cost and the year in which the decision is made; (A/F, i, T) is a general formula representing the conversion factor based on the annual value of the annual investment cost, where T refers to T _dx or T _jg , K is the net value of the equipment; According to the predetermined strategy parameter value, calculate the equipment risk value under the predetermined secondary equipment overhaul decision and the equipment risk value under the technical transformation decision, including: Use the formula R(t)=LE(t)×P(t) to calculate the equipment risk value under the predetermined secondary equipment overhaul decision and the equipment risk value under the technical renovation decision; Among them, LE=w ₁ × equipment importance+w ₂ × equipment possible loss+w ₃ × user influence, LE(t) is the risk loss value, P(t) is the risk probability value, w is the weight value, and w ₁ +w ₂ +w ₃ =1, w ₁ , w ₂ , and w ₃ take values according to the classification of the predetermined secondary equipment, and R(t) is the equipment risk value; According to the predetermined strategy parameter value, calculate the equipment performance value under the predetermined secondary equipment overhaul decision and the equipment performance value under the technical transformation decision, including: Use the ADC analysis model E=ADC to calculate the equipment efficiency value under the predetermined secondary equipment overhaul decision and the equipment efficiency value under the technical transformation decision; Among them, E is the equipment effectiveness value, A is the availability vector, D is the credibility matrix, and C is the inherent capability vector; Normalize the decision indicator values, including: Use the formula

C _N ∈ [0,1] normalizes the LCC equivalent annual average cost value; Use the formula

R _N ∈ [0,1] normalizes the equipment risk value; Use the formula E _N =E, E _N ∈[0,1] to normalize the device performance value; Among them, C _N , R _N , and _EN are the quantified values of the normalized values of each decision-making index, CI _max is the maximum initial investment cost in the same type of equipment; R _max is the risk maximum value of the risk assessment mode. 2. The method for determining a decision according to claim 1, wherein the normalized decision index value is used as a parameter to calculate using a cost-risk-benefit model, comprising: The quantified value C _{N of the normalized LCC equivalent annual average cost value, the quantified value R N of the equipment risk value and the quantified value E N of the} equipment efficiency value are used as parameters to use the cost-risk-benefit model

Calculation is carried out to obtain the annual average cost comprehensive benefit value REC under different decision-making years. 3. The method for determining a decision according to claim 2, characterized in that, by comparing the annual average cost comprehensive benefit value of the overhaul decision and the technical transformation decision in the same decision-making period, the optimal value for the major overhaul of the predetermined secondary equipment is determined. decision-making options, including: When the annual average cost comprehensive benefit value of the overhaul decision is not less than the annual average cost comprehensive benefit value of the technical renovation decision, the overhaul project shall be approved; When the annual average cost comprehensive benefit value of the overhaul decision is less than the annual average cost comprehensive benefit value of the technical renovation decision, the technical renovation project will be approved. 4. The decision-making determination method according to claim 3, wherein, before obtaining the predetermined strategy parameter value from the state information processing analysis result of the predetermined secondary equipment in the system and the health state evaluation result of the predetermined secondary equipment include: From the status information processing and analysis results of the predetermined secondary equipment in the system and the health status evaluation results of the predetermined secondary equipment, and according to the judgment criteria to determine whether major revisions are required; If not, run it after normal maintenance. 5. A decision-making determination system for a secondary equipment overhaul technical transformation, characterized in that, comprising: a parameter obtaining module, configured to obtain a predetermined strategy parameter value from the state information processing and analysis result of the predetermined secondary device in the system and the health state evaluation result of the predetermined secondary device; The decision index value calculation module is used to calculate the decision index value under the predetermined secondary equipment overhaul decision and the decision index value under the technical transformation decision respectively according to the predetermined strategy parameter value; wherein, the decision index value includes LCC Equivalent annual cost value, equipment risk value and equipment performance value; The normalization processing module is used to normalize the decision index value; The annual average cost comprehensive benefit value calculation module is used to calculate the normalized decision index value as a parameter using the cost risk benefit model to obtain the annual average cost comprehensive benefit of the overhaul decision for the predetermined secondary equipment under different decision years. value and the annual average cost and comprehensive benefit value of technological transformation decisions; The decision-making module is used to determine the optimal decision-making plan for the major overhaul of the predetermined secondary equipment by comparing the annual average cost and comprehensive benefit value of the overhaul decision and the technical transformation decision in the same decision-making period; According to the predetermined strategy parameter value, calculate the LCC equivalent annual average cost value under the predetermined secondary equipment overhaul decision and the LCC equivalent annual average cost value under the technical transformation decision, including: Use the formula

Calculate the LCC equivalent annual average cost value NPVA _dx under the predetermined secondary equipment overhaul decision; Use the formula

Calculate the LCC equivalent annual average cost value _NPVA under the described predetermined secondary equipment technical transformation decision; in,

K = C _{original value} - C _{residual value} - T _operation × C _{year depreciation} , T _dx and T _jg respectively represent the remaining service life after the equipment is overhauled and technically modified; CI _dx and CI _jg respectively represent the overhaul estimate and equipment The initial total investment of technical renovation, CO, CM, CF, and CD respectively represent the operating cost, maintenance cost, failure loss cost, and decommissioning disposal cost corresponding to overhaul and technical renovation; i is the bank interest rate; r is the inflation rate; n is the Calculate the annual value of the difference between the design life of the annual average cost and the year in which the decision is made; (A/F, i, T) is a general formula representing the conversion factor based on the annual value of the annual investment cost, where T refers to T _dx or T _jg , K is the net value of the equipment; According to the predetermined strategy parameter value, calculate the equipment risk value under the predetermined secondary equipment overhaul decision and the equipment risk value under the technical transformation decision, including: Use the formula R(t)=LE(t)×P(t) to calculate the equipment risk value under the predetermined secondary equipment overhaul decision and the equipment risk value under the technical renovation decision; Among them, LE=w ₁ × equipment importance+w ₂ × equipment possible loss+w ₃ × user influence, LE(t) is the risk loss value, P(t) is the risk probability value, w is the weight value, and w ₁ +w ₂ +w ₃ =1, w ₁ , w ₂ , and w ₃ take values according to the classification of the predetermined secondary equipment, and R(t) is the equipment risk value; According to the predetermined strategy parameter value, calculate the equipment performance value under the predetermined secondary equipment overhaul decision and the equipment performance value under the technical transformation decision, including: Use the ADC analysis model E=ADC to calculate the equipment efficiency value under the predetermined secondary equipment overhaul decision and the equipment efficiency value under the technical transformation decision; Among them, E is the equipment effectiveness value, A is the availability vector, D is the credibility matrix, and C is the inherent capability vector; Normalize the decision indicator values, including: Use the formula

C _N ∈ [0,1] normalizes the LCC equivalent annual average cost value; Use the formula

R _N ∈ [0,1] normalizes the equipment risk value; Use the formula E _N =E, E _N ∈[0,1] to normalize the device performance value; Among them, C _N , R _N , and _EN are the quantified values of the normalized values of each decision-making index, CI _max is the maximum initial investment cost in the same type of equipment; R _max is the risk maximum value of the risk assessment mode. 6. The decision-making determination system according to claim 5, wherein the annual average cost comprehensive benefit value calculation module comprises: The unit for calculating the comprehensive benefit value of the annual average cost of the overhaul decision is used to calculate the quantified value C _N of the LCC equivalent annual average cost value after normalization under the overhaul decision, the quantified value of the equipment risk value R _N and the quantified value of the equipment efficiency value E _N as a parameter using cost-risk-benefit model

Calculation is carried out to obtain the annual average cost comprehensive benefit value REC _dx of overhaul decision under different decision years; The calculation unit for the comprehensive benefit value of the annual average cost of technical renovation decision-making is used to calculate the quantified value C _N of the LCC equivalent annual average cost value after normalization under the technical renovation decision, the quantified value of the equipment risk value R _N and the equipment efficiency value. The quantified value E _N is used as a parameter in the cost-risk-benefit model

Calculation is carried out to obtain the annual average cost comprehensive benefit value REC _jg of the technological transformation decision under different decision-making years.

Images