CN107194604A - A kind of fired power generating unit method for evaluating reliability - Google Patents
A kind of fired power generating unit method for evaluating reliability Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- CN107194604A CN107194604A CN201710429995.7A CN201710429995A CN107194604A CN 107194604 A CN107194604 A CN 107194604A CN 201710429995 A CN201710429995 A CN 201710429995A CN 107194604 A CN107194604 A CN 107194604A
- Authority
- CN
- China
- Prior art keywords
- mrow
- msub
- mtd
- scheme
- munderover
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Pending
Links
- 238000000034 method Methods 0.000 title claims abstract description 50
- 230000008901 benefit Effects 0.000 claims abstract description 6
- 230000008569 process Effects 0.000 claims abstract description 6
- 238000013459 approach Methods 0.000 claims abstract description 3
- 230000008030 elimination Effects 0.000 claims abstract description 3
- 238000003379 elimination reaction Methods 0.000 claims abstract description 3
- 239000011159 matrix material Substances 0.000 claims description 42
- 206010021703 Indifference Diseases 0.000 claims description 16
- 238000013210 evaluation model Methods 0.000 claims description 3
- 238000011156 evaluation Methods 0.000 abstract description 9
- 238000004458 analytical method Methods 0.000 abstract description 5
- 230000005611 electricity Effects 0.000 description 2
- 238000004519 manufacturing process Methods 0.000 description 2
- 238000012443 analytical study Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000004364 calculation method Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000002860 competitive effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000011161 development Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000005516 engineering process Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000002401 inhibitory effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000010248 power generation Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000008439 repair process Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000011160 research Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000004083 survival effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000007704 transition Effects 0.000 description 1
Classifications
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- G06Q10/00—Administration; Management
- G06Q10/06—Resources, workflows, human or project management; Enterprise or organisation planning; Enterprise or organisation modelling
- G06Q10/063—Operations research, analysis or management
- G06Q10/0639—Performance analysis of employees; Performance analysis of enterprise or organisation operations
- G06Q10/06393—Score-carding, benchmarking or key performance indicator [KPI] analysis
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- G06Q50/00—Information and communication technology [ICT] specially adapted for implementation of business processes of specific business sectors, e.g. utilities or tourism
- G06Q50/06—Energy or water supply
Landscapes
- Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
- Human Resources & Organizations (AREA)
- Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
- Economics (AREA)
- Strategic Management (AREA)
- General Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- Development Economics (AREA)
- Health & Medical Sciences (AREA)
- Educational Administration (AREA)
- Marketing (AREA)
- Entrepreneurship & Innovation (AREA)
- Theoretical Computer Science (AREA)
- Tourism & Hospitality (AREA)
- Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- General Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
- Operations Research (AREA)
- Quality & Reliability (AREA)
- Game Theory and Decision Science (AREA)
- Public Health (AREA)
- Water Supply & Treatment (AREA)
- General Health & Medical Sciences (AREA)
- Primary Health Care (AREA)
- Management, Administration, Business Operations System, And Electronic Commerce (AREA)
Abstract
A kind of fired power generating unit method for evaluating reliability, accuracy for improving evaluation result, its technical scheme is, methods described determines criterion weight it is determined that programme, sets up on the basis of hierarchical structure by analytic hierarchy process (AHP), by selecting elimination approach, the quality of expressional scheme in terms of harmonious sex index humorous sex index two on good terms, then integrates Valued outranking relation, and finally programme is ranked up using net advantage percentile method.The present invention had both contained logic judgment and the analysis of subjectivity by two methods of the common agriculture products weight of AHP and ELECTRE, carried out accurately calculating and deducing by objective law again, so that decision process has very strong logic and science.This method calculates simple, scientific and reasonable, and comprehensively analysis can be made to the reliability of fired power generating unit and is evaluated.
Description
Technical field
The present invention relates to a kind of fired power generating unit method for evaluating reliability, belong to technical field of power generation.
Background technology
With updating for electric power structure, GENERATION MARKET generates electricity from monopoly industry to competitive industrial structure transition
Enterprise is increasingly becoming the main body of market competition, it will be faced with more and more fierce competition.Power plant is participating in fierce market
During competition, the reliability of equipment seems more important.Power Plant Generating Equipment Reliability research can ensure the safe operation of equipment first,
And it is top priority in power plant to keep the safety in production, by fail-safe analysis can determine equipment or system weak link and
Key position, takes measures to eliminate safe hidden trouble in time to it, increases system reliability.Therefore earnest analytical study fired power generating unit
Reliability evaluation index, influence factor, to the survival and development important in inhibiting of fired power generating unit.At present, to fired power generating unit
When reliability is evaluated, typically all using single method agriculture products weight, such as expert's estimation technique, analytic hierarchy process (AHP)
(AHP), experience method, entropy assessment, PCA etc., such evaluation method have certain one-sidedness, obtained
Evaluation result and actual conditions have certain deviation, it is therefore necessary to improved.
The content of the invention
It is an object of the invention to the drawback for prior art there is provided a kind of fired power generating unit method for evaluating reliability, with
Improve the accuracy of evaluation result.
Problem of the present invention is solved with following technical proposals：
A kind of fired power generating unit method for evaluating reliability, methods described is it is determined that programme, sets up the basis of hierarchical structure
On, criterion weight is determined by analytic hierarchy process (AHP), by selecting elimination approach, in terms of harmonious sex index humorous sex index two on good terms
The quality of expressional scheme, then integrates Valued outranking relation, and finally programme is arranged using net advantage percentile method
Sequence.
Above-mentioned fired power generating unit method for evaluating reliability, the described method comprises the following steps：
A. programme is determined, hierarchical structure is set up
N fired power generating unit reliability index is chosen as representative criterion, while choosing m programme, AHP layers are set up
Secondary structure；
B. each criterion weight is determined
1. i-th of criterion is designated as a to the relative importance of j-th of criterionij, construct the judgment matrix A of weight：
Element a using the 9 grades of scaling laws commonly used in AHP to judgment matrix AijAssignment；
2. judgment matrix A dominant eigenvalue λ is soughtmaxWith weight vector W
Dominant eigenvalue λ is tried to achieve by judgment matrix Amax；
With eigenvector method can in the hope of matrix A dominant eigenvalue λmax, still, ask λ to solve n equation of n th order n, as n >=3
Calculate cumbersome, can be as follows with approximate data：
(1) even multiply per row element in A and open n powers：
(2) weight is sought：
(3) summed in A per column element：
(4) λ is calculatedmaxValue：
By aijIt is used as the weight w of attribute (attribute is reliability index) i relative importanceiIt is relatively important with attribute j
The weight w of propertyjThe ratio between approximation, i.e. aij=wi/wj, then weight vector W=[w1 w2…wn]TTried to achieve by following formula：
AW=λmaxW (5)
3. judgment matrix A consistency check
If the dominant eigenvalue λ tried to achieve from judgment matrix AmaxMore than Critical Eigenvalue λ 'max, then uniformity can not be passed through
Examine, it is necessary to which policymaker is to element a in judgment matrix AijValue be adjusted after recalculate λmax, until λmaxLess than λ 'maxFor
Only；
C. each criterion threshold value is determined, harmonious sex index humorous sex index on good terms is calculated
1. the essential information needed for problem solving
If attribute j=1,2 ..., n are profit evaluation model, qj[yj(ai)] be the indifference on attribute j between scheme threshold value
(or indifference threshold value), i.e. scheme aiWith scheme akAttribute j values difference be less than qjWhen, the two schemes are nothings on attribute j
Difference；pj[yj(ai)] represent scheme aiProperty value yj(ai) strictly it is better than scheme akProperty value yj(ak) threshold value (or
Claim strictly to be better than threshold value)；vj[yj(ai)] represent rejection threshold value (or rejection threshold value), i.e. scheme aiProperty value yj(ai) low
In scheme akProperty value yj(ak) meet or exceed vj[yj(ai)] when, scheme of denying recognition aiScheme is superior on the whole
ak；
2. harmonious sex index humorous sex index on good terms is defined
Orderly scheme is defined to (ai,ak) harmonious sex index c (ai,ak) be
Wherein
Discordance index dj(ai,ak) be
D. Valued outranking relation is calculated
Orderly scheme is to (ai,ak) Valued outranking relation S (ai,ak) be defined as
E. total score is calculated, each scheme orbution is determined
Numerical procedure alBe satisfied with score value δl：
Size by score value is satisfied with is ranked up to n scheme, and the bigger scheme satisfaction of score value is higher.
Above-mentioned fired power generating unit method for evaluating reliability, the fired power generating unit reliability index chooses eight, is respectively：(1)
Usage factor (UTF)
(2) availability coefficient (AF)
(3) operating factor (SF)
(4) planned outage coefficient (POF)
(5) unplanned outage coefficient (UOF)
(6) forced outage factor (FOF)
(7) equivalent available factor (EAF)
(8) equivalent forced discontinuation rate (EFOR)
Wherein, hours of operation when referring to that unit generation amount is converted into installed capacity using hour (UTH).During statistics
Hour (PH) equipment is in the calendar hourage of use state.Available hours refer to that equipment is in the hourage of upstate, etc.
In hours run (RH) and standby hour (SH) sum.Availability coefficient is the important evaluation index of subsidiary engine equipment.Hours run
(SH) refer to that equipment is in the hourage of running status.The height of operating factor index directly reflects unit in the network operation time
Length, can determine whether equipment is overhauled by hours run, regular working.The area of operating factor and availability coefficient
It is not in availability coefficient molecule to contain the standby time.In the case of same availability coefficient, the high explanation machine of operating factor
The standby time of group is short, and the standby time that is on the contrary then illustrating unit is long.Planned outage hour (POH) refers to that equipment is stopped in plan
The hourage of fortune state.Unplanned outage hour (UOH) refers to that equipment is in the hourage of unplanned outage state, including first
To five class unplanned outage hourages.Unplanned outage coefficient is the important indicator for evaluating electric power enterprise production management, directly anti-
Mirror the operation level, repair quality, equipment Management Level of equipment.Forced outage hour (FOH) is that unit is in the first to three
The hourage sum of class unplanned outage state.That accidents happened is sudden for main reflection.Equivalent available factor indicates generator
Group overfill power operation ability.Equivalent available factor then covers the over-all properties of generating set, is to weigh generating set itself
The more perfect index of ability.The time probability of forced outage occurs for generating equipment, its value be forced outage hour and the 1st~
The equivalent hour sum of 3 class unplanned deratings and hours run, forced outage hour and the 1st~3 class unplanned derating
The ratio of equivalent hour sum.
Above-mentioned fired power generating unit method for evaluating reliability, indifference threshold value=10%* (maximal criterion values-minimum criteria
Value), strictly better than threshold value=3* indifference threshold values, veto threshold value=2* (maximal criterion value-minimum criteria value).
The present invention by two methods of the common agriculture products weight of AHP and ELECTRE, both contained subjectivity logic judgment and
Analysis, carries out accurately calculating and deducing, so that decision process has very strong logic and science by objective law again.
This method calculates simple, scientific and reasonable, and comprehensively analysis can be made to the reliability of fired power generating unit and is evaluated.
The invention will be further described below in conjunction with the accompanying drawings.
Brief description of the drawings
Fig. 1 is fired power generating unit reliability assessment system figure；
Fig. 2 is flow chart of the method for the present invention.
Each symbol is in text：aijFor relative importance of i-th of target to j-th of criterion；A is judgment matrix；λmaxFor most
Big characteristic value；W is weight vector；wiFor the weight of attribute i relative importance；wjFor the weight of attribute j relative importance；qj
[yj(ai)] be the indifference on attribute j between scheme threshold value；pj[yj(ai)] represent scheme aiProperty value yj(ai) strict excellent
In scheme akProperty value yj(ak) threshold value；vj[yj(ai)] represent rejection threshold value；c(ai,ak) for orderly scheme to (ai,
ak) harmonious sex index；dj(ai,ak) for orderly scheme to (ai,ak) discordance index；S(ai,ak) it is orderly scheme pair
(ai,ak) Valued outranking relation；δlFor scheme alBe satisfied with score value；I is unit matrix.
Embodiment
The present invention is comprised the steps of：
(1) programme, is determined, hierarchical structure is set up.
It is intended to according to fired power generating unit reliability evaluation, chooses 8 fired power generating unit reliability indexs as representative criterion, point
It is not：Usage factor (UTF), availability coefficient (AF), operating factor (SF), planned outage coefficient (POF), unplanned outage coefficient
(UOF), forced outage factor (FOF), equivalent available factor (EAF), equivalent forced discontinuation rate (EFOR).8 sides are chosen simultaneously
Case, sets up AHP hierarchical charts such as Fig. 1.
(2) each criterion weight, is determined.
The judgment matrix A of weight is a reciprocal matrix, and matrix element aij(i=1,2 ..., n；J=1,2 ..., n) have
Following property：aij＞ 0；aij=1/aji；aii=1；Determine matrix element aijPolicymaker is needed to answer following problem repeatedly：aiWith
ajWhich is more important, and how is significance levelElement assignment of the 9 grades of scaling laws commonly used in AHP to judgment matrix is used herein.
(1) the structural matrix A of table 1 is utilized by policymaker
Matrix A is the paired result of the comparison of n target.I-th of target is designated as to the relative importance of j-th of target
aij, and think, here it is attribute i power wiWith attribute j power wjThe ratio between approximation, aij=wi/wj, i.e.,：
The value of element in the target importance judgment matrix A of table 1
(2) λ is sought with eigenvector methodmaxAnd W
I-th of target (criterion) is designated as a to the relative importance of j-th of targetij, and think, here it is attribute i phase
To the weight w of importanceiWith the weight w of attribute j relative importancejThe ratio between approximation,
aij=wi/wj
As available from the above equation：
I.e.
(A-nI) W=0
I is unit matrix in formula, if the value estimation in target importance judgment matrix A is accurate, above formula is exactly equal to 0 (n
The vector of dimension 0), if A estimation is not accurate enough, the small perturbation of element means the small perturbation of characteristic value in A, so as to have
AW=λmaxW
λ in formulamaxIt is the dominant eigenvalue of matrix A.Can be weight vector W=[w in the hope of eigenvector by above formula1 w2…
wn]T。
(3) consistency check of matrix A
If trying to achieve dominant eigenvalue λ from matrix AmaxMore than Critical Eigenvalue λ 'max, illustrate the matrix given by policymaker
Each element a in AijUniformity it is too poor, it is impossible to by consistency check, it is necessary to which policymaker carefully considers, adjustment matrix A in element
aijValue after recalculate λmax, until λmaxLess than λ 'maxUntill.
The random index RI and corresponding Critical Eigenvalue λ ' of the n rank matrixes of table 2max
| n | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
| RI | 0.00 | 0.58 | 0.90 | 1.12 | 1.24 | 1.32 | 1.41 | 1.45 | 1.49 |
| λ‘max | 3.116 | 4.27 | 5.45 | 6.62 | 7.79 | 8.99 | 10.16 | 11.34 |
(3) each criterion threshold value, is determined, harmonious sex index humorous sex index on good terms is calculated.
1. the essential information needed for problem solving
If attribute j=1,2 ..., n is profit evaluation model.qjIt is the threshold value of the indifference on attribute j between scheme, i.e. scheme ai
With scheme akAttribute j values difference be less than qjWhen, the two schemes are indifferences on attribute j, more generally in the case of qjIt is
Property value yj(ai) function, you can be denoted as qj[yj(ai)]。
With qjIt is similar, pj[yj(ai)] represent scheme aiProperty value yj(ai) strictly it is better than scheme akProperty value yj(ak)
Threshold value.
vj[yj(ai)] represent rejection threshold value, i.e. scheme aiProperty value yj(ai) it is less than scheme akProperty value yj(ak)
Meet or exceed vj[yj(ai)] when, scheme of denying recognition aiScheme a is superior on the wholek。
Indifference threshold value=10%* (maximal criterion value-minimum criteria value) is taken, strictly better than threshold value=3* indifference thresholds
Value, rejection threshold value=2* (maximal criterion value-minimum criteria value).
wjTo represent the weight of attribute j relative importances.
2. harmonious sex index humorous sex index on good terms is defined
The orderly scheme that ELECTRE-III methods are defined is to (ai,ak) harmonious sex index c (ai,ak) be
Wherein
Index cj(ai, ak) it is a on attribute jiBetter than akDegree, c (ai,ak) it can then be used as support " aiIt is superior to
ak" this judgement estimates.
Discordance index dj(ai,ak) be
dj(ai,ak) it is then refusal " aiIt is superior to ak" this judgement, i.e. discordance intensity estimates.
(4) Valued outranking relation, is calculated.
Orderly scheme is to (ai,ak) Valued outranking relation S (ai,ak) be defined as
(5) total score, is calculated, each scheme orbution is determined
Using " net advantage percentile method " as the foundation for judging scheme points, this method can be as follows with formulae express：
δlRepresent scheme alBe satisfied with score value, the maximum scheme satisfaction highest of score value, the score value second largest scheme time
It, the rest may be inferred.
The present invention, as example sample, is evaluated it using 8, somewhere electricity power enterprise using above-mentioned evaluation method：
Table 1 is obtained to initial data nondimensionalization：
Table 1：Data after nondimensionalization
The judgment matrix A of weight is a reciprocal matrix, and matrix element aij(i=1,2 ..., n；J=1,2 ..., n) have
Following property：aij＞ 0；aij=1/aji；aii=1；Determine matrix element aijPolicymaker is needed to answer following problem repeatedly：aiWith
ajWhich is more important, and how is significance levelElement assignment of the 9 grades of scaling laws commonly used in AHP to judgment matrix is used herein.
Obtain judgment matrix such as table 2.
Table 2：Criterion weight judgment matrix
Indifference threshold value=10%* (maximal criterion value-minimum criteria value) is taken in this paper cases, strictly better than threshold value=3*
Indifference threshold value, rejection threshold value=2* (maximal criterion value-minimum criteria value).Obtain different criterion threshold values such as table 3.
Table 3：The threshold value of different criterions
| a1 | a2 | a3 | a4 | a5 | a6 | a7 | a8 | |
| qj | 112.052 | 57.821 | 61.901 | 34.391 | 10.849 | 5.491 | 0.472 | 0.078 |
| pj | 336.156 | 173.463 | 185.703 | 103.173 | 32.547 | 16.473 | 1.416 | 0.234 |
| vj | 2241 | 1156.4 | 1238 | 687.82 | 216.98 | 109.82 | 9.44 | 1.56 |
According to harmonious sex index humorous sex index on good terms resulting above, Valued outranking relation matrix is calculated by formula
Such as table 4.
Table 4：Outranking relation matrix
| a | a1 | a2 | a3 | a4 | a5 | a6 | a7 | a8 |
| a1 | -0.1473 | 1.32512 | -0.8352 | 0.88723 | -1.0440 | 0.47405 | -0.0156 | -0.1278 |
| a2 | -0.1392 | 1.25179 | -0.7890 | 0.83813 | -0.9862 | 0.44782 | -0.0148 | -0.1207 |
| a3 | -0.3091 | 2.77948 | -1.7520 | 1.86100 | -2.1899 | 0.99434 | -0.0328 | -0.2681 |
| a4 | -0.1898 | 1.70720 | -1.0761 | 1.14305 | -1.3450 | 0.61074 | -0.0201 | -0.1646 |
| a5 | -0.2212 | 1.98922 | -1.2539 | 1.33188 | -1.5672 | 0.71163 | -0.0235 | -0.1919 |
| a6 | -0.1509 | 1.35676 | -0.8551 | 0.90839 | -1.0689 | 0.48535 | -0.0160 | -0.1307 |
| a7 | -0.3013 | 2.70942 | -1.7077 | 1.81407 | -2.1346 | 0.96925 | -0.0320 | -0.2612 |
| a8 | -0.1860 | 1.67253 | -1.0541 | 1.11981 | -1.3176 | 0.59830 | -0.0197 | -0.1612 |
Each scheme score value is calculated according to net advantage percentile method and ranking results are shown in Table 5：
Table 5：The score value of each scheme
| Scheme | a1 | a2 | a3 | a4 |
| Score value δ | 2.1613 | -12.1412 | -1.7365 | -10.9751 |
| Scheme | a5 | a6 | a7 | a8 |
| Score value δ | 1.4537 | -3.3091 | -2.0785 | 2.6645e-15 |
From above-mentioned result of calculation, 8 fired power generating unit reliability powers are followed successively by a1>a5>a3>a7>a6>a4>a2>a8。
It is to be based on AHP and ELECTRE-III methods herein, the reliability to fired power generating unit in Thermal Power Enterprises is evaluated and made
Go out decision-making.The weight in example is determined with AHP, each scheme is evaluated with ELECTRE-III, two methods, which are combined, to be made
For a kind of new method to fired power generating unit reliability evaluation.Using net advantage method programme is ranked up, it is to avoid original
Sort method complexity in ELECTRE-III methods.The total score of each scheme is finally calculated, successfully to schemes ranking.
Claims (4)
1. a kind of fired power generating unit method for evaluating reliability, it is characterized in that, methods described is it is determined that programme, sets up hierarchical structure
On the basis of, criterion weight is determined by analytic hierarchy process (AHP), by selecting elimination approach, from harmonious sex index humorous sex index two on good terms
The quality of individual aspect expressional scheme, then integrates Valued outranking relation, finally using net advantage percentile method to programme
It is ranked up.
2. a kind of fired power generating unit method for evaluating reliability according to claim 1, it is characterized in that, methods described includes following
Step：
A. programme is determined, hierarchical structure is set up
N fired power generating unit reliability index is chosen as representative criterion, while choosing n programme, AHP level knots are set up
Structure；
B. each criterion weight is determined
1. i-th of criterion is designated as a to the relative importance of j-th of criterionij, construct the judgment matrix A of weight：
<mrow>
<mi>A</mi>
<mo>=</mo>
<mfenced open = "[" close = "]">
<mtable>
<mtr>
<mtd>
<msub>
<mi>a</mi>
<mn>11</mn>
</msub>
</mtd>
<mtd>
<msub>
<mi>a</mi>
<mn>12</mn>
</msub>
</mtd>
<mtd>
<mn>...</mn>
</mtd>
<mtd>
<msub>
<mi>a</mi>
<mrow>
<mn>1</mn>
<mi>n</mi>
</mrow>
</msub>
</mtd>
</mtr>
<mtr>
<mtd>
<msub>
<mi>a</mi>
<mn>21</mn>
</msub>
</mtd>
<mtd>
<msub>
<mi>a</mi>
<mn>22</mn>
</msub>
</mtd>
<mtd>
<mn>...</mn>
</mtd>
<mtd>
<msub>
<mi>a</mi>
<mrow>
<mn>2</mn>
<mi>n</mi>
</mrow>
</msub>
</mtd>
</mtr>
<mtr>
<mtd>
<mo>.</mo>
</mtd>
<mtd>
<mo>.</mo>
</mtd>
<mtd>
<mrow></mrow>
</mtd>
<mtd>
<mo>.</mo>
</mtd>
</mtr>
<mtr>
<mtd>
<mo>.</mo>
</mtd>
<mtd>
<mo>.</mo>
</mtd>
<mtd>
<mrow></mrow>
</mtd>
<mtd>
<mo>.</mo>
</mtd>
</mtr>
<mtr>
<mtd>
<mo>.</mo>
</mtd>
<mtd>
<mo>.</mo>
</mtd>
<mtd>
<mrow></mrow>
</mtd>
<mtd>
<mo>.</mo>
</mtd>
</mtr>
<mtr>
<mtd>
<msub>
<mi>a</mi>
<mrow>
<mi>n</mi>
<mn>1</mn>
</mrow>
</msub>
</mtd>
<mtd>
<msub>
<mi>a</mi>
<mrow>
<mi>n</mi>
<mn>2</mn>
</mrow>
</msub>
</mtd>
<mtd>
<mn>...</mn>
</mtd>
<mtd>
<msub>
<mi>a</mi>
<mrow>
<mi>n</mi>
<mi>n</mi>
</mrow>
</msub>
</mtd>
</mtr>
</mtable>
</mfenced>
</mrow>
Element a using the 9 grades of scaling laws commonly used in AHP to judgment matrix AijAssignment；
2. judgment matrix A dominant eigenvalue λ is soughtmaxWith weight vector W
Dominant eigenvalue λ is tried to achieve by judgment matrix Amax；
With eigenvector method can in the hope of matrix A dominant eigenvalue λmax；But, ask λ to solve n equation of n th order n, calculated as n >=3
It is cumbersome, can be as follows with approximate data：
(1) even multiply per row element in A and open n powers：
<mrow>
<msubsup>
<mi>w</mi>
<mi>i</mi>
<mo>&prime;</mo>
</msubsup>
<mo>=</mo>
<mroot>
<mrow>
<munderover>
<mo>&Pi;</mo>
<mrow>
<mi>j</mi>
<mo>=</mo>
<mn>1</mn>
</mrow>
<mi>n</mi>
</munderover>
<msub>
<mi>a</mi>
<mrow>
<mi>i</mi>
<mi>j</mi>
</mrow>
</msub>
</mrow>
<mi>n</mi>
</mroot>
<mo>,</mo>
<mi>i</mi>
<mo>=</mo>
<mn>1</mn>
<mo>,</mo>
<mn>2</mn>
<mo>,</mo>
<mo>...</mo>
<mo>,</mo>
<mi>n</mi>
<mo>-</mo>
<mo>-</mo>
<mo>-</mo>
<mrow>
<mo>(</mo>
<mn>1</mn>
<mo>)</mo>
</mrow>
</mrow>
(2) weight is sought：
<mrow>
<msub>
<mi>w</mi>
<mi>i</mi>
</msub>
<mo>=</mo>
<msubsup>
<mi>w</mi>
<mi>i</mi>
<mo>&prime;</mo>
</msubsup>
<mo>/</mo>
<munderover>
<mo>&Sigma;</mo>
<mrow>
<mi>i</mi>
<mo>=</mo>
<mn>1</mn>
</mrow>
<mi>n</mi>
</munderover>
<msubsup>
<mi>w</mi>
<mi>i</mi>
<mo>&prime;</mo>
</msubsup>
<mo>,</mo>
<mi>i</mi>
<mo>=</mo>
<mn>1</mn>
<mo>,</mo>
<mn>2</mn>
<mo>,</mo>
<mo>...</mo>
<mo>,</mo>
<mi>n</mi>
<mo>-</mo>
<mo>-</mo>
<mo>-</mo>
<mrow>
<mo>(</mo>
<mn>2</mn>
<mo>)</mo>
</mrow>
</mrow>
(3) summed in A per column element：
<mrow>
<msub>
<mi>S</mi>
<mi>j</mi>
</msub>
<mo>=</mo>
<munderover>
<mo>&Sigma;</mo>
<mrow>
<mi>i</mi>
<mo>=</mo>
<mn>1</mn>
</mrow>
<mi>n</mi>
</munderover>
<msub>
<mi>a</mi>
<mrow>
<mi>i</mi>
<mi>j</mi>
</mrow>
</msub>
<mo>,</mo>
<mi>j</mi>
<mo>=</mo>
<mn>1</mn>
<mo>,</mo>
<mn>2</mn>
<mo>,</mo>
<mo>...</mo>
<mo>,</mo>
<mi>n</mi>
<mo>-</mo>
<mo>-</mo>
<mo>-</mo>
<mrow>
<mo>(</mo>
<mn>3</mn>
<mo>)</mo>
</mrow>
</mrow>
(4) λ is calculatedmaxValue：
<mrow>
<msub>
<mi>&lambda;</mi>
<mrow>
<mi>m</mi>
<mi>a</mi>
<mi>x</mi>
</mrow>
</msub>
<mo>=</mo>
<munderover>
<mo>&Sigma;</mo>
<mrow>
<mi>i</mi>
<mo>=</mo>
<mn>1</mn>
</mrow>
<mi>n</mi>
</munderover>
<msub>
<mi>w</mi>
<mi>i</mi>
</msub>
<msub>
<mi>S</mi>
<mi>i</mi>
</msub>
<mo>-</mo>
<mo>-</mo>
<mo>-</mo>
<mrow>
<mo>(</mo>
<mn>4</mn>
<mo>)</mo>
</mrow>
</mrow>
By aijIt is used as the weight w of attribute i (attribute is reliability index) relative importanceiWith attribute j relative importance
Weight wjThe ratio between approximation, i.e. aij=wi/wj, then weight vector W=[w1 w2 … wn]TTried to achieve by following formula：
AW=λmaxW； (5)
3. judgment matrix A consistency check
If the dominant eigenvalue λ tried to achieve from judgment matrix AmaxMore than Critical Eigenvalue λ 'max, then can not be examined by uniformity
Test, it is necessary to which policymaker is to element a in judgment matrix AijValue be adjusted after recalculate λmax, until λmaxLess than λ 'maxFor
Only；
C. each criterion threshold value is determined, harmonious sex index humorous sex index on good terms is calculated
1. the essential information needed for problem solving
If attribute j=1,2 ..., n are profit evaluation model, qj[yj(ai)] be the indifference on attribute j between scheme threshold value (or
Indifference threshold value), i.e. scheme aiWith scheme akAttribute j values difference be less than qjWhen, the two schemes are indifferences on attribute j
's；pj[yj(ai)] represent scheme aiProperty value yj(ai) strictly it is better than scheme akProperty value yj(ak) threshold value it is (or tight
Lattice are better than threshold value)；vj[yj(ai)] represent rejection threshold value (or rejection threshold value), i.e. scheme aiProperty value yj(ai) less than side
Case akProperty value yj(ak) meet or exceed vj[yj(ai)] when, scheme of denying recognition aiScheme a is superior on the wholek；
2. harmonious sex index humorous sex index on good terms is defined
Orderly scheme is defined to (ai,ak) harmonious sex index c (ai,ak) be
<mrow>
<mi>c</mi>
<mrow>
<mo>(</mo>
<msub>
<mi>a</mi>
<mi>i</mi>
</msub>
<mo>,</mo>
<msub>
<mi>a</mi>
<mi>k</mi>
</msub>
<mo>)</mo>
</mrow>
<mo>=</mo>
<munderover>
<mo>&Sigma;</mo>
<mrow>
<mi>j</mi>
<mo>=</mo>
<mn>1</mn>
</mrow>
<mi>n</mi>
</munderover>
<msub>
<mi>w</mi>
<mi>j</mi>
</msub>
<msub>
<mi>c</mi>
<mi>j</mi>
</msub>
<mrow>
<mo>(</mo>
<msub>
<mi>a</mi>
<mi>i</mi>
</msub>
<mo>,</mo>
<msub>
<mi>a</mi>
<mi>k</mi>
</msub>
<mo>)</mo>
</mrow>
<mo>/</mo>
<munderover>
<mo>&Sigma;</mo>
<mrow>
<mi>j</mi>
<mo>=</mo>
<mn>1</mn>
</mrow>
<mi>n</mi>
</munderover>
<msub>
<mi>w</mi>
<mi>j</mi>
</msub>
<mo>-</mo>
<mo>-</mo>
<mo>-</mo>
<mrow>
<mo>(</mo>
<mn>6</mn>
<mo>)</mo>
</mrow>
</mrow>
Wherein
Discordance index dj(ai,ak) be
D. Valued outranking relation is calculated
Orderly scheme is to (ai,ak) Valued outranking relation S (ai,ak) be defined as
E. total score is calculated, each scheme orbution is determined
Numerical procedure alBe satisfied with score value δl：
<mrow>
<msub>
<mi>&delta;</mi>
<mi>l</mi>
</msub>
<mo>=</mo>
<munderover>
<mo>&Sigma;</mo>
<mrow>
<mi>k</mi>
<mo>=</mo>
<mn>1</mn>
</mrow>
<mi>n</mi>
</munderover>
<mi>S</mi>
<mrow>
<mo>(</mo>
<msub>
<mi>a</mi>
<mi>l</mi>
</msub>
<mo>,</mo>
<msub>
<mi>a</mi>
<mi>k</mi>
</msub>
<mo>)</mo>
</mrow>
<mo>-</mo>
<munderover>
<mo>&Sigma;</mo>
<mrow>
<mi>k</mi>
<mo>=</mo>
<mn>1</mn>
</mrow>
<mi>n</mi>
</munderover>
<mi>S</mi>
<mrow>
<mo>(</mo>
<msub>
<mi>a</mi>
<mi>k</mi>
</msub>
<mo>,</mo>
<msub>
<mi>a</mi>
<mi>l</mi>
</msub>
<mo>)</mo>
</mrow>
<mo>,</mo>
<mi>l</mi>
<mo>=</mo>
<mn>1</mn>
<mo>,</mo>
<mn>2</mn>
<mo>,</mo>
<mo>...</mo>
<mo>,</mo>
<mi>n</mi>
<mo>-</mo>
<mo>-</mo>
<mo>-</mo>
<mrow>
<mo>(</mo>
<mn>10</mn>
<mo>)</mo>
</mrow>
</mrow>
Size by score value is satisfied with is ranked up to n scheme, and the bigger scheme satisfaction of score value is higher.
3. a kind of fired power generating unit method for evaluating reliability according to claim 2, it is characterized in that, the fired power generating unit is reliable
Property selecting index eight, be respectively：Usage factor (UTF), availability coefficient (AF), operating factor (SF), planned outage coefficient
(POF), unplanned outage coefficient (UOF), forced outage factor (FOF), equivalent available factor (EAF), equivalent forced discontinuation rate
(EFOR)。
4. a kind of fired power generating unit method for evaluating reliability according to claim 3, it is characterized in that, the indifference threshold value=
10%* (maximal criterion value-minimum criteria value), strictly better than threshold value=3* indifference threshold values, vetos threshold value=2* (maximal criterions
Value-minimum criteria value).
Priority Applications (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN201710429995.7A CN107194604A (en) | 2017-06-09 | 2017-06-09 | A kind of fired power generating unit method for evaluating reliability |
Applications Claiming Priority (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN201710429995.7A CN107194604A (en) | 2017-06-09 | 2017-06-09 | A kind of fired power generating unit method for evaluating reliability |
Publications (1)
| Publication Number | Publication Date |
|---|---|
| CN107194604A true CN107194604A (en) | 2017-09-22 |
Family
ID=59877674
Family Applications (1)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN201710429995.7A Pending CN107194604A (en) | 2017-06-09 | 2017-06-09 | A kind of fired power generating unit method for evaluating reliability |
Country Status (1)
| Country | Link |
|---|---|
| CN (1) | CN107194604A (en) |
Cited By (4)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN109359870A (en) * | 2018-10-19 | 2019-02-19 | 西南交通大学 | A kind of distribution network failure recovery scheme comprehensive estimation method based on selection elimination approach |
| CN109583595A (en) * | 2017-09-27 | 2019-04-05 | 上海电气电站设备有限公司 | A kind of method of determining thermal power steam turbine overhaul life and its influence factor |
| CN110119907A (en) * | 2019-05-24 | 2019-08-13 | 北京交通大学 | A kind of method for evaluating reliability of electric railway traction power supply system |
| WO2022133895A1 (en) * | 2020-12-24 | 2022-06-30 | 华能国际电力股份有限公司 | Equipment supervision-based thermal power equipment quality data processing method and apparatus |
-
2017
- 2017-06-09 CN CN201710429995.7A patent/CN107194604A/en active Pending
Cited By (5)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN109583595A (en) * | 2017-09-27 | 2019-04-05 | 上海电气电站设备有限公司 | A kind of method of determining thermal power steam turbine overhaul life and its influence factor |
| CN109359870A (en) * | 2018-10-19 | 2019-02-19 | 西南交通大学 | A kind of distribution network failure recovery scheme comprehensive estimation method based on selection elimination approach |
| CN109359870B (en) * | 2018-10-19 | 2022-01-14 | 西南交通大学 | Power distribution network fault recovery scheme comprehensive evaluation method based on selective elimination method |
| CN110119907A (en) * | 2019-05-24 | 2019-08-13 | 北京交通大学 | A kind of method for evaluating reliability of electric railway traction power supply system |
| WO2022133895A1 (en) * | 2020-12-24 | 2022-06-30 | 华能国际电力股份有限公司 | Equipment supervision-based thermal power equipment quality data processing method and apparatus |
Similar Documents
| Publication | Publication Date | Title |
|---|---|---|
| CN109543737B (en) | Information system health degree evaluation method based on FAHP-FCA combined empowerment | |
| Deliktas et al. | A comparative analysis of productivity growth, catch-up, and convergence in transition economies | |
| CN107194604A (en) | A kind of fired power generating unit method for evaluating reliability | |
| CN106483947A (en) | Distribution Running State assessment based on big data and method for early warning | |
| CN106093612A (en) | A kind of method for diagnosing fault of power transformer | |
| Celikmih et al. | Failure prediction of aircraft equipment using machine learning with a hybrid data preparation method | |
| CN105225020A (en) | A kind of running status Forecasting Methodology based on BP neural network algorithm and system | |
| CN108053148B (en) | Efficient fault diagnosis method for power information system | |
| CN109740859A (en) | Transformer condition evaluation and system based on Principal Component Analysis and support vector machines | |
| CN104715318A (en) | Multi-dimensional operational risk evaluating method for communication network | |
| CN110310031A (en) | A kind of power distribution network multidimensional methods of risk assessment | |
| CN110417011A (en) | A kind of online dynamic secure estimation method based on mutual information Yu iteration random forest | |
| CN105046407B (en) | A kind of power grid and the methods of risk assessment of user's two-way interaction Service Operation pattern | |
| CN108197280B (en) | Mining ability evaluation method based on industrial equipment data | |
| CN110909802A (en) | Improved PSO (particle swarm optimization) based fault classification method for optimizing PNN (portable network) smoothing factor | |
| CN113537807B (en) | Intelligent wind control method and equipment for enterprises | |
| CN105631575A (en) | Assessment method of science and technology projects | |
| CN110705887A (en) | Low-voltage transformer area operation state comprehensive evaluation method based on neural network model | |
| CN112818525A (en) | Hydroelectric generating set state evaluation method and system | |
| CN104218571A (en) | Running state evaluation method for wind power generation equipment | |
| CN116579640A (en) | Power marketing service channel user experience assessment method and system | |
| CN108446563A (en) | A kind of ICS Method of Information Security Evaluation based on Fuzzy AHP | |
| CN113283673A (en) | Model performance attenuation evaluation method, model training method and device | |
| CN110866694A (en) | Power grid construction project financial evaluation system and method | |
| Xia et al. | An evaluation method for sortie generation capacity of carrier aircrafts with principal component reduction and catastrophe progression method |
Legal Events
| Date | Code | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| PB01 | Publication | ||
| PB01 | Publication | ||
| SE01 | Entry into force of request for substantive examination | ||
| SE01 | Entry into force of request for substantive examination | ||
| WD01 | Invention patent application deemed withdrawn after publication | ||
| WD01 | Invention patent application deemed withdrawn after publication |
Application publication date: 20170922 |