CN112926888A - Multi-dimensional power channel state evaluation method based on risk evaluation result - Google Patents
Multi-dimensional power channel state evaluation method based on risk evaluation result Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- CN112926888A CN112926888A CN202110342413.8A CN202110342413A CN112926888A CN 112926888 A CN112926888 A CN 112926888A CN 202110342413 A CN202110342413 A CN 202110342413A CN 112926888 A CN112926888 A CN 112926888A
- Authority
- CN
- China
- Prior art keywords
- factor
- risk
- channel state
- value
- power channel
- 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
- 238000011156 evaluation Methods 0.000 title claims abstract description 58
- 238000000034 method Methods 0.000 claims abstract description 19
- 238000011002 quantification Methods 0.000 claims abstract description 6
- 238000010276 construction Methods 0.000 claims description 15
- 230000007547 defect Effects 0.000 claims description 13
- 230000000694 effects Effects 0.000 claims description 13
- 238000009826 distribution Methods 0.000 claims description 12
- 238000012423 maintenance Methods 0.000 claims description 10
- 238000013461 design Methods 0.000 claims description 8
- 239000003102 growth factor Substances 0.000 claims description 8
- 238000012502 risk assessment Methods 0.000 claims description 5
- 238000001514 detection method Methods 0.000 abstract description 5
- 238000007689 inspection Methods 0.000 abstract description 4
- XLYOFNOQVPJJNP-UHFFFAOYSA-N water Chemical compound O XLYOFNOQVPJJNP-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 40
- 230000006378 damage Effects 0.000 description 10
- 230000002159 abnormal effect Effects 0.000 description 7
- 230000003014 reinforcing effect Effects 0.000 description 7
- 230000005540 biological transmission Effects 0.000 description 5
- 239000011248 coating agent Substances 0.000 description 5
- 238000000576 coating method Methods 0.000 description 5
- 238000010586 diagram Methods 0.000 description 3
- 230000007613 environmental effect Effects 0.000 description 3
- 230000008014 freezing Effects 0.000 description 3
- 238000007710 freezing Methods 0.000 description 3
- 238000007726 management method Methods 0.000 description 2
- 230000008569 process Effects 0.000 description 2
- 230000008439 repair process Effects 0.000 description 2
- 230000005856 abnormality Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000004458 analytical method Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000009286 beneficial effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000009960 carding Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000008859 change Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000011161 development Methods 0.000 description 1
- 201000010099 disease Diseases 0.000 description 1
- 208000037265 diseases, disorders, signs and symptoms Diseases 0.000 description 1
- 238000012854 evaluation process Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000009434 installation Methods 0.000 description 1
- 239000012212 insulator Substances 0.000 description 1
- 238000004519 manufacturing process Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000012986 modification Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000004048 modification Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000002265 prevention Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000001681 protective effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 239000011241 protective layer Substances 0.000 description 1
- 238000011158 quantitative evaluation Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000013139 quantization Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000011160 research Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000012954 risk control Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000003068 static effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000005728 strengthening Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000006467 substitution reaction Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000012876 topography Methods 0.000 description 1
Images
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
- G06Q10/0635—Risk analysis of enterprise or organisation activities
-
- 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)
- Entrepreneurship & Innovation (AREA)
- Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- Theoretical Computer Science (AREA)
- Health & Medical Sciences (AREA)
- Marketing (AREA)
- General Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- General Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
- Tourism & Hospitality (AREA)
- Educational Administration (AREA)
- Quality & Reliability (AREA)
- Operations Research (AREA)
- Game Theory and Decision Science (AREA)
- Development Economics (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
The application shows a multi-dimensional power channel state evaluation method based on risk evaluation results, which comprises the following steps: dividing a power channel state area according to the evaluation object and the hazard range; and calculating a risk value of the power channel state area according to a risk definition theory, and performing risk evaluation on the risk value through a risk quantification standard to obtain a risk grade after the risk evaluation of the power channel state area. The method can solve the problems that the conventional power channel state evaluation method needs multiple detection tools, spends a large amount of inspection time, is difficult to evaluate the actual state of the channel with complex channel state and huge unit number and easily omits key point position information, and shows a technical scheme with strong operability and capability of reflecting the channel state more intuitively.
Description
Technical Field
The invention belongs to the field of power line channel state evaluation, and particularly relates to a multi-dimensional power channel state evaluation method based on a risk evaluation result.
Background
As the number of electrical loads increases, good operation of transmission line channels becomes increasingly important as an important link in power supply. With increasingly complex operating conditions, the influence of external factors from ice coating, mountain fires, external damage, etc. on the state of the transmission line channel becomes increasingly severe. Based on the purpose of comprehensively improving the life cycle of the equipment, the requirement for accurately evaluating the running state of the power line channel relates to all links of channel research, exploration, involvement, installation, running, post-disaster treatment and the like. In the actual execution process, based on the practical problems of long internal path, short operation and maintenance resources, lack of an actual operation condition evaluation method and the like of the existing power channel circuit, a method and a flow which have strong operability and can reflect the channel state more intuitively are needed to be provided.
The existing channel state evaluation method divides a line into 8 line units of a foundation, a ground wire, a pole tower, an insulator, a hardware fitting, a grounding device, an accessory device and a channel environment, and represents the running state of the channel according to the static parameters of each unit. In the routine passage maintenance patrol process, in order to accurately evaluate the actual state of each unit, a plurality of detection tools are needed, and a large amount of patrol time is spent. Particularly for the passage with complex traffic state and large unit number in the corridor, the actual state evaluation is difficult, and the key point location information is easier to miss.
When the line fortification lifting work such as anti-icing strengthening, special section carding and the like is carried out, the section range is difficult to be effectively quantified by means of the existing means. The users of the power supply unit lack accuracy when performing treatment project declaration and maintenance strategy revision due to no good standard.
Disclosure of Invention
Based on the problems, the invention provides a multi-dimensional power channel state evaluation method based on a risk evaluation result, solves the problems that the conventional power channel state evaluation method needs multiple detection tools, takes a large amount of routing inspection time, is difficult to evaluate the actual state of a channel with complex channel state and huge unit number, and is easy to omit key point position information, and shows a technical scheme which has strong operability and can more intuitively reflect the channel state.
The application shows a multi-dimensional power channel state evaluation method based on risk evaluation results, which comprises the following steps:
s1: dividing a power channel state area according to the evaluation object and the hazard range;
s2: and calculating a risk value of the power channel state area according to a risk definition theory, and performing risk evaluation on the risk value through a risk quantification standard to obtain a risk grade after the risk evaluation of the power channel state area.
Preferably, the power channel status region divided according to the evaluation target and the hazard range includes:
the early warning system comprises a traditional medium heavy ice region, a recent cold tide down pole severe region, a warning region during a special weather early warning period of 72 hours in the future and a traditional three-span special section.
Preferably, the risk definition theory is:
the risk degree can be judged according to the possibility of occurrence of the unexpected event and poor results or power loss;
the basic expression of the risk definition theory is as follows:
R＝F(P，C，B)＝P×C×B；
wherein R is a risk value, F represents a functional relation, P represents an event probability, C represents a correlation coefficient, and B represents a reference value;
the basic expression meaning of the risk definition theory is defined as: the risk value is (hazard value) x (probability value) x (reference value).
Preferably, the hazard value includes several factors including: a hazard severity factor, a social impact factor, a loss load, or a user nature factor.
Preferably, the probability value comprises a number of factors, the number of factors comprising: the system comprises a channel environment risk factor, an artificial activity factor, a micro-terrain factor, a tower operation state evaluation factor, a line operation age limit factor, an equipment type factor, a supplier evaluation result factor, a fault category factor, a historical data statistical factor, a weather influence factor, an equipment defect influence factor, an overhaul time factor, a field construction factor, a control measure factor, a tower vegetation growth factor, a design ice thickness and ice area distribution difference factor, an anti-back-flow measure factor and an operation risk factor.
The beneficial effect of this application does:
the method can solve the problems that the conventional power channel state evaluation method needs multiple detection tools, spends a large amount of inspection time, is difficult to evaluate the actual state of the channel with complex channel state and huge unit number and easily omits key point position information, and shows a technical scheme with strong operability and capability of reflecting the channel state more intuitively.
Drawings
In order to more clearly explain the technical solution of the application, the drawings needed to be used in the embodiments are briefly described below, and it is obvious for those skilled in the art to obtain other drawings without creative efforts.
Fig. 1 is a schematic diagram of a multi-dimensional power channel state assessment method based on a risk assessment result according to the present application;
fig. 2 is a schematic flow chart of calculating a risk value according to the present application.
Detailed Description
Referring to fig. 1, fig. 1 shows a multi-dimensional power channel state assessment method based on risk assessment results, the method includes:
s1: dividing a power channel state area according to the evaluation object and the hazard range; the power channel state region includes: the early warning system comprises a traditional medium heavy ice region, a recent cold tide down pole severe region, a warning region during a special weather early warning period of 72 hours in the future and a traditional three-span special section. The electric power channel state area can be used for combing special sections of mountain fires and external broken trees.
S2: and calculating a risk value according to a risk definition theory, and performing risk evaluation on the risk value through a risk quantitative standard to obtain a risk grade after the risk evaluation of the power channel state area.
The risk definition theory is:
the risk degree can be judged according to the possibility of occurrence of the unexpected event and poor results or power loss;
the basic expression of the risk definition theory is as follows:
R＝F(P，C，B)＝P×C×B；
wherein R is a risk value, F represents a functional relation, P represents an event probability, C represents a correlation coefficient, and B represents a reference value;
the basic expression meaning of the risk definition theory is defined as: the risk value is (hazard value) x (probability value) x (reference value).
The risk quantification criteria are referred to table 1:
table 1: risk quantification standard
| Level I risk | Red colour | 1500 or less risk value |
| Level II risk | Orange colour | 750 is less than or equal to the risk value of 1400 |
| Level III risk | Yellow colour | 120 is less than or equal to the risk value of 750 |
| Risk of class IV | Blue color | 20 is less than or equal to the risk value of 120 |
| Risk of V level | White colour | 5 is less than or equal to the risk value of less than or equal to 20 |
| Risk of class VI | 0 is less than or equal to the risk value of less than or equal to 5 |
The hazard value includes a number of factors, including: a hazard severity factor, a social impact factor, a loss load, or a user nature factor. The several factors also include other factors considered based on the degree of risk impact.
The probability value includes a number of factors including: the system comprises a channel environment risk factor, an artificial activity factor, a micro-terrain factor, a tower operation state evaluation factor, a line operation age factor, an equipment type factor, a supplier evaluation result factor, a fault category factor, a historical data statistical factor, a weather influence factor, an equipment defect influence factor, a maintenance time factor, a field construction factor, a control measure factor, a tower vegetation growth factor, a design ice thickness and ice area distribution difference factor, an anti-string-falling measure factor and an operation risk factor. The number of factors further includes: other factors that cause increased risk based on issue considerations.
The method for calculating the risk value according to the risk definition theory comprises the following steps:
a risk value (hazard value) x (probability value) x (reference value);
wherein:
hazard value ═ (hazard severity factor) x (social impact factor) x (loss load or user nature factor);
a probability value (channel environment risk factor) x (artificial activity factor) x (micro terrain factor) x (tower operation state evaluation factor) x (line operation year factor) x (equipment type factor) x (supplier evaluation result factor) x (fault category factor) x (historical data statistics factor) x (weather influence factor) x (equipment defect influence factor) x (maintenance time factor) x (site construction factor) x (control measure factor) x (vegetation under tower growth factor) x (designed ice thickness and ice region distribution difference factor) x (anti-reverse string measure factor) x (operation risk factor);
the definition criteria of the hazard severity factor are shown in table 2;
table 2: definition standard of harm severity factor
| Severity of hazard | Corresponding accident/event rating | Score value |
| Damage of extra serious accident | Particularly serious accidents | 4000～8000 |
| Major accident hazard | Major accident | 2000～2400 |
| Greater accident hazard | Major accident | 400～600 |
| General accident hazard | General accident | 200～250 |
| First order event hazard | First order events | 100～150 |
| Secondary event hazard | Second order events | 10～40 |
| Tertiary event hazard | Third level events | 1～5 |
The definition criteria of the social influence factors are shown in table 3:
table 3: definition standard of social influence factor
| Time to repair | General period | Special time protection power supply | Two-stage protection power supply | Primary protection power supply | Super power supply |
| Score value | 1 | 1.2 | 1.4 | 1.6 | 2 |
The definition criteria of the loss load or user property factor are shown in table 4:
table 4: definition standard of loss load or user property factor
| Loss of load or user nature | General load | Important city load | Premium and first level important users |
| Score value | 1 | 1.2-2.5 | 1.2-2.5 |
In a feasible embodiment, the damage severity of the power channel state area is the damage of a primary event, the social influence factor is the power supply protection in a special period, and the loss load or the user property factor is the general load; in this embodiment:
the hazard value is 120 × 1.2 × 1 × 144.
The weight of each factor shown in the application is determined based on the operation rule in the life cycle of the power line and the operation and maintenance conditions of the historical channel.
And the channel environment risk factor determines the abnormal probability weight according to the conditions of cross spanning, multiple times of the same tower, the conditions of trees and buildings under the channel, the collapse condition and the dangerous object condition.
The definition criteria of the channel environmental risk factor refer to table 5:
table 5: channel environment risk factor definition standard
In a feasible embodiment, the channel environmental risk is: the method has the advantages that the method spans rivers, railways, lines and multiple loops on the same tower do not exist, the number and buildings exist under channels, collapse and dangerous objects do not exist; in this embodiment:
the channel environmental risk factor is 0.3 × 0.3+0.3 × 0.3+0.3 × 0.1+0.2 × 0.2+0.1 × 0.05+0.1 × 0.05 ═ 0.26.
The artificial activity factors are sorted according to the defect fault conditions of the historical statistics of the line, the artificial activity factors are closely related to the abnormal probability of the channel, and the invention provides the quantization standard of the artificial activity factors on the basis of the artificial activity factors: and determining the damage probability of the passage according to the moving range of the personnel to the tower in the geographic area.
The artificial activity factor definition criteria are seen in table 6:
table 6: artificial activity factor definition criteria
In a possible embodiment, when 20m < x1When the distance is less than 50m, the damage probability of the channel is 0.6; in this embodiment:
the artificial activity factor is 0.6;
in the micro-terrain factor, the influence of line icing on the risk of the channel is large, and the micro-terrain is introduced as a factor mainly considering the influence of the icing. Microtopography is defined as a local topography that facilitates the development of line icing, the microtopography comprising: the region is higher than the local freezing height, a bealock with an ice-coated airflow accelerated, an air duct section, a long gentle slope section forcing the ice-coated airflow to be lifted and supercooled water to be increased, a section enabling the ice coating to be increased for a long time, a humid region such as a river and a lake with sufficient water vapor in winter, and a basin-shaped region forming a closed low-lying ice-coated microclimate; when the micro-terrain is found in the power channel state area, the probability of channel state damage is increased;
the microrelief factor definition criteria are found in table 7:
table 7: microrelief factor definition standard
| Micro-landform | 1 is provided with | n number of |
| Probability value | 0.2 | 0.2*n |
In a possible embodiment, the power channel status region comprises: a section 1 higher than the local freezing height and a section 1 for lengthening the icing time; in this embodiment:
the microtopography factor is 0.2 × 2 is 0.4;
the tower operation state evaluation factor is based on the existing power transmission line tower abnormal state evaluation result, including tower accessory operation condition and base operation state, comprehensively determines the tower state evaluation result to be divided into four grades of normal, attention, abnormal and serious, and determines the risk probability according to the evaluation result grade;
the tower operation state evaluation factor definition standard is shown in table 8:
table 8: definition standard of tower operation state evaluation factor
| Pole tower state results | Is normal | Attention is paid to | Abnormality (S) | Severe severity of disease |
| Probability value | 0.3 | 0.6 | 0.8 | 1 |
In a possible embodiment, the tower operating state is noted, and in this embodiment:
the evaluation factor of the tower operation state is 0.6;
because the number of the existing electric power line towers is huge, basic ledger management is lacked, and specific parameters of the towers cannot be accurately determined through combing. Therefore, the line commissioning age is taken as a risk probability factor;
the definition standard of the line operation age factor refers to a table 9:
table 9: line delivery age factor definition standard
| Year of operation (year) | 0-5 | 5-10 | 10-15 | ＞15 |
| Probability value | 0.3 | 0.6 | 0.8 | 1 |
In a possible embodiment, the power channel status region line commissioning life is 8 years, in this embodiment:
the service life factor of the line is 0.6;
the device types include: cables, overhead lines, double-loop (or multi-loop) lines on the same tower, and direct current lines; the method comprises the steps that an equipment type factor can be defined based on the design specification of the overhead line and the condition of line equipment, and the risk probability is evaluated through the equipment type factor;
the device type factor definition criteria refer to table 10;
table 10: definition standard of probability reference of device type factor
| Type (B) | Cable with a protective layer | Overhead line | Double-circuit line (or multi-circuit) on same tower | Direct current circuit |
| Probability value | 0.8 | 1 | 0.5 | 1.2 |
In a possible embodiment, the power channel status area employs a cable, in which embodiment:
the device type factor is 0.8;
because the existing transmission lines of the equipment administration unit, especially the basic ledger management of the distribution lines is lost, the manufacturer changes quickly, and the quantitative evaluation of the tower state cannot be accurately carried out. Therefore, the risk probability is evaluated according to the evaluation result of the supplier by referring to the evaluation result of the credit worthiness of the contractor with each unit as disclosure;
the supplier evaluation result factor definition criteria are referred to table 11;
table 11: supplier evaluation result factor definition standard
In a feasible embodiment, the supplier evaluates the power channel state area as good; in this embodiment:
supplier evaluation result factor 0.4;
and (4) integrating the line user conditions, judging the power grid risk possibly caused by the single element fault, and evaluating the risk probability through fault category factors according to the fault level of the risk event.
The fault class factor definition standard refers to table 12;
table 12: defect class factor definition criteria
| Type (B) | First order fault | Second order fault | Third order failure |
| Probability value | 0.8～1.2 | 0.3～0.6 | 0.1～0.2 |
In a possible embodiment, the fault category is a second level fault, in which embodiment:
the fault class factor is 0.4;
evaluating the risk probability through historical data statistical factors according to the annual average failure times of equipment in the equipment range governed by each operation unit;
the historical data statistical factor definition standard refers to table 13;
table 13: historical data statistical factor definition criteria
In a possible embodiment, the power path status area device type is an overhead transmission line, in which embodiment:
the statistical factor of the historical data is 1.02;
the weather condition is a main factor of the abnormal state of the line channel, the weather condition is formed based on the abnormal state of the line, and the risk probability is evaluated through the weather influence factor.
The weather influence factor definition standard refers to table 14;
table 14: weather Effect factor definition criteria
| Type (B) | Is normal | Typhoon | Thunderstorm strong wind | Fire danger for forest | Low temperature | High humidity | Freezing of water |
| Probability value | 1 | 1～4 | 1～2 | 1～1.5 | 1～1.2 | 1～1.2 | 1～1.5 |
In a feasible embodiment, the weather of the power channel state area is thunderstorm and strong wind; in this embodiment:
weather influence factor is 1.5;
and evaluating the risk probability through the equipment defect influence factor based on the actual state condition of the main element unit in the channel state evaluation process.
The equipment defect influence factor definition standard refers to table 15;
table 15: equipment defect influence factor definition standard
| Type (B) | Normal state | Device exception | General defects | Urgent defect | Major drawback |
| Probability value | 1 | 1.1 | 1.2 | 1.3 | 1.5 |
In a possible embodiment, the power channel status zone device is abnormal; in this embodiment:
the equipment defect influence factor is 1.1;
based on the change of the probability of various basic risks during the overhaul of the power line channel. And evaluating the risk probability through the overhaul time factor.
The maintenance time factor definition standard refers to table 16;
table 16: time to overhaul factor definition criteria
| Time to repair | 1 to 2 days | 3 to 7 days | 8-30 days | Over 30 days |
| Probability value | 0.6 | 0.7～1 | 1～1.5 | 1.5～2 |
In a feasible embodiment, the electric power channel state area overhaul time is 6 days; in this embodiment:
the maintenance time factor is 0.9;
based on the situation of resource input in site construction, two types of human construction and mechanical construction are introduced, and the risk probability is evaluated through site construction factors.
The site construction factor definition standard refers to table 17;
table 17: on-site construction factor definition standard
| Type (B) | Manpower construction | Mechanical construction |
| Probability value | 1～1.5 | 1～2.5 |
In a possible embodiment, the electric power passage status area is mechanical construction; in this embodiment:
the field construction factor is 2;
and introducing a risk control measure based on the means of line risk occurrence and risk pre-control, and evaluating the risk probability through a control measure factor.
The control measure factor definition criteria are referred to table 18;
table 18: control measure factor definition criteria
| Type (B) | No measures taken | Equipment patrol | Automation device |
| Probability value | 1 | 0.8 | 0.1～0.8 |
In a possible embodiment, the power channel status region control measure is an override, in which embodiment:
the control measure factor is 1;
the method is characterized in that the proportion of the falling pole and the broken pole is analyzed during the ice coating period of the power line, and the proportion of the falling pole is about seven times due to the fact that the tree ice coating presses the falling pole, and part of trees cannot be cleaned in time in a short period. Based on the difference of the growth speeds of different trees under the existing channel, the risk probability is dynamically changed. Based on the difference of the growth speeds of different vegetations, the probability of the vegetation production factor under the tower is introduced.
The standard for defining the vegetation growth factor under the tower is shown in a table 19;
table 19: standard for defining growth factor of vegetation under tower
| Type (B) | < 0.2 m/year | 0.2 to 0.5 m/year | Greater than 0.5 m/year |
| Probability value | 0.2 | 0.6 | 0.8 |
In a feasible embodiment, the growth rate of the vegetation under the tower is 0.3 m/year; in this embodiment:
the growth factor of the vegetation under the tower is 0.6;
the anti-icing capacity of the power line is directly related to the designed ice thickness, the larger the designed ice thickness value is, the stronger the anti-icing capacity is, and the necessity of checking the actual ice coating condition and the designed ice thickness is high. Based on the analysis consideration, the ice thickness of the corresponding region in the 2018 version ice region distribution diagram is mainly taken as a reference criterion, and the difference value between the designed ice thickness and the ice region distribution diagram is introduced as a probability reference factor.
The factor definition standard of the difference between the designed ice thickness and the ice area distribution is referred to a table 20;
table 20: design ice thickness and ice area distribution difference factor definition standard
In a possible embodiment, the difference between the ice thickness and the ice area distribution is designed to be 10mm, in which embodiment:
designing the difference factor between the ice thickness and the ice area distribution as 0.35;
due to the fact that adjacent towers are damaged or overturned, the tension of the ground wire on one side of each tower is partially or completely released, the longitudinal load acting on each tower is far larger than a design allowable value, and the towers are caused to be in a serial mode. Based on this, a back-off prevention probability factor is proposed. (note: the reinforcing tower configuration principle is that the light ice area is at every 7-8 bases, the middle ice area is at every 4-5 bases, the performance of the reinforcing tower meets the design conditions of the conventional linear tower, and the tension of broken wires (split wires are unbalanced in the longitudinal direction) on the same sides of all the wires and the ground wires is calculated.
The anti-reverse-string measure factor definition standard refers to table 21;
table 21: anti-reverse-string measure factor definition standard
In a feasible embodiment, the number of reinforcing towers in the light ice area of the power channel state area is enough, the performance of the reinforcing towers is satisfied, the number of reinforcing towers in the medium ice area is insufficient, and the performance of the reinforcing towers is satisfied; in this embodiment:
the factor of the anti-reverse string measure is 0.25 × 0.25 × 0.5 × 0.25 ═ 0.0078125;
when the channel reinforcing strategy is executed, risks caused by various operations exist, and operation risk probability is provided based on the risks.
The operational risk factor definition criteria refer to table 22;
table 22: operational risk factor definition criteria
| Type (B) | No operation | Electromagnetic looped network loop closing | Performing temporary protective action operations |
| Probability value | 1 | 1.2 | 1.1～1.3 |
In a possible embodiment, the channel hardening policy is implemented as no operation, in which embodiment:
the operational risk factor is 1;
in a possible embodiment, referring to fig. 2, the work flow of the present application is:
dividing a power channel state area according to the evaluation object and the hazard range; calculating a risk value according to a risk definition theory, wherein the risk value is (harm value) x (probability value); since the hazard value includes several factors, the probability value includes several factors; therefore, the risk value is (damage severity factor) x (social influence factor) x (loss load or user property factor) x (channel environment risk factor) x (human activity factor) x (micro terrain factor) x (tower operation state evaluation factor) x (line operation age factor) x (equipment type factor) x (supplier evaluation result factor) x (fault category factor) x (historical data statistics factor) x (weather influence factor) x (equipment defect influence factor) x (maintenance time factor) x (site construction factor) x (control measure factor) x (under tower vegetation growth factor) x (design ice thickness and ice region distribution difference factor) x (anti-cross-flow measure factor) x (operation risk factor);
in this embodiment, the data in the above embodiment is used for each factor and factor, and if the reference value is B equal to 1000, then in this embodiment:
the risk value is 144 × 0.26 × 0.6 × 0.4 × 0.6 × 0.6 × 0.8 × 0.4 × 0.4 × 1.02 × 1.5 × 1.1 × 0.9 × 2 × 1 × 0.6 × 0.35 × 0.0078125 × 1 × 1000 ═ 2.057;
performing risk assessment on the risk value through a risk quantification standard, wherein the risk value belongs to a VI-level risk according to the table 1; and obtaining the risk grade after the risk evaluation of the power channel state area.
The method can solve the problems that the conventional power channel state evaluation method needs multiple detection tools, spends a large amount of inspection time, is difficult to evaluate the actual state of the channel with complex channel state and huge unit number and easily omits key point position information, and shows a technical scheme with strong operability and capability of reflecting the channel state more intuitively.
The present application has been described in detail with reference to specific embodiments and illustrative examples, but the description is not intended to limit the application. Those skilled in the art will appreciate that various equivalent substitutions, modifications or improvements may be made to the embodiments and implementations of the disclosure without departing from the spirit and scope of the disclosure, which is within the scope of the disclosure as defined by the appended claims.
Claims (5)
1. A multi-dimensional power channel state assessment method based on risk assessment results is characterized by comprising the following steps:
s1: dividing a power channel state area according to the evaluation object and the hazard range;
s2: and calculating a risk value of the power channel state area according to a risk definition theory, and performing risk evaluation on the risk value through a risk quantification standard to obtain a risk grade after the risk evaluation of the power channel state area.
2. The method according to claim 1, wherein the power channel status areas divided according to the evaluation object and the hazard range comprise:
the early warning system comprises a traditional medium heavy ice region, a recent cold tide down pole severe region, a warning region during a special weather early warning period of 72 hours in the future and a traditional three-span special section.
3. The method for multi-dimensional power channel state assessment based on risk assessment results according to claim 1, wherein the risk definition theory is as follows:
the risk degree can be judged according to the possibility of occurrence of the unexpected event and poor results or power loss;
the basic expression of the risk definition theory is as follows:
R＝F(P，C，B)＝P×C×B；
wherein R is a risk value, F represents a functional relation, P represents an event probability, C represents a correlation coefficient, and B represents a reference value;
the basic expression meaning of the risk definition theory is defined as: the risk value is (hazard value) x (probability value) x (reference value).
4. The method according to claim 3, wherein the hazard value comprises a plurality of factors, and the factors comprise: hazard severity factors, social impact factors, and loss load or user nature factors.
5. The method as claimed in claim 3, wherein the probability value includes several factors, and the several factors include: the system comprises a channel environment risk factor, an artificial activity factor, a micro-terrain factor, a tower operation state evaluation factor, a line operation age factor, an equipment type factor, a supplier evaluation result factor, a fault category factor, a historical data statistical factor, a weather influence factor, an equipment defect influence factor, a maintenance time factor, a field construction factor, a control measure factor, a tower vegetation growth factor, a design ice thickness and ice area distribution difference factor, an anti-string-falling measure factor and an operation risk factor.
Priority Applications (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202110342413.8A CN112926888A (en) | 2021-03-30 | 2021-03-30 | Multi-dimensional power channel state evaluation method based on risk evaluation result |
Applications Claiming Priority (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202110342413.8A CN112926888A (en) | 2021-03-30 | 2021-03-30 | Multi-dimensional power channel state evaluation method based on risk evaluation result |
Publications (1)
| Publication Number | Publication Date |
|---|---|
| CN112926888A true CN112926888A (en) | 2021-06-08 |
Family
ID=76176624
Family Applications (1)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202110342413.8A Pending CN112926888A (en) | 2021-03-30 | 2021-03-30 | Multi-dimensional power channel state evaluation method based on risk evaluation result |
Country Status (1)
| Country | Link |
|---|---|
| CN (1) | CN112926888A (en) |
Cited By (1)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| WO2023168950A1 (en) * | 2022-03-11 | 2023-09-14 | 浙江万胜智能科技股份有限公司 | Data collection method and system for smart meter-reading terminal |
Citations (3)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN102521497A (en) * | 2011-12-05 | 2012-06-27 | 广东省电力调度中心 | Method and system for handling power grid operation risk |
| CN106408193A (en) * | 2016-09-26 | 2017-02-15 | 贵州电网有限责任公司输电运行检修分公司 | Power transmission line gridding risk analysis and evaluation method |
| CN108537367A (en) * | 2018-03-20 | 2018-09-14 | 广东电网有限责任公司惠州供电局 | Power transmission line comprehensive methods of risk assessment under a kind of more meteorological disasters |
-
2021
- 2021-03-30 CN CN202110342413.8A patent/CN112926888A/en active Pending
Patent Citations (3)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN102521497A (en) * | 2011-12-05 | 2012-06-27 | 广东省电力调度中心 | Method and system for handling power grid operation risk |
| CN106408193A (en) * | 2016-09-26 | 2017-02-15 | 贵州电网有限责任公司输电运行检修分公司 | Power transmission line gridding risk analysis and evaluation method |
| CN108537367A (en) * | 2018-03-20 | 2018-09-14 | 广东电网有限责任公司惠州供电局 | Power transmission line comprehensive methods of risk assessment under a kind of more meteorological disasters |
Cited By (1)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| WO2023168950A1 (en) * | 2022-03-11 | 2023-09-14 | 浙江万胜智能科技股份有限公司 | Data collection method and system for smart meter-reading terminal |
Similar Documents
| Publication | Publication Date | Title |
|---|---|---|
| Walski | Water distribution valve topology for reliability analysis | |
| CN105005827B (en) | A kind of emergency response method for early warning based on electric power accident | |
| CN104123682B (en) | A kind of Distribution Network Failure methods of risk assessment based on meteorological effect factor | |
| CN103427367B (en) | A kind of power transmission lines overhauling method | |
| CN105427019A (en) | Meteorological associated power transmission line risk difference evaluation method | |
| CN109784782B (en) | Subway power supply system dynamic risk analysis and evaluation method based on fuzzy inference | |
| CN103440400A (en) | Power system short-term risk determination method taking disaster factors into account | |
| CN102521497A (en) | Method and system for handling power grid operation risk | |
| CN103679294A (en) | Differentiation based power transmission network anti-disaster ability planning method | |
| CN115330163A (en) | Urban power grid multi-disaster accident prevention and early warning emergency platform based on big data | |
| CN106327071A (en) | Power line communication risk analysis method and power line communication risk analysis system | |
| CN109359896A (en) | A kind of Guangdong power system method for prewarning risk based on SVM | |
| CN112668821A (en) | Distribution line risk analysis method based on insulator fault probability of sand blown region | |
| CN112926888A (en) | Multi-dimensional power channel state evaluation method based on risk evaluation result | |
| CN113177858B (en) | Multi-dimensional power grid typhoon resistance evaluation method | |
| CN110739689A (en) | distribution network line system operation safety identification method and system | |
| Liu | Short-term operational reliability evaluation for power systems under extreme weather conditions | |
| Broström | Ice storm modelling in transmission system reliability calculations | |
| CN112052980A (en) | Fault analysis and prediction method for distribution network line of transformer substation | |
| CN113609752B (en) | Southwest vortex-oriented distribution transformer loss evaluation system and southwest vortex-oriented distribution transformer loss evaluation method | |
| CN106845821B (en) | Comprehensive evaluation method and system for icing-galloping-prevention technically improved project | |
| CN115409264A (en) | Power distribution network emergency repair stagnation point position optimization method based on feeder line fault prediction | |
| Xu et al. | Data mining and analysis of tree-caused faults in power distribution systems | |
| CN109583683B (en) | Effectiveness evaluation method of bird damage protection device of power transmission line | |
| CN111092430A (en) | Emergency resource optimal configuration method suitable for power system recovery |
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 |