CN115713241A - Full life cycle evaluation method and terminal for power grid infrastructure project - Google Patents
Full life cycle evaluation method and terminal for power grid infrastructure project Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- CN115713241A CN115713241A CN202211262166.1A CN202211262166A CN115713241A CN 115713241 A CN115713241 A CN 115713241A CN 202211262166 A CN202211262166 A CN 202211262166A CN 115713241 A CN115713241 A CN 115713241A
- Authority
- CN
- China
- Prior art keywords
- index
- project
- life cycle
- cost
- power grid
- 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
Images
Classifications
-
- Y—GENERAL TAGGING OF NEW TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS; GENERAL TAGGING OF CROSS-SECTIONAL TECHNOLOGIES SPANNING OVER SEVERAL SECTIONS OF THE IPC; TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC CROSS-REFERENCE ART COLLECTIONS [XRACs] AND DIGESTS
- Y04—INFORMATION OR COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES HAVING AN IMPACT ON OTHER TECHNOLOGY AREAS
- Y04S—SYSTEMS INTEGRATING TECHNOLOGIES RELATED TO POWER NETWORK OPERATION, COMMUNICATION OR INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES FOR IMPROVING THE ELECTRICAL POWER GENERATION, TRANSMISSION, DISTRIBUTION, MANAGEMENT OR USAGE, i.e. SMART GRIDS
- Y04S10/00—Systems supporting electrical power generation, transmission or distribution
- Y04S10/50—Systems or methods supporting the power network operation or management, involving a certain degree of interaction with the load-side end user applications
Landscapes
- Management, Administration, Business Operations System, And Electronic Commerce (AREA)
Abstract
The invention discloses a power grid infrastructure project full-life cycle evaluation method and a terminal, wherein an evaluation system of a project full-life cycle comprising an operation and maintenance stage and an operation feedback stage and reference values of all indexes in the evaluation system are established, and the index values of all the indexes are obtained; acquiring the AHP subjective weight of each index according to the evaluation system; obtaining objective weight of each index through a pre-trained random forest algorithm; calculating the combination weight of each index according to the AHP subjective weight and the objective weight of each index; calculating the index comprehensive score of each index and the project comprehensive score of the whole project life cycle according to the index value, the reference value and the combined weight of each index; the operation and maintenance and operation feedback stage construction are considered, the method is more comprehensive, the defect of a single weighting method is overcome, the influence of the method which only depends on subjective weight or obtains objective weight in the past on the data dependence is effectively reduced, and the reliability and accuracy of evaluation are improved.
Description
Technical Field
The invention relates to the technical field of power grid infrastructure, in particular to a full life cycle evaluation method and terminal for a power grid infrastructure project.
Background
With respect to the theory of Life Cycle Cost (LCC for short), some scholars both at home and abroad have conducted extensive and intensive research and proposed many models to estimate LCC. The concept of LCC was originally launched in 1904 of the swedish railway system, recognizing that not only the current construction costs but also the maintenance costs of future railways need to be considered for railway construction. In 1980, the international advanced countries have fully realized the theory of the life cycle, each industry field sets up the industrial regulation and method adopting the idea of the life cycle cost, and the theory is combined with the aspects of ship building industry, space industry, capital construction and equipment to develop a great deal of research and application, and the number of documents is large. Accordingly, the construction enterprises also focus the vision on the advanced theory, particularly the construction field belongs to the capital-intensive industry, and the profit rate is not high, so that how to save the cost becomes the subject of continuous exploration and research in the field, and the appearance of the life cycle theory gives new ideas for the construction enterprises. The construction enterprises carry out optimization research on the whole life cycle cost of the design, tools and related facilities of the construction enterprises, and great achievement is achieved in the aspect of scheme selection, but the related research in China is relatively laggard, and particularly laggard serious in the aspects of standards and data accumulation. As for the definition of Life Cycle Cost (Life Cycle Cost), no definition commonly accepted by people exists in the strict sense of the academic world at present, but the Life Cycle comprises the feasibility study of engineering, facilities and information systems, preliminary design, production and construction, operation and maintenance, overhaul and reconstruction and the final Life of retirement scrapping through domestic and foreign documents, so that the LCC just comprises the direct Cost and the indirect Cost generated in all the stages.
The research on the LCC can clarify the influence rule of the cost between different stages, and seek the quantity logic relationship between different expense subjects and the cost transmission of the expense subject, and in conclusion, from the rule, relationship and transmission, we can seek the cost control measure to optimize and control the cost of the whole life cycle. The united states branchard professor considers that different stages of the full life cycle form a mutual system, the cost of the different stages can be transmitted in the system, in order to control and optimize the LCC, all links must be coordinated and unified, the goal is clear, the optimized constraint condition must cover the full life cycle, otherwise, the constraint condition may have defects, and the optimized LCC loses the reference meaning.
In the field of power grid infrastructure projects, the whole life cycle cost control theory is longer, the research cycle is defined as the whole life, the cost of a certain stage cannot be counted, and the cost in the whole life cycle is the minimum. The Life Cycle Cost (Life Cycle Cost) refers to the sum of the Cost from the whole process of project design, construction, operation and maintenance to scrapping. Because the power grid infrastructure project has the characteristics of long construction period and huge cost number, the construction period cost control easily causes the attention of all parties, the expenses of later-period operation and maintenance, overhaul and the like are usually multiple times of the construction period cost, but the expenses of later-period operation and maintenance, overhaul and the like are a long-term process and are usually ignored by managers.
Meanwhile, many scholars determine objective weight according to the index variability by using methods such as an entropy weight method and a coefficient of variation method for project evaluation, but the method cannot consider the transverse influence between indexes; the dependence on the sample is large, and the weight changes along with the change of the modeling sample, so that weight distortion often occurs by using methods such as an entropy weight method.
Disclosure of Invention
The technical problem to be solved by the invention is as follows: the method and the terminal for evaluating the full life cycle of the power grid infrastructure project are provided, the cost of operation, maintenance and overhaul in the later period is considered, and more accurate evaluation can be made.
In order to solve the technical problems, the invention adopts the technical scheme that:
a full life cycle evaluation method of a power grid infrastructure project comprises the following steps:
s1, establishing an evaluation system of a project full life cycle comprising an operation and maintenance stage and an operation feedback stage and reference values of all indexes in the evaluation system, and acquiring index values of all the indexes;
s2, acquiring the AHP subjective weight of each index according to the evaluation system;
s3, acquiring objective weight of each index through a pre-trained random forest algorithm;
s4, calculating the combination weight of each index according to the AHP subjective weight and the objective weight of each index;
and S5, calculating the index comprehensive score of each index and the project comprehensive score of the whole project full life cycle according to the index value, the reference value and the combined weight of each index.
In order to solve the technical problem, the invention adopts another technical scheme as follows:
a full-life-cycle evaluation terminal for a power grid infrastructure project comprises a processor, a memory and a computer program which is stored in the memory and can run on the processor, wherein the processor executes the computer program to realize the steps of the full-life-cycle evaluation method for the power grid infrastructure project.
The invention has the beneficial effects that: according to the method and the terminal for evaluating the whole life cycle of the power grid infrastructure project, an evaluation system of the whole life cycle of the project is established in consideration of an operation and maintenance stage and an operation feedback stage, the evaluation system is more comprehensive, objective weights are obtained through a random forest algorithm, subjective weights are obtained through an improved analytic hierarchy process, combined weights of all indexes are comprehensively determined according to the subjective weights and the objective weights, a combined weight determining strategy overcomes the defect of a single weighting method, the influence of a method which only depends on the subjective weights or obtains the objective weights in the past on the data dependence is effectively reduced, and the reliability and the accuracy of evaluation are improved.
Drawings
Fig. 1 is a flowchart of a method for evaluating a full life cycle of a power grid infrastructure project according to an embodiment of the present invention;
fig. 2 is a structural diagram of a full life cycle evaluation terminal of a power grid infrastructure project according to an embodiment of the invention;
FIG. 3 is a random forest algorithm interpretation diagram of a power grid infrastructure project full life cycle evaluation method according to an embodiment of the invention;
description of reference numerals:
1. a full life cycle evaluation terminal of a power grid infrastructure project; 2. a processor; 3. a memory.
Detailed Description
In order to explain technical contents, achieved objects, and effects of the present invention in detail, the following description is made with reference to the accompanying drawings in combination with the embodiments.
Referring to fig. 1, a method for evaluating a full life cycle of a power grid infrastructure project includes the steps of:
s1, establishing an evaluation system of a project full life cycle comprising an operation and maintenance stage and an operation feedback stage and reference values of all indexes in the evaluation system, and acquiring index values of all the indexes;
s2, acquiring the AHP subjective weight of each index according to the evaluation system;
s3, obtaining objective weights of the indexes through a pre-trained random forest algorithm;
s4, calculating the combination weight of each index according to the AHP subjective weight and the objective weight of each index;
and S5, calculating the index comprehensive score of each index and the project comprehensive score of the whole project life cycle according to the index value, the reference value and the combined weight of each index.
From the above description, the beneficial effects of the present invention are: according to the method and the terminal for evaluating the whole life cycle of the power grid infrastructure project, an evaluation system of the whole life cycle of the project is established in consideration of an operation and maintenance stage and an operation feedback stage, the evaluation system is more comprehensive, objective weights are obtained through a random forest algorithm, subjective weights are obtained through an improved analytic hierarchy process, combined weights of all indexes are comprehensively determined according to the subjective weights and the objective weights, a combined weight determining strategy overcomes the defect of a single weighting method, the influence of a method which only depends on the subjective weights or obtains the objective weights in the past on the data dependence is effectively reduced, and the reliability and the accuracy of evaluation are improved.
Further, the step S2 includes the steps of:
s21, establishing a judgment matrix scale;
s22, acquiring an expert importance comparison score according to the matrix scale, and generating a judgment matrix;
s23, normalizing the judgment matrix to obtain a standard judgment matrix;
and S24, summing the standard judgment matrix according to rows, and carrying out normalization processing on the sums of the rows to obtain the AHP subjective weight of each index.
As can be seen from the above description, the AHP subjective weight is calculated in the above manner.
Further, the judgment matrix is:
A＝[a ij ] n×n ；
the normalization processing of the judgment matrix by columns specifically comprises the following steps:
summing the obtained standard judgment matrix according to rows to obtain each row of the standard judgment matrix:
for standard matrix rows and columnsNormalization processing is carried out to obtain the AHP subjective weight W of each index i ：
Wherein n represents the number of indexes,
representing the elements of the matrix after the normalization process.
From the above description, the AHP subjective weight is calculated by the above formula.
Further, the step S2 further includes the steps of:
s25, calculating a consistency index CI:
wherein n represents the index number, λ max represents the maximum eigenvalue of the judgment matrix, and the calculation formula of λ max is as follows:
wherein, W i AHP subjective weight, a, representing each index ij Representing the value, i, in the ith row and jth column of the decision matrix<n，j<n；
S26, looking up a table according to the order of the judgment matrix to obtain a random consistency index RI;
s27, calculating a consistency ratio:
and if the CR value is smaller than the preset threshold value, the judgment matrix passes the consistency test.
According to the description, the consistency test is carried out on the judgment matrix, and the effectiveness of the AHP subjective weight is ensured.
Further, the training of the random forest algorithm in the step S3 includes the steps of:
s31, performing Bootstrap sampling on a random forest, and generating K independent decision trees by extracting K sample data sets, wherein each sample data set is a power grid infrastructure project full life cycle index system;
s32, letting k =1, training decision tree T k The training input is the kth data set, the kth data set is calculated, and the accuracy rate L of the kth out-of-bag data set is calculated k ；
S33, rearranging the characteristics f in the data set outside the bag and calculating the accuracy
S34, executing the step S32 and the step 33 on all sample data sets K =2,3 \ 8230k;
s35, calculating the classification accuracy error after rearrangement:
s36, for each feature f, calculating the influence degree of the feature f on the accuracy rate of the data outside the bag:
and variance of the degree of influence:
and further calculate the importance f of the feature f c ：
f c ＝e f /S；
Importance of obtaining all features f c 。
As can be seen from the above description, the training of the random forest algorithm is performed in the above manner, so as to be used for the calculation of the objective weight.
Further, the calculation of the combining weight specifically includes:
wherein, W j Represents the combined weight, W, of the index j j 1 And W j 2 And sequentially and respectively representing the subjective weight and the objective weight of the index j.
According to the description, the combination weight is calculated through the Lagrange multiplier method according to the subjective weight and the objective weight, the influence factors of all indexes in a single project can be comprehensively analyzed according to the obtained combination weight, and the project cost is saved by paying more attention to the indexes with large weights.
Further, the step S5 specifically includes:
dividing the index value by the reference value for each index, and performing normalization processing on the index value of each index to unify the dimension of the index to obtain a second index value of each index;
multiplying the second index value by the combined weight for each index to obtain the index comprehensive score of each index;
and adding all the index comprehensive scores to obtain the project comprehensive score.
According to the description, the indexes are normalized by using the per unit value idea for reference, the indexes are unified, the indexes are weighted and calculated on the basis, the comprehensive index score and the comprehensive project score of each index are calculated, and the project and each index in the project are evaluated.
Further, the evaluation system of the project full life cycle comprises the following indexes: planning capacity, feasibility argument, survey fee, basic design fee, other design fee, bid job, contract content, execution evaluation, equipment data, construction installation engineering fee, equipment purchase fee, other fee, dynamic fee, labor fee, energy cost, environment fee, other fee, maintenance fee, repair fee, labor fee, insurance fee, outage time, repair cost, electricity value coefficient, mean failure rate, rejection cost, equipment residual value, line loss rate, comprehensive voltage qualification rate, power supply reliability rate, incremental investment economic internal profit rate, incremental capital fund profit rate, incremental investment financial net present value, incremental investment profit rate, management mechanism evaluation, incentive mechanism evaluation, N-1 passage rate, overload line proportion and continuous safe operation days;
wherein, the other design fees are fees charged according to the relevant requirements of engineering design or the relevant regulations of the consignor;
other costs are other related costs necessary to complete the construction of the project, but not the construction project costs, installation project costs and equipment purchase costs;
other fees refer to other fees besides labor, energy and environmental fees required for the operation of the project each year in the operation and maintenance phase.
According to the description, the project is scientifically divided and defined based on the full life cycle theory, and is inspected and evaluated at multiple angles, so that the evaluation and control of the whole process of the power grid infrastructure project are realized, the cost composition of each stage of project design, construction, operation and maintenance, overhaul, risk and scrapping is definite, and the consideration is more comprehensive.
Further, the acquiring of the device data specifically includes:
step one, establishing an alternative cost calculation model S:
wherein minS is the lowest cost input of a model selection stage, an operation maintenance and overhaul stage and a scrapping stage of specific equipment of a power grid capital construction project, and x is j J =1,2, \8230n; the quantity of n types of equipment required in the capital construction project, c j J =1,2, \8230n; unit price, omega, for the cost of the corresponding equipment j J =1,2, \ 8230n; the operation and maintenance cost is the average operation and maintenance cost of a single equipment per year, N is the service life of the equipment, and i is the discount rate;
step two, finding out an integer feasible solution of S by a linear programming solution method to obtain an objective function value
By s * Represents the optimal cost of the plant solution, in this case
And performing iteration;
step three, optionally selecting a variable x which does not accord with the integer condition in the optimal solution of S j Having a value of b j In the order of [ b j ]Denotes a value less than b j Is the largest integer of (2), constrains the condition to x j ＜[b j ]Adding the constraint condition x into S as a constraint condition of a subsequent planning problem S1 j ≥[b j ]+1 added to S as a subsequent planning problem S 2 Respectively using the solutions of linear programming to solve the subsequent programming problem S 1 And S 2 ；
Step four, if the optimal objective function of each branch is larger than j, the branch is cut off, if the optimal objective function is smaller than j and does not accord with the integer condition, the step two is repeated until the optimal objective function is smaller than j
Get the optimal solution
As can be seen from the above description, the device data is obtained through calculation in the above manner.
Referring to fig. 2, a full life cycle evaluation terminal for a power grid infrastructure project includes a processor, a memory, and a computer program stored in the memory and executable on the processor, where the processor implements the steps in the full life cycle evaluation method for the power grid infrastructure project when executing the computer program.
The full life cycle evaluation method and terminal for the power grid infrastructure project are suitable for full life cycle evaluation of the power grid infrastructure project.
Referring to fig. 1 and fig. 3, a first embodiment of the present invention is:
a full life cycle evaluation method of a power grid infrastructure project is characterized by comprising the following steps:
s1, establishing an evaluation system of a project full life cycle comprising an operation and maintenance stage and an operation feedback stage and reference values of all indexes in the evaluation system, and acquiring index values of all the indexes;
the evaluation system of the project full life cycle comprises the following indexes: planning capability, feasibility demonstration, survey fee, basic design fee, other design fee, bid job, contract content, execution evaluation, equipment data, construction installation engineering fee, equipment purchase fee, other fee, dynamic fee, labor fee, energy consumption, environment fee, other fee, maintenance fee, repair fee, labor fee, insurance fee, outage time, repair cost, electricity value coefficient, average failure rate, rejection cost, equipment residual value, line loss rate, comprehensive voltage qualification rate, power supply reliability rate, incremental investment economic internal profit rate, incremental capital profit rate, incremental investment financial net present value, incremental investment profit rate, management mechanism evaluation, incentive mechanism evaluation, N-1 passage rate, overload line proportion and continuous safe operation days;
wherein, the other design fees are fees charged according to the relevant requirements of engineering design or the relevant regulations of the consignor;
other expenses are other related expenses which are necessary for completing construction of the engineering project but are not the construction engineering expenses, the installation engineering expenses and the equipment purchase expenses;
other fees refer to other fees besides labor, energy and environmental fees required for the operation of the project each year in the operation and maintenance phase.
In this embodiment, the target layer of the whole model is the full life cycle of the power grid infrastructure project, and the criterion layer is divided into four layers, namely a planning stage, an engineering implementation stage, a project operation maintenance stage and a production operation feedback stage. Each level index is shown in table 1, for example, in this embodiment, the scoring calculation is mainly performed on the three levels of indexes.
A planning stage:
the planning stage works by drawing up a contract according to the overall data of survey, design icons and the like, making a design scheme, checking the reasonable compliance of a drawing, and if the design does not accord with the contract regulations, adjusting the design scheme until the design regulations are met. Meanwhile, the cost and investment cost of each link is compared with the design scheme, and the calculation result is repeatedly verified, so that the situation of miscalculation is avoided. The established indexes at all levels are as follows:
1.1.1 early work plan
(1) Planning capability
Project planning capability is the selection of project execution mechanisms to formulate activities including project objectives, engineering criteria, project budgets, implementation programs and implementations, etc., based on future project decisions.
The schedule plan execution normalized specific scoring detailed rule is as follows:
(1) the progress plan is complete in content and comprehensive in coverage angle;
(2) the progress control conforms to the construction period and progress management method of the electric power company;
(3) the progress deviation is processed in time, and the progress plan is dynamically adjusted in time;
(4) the overall control measures of the construction progress are good, and the progress risks and the corresponding measures of each stage are scientific, reasonable and effective;
each term "match" is 100 points, "substantial match" is 80 points, "partial match" is 60 points.
Taking a reference value: 60 minutes
(2) Demonstration of feasibility
The feasibility demonstration refers to a working method for comprehensively analyzing and demonstrating the technical advancement and economic rationality of a project so as to achieve the best economic effect. The general extension set can be used for research, preliminary feasibility research and technical and economic feasibility research.
The detailed scoring rules of feasibility demonstration are as follows:
(1) meeting market expectations through market research
(2) Preliminary feasibility study
(3) Research on technical and economic feasibility
(4) Construction accident and risk assessment
Each term "match" is 100 points, "substantial match" is 80 points, "partial match" is 60 points.
Taking a reference value: 60 minutes
1.1.2 investigation and design work
The design cost of the survey design work is composed of a survey cost, a basic design cost, and other design costs.
(1) Survey fee
The survey fee refers to the fee paid by project personnel entrusted with qualified survey institutions according to the survey design specification requirements, engineering survey operation is carried out on the project, and related survey files, geotechnical engineering design corporations and the like are compiled. The calculation standard is as follows: calculated according to the engineering investigation charging standard issued by the national administration department.
Taking a reference value: average cost of industry
(2) Basic design fee
The basic design fee is the fee charged by compiling the files such as the initial design file, the construction drawing and the like. This cost includes the services: provides technical solution, solves the technical problems encountered in the construction according to the design and finally provides the completion acceptance service. The calculation formula is as follows:
J＝Y×t 1 ×t 2 ×t 3 (I-1)
wherein: j is the basic design cost; y is an engineering design base number; t is t 1 Adjusting the coefficient for the specialty; t is t 2 Adjusting the coefficient for engineering complexity cost; t is t 3 To add adjustment factors.
The project design cost is the sum of equipment cost, building installation cost, tool cost and test operation cost in the primary design budget of project approval construction.
Taking a reference value: average cost of industry
(3) Other design costs
Other design fees are fees charged according to the relevant needs of the engineering design or the relevant regulations of the principal, including the overall design fees, coordination fees, standard design fees, reissue design fees, and other relevant cost items. The calculation formula is as follows:
Q＝J×λ (1-2)
wherein: q is other design cost; λ is the other design cost ratio (the baseline design cost).
Taking a reference value: average cost of industry
1.1.3 Bidding work
The design of the power grid infrastructure project is generally in a public bidding mode, and mainly comprises various electric power design houses to draft bidding documents according to the content of bidding documents, wherein the bidding documents comprise the parts of technical schemes, quotations, enterprise qualifications and the like. And the bidding unit carries out evaluation according to the bidding document, finally determines the winning bid party, and designs according to materials such as project recommendation or investment estimation after winning the bid in a certain power design institute.
1.1.4 contract signing evaluation
(1) Contract content
And evaluating the achievement abundance degree, the research content response degree and the contract item perfection degree related to the contract items.
The detail scoring rule of contract signing normalization is as follows:
(1) the contract signing flow is standard and reasonable, 40 points are met, 30 points are basically met, and part of the contract signing flow is in accordance with 20 points;
(2) the contract signs out the right obligation of both sides of the specified contract, the resolution of dispute of the contract, the distribution condition of benefits and risks, the detailed specified notice and the like, has fairness, and basically meets 15 points if 30 points meet 20 points;
(3) the contract clauses are complete in content and complete in conformity with requirements, and 30 points are met, 20 points are basically met, and 15 points are partially met.
Taking a reference value: 60 minutes
(2) Performing an evaluation
And evaluating the monthly fund execution condition and the annual fund execution condition of the project.
And (4) scoring detailed rules:
(1) monthly fund execution;
(2) annual fund execution.
Each term "match" is 100 points, "substantial match" is 80 points, "partial match" is 60 points.
Taking a reference value: 60 minutes
And (3) engineering implementation stage:
1.2.1 device model selection analysis
In the process of the development of the power grid infrastructure project, the type selection of equipment is one of important links influencing capital investment, and is determined by the property of the power grid infrastructure project, the equipment cost accounts for a large proportion of the total investment, and the cost expenditure of the subsequent operation, maintenance and overhaul stages is influenced by the factor of the type selection of the equipment.
In the equipment model selection of the power grid infrastructure project, according to the actual engineering requirements, a plurality of index requirements exist, the constraint is understood as constraint, the constraint contents of different project environments are different, and the equipment model selection can influence the cost expenditure in the operation, maintenance and repair stage. The decision maker aims to achieve the optimal cost on the premise of meeting the constraint conditions, and the final result of equipment selection is determined to be an integer, so that the problem of integer programming is solved.
Step one, establishing an alternative cost calculation model S:
wherein minS is the lowest cost input of a model selection stage, an operation maintenance and overhaul stage and a scrapping stage of specific equipment of a power grid capital construction project, and x is j J =1,2, \ 8230n; the quantity of n types of equipment required in the capital construction project, c j J =1,2, \ 8230n; unit price of cost, omega, for corresponding equipment j J =1,2, \ 8230n; the operation and maintenance cost is the average operation and maintenance cost of a single equipment per year, N is the service life of the equipment, and i is the discount rate;
step two, finding out an integer feasible solution of S by a linear programming solution method to obtain an objective function value
By s * Represents the optimal cost of the equipment solution selection S, in this case
And iteration is carried out;
step three, optionally selecting a variable x which does not accord with the integer condition in the optimal solution of S j Having a value of b j In the order of [ b j ]Denotes a value less than b j Is the largest integer of (c), constraint the condition x j ＜[b j ]Adding the constraint condition x into S as a constraint condition of a subsequent planning problem S1 j ≥[b j ]+1 added to S as a subsequent planning problem S 2 Respectively using the solutions of linear programming to solve the subsequent programming problem S 1 And S 2 ；
Step four, if the optimal target function of each branch is larger than j, the branch is cut off, if the optimal target function of each branch is smaller than j and does not accord with the integer condition, the step two is repeated until the optimal target function of each branch is smaller than j and does not accord with the integer condition
Obtaining an optimal solution
Taking a reference value: overall investment of project
1.2.2 construction stage cost analysis
The construction stage cost of the power grid infrastructure project consists of construction installation project cost, equipment purchase cost, other cost and dynamic cost according to the latest power grid engineering construction budgeting and calculation regulation issued by the national energy agency (2013 edition). The sum of the construction installation project cost, the equipment purchase cost and other costs is called static investment. The cost components of the respective parts are divided in detail below.
(1) Construction installation engineering cost
The construction and installation engineering cost comprises construction engineering cost and installation engineering cost. The construction cost is a cost required for constructing various buildings, structures and other facilities constituting a construction project to meet requirements and functions. The installation engineering cost is the cost required for combining, assembling and debugging various devices, pipelines, cables and auxiliary devices thereof which form the production process system in the construction project to ensure that the devices, the pipelines, the cables and the auxiliary devices thereof meet the functional indexes of the design requirements.
The construction installation project cost consists of five parts: direct fees, indirect fees, profits, base time price differences and taxes.
Taking a reference value: average cost of industry
(2) Purchase fee of equipment
The equipment purchase cost is a cost spent on purchasing or self-making various kinds of equipment for project construction and transporting the equipment to a site set by a construction site. Including equipment fees and equipment freight fees.
Taking a reference value: average cost of industry
(3) Other costs
The other expenses are other related expenses which are necessary for completing construction of the engineering project and are not related to construction engineering expenses, installation engineering expenses and equipment purchase expenses. The method comprises the steps of expropriating and clearing cost of a construction site, project construction management cost, project construction technical service cost, standard labor preparation cost and major transport measure cost.
Taking a reference value: average cost of industry
(4) Dynamic fees
The dynamic cost is the cost generated by price increase and capital cost increase stations caused by time and market price change stations during construction budgeting year to completion acceptance of each element forming the construction cost, and mainly comprises price difference reserve cost and construction period loan interest.
Dynamic fees include spread preparation fees and construction period interest.
Wherein the difference preparation fee calculation formula is as follows:
c is a price difference preparation fee, e is an annual rising index, and n1 is a time interval from the horizontal year to the beginning year of construction budget planning; n2 is an engineering construction period; i is the i-th year from the beginning year: fi is the engineering capital invested in year i.
And the interest of the construction loan is calculated according to the contemporaneous interest rate of the bank.
Taking a reference value: average cost of industry
And (3) operation and maintenance stage:
1.3.1 operation and maintenance phase cost analysis
The cost of the operation and maintenance stage of the power grid infrastructure project refers to the sum of all costs spent during the operation period after the power grid infrastructure project is built, and the costs include labor cost, energy consumption, environmental cost and other costs.
(1) Labor cost: refers to the sum of payroll, welfare, allowance, personnel safety guarantee expenditure and training expenditure of project personnel.
(2) The energy consumption: which means the energy cost consumed in the daily operation after the project is built. Such as electric energy consumption, oil consumption, etc., and coal consumption, etc.
(3) Environment fee: pollution of certain properties, such as noise pollution, water pollution, electromagnetic radiation and the like, can be caused in the operation process of the power grid infrastructure project. With the increasing emphasis on environmental protection in China, the expenditure on environmental protection in the daily operation and maintenance process is increased, so the expenditure on the environment must be brought into the cost accounting of the whole life cycle. In particular to the sum of expenses spent for protecting the surrounding environment of the project or beautifying the surrounding of the project, and the content of the part is continuously spent along with the operation of the project.
(4) Other fees
Representing other costs of the project operating each year.
1.3.2 routine overhaul cost analysis
And conventional maintenance, namely scheduled periodic equipment maintenance work, does not influence the use of the power utilization side, and the cost loss caused by power failure occurs. The calculation method is as follows:
wherein:
r 0 for investment profitability
t i The service life of the ith equipment;
n is the number of project equipment
p is the overhaul rate.
Maintenance rate = equipment operating cost/investment amount
Equipment investment = equipment investment × overhaul rate
1.3.3 unconventional inspection cost analysis
The irregular maintenance is maintenance performed by loss due to a planned power outage or a power outage at the power-consuming side due to an unexpected failure. The calculation formula is as follows:
FC i ＝Σ a ×W j ×T J +λ j ×RC j ×MRRT j (1-6)
λ j the mean annual fault rate of the jth equipment is obtained;
T J the annual fault interruption rate of the jth equipment is set;
RC j average repair cost for the jth equipment;
MRRT j average repair time for jth equipment;
a is the value coefficient of the electricity consumption of the user at the relevant electricity utilization side;
and an operation feedback stage:
1.4.1 cost of scrapping stage
The cost of the power grid capital construction project to the scrapping stage is mainly reduced by the cost of equipment and materials recovered by the project, such as equipment disassembly, supporting building disassembly, waste recycling cost, environmental protection cost and the like after the project is scrapped. The cost of protecting the environment of the power grid infrastructure project is the cost of protecting the environment, which is called the cost of protecting the environment, because the power grid infrastructure project is additionally built in suburbs, mountainous regions or cultivated lands and the ambient environment needs to be protected or recovered after being scrapped. The environmental protection cost is emphasized, the power grid enterprise can clearly determine the social responsibility and improve the understanding of the power grid enterprise on the environmental protection cost. The scrap stage cost is equal to the scrap disposal cost minus the equipment residual.
1.4.2 social and economic benefits
(1) Line loss rate (10 kV and below integrated line loss rate)
The index refers to the percentage of the loss load of a power distribution network line of 10kV or below in the power supply load, is an important content examined by an electric power department, is a comprehensive technical and economic index for reflecting the operation and management level of a power grid, and aims to guide each unit to pay attention to the improvement of the power supply capacity of the power grid, the scientificity of the power grid development, the enhancement of energy conservation and consumption reduction consciousness, the optimization of the power grid structure and the improvement of the power supply efficiency.
Taking a reference value: power supply load
(2) Integrated voltage yield
The index is used for measuring the power supply quality of the power supply of a company to a user, and is specifically defined as the percentage of the accumulated operation time of the actual operation voltage deviation within the limit value range to the corresponding total operation statistical time.
Taking a reference value: total running statistical time
(3) Reliability of power supply
The index is set according to the evaluation regulation of power supply reliability of users of the power supply system (DL/T836-2012) and is used for quantitatively measuring the degree of reliable power supply of the users by the power supply network. In the case of considering fault power failure and prearranged power failure, and not considering the power limit caused by insufficient system power supply, the average power failure hours of a user in a counting period are counted, and the index is marked as AIHC-3 (h/user). The calculation formula is as follows:
power supply reliability =1- (average user power consumption time/statistical time) × 100%
(4) Incremental investment economy internal rate of return (Δ EIRR)
The incremental investment economy internal rate of return is divided into incremental total investment and incremental domestic investment economy internal rate of return. The internal yield of the incremental total investment economy is a relative index which reflects the benefit of the project for the national economy from the perspective of the national economy as a whole and represents the dynamic benefit obtained by the funds occupied by the project. The incremental domestic investment economy internal rate of return reflects the dynamic benefit obtainable from the domestic funds occupied by the project. Δ EIRR is deduced inversely from 1-7:
wherein: Δ EIRR is the economic internal profitability:
delta B is the incremental national economic benefit inflow:
delta C is the incremental national economic benefit outflow:
(ΔB-ΔC) t the incremental net benefit flow for the t year.
n is the number of years in the calculation period
1.4.3 item sustainability evaluation (external Environment)
(1) Incremental fund profit margin
The incremental fund profit margin is the ratio of the average annual incremental profit sum to the incremental fund within the project production and operation period and reflects the profit capacity of the incremental fund.
The profit margin of the fund = annual increment profit total/increment fund x 100%
(2) Incremental investment finance net present value (Delta FNPV)
The incremental investment financial net present value is the benchmark profitability (i) according to the power industry c ) Or the set discount rate is used for discounting the incremental net cash flow (the incremental total investment or the incremental own fund) of each year in the project calculation period to the sum of the present values at the beginning of the construction period. It is a reflection of the increment in the life of the projectAnd (4) dynamic evaluation indexes of investment profitability. And taking the actual incremental net cash flow in the year before the post-evaluation time point, predicting the incremental net cash flow of each year again according to the situation in the years after the post-evaluation time point, discounting the incremental cash flow of each year to the beginning of the construction period according to the reselected discount rate, and summing all the years.
ΔFNPV＝∑(ΔRCI-ΔRCO) t (1+i k ) -t t＝1……n (1-8)
Δ RCI-the actual or actual, re-predicted annual incremental cash inflow to the project;
Δ RCO-the annual incremental cash outflow of the project, actual or re-predicted from actual conditions;
i k -a discount rate is reselected according to the actual situation;
n-calculation period (evaluation earlier);
t is a specific year of the examination period.
Projects with incremental investment financial net present values greater than zero or equal to zero are successful.
(3) Incremental investment profit margin
The incremental investment profit margin refers to the ratio of the average annual incremental profit sum of the project in the production and operation period to the incremental total fund (the sum of the incremental fixed asset investment and the incremental total liquidity) in the construction period, and is a static index for inspecting the incremental investment profit capacity of the project unit.
Incremental investment profit rate = incremental profit total/incremental total investment x 100%
The incremental profit sum is the difference between the "project" and "project free" profit sums, and the incremental total fund is the difference between the "project free" total fund minus the "project free" total fund.
1.4.4 item sustainability evaluation (intrinsic mechanism)
(1) Management mechanism evaluation
Subjective scoring by experts
Reference value: 60 minutes
(2) Evaluation of incentive mechanisms
Subjective scoring by expert
Reference value: 60 minutes
(3) N-1 passage rate
The index reflects the ability of the grid to maintain a normal continuous supply of power to the load under a set of anticipated accidents for purposes of verifying the strength of the distribution grid structure and the rationality of the mode of operation. The medium-voltage line N-1 refers to the transfer capability of the same-level power grid when one section (including one section of an overhead line, one ring network unit of a cable line or one section of a cable incoming line body) in the medium-voltage line fails or is scheduled to exit the operation. The medium voltage line N-1 pass rate reflects the proportion of the medium voltage line that meets N-1. When the index is calculated, the transfer capacity of the current-level power grid and the next-level power grid needs to be reasonably considered.
N-1 pass rate = 100% of the number of medium voltage utility distribution lines satisfying N-1 in the line/total number of medium voltage utility distribution lines%
Multiplying the N-1 passing rate by 100 to obtain the score of the index
Reference value: 60 minutes
(4) Proportion of overload line
Reference value: 1
(5) Number of consecutive safe operation days
Reference value: 365
TABLE 1
The step S1 further includes the steps of:
s11, normalizing the index values according to the reference values to unify the index dimension.
In this embodiment, the indexes are normalized to unify the dimension of the indexes, the value of each index is divided by the reference value to obtain a per unit value, and the indexes are weighted based on the per unit value.
The voltage levels of the power grid in the power system are different, and in order to make calculation more convenient, people adopt per unit values to calculate by unifying dimensions. In the random forest algorithm, because the data difference of each index is very large and is not related to each other, the importance of each index cannot be directly analyzed and sequenced under normal conditions. By using the idea of per unit value for reference, a reference value is selected for each index, and the original data is divided by the reference value to obtain a uniform dimension.
S2, acquiring the AHP subjective weight of each index according to the evaluation system;
the step S2 includes the steps of:
s21, establishing a judgment matrix scale;
s22, acquiring an expert importance comparison score according to the matrix scale, and generating a judgment matrix;
the judgment matrix is as follows:
A＝[a ij ] n×n ；
s23, normalizing the judgment matrix to obtain a standard judgment matrix;
the normalization processing of the judgment matrix according to columns specifically comprises the following steps:
s24, summing the standard judgment matrix according to rows, and carrying out normalization processing on the sums of the rows to obtain the AHP subjective weight of each index;
summing the obtained standard judgment matrix according to rows to obtain each row of the standard judgment matrix:
normalizing each row of the standard matrix to obtain the AHP subjective weight W of each index i ：
Wherein n represents the number of indexes,
representing the elements of the matrix after the normalization process.
In this embodiment, in the analytic hierarchy process, numbers 1 to 9 and their inverses are cited as the judgment matrix scale, and the meaning of the judgment matrix scale is shown in the following table 2:
TABLE 2
| Scale | Means of |
| 1 | Compared with the two indexes, the two indexes have the |
| 3 | The former is slightly more important than the latter in comparison with the two indexes |
| 5 | The former is more important than the latter in comparison |
| 7 | The former is more important than the latter in comparison with the two indexes |
| 9 | The former is extremely important than the latter in comparison with the two |
| 2、4、6、8 | Intermediate value of the above-mentioned adjacent judgment |
And the hierarchical single sequencing comprises the steps of calculating the relative weight of each level index in an evaluation index system and checking the consistency. The judgment matrix of the index of the criterion layer relative to the target layer is formed by expert scoring, and the judgment matrix is shown in table 3:
TABLE 3
| A | B1 | B2 | | B4 |
| B1 | ||||
| 1 | 1/2 | 1/3 | 1/4 | |
| |
2 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| |
3 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| B4 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
For easy understanding, the importance of the indexes reflected by the table is as follows: b4, B3, B2 and B1. The above table is merely an example to assist understanding, and is not a determination matrix used in practice.
The step S2 further includes the steps of:
s25, calculating a consistency index CI:
wherein n represents the index number, λ max represents the maximum eigenvalue of the judgment matrix, and the calculation formula of λ max is as follows:
wherein, W i AHP subjective weight, a, representing each index ij Representing the value, i, of the ith row and jth column of the decision matrix<n，j<n；
S26, looking up a table according to the order of the judgment matrix to obtain a random consistency index RI;
s27, calculating a consistency ratio:
and if the CR value is smaller than the preset threshold value, the judgment matrix passes the consistency check.
S3, obtaining objective weights of the indexes through a pre-trained random forest algorithm;
the training of the random forest algorithm in the step S3 comprises the following steps:
s31, performing Bootstrap sampling on a random forest, and generating K independent decision trees by extracting K sample data sets, wherein each sample data set is a power grid infrastructure project full life cycle index system;
s32, letting k =1, training decision tree T k The training input is the kth data set, the kth data set is calculated, and the accuracy rate L of the kth out-of-bag data set is calculated k ；
S33, rearranging the characteristics f in the data set outside the bag and calculating the accuracy
S34, executing the step S32 and the step 33 on all sample data sets K =2,3 \ 8230k;
s35, calculating the classification accuracy error after rearrangement:
s36, for each feature f, calculating the influence degree of the feature f on the accuracy rate of the data outside the bag:
and variance of the degree of influence:
further calculating the importance f of the feature f c ：
f c ＝e f /S；
Importance of obtaining all features f c 。
As shown in fig. 3, the random forest is an algorithm for integrating a plurality of trees by the idea of ensemble learning, and its basic unit is a decision tree, and its essence belongs to a large branch-ensemble learning method in machine learning. Random forests have good ability to prevent overfitting. The specific process of constructing each classifier needs to randomly extract a part of samples from an original data set to serve as a sample subspace, then randomly select a new feature subspace from the sample subspace, establish a decision tree in the new space to serve as a classifier, and finally obtain a final decision through a voting method. Random forests have two important randomizations:
1. forming a training set of each tree by using a Bagging method; the Bagging idea is to randomly take a part of samples from the total samples for training, vote for multiple times to obtain a classification result, and finally take the model mean value as a final result. Because the samples are sampled and then placed back on the fly, the perturbation capability of the samples is increased.
2. Random subspace of features: when splitting each node of the decision tree, a subset is randomly selected from all the feature samples, and then the best split is selected from the subset to construct the tree. The decision tree is an independent and equally distributed random variable sequence. Because the training of each decision tree is mutually independent, the training of the random forest can be realized through parallel processing, and the efficiency and the expansibility of the random forest algorithm are effectively ensured.
S4, calculating the combination weight of each index according to the AHP subjective weight and the objective weight of each index;
the calculation of the combination weight is specifically as follows:
wherein, W j Combined weight, W, representing index j j 1 And W j 2 And sequentially and respectively representing the subjective weight and the objective weight of the index j.
The insulation state of the transformer reflected by each characteristic quantity index has certain difference, subjective weight obtained by an AHP method reflects subjective preference of an evaluator, and the random forest algorithm utilizes a decision tree and an integrated learning idea to objectively weight the indexes. In order to avoid the defects of strong subjectivity and possible errors of algorithm data, a combined weighting method is adopted to reflect the influence degrees of different indexes for effectively combining the two weighting methods. Subjective scoring based on expert experience can be fully considered, and the weight can be corrected according to the characteristics of the data, so that the obtained weight is more scientific and reasonable.
According to the obtained combined weight, influence factors of each index in a single project can be comprehensively analyzed, and the indexes with large weight are paid more attention so as to save project cost.
S5, calculating index comprehensive scores of all the indexes and project comprehensive scores of the whole project full life cycle according to the index values, the reference values and the combined weights of all the indexes;
the step S5 specifically includes:
dividing the index value by the reference value for each index, and performing normalization processing on the index value of each index to unify the dimension of the index to obtain a second index value of each index;
multiplying the second index value by the combined weight for each index to obtain the index comprehensive score of each index;
and adding all the index comprehensive scores to obtain the project comprehensive score.
Referring to fig. 2, the second embodiment of the present invention is:
a power grid infrastructure project full life cycle evaluation terminal 1 comprises a processor 2, a memory 3 and a computer program which is stored in the memory 3 and can run on the processor 2, wherein the processor 2 executes the computer program to realize the steps of the power grid infrastructure project full life cycle evaluation method of the first embodiment
In summary, the method and the terminal for evaluating the full life cycle of the power grid infrastructure project provided by the invention take the operation and maintenance stage and the operation feedback stage into consideration to establish an evaluation system of the full life cycle of the project, are more comprehensive, obtain objective weights by using a random forest algorithm, obtain subjective weights by using an improved analytic hierarchy process, and comprehensively determine the combined weight of each index according to the subjective weights and the objective weights, and the combined weight determination strategy overcomes the defects of a single weighting method, effectively reduces the influence of a method which only depends on the subjective weights or obtains the objective weights in the past on the data dependence, and improves the reliability and the accuracy of evaluation.
The method starts from the whole process of the power grid infrastructure project, scientifically divides and defines the project based on the full life cycle theory, inspects and evaluates the project at multiple angles, realizes evaluation and control of the whole process of the power grid infrastructure project, gives consideration to the development speed and the development quality, reasonably and efficiently utilizes internal resources of enterprises, and improves the operation capacity, the asset profitability and the high-quality service capacity of the enterprises.
In each life cycle, analyzing and setting the evaluation indexes of the power grid infrastructure project; influence factors of each stage of the infrastructure project period are quantified, a power grid infrastructure project evaluation index system is constructed by determining dimensions such as a target layer, a criterion layer and an index layer, a scientific and objective power grid infrastructure project evaluation system is established, and the power grid infrastructure project is subjected to post-evaluation.
The method includes the steps of utilizing the idea of per unit value to unify matrixes formed by all characteristic quantities to the same dimension, utilizing a random forest algorithm to obtain objective weights of indexes, utilizing an improved analytic hierarchy process to obtain subjective weights of the indexes, and sequencing the subjective weights and the objective weights according to index importance through a combined weighting method to obtain combined weights of all the indexes. The weight determination strategy overcomes the defects of a single empowerment method and has certain practical significance.
The above description is only an embodiment of the present invention, and is not intended to limit the scope of the present invention, and all equivalent modifications made by the present invention and the contents of the accompanying drawings, which are directly or indirectly applied to the related technical fields, are included in the scope of the present invention.
Claims (10)
1. A full life cycle evaluation method of a power grid infrastructure project is characterized by comprising the following steps:
s1, establishing an evaluation system of a project full life cycle including an operation and maintenance stage and an operation feedback stage and reference values of all indexes in the evaluation system, and acquiring the index values of all the indexes;
s2, acquiring the AHP subjective weight of each index according to the evaluation system;
s3, acquiring objective weight of each index through a pre-trained random forest algorithm;
s4, calculating the combination weight of each index according to the AHP subjective weight and the objective weight of each index;
and S5, calculating the index comprehensive score of each index and the project comprehensive score of the whole project life cycle according to the index value, the reference value and the combined weight of each index.
2. The method for evaluating the full life cycle of the power grid infrastructure project according to claim 1, wherein the step S2 comprises the steps of:
s21, establishing a judgment matrix scale;
s22, acquiring an expert importance comparison score according to the matrix scale, and generating a judgment matrix;
s23, normalizing the judgment matrix to obtain a standard judgment matrix;
and S24, summing the standard judgment matrix according to rows, and carrying out normalization processing on the sums of the rows to obtain the AHP subjective weight of each index.
3. The method for evaluating the full life cycle of the power grid infrastructure project according to claim 2, wherein the judgment matrix is as follows:
A＝[a ij ] n×n ；
the normalization processing of the judgment matrix by columns specifically comprises the following steps:
summing the obtained standard judgment matrix according to rows to obtain each row of the standard judgment matrix:
normalizing each row of the standard matrix to obtain the AHP subjective weight W of each index i ：
Wherein n represents the number of indexes,
representing the elements of the matrix after the normalization process.
4. The method for evaluating the full life cycle of the power grid infrastructure project according to claim 2, wherein the step S2 further comprises the steps of:
s25, calculating a consistency index CI:
wherein n represents the number of indices, λ max Represents the maximum eigenvalue, λ, of the decision matrix max The calculation formula of (a) is as follows:
wherein, W i AHP subjective weight, a, representing each index ij Representing the value, i, of the ith row and jth column of the decision matrix<n，j<n；
S26, looking up a table according to the order of the judgment matrix to obtain a random consistency index RI;
s27, calculating a consistency ratio:
and if the CR value is smaller than the preset threshold value, the judgment matrix passes the consistency test.
5. The method for evaluating the full life cycle of the power grid infrastructure project according to claim 1, wherein the step S1 further comprises the steps of:
s11, normalizing the index values according to the reference values to unify the index dimension;
the training of the random forest algorithm in the step S3 comprises the following steps:
s31, performing Bootstrap sampling on a random forest, and generating K independent decision trees by extracting K sample data sets, wherein each sample data set is a power grid infrastructure project full life cycle index system;
s32, letting k =1, training decision tree T k The training input is the kth data set, the kth data set is calculated, and the accuracy rate L of the kth out-of-bag data set is calculated k ；
S33, rearranging the characteristics f in the data set outside the bag, and calculating the accuracy
S34, executing step S32 and step 33 on all sample data sets K =2,3 \8230Ok;
s35, calculating the classification accurate error after rearrangement:
s36, for each feature f, calculating the influence degree of the feature f on the accuracy rate of the data outside the bag:
and variance of the degree of influence:
and further calculate the importance f of the feature f c ：
f c ＝e f /S；
Importance of obtaining all features f c 。
6. The method for evaluating the full life cycle of the power grid infrastructure project according to claim 1, wherein the calculation of the combination weight specifically comprises:
wherein, W j Combined weight, W, representing index j j 1 And W j 2 And sequentially and respectively representing the subjective weight and the objective weight of the index j.
7. The method for evaluating the full life cycle of the power grid infrastructure project according to claim 1, wherein the step S5 specifically comprises:
dividing the index value by the reference value for each index, and performing normalization processing on the index values of each index to unify the dimension of the index to obtain a second index value of each index;
multiplying the second index value by the combined weight for each index to obtain the index comprehensive score of each index;
and adding all the index comprehensive scores to obtain the project comprehensive score.
8. The method for evaluating the full life cycle of the power grid infrastructure project according to claim 1, wherein the evaluation system of the full life cycle of the project comprises the following indexes: planning capacity, feasibility argument, survey fee, basic design fee, other design fee, bid job, contract content, execution evaluation, equipment data, construction installation engineering fee, equipment purchase fee, other fee, dynamic fee, labor fee, energy cost, environment fee, other fee, maintenance fee, repair fee, labor fee, insurance fee, outage time, repair cost, electricity value coefficient, mean failure rate, rejection cost, equipment residual value, line loss rate, comprehensive voltage qualification rate, power supply reliability rate, incremental investment economic internal profit rate, incremental capital fund profit rate, incremental investment financial net present value, incremental investment profit rate, management mechanism evaluation, incentive mechanism evaluation, N-1 passage rate, overload line proportion and continuous safe operation days;
wherein, the other design fees are fees charged according to the relevant requirements of engineering design or the relevant regulations of the consignor;
other expenses are other related expenses which are necessary for completing construction of the engineering project but are not the construction engineering expenses, the installation engineering expenses and the equipment purchase expenses;
other fees refer to other fees besides labor, energy and environmental fees required for the operation of the project each year in the operation and maintenance phase.
9. The method for evaluating the full life cycle of the power grid infrastructure project according to claim 8, wherein the acquiring of the equipment data specifically comprises:
step one, establishing an alternative cost calculation model S:
wherein, minS is the lowest cost input of the model selection stage, the operation maintenance and overhaul stage and the scrapping stage of the specific equipment of the power grid infrastructure project, and x is j J =1,2, \ 8230n; the quantity of n types of equipment required in the capital construction project, c j J =1,2, \ 8230n; unit price, omega, for the cost of the corresponding equipment j J =1,2, \ 8230n; for the annual average maintenance and operation cost, a, of the corresponding equipment j J =1,2, \8230n; is the equipment residual rate.
N is the service life of the equipment, i is the discount rate;
step two, finding out an integer feasible solution of S by a linear programming solution method to obtain an objective function value
By s * Represents the optimal cost of the equipment solution selection S, in this case
And performing iteration;
step three, optionally selecting a variable x which does not accord with the integer condition in the optimal solution of S j Having a value of b j To [ b ] j ]Denotes a value of less than b j Is the largest integer of (2), constrains the condition to x j ＜[b j ]Adding the constraint condition x into S as a constraint condition of a subsequent planning problem S1 j ≥[b j ]+1 added to S as a subsequent planning problem S 2 Respectively solving the subsequent programming problem S by using the solutions of the linear programming 1 And S 2 ；
Step four, if the optimal objective function of each branch is larger than j, the branch is cut off, if the optimal objective function is smaller than j and does not accord with the integer condition, the step two is repeated until the optimal objective function is smaller than j
Get the optimal solution
10. A power grid infrastructure project full-life-cycle evaluation terminal, comprising a processor, a memory and a computer program stored in the memory and operable on the processor, wherein the processor executes the computer program to implement the steps of a power grid infrastructure project full-life-cycle evaluation method according to any one of claims 1 to 9.
Priority Applications (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202211262166.1A CN115713241A (en) | 2022-10-14 | 2022-10-14 | Full life cycle evaluation method and terminal for power grid infrastructure project |
Applications Claiming Priority (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202211262166.1A CN115713241A (en) | 2022-10-14 | 2022-10-14 | Full life cycle evaluation method and terminal for power grid infrastructure project |
Publications (1)
| Publication Number | Publication Date |
|---|---|
| CN115713241A true CN115713241A (en) | 2023-02-24 |
Family
ID=85231133
Family Applications (1)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202211262166.1A Pending CN115713241A (en) | 2022-10-14 | 2022-10-14 | Full life cycle evaluation method and terminal for power grid infrastructure project |
Country Status (1)
| Country | Link |
|---|---|
| CN (1) | CN115713241A (en) |
Cited By (4)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN116029559A (en) * | 2023-03-29 | 2023-04-28 | 国网湖北省电力有限公司经济技术研究院 | Power system infrastructure project combination scheme decision method |
| CN116862545A (en) * | 2023-04-25 | 2023-10-10 | 广东源恒软件科技有限公司 | Dynamic analysis method and system for engineering cost |
| CN117786899A (en) * | 2024-02-23 | 2024-03-29 | 中机生产力促进中心有限公司 | Method, device, computer and storage medium for deciding life cycle attribute of basic mechanical part |
| CN117938726A (en) * | 2024-03-22 | 2024-04-26 | 奇安信科技集团股份有限公司 | Virtual network security function evaluation method and system |
-
2022
- 2022-10-14 CN CN202211262166.1A patent/CN115713241A/en active Pending
Cited By (6)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN116029559A (en) * | 2023-03-29 | 2023-04-28 | 国网湖北省电力有限公司经济技术研究院 | Power system infrastructure project combination scheme decision method |
| CN116862545A (en) * | 2023-04-25 | 2023-10-10 | 广东源恒软件科技有限公司 | Dynamic analysis method and system for engineering cost |
| CN117786899A (en) * | 2024-02-23 | 2024-03-29 | 中机生产力促进中心有限公司 | Method, device, computer and storage medium for deciding life cycle attribute of basic mechanical part |
| CN117786899B (en) * | 2024-02-23 | 2024-05-10 | 中机生产力促进中心有限公司 | Method, device, computer and storage medium for deciding life cycle attribute of basic mechanical part |
| CN117938726A (en) * | 2024-03-22 | 2024-04-26 | 奇安信科技集团股份有限公司 | Virtual network security function evaluation method and system |
| CN117938726B (en) * | 2024-03-22 | 2024-05-24 | 奇安信科技集团股份有限公司 | Virtual network security function evaluation method and system |
Similar Documents
| Publication | Publication Date | Title |
|---|---|---|
| Wu et al. | An integrated decision-making model for sustainable photovoltaic module supplier selection based on combined weight and cumulative prospect theory | |
| Zhou et al. | Analysis of risk priorities for renewable energy investment projects using a hybrid IT2 hesitant fuzzy decision-making approach with alpha cuts | |
| Garbuzova-Schlifter et al. | AHP-based risk analysis of energy performance contracting projects in Russia | |
| Zavadskas et al. | Selecting a contractor by using a novel method for multiple attribute analysis: Weighted Aggregated Sum Product Assessment with grey values (WASPAS-G) | |
| Hastak et al. | ICRAM-1: Model for international construction risk assessment | |
| CN115713241A (en) | Full life cycle evaluation method and terminal for power grid infrastructure project | |
| CN109308631B (en) | Modeling method for electric power market decision analysis | |
| Bangjun et al. | Decision making on investments in photovoltaic power generation projects based on renewable portfolio standard: Perspective of real option | |
| Wang | Construction of Risk Evaluation Index System for Power Grid Engineering Cost by Applying WBS‐RBS and Membership Degree Methods | |
| Shi et al. | Economic policy, regulatory policy, or soft policy: Which category of policy can effectively improve the green innovation of Chinese wind power industry? | |
| Agyapong et al. | The antecedents of circular economy financing and investment supply: The role of financial environment | |
| Dong et al. | Trading performance evaluation for traditional power generation group based on an integrated matter-element extension cloud model | |
| Zhang et al. | Risk assessment of water environment treatment PPP projects based on a cloud model | |
| Chen et al. | Research on the risk evaluation of urban wastewater treatment projects based on an improved fuzzy cognitive map | |
| Bedhiye et al. | Fiscal policy and private investment in developing economies: Evidence from Ethiopia | |
| Castro et al. | Analysis of energy management and financial planning in the implementation of PV systems | |
| Nordling et al. | Social costs and benefits of smart grid technologies | |
| Wang et al. | Supply chain diffusion mechanisms for AI applications: A perspective on audit pricing | |
| CN112288269A (en) | Regional power distribution network equipment asset investment scheme evaluation method and system | |
| Vilela et al. | Economic feasibility analysis for co-generation of power by diesel generator at peak time: Monte Carlo simulation approach in a hospital | |
| Li et al. | Big data analysis model of power customer satisfaction based on ANP | |
| Bature et al. | An investigation into the effects of risks and risk management of bioenergy projects | |
| Liu et al. | Risk Identification and Evaluation of Urban Underground Pipe Gallery PPP Project Based on Improved AHP | |
| Liu | Discussion on the construction of financial risk control system of electric power research institutes under the background of informational | |
| Liu | Comprehensive Evaluation Method of Enterprise Financial Budget Performance Based on Data Mining |
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 |