E.M. Farkhadzadeh, A.Z. Muradaliyev, Y.Z. Farzaliyev, T.K. Rafiyeva
Èlektron. model. 2017, 39(2):75-90
https://doi.org/10.15407/emodel.39.02.075
ABSTRACT
Obstacle for calculation of the integrated indicator (II) characterizing operational efficiency of the EPS objects of the same name is multidimensionality of statistical data, small volume of data and different types of scales of data measurement. Calculation of II is preceded by transition from absolute values of the indicators of the same name to rated ones. It is shown that it is expedient to perform the transition to rated values concerning a median and scope of realization. The assessment of the II significance by means of the Harrington desirability function has been carried out. This method has been applied to the characteristic of technical condition of boiler installations of power units of 300 MW on oil-gas fuel. The traditional method was simplified by means of replacement of Harrington desirability function with the function of uniform distribution of rated indicators in an interval [1; +1]. It allowed not only keeping a five-point assessment of technical condition, but also natural character of choosing the intervals of distribution function.
KEYWORDS
integrated indicator, reliability, profitability, analysis, rationing, boiler installation, distribution function, desirability functiony.
REFERENCES
1. RD 34.08.554, (1991), Svodnyi klassifikator elektricheskoy chasti elektrostantsiy, elektricheskikh i teplovykh setey [Summary qualifier of electric part of power plants, electric and thermal networks. Service of the best practices of ORGRES], SPO ORGRES, Moscow, Russia.
2. Orlov, A.I. (2014), “A new paradigm of the analysis of statistical and experimental data in problems of economy and management”, Scientific journal of KubGAU, no. 98(04), pp. 1-21.
3. Farhadzadeh, E.M., Farzaliyev, Y.Z., Muradaliyev, A.Z. and Rafiyeva, T.K. (2015), “Increase of reliability and profitability of boiler installations of block power plants. Methodical questions of research of reliability of big systems of power”, Sbornik nauchnykh statei. Aktualnyie problemy nadyozhnosti system energetiki, Iss. 66, responsible eds Voropay, N.I., Korotkevich, M.A., Mikhalevich, A.A., BNTU, Minsk, Iss. 66, pp. 404-410.
4. Standard of the JSC RAO UES of Russia organization “Thermal and hydraulic power plants” (2007), Technique of an assessment of quality of the power equipment. Basic provisions. Order 23.04.2007, no. 275. Center of labor safety, Chelyabinsk, Russia.
5. Dmitriyev, V.V. (2009), “Determination of an integrated indicator of the condition of natural object as a composite system”, Obshchestvo, sreda, razvitie (Terra Humana), no. 4, pp. 146-165.
6. Fedyukin, V. (2013), Upravlenie kachestvom tekhnologicheskikh protsessov [Control of quality of technological processes], KNORUS, Moscow, Russia.
7. Farkhadzadeh, E.M., Farzaliyev, Y.Z., Muradaliyev, A.Z. and Abdullaeva, S.A. (2016), “Improvement of methods of increasing reliability of the objects of electrical power systems”, Elektrichestvo, no. 8, pp. 18-28.
8. Farzaliyev, Y.Z. (2014), “Comparison of ways of normalization at classification of initial data”, Reliability: Theory & Applications, Vol. 9, no. 2(33), pp. 50-56.
9. Fedorcenko, S.G. and Fedorcenko, G.S. (2014),“Integrated measure of estimates of the state of energy safety”, Problem of Regional Power, no. 1(24), pp. 1-16.