基于IAHP-CRITIC二维云模型的舰船电力系统韧性评价

doi:10.12305/j.issn.1001-506X.2025.01.23

Abstract

Abstract:

The ship power system is the key to the normal operation of the ship, and has high degree of complexity and fuzziness, which makes it difficult to evaluate its resilience accurately and objectively. According to the main tasks of the ship power system, the resilience evaluation index system of the ship power system is constructed. The interval analytic hierarchy process (IAHP) and the criteria importance though intercrieria correlation (CRITIC) are used to calculate the subjective and objective weights of the evaluation index system respectively, and the combined weights are determined by the improved game theory method to reduce the subjectivity and randomness of weight calculation. Combined with the two-dimensional cloud model, the resilience of ship power system is evaluated from two dimensions of defense capability and recovery capability, which reflects the resilience of ship power system more comprehensively and objectively. The example shows that the proposed method can effectively solve the randomness and uncertain problems in the resilience evaluation of ship power system, and is conducive to obtaining more accurate and objective evaluation results.

Key words: ship power system, two-dimensional cloud model, resilience evaluation, interval analytic hierarchy process (IAHP), criteria importance though intercrieria correlation (CRITIC

CLC Number:

E917

Tao HU, Haobang LIU, Tong CHEN, Yujiang WANG, Minggui LI, Kai DU. Evaluation of ship power system resilience based on two-dimensional cloud model of IAHP-CRITIC[J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2025, 47(1): 217-229.

Figures/Tables 29

Fig.1

Fig.2

Fig.3

Table 1

Table 2

Table 3

Fig.4

Fig.5

Fig.6

Table 4

Fig.7

Fig.8

Fig.9

Table 5

Fig.10

Fig.11

Fig.12

Fig.13

Fig.14

Fig.15

Fig.16

Fig.17

Fig.18

Fig.19

Fig.20

Fig.21

Fig.22

Fig.23

Fig.24

References 35

1	黄海静,高阳,孙英涛,等.电力系统安全韧性评价标准化研究[J].标准科学,2022,12(1):98-101.
	HUANGH J,GAOY,SUNY T,et al.Research on standardi-zation of safety toughness evaluation of power system[J].Standard Science,2022,12(1):98-101.
2	CHIVUNGAJ N,LINZ Y,BLANCHARDR.Power systems'resilience: a comprehensive literature review[J].Energies,2023,16(5):45-57.
3	YOUNESIA,SHAYEGHIH,WANGZ J,et al.Trends in modern power systems resilience: state-of-the-art review[J].Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews,2022,12(2):76-91.
4	UMUNNAKWEA,HUANGH,OIKONOMOUK,et al.Quantitative analysis of power systems resilience: standardization, categorizations, and challenges[J].Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews,2021,14(7):112-128.
5	SHENL J,TANGY L,TANGL C.Understanding key factors affecting power systems resilience[J].Reliability Engineering System Safety,2021,3(2):107-124.
6	AFZALS,MOKHLISH,ILLIASH A,et al.State-of-the-art review on power system resilience and assessment techniques[J].IET Generation, Transmission Distribution,2020,14(25):6107-6121. doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2020.0531
7	田甜,张骏,叶樊,等.洪涝灾害下配电网三维韧性指标评估体系[J].电工电能新技术,2022,41(7):80-88.
	TIANT,ZHANGJ,YEF,et al.Evaluation system of 3D toughness index of distribution network under flood disaster[J].New Technology of Electro engineering and Electric Energy,2022,41(7):80-88.
8	SABOUHIH,DOROUDIA,FOTUHIF M,et al.Electrical power system resilience assessment: a comprehensive approach[J].IEEE Systems Journal,2019,13(5):111-126.
9	PANTELIM,TRAKASD N,MANCARELLAP,et al.Power systems resilience assessment: hardening and smart operational enhancement strategies[J].Proceedings of the IEEE,2017,105(7):1202-1213. doi: 10.1109/JPROC.2017.2691357
10	SEBASTIANE,MATHAIOSP,PIERLUIGIM,et al.Multi-phase assessment and adaptation of power systems resilience to natural hazards[J].Electric Power Systems Research,2016,13(6):352-361.
11	张鑫,王楠,王伟,等.考虑台风天气的电力系统韧性评估[J].电力系统及其自动化学报,2019,31(8):21-26.
	ZHANGX,WANGN,WANGW,et al.Toughness evaluation of power system considering typhoon weather[J].Journal of Electric Power Systems and Automation,2019,31(8):21-26.
12	ZHANGH,BIEZ H,LIG F,et al.Assessment method and metrics of power system resilience after disasters[J].The Journal of Engineering,2019,19(16):880-883.
13	孙为民,孙华东,何剑,等.面向严重自然灾害的电力系统韧性评估技术综述[J].电网技术,2024,48(1):129-139.
	SUNW M,SUNH D,HEJ,et al.Review of power system resilience assessment techniques for severe natural disasters[J].Power Grid Technology,2024,48(1):129-139.
14	WANGC,JUP,WUF,et al.A systematic review on power system resilience from the perspective of generation, network, and load[J].Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews,2022,16(7):96-108.
15	DENGX,GENGF T,YANGJ X.A novel portfolio based on interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy AHP with improved combination weight method and new score function[J].Engineering Letters,2023,31(4):66-78.
16	ZENGW H,FANJ Y,RENZ C,et al.Economic evaluation method of modern power transmission system based on improved technique for order of preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS) and best-worst method-anti-entropy weight[J].Energies,2023,16(21):145-158.
17	ZHANGQ J,LIUC J,GUOS,et al.Evaluation of the rock burst intensity of a cloud model based on the CRITIC method and the order relation analysis method[J].Mining, Metallurgy Exploration,2023,40(5):1849-1863.
18	南东亮,王维庆,张陵,等.基于关联规则挖掘与组合赋权-云模型的电网二次设备运行状态风险评估[J].电力系统保护与控制,2021,49(10):67-76.
	NAND L,WANGW Q,ZHANGL,et al.Operational state risk assessment of power grid secondary equipment based on association rule mining and combination empowerment cloud model[J].Power System Protection and Control,2021,49(10):67-76.
19	周依希,李晓明,瞿合祚.基于反熵-AHP二次规划组合赋权法的电网节点综合脆弱性评估[J].电力自动化设备,2019,39(7):133-140.
	ZHOUY X,LIX M,QUH Z.Comprehensive vulnerability assessment of power grid nodes based on inverse entropy-AHP quadratic programming combination weighting method[J].Electric Power Automation Equipment,2019,39(7):133-140.
20	翟芸,胡冰,施端阳.基于区间层次分析法和Vague集的雷达装备可靠性评估[J].探测与控制学报,2023,45(3):81-88.
	ZHAIY,HUB,SHID Y.Reliability evaluation of radar equipment based on interval analytic hierarchy process and Vague set[J].Journal of Detection and Control,2019,45(3):81-88.
21	李敬强,樊天辰,周妍汝,等.基于云模型的民航监察员队伍能力综合评价[J].北京航空航天大学学报,2022,48(12):2425-2433.
	LIJ Q,FANT C,ZHOUY R,et al.Comprehensive evaluation of civil aviation inspector team capability based on cloud model[J].Journal of Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics,2022,48(12):2425-2433.
22	崔宇朋,余杨,韦明秀,等.改进博弈论四重组合赋权法下的开口甲板多目标拓扑优化设计[J].机械工程学报,2023,59(9):263-273.
	CUIY P,YUY,WEIM X,et al.Multi-objective topology optimization design of open deck based on improved game theory quadruple weighting method[J].Chinese Journal of Mecha-nical Engineering,2019,59(9):263-273.
23	王宇江,狄鹏,侯丙旭,等.基于FAHP-CM的舰船电力系统韧性评价研究[J].现代防御技术,2024,52(5):138-146.
	WANGY J,DIP,HOUB X,et al.Study on toughness evaluation of ship power system based on FAHP-CM[J].Modern Defense Technology,2024,52(5):138-146.
24	陈磊,邓欣怡,陈红坤,等.电力系统韧性评估与提升研究综述[J].电力系统保护与控制,2022,50(13):11-22.
	CHENL,DENGX Y,CHENH K,et al.Review on toughness evaluation and improvement of power systems[J].Power Systems Protection and Control,2022,50(13):11-22.
25	谢斌, 刘岩, 崔利兵. 基于改进博弈论—二维云模型的高海拔铁路隧道施工风险预警[EB/OL]. [2023-11-04]. https://doi.org/10.1328/j.issn.1004-2954.202306120001.
	XIE B, LIU Y, CUI L B. Risk warning of high-altitude railway tunnel construction based on improved game theory two dimensional cloud model[EB/OL]. [2023-11-04]. https://doi.org/10.1328/j.issn.1004-2954.202306120001.
26	韩峰,刘志博,尹文华,等.基于二维云模型的沙漠高速公路生态风险评价及优选研究[J].安全与环境学报,2023,23(10):3774-3783.
	HANF,LIUZ B,YINW H,et al.Ecological risk assessment and optimization of desert expressway based on two dimensional cloud model[J].Journal of Safety and Environment,2023,23(10):3774-3783.
27	UMAIRS.The concept of vulnerability and resilience in electric power systems[J].Australian Journal of Electrical and Electronics Engineering,2021,18(3):138-145.
28	DUL H,CHENH,FANGY D.Research of ergonomic comprehensive evaluation for suit production operation based on hybrid method with IAHP and gray entropy[J].EURASIP Journal on Advances in Signal Processing,2021,21(1):210-227.
29	任娟娟,刘宽,王伟华,等.基于区间层次分析的CRTS Ⅲ型板式无砟轨道开裂状况评估[J].浙江大学学报(工学版),2021,55(12):2267-2274.
	RENJ J,LIUK,WANGW H,et al.Evaluation of cracking status of CRTS Ⅲ. type slab ballastless track based on interval analytic hierarchy process[J].Journal of Zhejiang University(Engineering Science),2021,55(12):2267-2274.
30	WANGY M,CHINK S.An eigenvector method for generating normalized interval and fuzzy weights[J].Applied Mathematics and Computation,2006,181(2):1257-1275.
31	ZHONGS H,CHENY Y,MIAOY J.Using improved CRITIC method to evaluate thermal coal suppliers[J].Scientific Reports,2023,13(1):195-195.
32	TIANR,WUJ H.Groundwater quality appraisal by improved set pair analysis with game theory weightage and health risk estimation of contaminants for Xuecha drinking water source in a loess area in Northwest China[J].Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal,2019,25(1/2):132-157.
33	WANGL,JINR B,ZHOUJ P,et al.Construction risk assessment of yellow river bridges based on combined empowerment method and two-dimensional cloud model[J].Applied Sciences,2023,13(19):77-92.
34	LIUY T,YEN H,HUX L,et al.An improved fatigue da-mage model based on the virtual load spectrum of golden section method[J].Fatigue Fracture of Engineering Materials Structures,2021,44(8):2101-2118.
35	ZHANGL M,CHENW Y.Multi-criteria group decision-ma-king with cloud model and TOPSIS for alternative selection under uncertainty[J].Soft Computing,2022,26(22):509-529.

比例标度	重要程度
1	t_i与t_j同等重要
3	t_i比t_j稍微重要
5	t_i比t_j明显重要
2, 4	介于上述两判断的中间值

1级指标	权重			2级指标	权重
1级指标	IAHP法主观权重	CRITIC法客观权重	改进博弈论组合权重	2级指标	IAHP法主观权重	CRITIC法客观权重	改进博弈论组合权重
T₁	0.266	0.237	0.252	T₁₁	0.104	0.093	0.098
				T₁₂	0.077	0.071	0.073
				T₁₃	0.085	0.073	0.081
T₂	0.187	0.213	0.202	T₂₁	0.066	0.075	0.071
				T₂₂	0.083	0.091	0.087
				T₂₃	0.038	0.047	0.044
T₃	0.337	0.305	0.322	T₃₁	0.092	0.086	0.090
				T₃₂	0.076	0.067	0.071
				T₃₃	0.073	0.063	0.069
				T₃₄	0.096	0.089	0.092
T₄	0.210	0.245	0.224	T₄₁	0.088	0.102	0.093
				T₄₂	0.052	0.065	0.056
				T₄₂	0.070	0.078	0.075

1级指标	权重			2级指标	权重
1级指标	IAHP法主观权重	CRITIC法客观权重	改进博弈论组合权重	2级指标	IAHP法主观权重	CRITIC法客观权重	改进博弈论组合权重
T₁	0.307	0.286	0.295	T₁₁	0.115	0.109	0.112
				T₁₂	0.091	0.083	0.085
				T₁₃	0.101	0.094	0.098
T₂	0.152	0.168	0.161	T₂₁	0.053	0.059	0.057
				T₂₂	0.068	0.074	0.071
				T₂₃	0.031	0.035	0.033
T₃	0.353	0.365	0.359	T₃₁	0.098	0.112	0.106
				T₃₂	0.079	0.093	0.085
				T₃₃	0.076	0.068	0.072
				T₃₄	0.100	0.092	0.096
T₄	0.188	0.181	0.185	T₄₁	0.078	0.084	0.081
				T₄₂	0.043	0.038	0.040
				T₄₂	0.067	0.059	0.064

舰船电力系统韧性标准等级	舰船电力系统韧性水平描述	舰船电力系统防御能力	舰船电力系统恢复能力	标准云的数字特征(E_x0, E_n0, H_e0)
I	韧性极弱	防御能力极弱	恢复能力极弱	(0, 1.030, 0.261 8)
II	韧性弱	防御能力弱	恢复能力弱	(3.09, 0.6367, 0.161 8)
III	韧性极中	防御能力中	恢复能力中	(5, 0.393 5, 0.1)
IV	韧性强	防御能力强	恢复能力强	(6.91, 0.63 67, 0.161 8)
V	韧性极强	防御能力极强	恢复能力极强	(10, 1.030, 0.261 8)

舰船电力系统韧性综合评价云			舰船电力系统韧性一级指标评价云					舰船电力系统韧性二级指标评价云
目标	舰船电力系统防御能力	舰船电力系统恢复能力	指标	权重	舰船电力系统防御能力	权重	舰船电力系统恢复能力	指标	权重	舰船电力系统防御能力	权重	舰船电力系统恢复能力
T	(7.757, 0.606, 0.211)	(7.658, 0.593, 0.214)	T₁	0.252	(8.350, 0.642, 0.193)	0.295	(7.874, 0.516, 0.204)	T₁₁	0.098	(8.334, 0.582, 0.198)	0.112	(7.152, 0.447, 0.207)
								T₁₂	0.073	(7.946, 0.663, 0.165)	0.085	(8.423, 0.551, 0.223)
								T₁₃	0.081	(8.734, 0.696, 0.211)	0.098	(8.223, 0.566, 0.183)
			T₂	0.202	(7.446, 0.607, 0.199)	0.161	(7.484, 0.598, 0.234)	T₂₁	0.071	(7.323, 0.556, 0.175)	0.057	(6.823, 0.492, 0.203)
								T₂₂	0.087	(7.882, 0.675, 0.223)	0.071	(8.322, 0.688, 0.261)
								T₂₃	0.044	(6.784, 0.556, 0.193)	0.033	(6.824, 0.587, 0.228)
			T₃	0.322	(8.703, 0.628, 0.219)	0.359	(8.440, 0.648, 0.238)	T₃₁	0.090	(8.331, 0.663, 0.232)	0.106	(7.935, 0.612, 0.243)
								T₃₂	0.071	(8.856, 0.537, 0.213)	0.085	(9.215, 0.763, 0.257)
								T₃₃	0.069	(8.558, 0.653, 0.188)	0.072	(8.811, 0.691, 0.237)
								T₃₄	0.092	(9.058, 0.646, 0.234)	0.096	(8.033, 0.552, 0.216)
			T₄	0.224	(6.010, 0.534, 0.231)	0.185	(5.948, 0.604, 0.169)	T₄₁	0.093	(6.273, 0.497, 0.208)	0.081	(5.511, 0.533, 0.173)
								T₄₂	0.056	(5.882, 0.479, 0.266)	0.040	(6.103, 0.688, 0.177)
								T₄₃	0.075	(5.778, 0.622, 0.234)	0.064	(6.405, 0.642, 0.158)

Evaluation of ship power system resilience based on two-dimensional cloud model of IAHP-CRITIC

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 29

References 35

Related Articles 1

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments