Abstract

Ensuring data reliability is becoming increasingly important for further applications of artificial intelligence, internet of things, and digital twins. One promising technology for ensuring data reliability is data validation and reconciliation (DVR), which minimizes the uncertainty of measurements based on statistics. DVR has been widely used for the operation and maintenance of nuclear power plants in Europe and the United States in recent years. The most important input for DVR analysis is measurement uncertainty. The catalog value provided by sensor manufacturers includes the measurement uncertainty, but in reality, the actual measurement uncertainty is often smaller. Previous studies have proposed several methods for evaluating the actual measurement uncertainty based on process data, which have been confirmed to be effective for evaluating random errors. It is important to note that bias errors also contribute significantly to the measurement uncertainty. In our previous paper, we proposed a method for estimating bias error using process data, an incidence matrix, and a reference instrument. The proposed method was limited to a mass balance relation, i.e., flowrate measurements. In this paper, we extend the method to include an energy balance relation by considering energy conservation in addition to mass conservation. This extension enables the evaluation of measurement uncertainty for flowrate and temperature. The proposed method was validated with two benchmark problems. It was found to be applicable to various flow conditions, including physically fluctuating flow, such as that observed in the feedwater flow in nuclear power plants.

References

1.
Narasimhan
,
S.
, and
Jordache
,
C.
,
1999
,
Data Reconciliation and Gross Error Detection: An Intelligent Use of Process Data
,
Gulf Professional Publishing
,
Houston, TX
.
2.
Özyurt
,
D. B.
, and
Pike
,
R. W.
,
2004
, “
Theory and Practice of Simultaneous Data Reconciliation and Gross Error Detection for Chemical Processes
,”
Comput. Chem. Eng.
,
28
(
3
), pp.
381
402
.10.1016/j.compchemeng.2003.07.001
3.
Tamhane
,
A. C.
, and
Mah
,
R. S. H.
,
1985
, “
Data Reconciliation and Gross Error Detection in Chemical Process Networks
,”
Technometrics
,
27
(
4
), pp.
409
422
.10.1080/00401706.1985.10488080
4.
Crowe
,
C. M.
,
1996
, “
Data Reconciliation—Progress and Challenges
,”
J. Process Control
,
6
, pp.
89
98
.10.1016/0959-1524(96)00012-1
5.
Mah
,
R. S.
,
1990
,
Chemical Process Structures and Information Flows
,
Butterworth-Heinemann
,
Oxford, UK
.
6.
Madron
,
F.
,
1992
,
Process Plant Performance: Measurement and Data Processing for Optimization and Retrofits
,
Ellis Horwood
,
New York
.
7.
Veverka
,
V. V.
, and
Madron
,
F.
,
1997
,
Material and Energy Balancing in the Process Industries: From Microscopic Balances to Large Plants
, Vol.
7
,
Elsevier
,
Amsterdam, The Netherlands
.
8.
Romagnoli
,
J. A.
, and
Sánchez
,
M. C.
,
2000
,
Data Processing and Reconciliation for Chemical Process Operations
,
Academic Press
,
Cambridge, MA
.
9.
Kim
,
I. W.
,
Kang
,
M. S.
,
Park
,
S.
, and
Edgar
,
T. F.
,
1997
, “
Robust Data Reconciliation and Gross Error Detection: The Modified MIMT Using NLP
,”
Comput. Chem. Eng.
,
21
(
7
), pp.
775
782
.10.1016/S0098-1354(96)00304-3
10.
Guo
,
S.
,
Liu
,
P.
, and
Li
,
Z.
,
2016
, “
Data Reconciliation for the Overall Thermal System of a Steam Turbine Power Plant
,”
Appl. Energy
,
165
, pp.
1037
1051
.10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.01.002
11.
Langenstein
,
M.
,
Jansky
,
J.
, and
Laipple
,
B.
,
2004
, “
Finding Megawatts in Nuclear Power Plants With Process Data Reconciliation
,”
ASME
Paper No. ICONE12-49152.10.1115/ICONE12-49152
12.
Quang
,
A. T. T.
,
Azola
,
E.
,
Closon
,
H.
, and
Chares
,
R.
,
2011
, “
Nuclear Power Plant Performance Monitoring Using Data Validation and Reconciliation – Application at the Brazilian Angra 2 PWR Plant
,”
Proceedings of ICONE19
, Makuhari, Chiba, Japan, May 16–19, pp.
1
7
.https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jsmeicone/2011.19/0/2011.19__ICONE1944_6/_pdf
13.
Valdetaro
,
E. D.
, and
Schirru
,
R.
,
2009
, “
Particle Swarm Optimization Applied to Data Reconciliation in Nuclear Power Plant
,”
Proceedings of INAC2009
,
Rio De Janeiro, Brazil
, Sept. 27–Oct. 2, pp.
1
12
.https://inis.iaea.org/collection/NCLCollectionStore/_Public/41/115/41115776.pdf
14.
Valdetaro
,
E. D.
, and
Schirru
,
R.
,
2011
, “
Simultaneous Model Selection, Robust Data Reconciliation and Outlier Detection With Swarm Intelligence in a Thermal Reactor Power Calculation
,”
Ann. Nucl. Energy
,
38
(
9
), pp.
1820
1832
.10.1016/j.anucene.2011.06.001
15.
Jansky
,
A.
, and
Langenstein
,
M.
,
2022
, “
Nuclear Regulatory Acceptance of Certified Process Data Reconciliation
,”
ASME J. Nucl. Eng. Radiat. Sci.
,
8
(
2
), p.
022101
.10.1115/1.4051619
16.
Almasy
,
G. A.
, and
Mah
,
R. S. H.
,
1984
, “
Estimation of Measurement Error Variances From Process Data
,”
Ind. Eng. Chem. Process Des. Dev.
,
23
(
4
), pp.
779
784
.10.1021/i200027a026
17.
Keller
,
J. Y.
,
Zasadzinski
,
M.
, and
Darouach
,
M.
,
1992
, “
Analytical Estimator of Measurement Error Variances in Data Reconciliation
,”
Comput. Chem. Eng.
,
16
(
3
), pp.
185
188
.10.1016/0098-1354(92)85005-S
18.
Tamura
,
A.
,
Hidaka
,
Y.
,
Ikeda
,
H.
, and
Hamaura
,
N.
,
2023
, “
An Estimation Method for Bias Error of Measurements by Utilizing Process Data, an Incidence Matrix and a Reference Instrument for Data Validation and Reconciliation
,”
ASME J. Nucl. Eng. Radiat. Sci.
,
9
(
4
), p.
041802
.10.1115/1.4062865
You do not currently have access to this content.