Ship outfitting operation state sensing and early warning method and system

Abstract

The application provides a ship outfitting operation state sensing and early warning method and system, relates to the technical field of ship outfitting, and the method comprises the steps of: identifying an outfitting temporary structure unit; constructing a multi-parameter monitoring sensor network based on the outfitting temporary structure unit, acquiring real-time states of the outfitting temporary structure unit, and generating a steady-state monitoring data set and a wear monitoring data set; acquiring a stability score of the outfitting temporary structure unit; acquiring an interface integrity score of the outfitting temporary structure unit; performing correlation analysis on the stability score and the interface integrity score to acquire a comprehensive risk index of the outfitting temporary structure unit; comparing the comprehensive risk index with a preset risk level threshold value, triggering corresponding real-time graded early warning, and driving clear engineering response. The technical problem of early, accurate and comprehensive sensing and early warning of the systematic risk of the temporary structure in the ship outfitting operation process is solved.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This application relates to the field of ship outfitting technology, and in particular to methods and systems for ship outfitting operation status perception and early warning. Background Technology

[0002] Ship outfitting is a crucial stage in shipbuilding, involving the installation and securing of numerous equipment, pipelines, cables, and internal components. With the increasing size and complexity of modern ships, outfitting operations are lengthy and involve overlapping processes, resulting in a large number of outfitting components on-site in temporary, semi-fixed, or commissioning states. Before final welding and fastening, the stability of these components and their interaction with the permanent hull structure directly affect operational safety, structural integrity, and the quality of subsequent operation and maintenance.

[0003] Currently, safety monitoring and risk warning technologies for outfitting operations are still inadequate. Traditional methods mainly rely on manual inspections and experience-based judgment, lacking the ability to quantify and continuously perceive the status of temporary structures. Existing monitoring methods mostly focus on threshold alarms for single physical quantities, failing to systematically identify the core risk carrier—the temporary structural unit during outfitting—nor have they established a comprehensive assessment model for its stability risks, interface wear, and fatigue damage risks. Specifically, existing technologies have the following limitations: First, they lack a method for automatically comparing structural status based on 3D real-world scenes and design models, making it difficult to accurately and batch locate unfixed components; second, monitoring parameters are isolated, failing to form an integrated monitoring system with multi-sensor collaboration; third, risk assessment dimensions are singular, failing to quantify the coupling effect of instability and interface damage, resulting in a lagging and insufficiently targeted early warning mechanism.

[0004] In summary, existing technologies are insufficient for early, accurate, and comprehensive perception and warning of systemic risks to temporary structures during ship outfitting operations. Therefore, a suitable method is urgently needed to address these issues. Summary of the Invention

[0005] This disclosure provides a method and system for sensing and warning of the status of ship outfitting operations, in order to solve the technical problem in the prior art that it is difficult to achieve early, accurate and comprehensive sensing and warning of systemic risks of temporary structures during ship outfitting operations.

[0006] According to the first aspect of this disclosure, a method for sensing and early warning of the status of ship outfitting operations is provided, including:

[0007] The three-dimensional point cloud data of the outfitting area is obtained by using a three-dimensional laser scanning device. The three-dimensional point cloud data is then compared with the CAD design model of the ship to identify the temporary outfitting structural units.

[0008] A multi-parameter monitoring sensor network is constructed based on outfitting temporary structural units to obtain the real-time status of the outfitting temporary structural units and generate steady-state monitoring datasets and wear monitoring datasets. The steady-state monitoring datasets include displacement data and stress data, while the wear monitoring datasets include pressure data, acoustic data, and strain data.

[0009] A stability scoring function is defined, and the stability score of the outfitting temporary structural unit is obtained by combining the steady-state monitoring dataset.

[0010] Formulas for calculating local wear accumulation and fatigue damage accumulation are established, and the interface integrity score of outfitting temporary structural units is obtained by combining the wear monitoring dataset.

[0011] By performing correlation analysis on stability scores and interface integrity scores, a comprehensive risk index for outfitting temporary structural units can be obtained.

[0012] By comparing the comprehensive risk index with the preset risk level threshold, corresponding real-time graded early warnings are triggered, driving a clear engineering response.

[0013] According to a second aspect of this disclosure, a ship outfitting operation status perception and early warning system is provided, comprising:

[0014] The outfitting temporary structural unit identification module is used to acquire three-dimensional point cloud data of the outfitting area through a three-dimensional laser scanning device, compare the three-dimensional point cloud data with the CAD design model of the ship, and identify the outfitting temporary structural units.

[0015] The dataset construction module is used to construct a multi-parameter monitoring sensor network based on the outfitting temporary structural unit, obtain the real-time status of the outfitting temporary structural unit, and generate a steady-state monitoring dataset and a wear monitoring dataset. The steady-state monitoring dataset includes displacement data and stress data, and the wear monitoring dataset includes pressure data, acoustic data, and strain value data.

[0016] The stability score calculation module is used to set a stability score function and, in conjunction with a steady-state monitoring dataset, obtain the stability score of the outfitting temporary structural unit.

[0017] The interface integrity score calculation module is used to set the calculation formula for local wear accumulation and fatigue damage accumulation, and obtain the interface integrity score of the outfitting temporary structural unit by combining the wear monitoring dataset.

[0018] The comprehensive risk index fusion assessment module is used to perform correlation analysis on stability score and interface integrity score to obtain the comprehensive risk index of outfitting temporary structural unit;

[0019] The risk level determination and graded early warning module is used to compare the comprehensive risk index with the preset risk level threshold, trigger the corresponding real-time graded early warning, and drive a clear engineering response.

[0020] One or more technical solutions provided in this disclosure have at least the following technical effects or advantages: Three-dimensional point cloud data of the outfitting area is acquired using a three-dimensional laser scanning device; the three-dimensional point cloud data is compared with the ship's CAD design model to identify outfitting temporary structural units; a multi-parameter monitoring sensor network is constructed based on the outfitting temporary structural units to acquire the real-time status of the outfitting temporary structural units, generating a steady-state monitoring dataset and a wear monitoring dataset, wherein the steady-state monitoring dataset includes displacement data and stress data, and the wear monitoring dataset includes pressure data, acoustic data, and strain value data; a stability scoring function is set, and combined with the steady-state monitoring dataset, the stability score of the outfitting temporary structural unit is obtained; a formula for calculating local wear accumulation and a formula for calculating fatigue damage accumulation are set, and combined with the wear monitoring dataset, the interface integrity score of the outfitting temporary structural unit is obtained; the stability score and the interface integrity score are correlated to obtain the comprehensive risk index of the outfitting temporary structural unit; the comprehensive risk index is compared with a preset risk level threshold to trigger corresponding real-time graded early warnings and drive clear engineering responses. This invention solves the technical problem of achieving early, accurate, and comprehensive perception and early warning of systemic risks to temporary structures during ship outfitting operations, a problem that exists in existing technologies. It achieves the technical effects of automatically identifying risk units, integrating multi-source monitoring data, quantifying multiple failure modes, and realizing graded early warning, ultimately improving the safety control level and the intelligence of decision-making in outfitting operations.

[0021] The above description is merely an overview of the technical solution of this application. In order to better understand the technical means of this application and to implement it in accordance with the contents of the specification, and to make the above and other objects, features and advantages of this application more obvious and understandable, specific embodiments of this application are given below. Attached Figure Description

[0022] To more clearly illustrate the technical solutions in this disclosure or the prior art, the drawings used in the description of the embodiments or the prior art will be briefly introduced below. Obviously, the drawings described below are merely exemplary. For those skilled in the art, other drawings can be obtained based on the provided drawings without creative effort.

[0023] Figure 1 A flowchart illustrating the ship outfitting operation status perception and early warning method provided in this application embodiment;

[0024] Figure 2This is a schematic diagram of the structure of the ship outfitting operation status perception and early warning system provided in the embodiments of this application.

[0025] Figure labeling: Outfitting temporary structural unit identification module 11, dataset construction module 12, stability score calculation module 13, interface integrity score calculation module 14, comprehensive risk index fusion assessment module 15, risk level determination and graded early warning module 16. Detailed Implementation

[0026] The exemplary embodiments of this disclosure are described below with reference to the accompanying drawings, including various details of the embodiments to aid understanding, and should be considered merely exemplary. Therefore, those skilled in the art will recognize that various changes and modifications can be made to the embodiments described herein without departing from the scope and spirit of this disclosure. Similarly, for clarity and brevity, descriptions of well-known functions and structures are omitted in the following description.

[0027] Example 1: The method for sensing and early warning of ship outfitting operation status provided in this disclosure is hereby referred to. Figure 1 The methods include:

[0028] S1: Obtain three-dimensional point cloud data of the outfitting area through a three-dimensional laser scanning device, compare the three-dimensional point cloud data with the CAD design model of the ship, and identify the temporary outfitting structural units;

[0029] Specifically, the purpose of this step is to identify stability monitoring targets during ship outfitting operations by accurately identifying outfitting components that have not yet been fully fixed, and to clarify the analysis units used to assess the potential wear risk of temporary structures to the permanent hull structure, thus providing a basis for object division for subsequent interface integrity monitoring.

[0030] During ship outfitting operations, many outfitting components are in a temporary, semi-fixed, or unconstrained state. These components not only pose a certain risk of instability but also frequently come into contact with the permanent hull structure or other fixed components under the influence of operational loads, vibrations, personnel operations, and equipment movement. This can lead to localized compression, relative slippage, and repeated loading effects. These components are defined as outfitting temporary structural units. Specifically, outfitting temporary structural units refer to components that have not yet been fully fixed and are susceptible to displacement and deformation due to external disturbances. During operations, they typically rely on temporary supports, temporary clamps, welded positioning components, or semi-fixed connections to maintain their spatial relationship with the permanent hull structure, exhibiting significant uncertainty in structural stability and interface contact conditions. Examples include steel plates or supports that have not been fully welded, pipe sections fixed by temporary supports, equipment bases that are not fully locked, and component nodes that have not been fully connected. Since the aforementioned components may not only experience overall or local instability during operation, but may also cause wear to the permanent structural surfaces of the hull through repeated contact, they need to be identified and numbered as key analysis objects for subsequent stability and interface integrity assessments.

[0031] To ensure the safety of outfitting operations, this step employs the following methods to accurately identify temporary outfitting structural units. First, a 3D laser scanning device is used to scan the ship's outfitting area, acquiring high-precision 3D point cloud data. Then, the 3D point cloud data is spatially registered and geometrically compared with the ship's CAD design model. By calculating the deviation between the actual point cloud position of a component and its corresponding position in the design model, and combining this with information on component boundaries, connection gaps, and support relationships reflected in the point cloud, it is determined whether each component is in a state of incomplete final fixation or dependent on temporary constraints. Specifically, by analyzing the spatial offset between the component and the design model in the point cloud data, the gap dimensions between the component's end and the surrounding structure, and the presence of supporting components, it can be determined whether a component is still in a temporary support or semi-fixed state. For example, if the point cloud position of a steel plate does not reach the final splicing position in the design model, and there is a significant gap between its edge and adjacent components, or if there is a temporary support structure below it, it can be identified as a temporary outfitting structural unit. The identification results will not only be used for subsequent stability assessments, but will also serve as the basic analytical unit for analyzing the wear behavior of the interface between the interface and the ship's permanent structure.

[0032] After identifying potential outfitting temporary structural units based on 3D point cloud data, a further on-site manual verification mechanism is introduced to check the identification results. Workers can use on-site operation terminals to confirm, supplement, or correct the markings of temporary components within the current work area. Combined with the construction plan and work sequence, they can also supplement the identification of temporary supports or connections not yet appearing in the design model. By integrating the automatic identification results with the manual confirmation information, the final determination of the outfitting temporary structural units is formed, and each unit is assigned a unique identifier for subsequent stability scoring and interface integrity scoring calculations.

[0033] S2: Construct a multi-parameter monitoring sensor network based on outfitting temporary structural units to obtain the real-time status of outfitting temporary structural units and generate steady-state monitoring datasets and wear monitoring datasets. The steady-state monitoring dataset includes displacement data and stress data, and the wear monitoring dataset includes pressure data, acoustic data and strain data.

[0034] Specifically, after determining the outfitting temporary structural units, the core task of this step is to construct a unified multi-parameter monitoring sensor network for each temporary outfitting structural unit. This involves simultaneously monitoring its overall deformation state, internal stress state, and local behavior at the interface with the permanent hull structure. This provides a unified and comparable data foundation for subsequent stability and interface integrity scoring calculations. To this end, each temporary outfitting structural unit is equipped with five types of sensors: displacement sensors, stress sensors, pressure sensors, acoustic emission sensors, and micro-strain rosette array sensors. The number of different types of sensors deployed within the same unit is differentiated according to the monitoring object and data usage method.

[0035] First, regarding the displacement and stress information that reflects the overall stability characteristics of the outfitting temporary structural unit, considering that the components often have multiple key connection points, multiple force paths and deformation-sensitive points during the actual outfitting operation, in order to improve the accuracy of the characterization of the overall deformation and stress state, multiple displacement sensors and multiple stress sensors can be set on the same outfitting temporary structural unit. The specific number of sensors installed needs to be combined with the actual state of the outfitting temporary structural unit.

[0036] The displacement sensors are laser displacement sensors used to acquire displacement data of the outfitting temporary structural units. The sensors are specifically installed at key connection points and deformation-sensitive locations within each outfitting temporary structural unit, such as near the connecting bolts or welding areas between the steel plates and the support frame, the contact surfaces between pipe support clamps and the main support, the overlap between the temporary platform and the hull structure, and the base and top bearing points of large temporary hoisting supports. During installation, a stable, independent reference frame is set up near the monitoring point, the sensor is aligned with a reflective target fixed to the structure, and zero-point calibration is performed under no-load conditions.

[0037] Stress sensors, using strain gauges, are used to acquire stress data from temporary structural units during outfitting. The sensors are specifically installed in stress concentration areas and critical load-bearing sections of the components, such as the welds and heat-affected zones of main load-bearing members, the main material near bolted joints, the root area of ​​support points, and the midpoints of the tension and compression surfaces of beams and columns. The installation process strictly adheres to the following steps: surface treatment, application of specialized adhesive, pressure curing, welding of lead wires, and final moisture-proof sealing. Temperature compensation gauges are also attached to the same locations to eliminate thermal effects.

[0038] Meanwhile, to address the interaction behavior between the outfitting temporary structural unit and the permanent hull structure, a set of pressure sensors, a set of acoustic emission sensors, and a set of miniature strain gauge array sensors are configured on each outfitting temporary structural unit to uniformly characterize the pressure distribution, wear activity intensity, and local plastic deformation state of the unit at the main contact interface.

[0039] The pressure sensor employs a pressure-sensing diaphragm, primarily functioning to collect localized pressure data at the contact interface. Its installation location is at the main contact interface between the outfitting temporary structural unit and the permanent hull structure. This can be the contact surface between the temporary support and the hull steel plate, the contact point between the hoisting rigging and the hull structure, or the contact area between the welding temporary clamp and the hull. It is important to note that since there is only one set of pressure sensors, not every contact interface will be installed. Instead, a representative main contact interface will be selected for installation. The selection of this representative location depends on the actual structure of the outfitting temporary structural unit and the engineering experience of the personnel. During installation, the pressure-sensing diaphragm must be tightly fitted to the contact surface to avoid air gaps and ensure accurate pressure measurement.

[0040] Acoustic emission sensors are primarily used to collect acoustic wave data generated during fretting wear, material surface spalling, and the initiation and propagation of microcracks. They are installed in locations adjacent to the aforementioned contact interfaces where the acoustic signal propagation path is clear, such as near the contact area between temporary supports and the hull structure, or around the contact point between lifting rigging and the hull. Similar to pressure sensors, only one set of acoustic emission sensors is installed at representative locations. During installation, it is essential to ensure that the sensor surface is parallel to the contact interface to accurately capture the acoustic wave signals induced by fretting wear.

[0041] Miniature strain gauge array sensors monitor localized plastic deformation at contact interfaces by collecting strain data. They are primarily deployed at stress concentration points within the contact area, such as the contact surface between temporary supports and the hull structure, the contact points between lifting slings and the hull, and the clamping areas of welding fixtures. Similar to pressure sensors, only one set of miniature strain gauge array sensors is installed at representative locations; the specific location selection also requires consideration of the engineer's experience. During installation, ensure that the multiple strain gauge arrays of the strain gauge array sensor completely cover the monitoring area to accurately reflect localized deformation.

[0042] All sensors are networked together via a wireless sensor network to form a unified data acquisition system. Each sensor node collects data at a frequency of at least 10Hz and adds outfitting temporary structural unit numbers, sensor numbers, and timestamps for data annotation.

[0043] To ensure the accuracy and reliability of the collected data, all raw data underwent preprocessing. First, a moving average filter was used to initially smooth the data and remove short-term fluctuations. Then, a Kalman filter algorithm was applied to perform optimal estimation, eliminating interference from high-frequency electronic noise, environmental vibration noise, and other factors to ensure data accuracy.

[0044] Finally, the preprocessed data are categorized and stored according to their physical meaning and subsequent use. Displacement and stress data are stored in the steady-state monitoring dataset for later stability scoring calculations. Pressure, acoustic, and strain data are stored in the wear monitoring dataset for later interface integrity scoring calculations.

[0045] S3: Set a stability scoring function and combine it with the steady-state monitoring dataset to obtain the stability score of the outfitting temporary structural unit;

[0046] Furthermore, step S3 also includes:

[0047] Based on the stress and displacement data in the steady-state monitoring dataset, the average stress and average displacement of the outfitting temporary structural unit are calculated.

[0048] The critical stress of the outfitting temporary structural unit is obtained based on the material's yield strength and safety factor;

[0049] The maximum allowable displacement of the outfitting temporary structural unit is obtained based on the maximum span of the component and the allowable displacement ratio.

[0050] Using mean stress, mean displacement, critical stress, and maximum allowable displacement as input parameters, a stability scoring function is defined to obtain the stability score of the outfitting temporary structural element. The specific calculation formula is as follows:

[0051] ;

[0052] in, σ represents the stability score of the outfitting temporary structural element, and σ represents the average stress of the outfitting temporary structural element. δ represents the critical stress of the outfitting temporary structural element, and δ represents the average displacement of the outfitting temporary structural element. represents the maximum allowable displacement of the outfitting temporary structural element, max represents the maximum value function, and α, β and γ are the three weighting coefficients for the stress term, displacement term and interaction term, respectively.

[0053] Specifically, the core task of this step is to obtain the average stress and average displacement of the outfitting temporary structural unit, and then calculate the stability score to achieve a quantitative assessment and early warning of the component instability risk.

[0054] First, obtain the stress and displacement data from the steady-state monitoring dataset. Then, calculate the average value of the stress and displacement data at all monitoring points on each unit to obtain the representative average stress and average displacement of each outfitting temporary structural unit.

[0055] Subsequently, a stability scoring function was defined to evaluate the stability of each outfitting temporary structural element. This function takes mean stress and mean displacement as input parameters, performs a weighted calculation, and finally outputs a stability score. The specific calculation formula is as follows:

[0056] ;

[0057] Where σ represents the average stress of the outfitting temporary structural unit. δ represents the critical stress of the outfitting temporary structural unit, and δ represents the average displacement of the outfitting temporary structural unit. represents the maximum allowable displacement of the outfitting temporary structural unit, max represents the maximum value function, α, β and γ are the three weighting coefficients for stress, displacement and interaction terms, respectively, used to adjust the influence of stress, displacement and interaction terms on the stability score. Their specific values ​​are determined based on actual engineering application experience, experimental data or simulation analysis, and satisfy the constraint that the sum of the three is 1. Here they are set to 0.5, 0.2 and 0.1.

[0058] Detailed explanation, The stress term is used to calculate the ratio of the current average stress to the critical stress; a larger value indicates that the element is closer to instability. The weighting coefficients for the stress term... To adjust the effect of stress on stability, stress is typically set by conducting stress experiments on different components, analyzing the impact of stress on stability, and combining this with practical application experience. The value is usually between 0.4 and 0.5. The critical stress involved in the stress term is usually determined by the yield strength of the material, and the specific calculation formula is as follows: ,in The yield strength represents the material's strength and is usually found in the material's standard technical specifications or material databases. For example, for steel, the yield strength is typically between 250 MPa and 500 MPa. The safety factor, representing the design, is typically set based on the specific ship's operating environment and standards. It also takes into account material redundancy. It will be between 1.5 and 2.0 to ensure the safety of the structure.

[0059] The displacement term is used to calculate the ratio of the current average displacement to the maximum allowable displacement. A higher value indicates a higher risk of displacement deformation for that element. The weighting coefficient for the displacement term... The value used to adjust the impact of displacement on stability is generally obtained through experimental analysis of the effect of displacement on structural stability, and is typically between 0.2 and 0.3. The maximum allowable displacement involved in the displacement term is usually determined by the stiffness requirements of the ship structure, design specifications, and the service environment of the components; the specific calculation formula is as follows. Where L represents the maximum span of the components in the outfitting temporary structural unit, such as the length of the support beam, the width of the steel plate, etc., which is obtained by measuring the structure or design drawings. This represents the permissible displacement ratio, provided by ship design standards or relevant structural specifications. Generally, the permissible displacement for steel structures is 1 / 250 of the structural length, with the specific value determined by design standards or actual work requirements.

[0060] The interaction term, used to assess the interaction between mean stress and mean displacement, has a max function that takes the larger of the two values. This means that when either or both indicators are elevated, the interaction term provides a significant additional risk factor. The weighting coefficients of the interaction term... It is usually confirmed through experimental data or simulation analysis, and its value is usually between 0.1 and 0.3.

[0061] S4: Set the formulas for calculating local wear accumulation and fatigue damage accumulation, and combine them with the wear monitoring dataset to obtain the interface integrity score of the outfitting temporary structural unit;

[0062] Furthermore, step S4 also includes:

[0063] Based on the Archard wear model, a formula for calculating the local wear accumulation of outfitting temporary structural units is established to obtain the local wear accumulation.

[0064] Based on fatigue damage theory, a formula for calculating the cumulative fatigue damage of outfitting temporary structural units is established to obtain the cumulative fatigue damage.

[0065] The wear reference threshold is set based on the ship's CAD design model and the planned total service life. The specific calculation formula is as follows:

[0066] ;

[0067] in, Represents the wear reference threshold. T represents the total permissible wear volume, and T represents the planned total service life.

[0068] The local wear accumulation is standardized using a wear reference threshold, and the specific calculation formula is as follows:

[0069] ;

[0070] in, This represents the standardized local wear index. This represents the cumulative amount of local wear calculated during the current monitoring period. Represents the wear reference threshold;

[0071] Based on Miner's linear cumulative damage theory and combined with actual engineering conditions, a fatigue damage reference threshold is set. =0.7;

[0072] The cumulative fatigue damage is standardized using a fatigue damage reference threshold. The specific calculation formula is as follows:

[0073] ;

[0074] in, This represents a standardized fatigue damage index. This represents the calculated cumulative amount of fatigue damage. This represents the reference threshold for fatigue damage;

[0075] A weighted fusion model is introduced to calculate the interface integrity score. The specific calculation formula is as follows:

[0076] ;

[0077] in, The interface integrity score represents the outfitting temporary structural unit. and These represent the weighting coefficients for the local wear term and the fatigue damage term, respectively. This represents the damage coupling weight coefficient.

[0078] Furthermore, step S4 also includes:

[0079] Pressure and strain baseline signals under no-load conditions are acquired, and their mean and standard deviation are calculated. Based on these mean and standard deviations, threshold values ​​for pressure loading and strain loading are set. The specific formulas for setting these threshold values ​​are as follows:

[0080] Threshold for determining stress loading status: ;

[0081] Threshold for determining strain loading state: ;

[0082] in, This represents the threshold for determining the stress loading state. This represents the threshold for determining the strain loading state. The mean value representing the pressure baseline signal. The mean value of the strain baseline signal. The standard deviation of the pressure baseline signal, The standard deviation of the strain baseline signal, Represents the empirical amplification factor;

[0083] The pressure data is compared with the pressure loading state judgment threshold, and the strain value data is compared with the strain loading state judgment threshold. The number of times that either the pressure data or the strain value data exceeds the judgment threshold and then falls back to the judgment threshold is counted to obtain the loading cycle number.

[0084] Feature extraction is performed on the acoustic wave data in the wear monitoring dataset to obtain the cumulative acoustic emission energy. The specific calculation formula is as follows:

[0085] ;

[0086] in, A represents the cumulative energy of acoustic emission. j This represents the amplitude of the acoustic data at the j-th sampling time. The sampling time interval is represented by M, which represents the number of sampling points within the monitoring time period.

[0087] The wear coefficient correction factor is obtained based on the cumulative energy of acoustic emission. The specific calculation formula is as follows:

[0088] ;

[0089] in, Represents the wear coefficient correction factor. Represents the cumulative energy of acoustic emission. This represents the acoustic emission reference energy value obtained in advance under the same load level and operating conditions;

[0090] The initial wear coefficient is set according to the material type of the contact interface, and then corrected by a wear coefficient correction factor to ensure that it meets the following requirements:

[0091] ;

[0092] in, This represents the corrected wear coefficient. Represents the wear coefficient correction factor. Represents the initial wear coefficient;

[0093] Based on the location of the pressure sensors, the CAD design model is consulted to obtain the contact area between the temporary outfitting structural unit and the hull structure corresponding to the location of the sensors.

[0094] By acquiring pressure and average displacement data, and combining them with the number of loading cycles, the corrected wear coefficient, and the contact area, the local wear accumulation is calculated. The specific calculation formula is as follows:

[0095] ;

[0096] in, Represents the cumulative amount of localized wear. Represents pressure, Represents the contact area. Represents the average displacement. Represents the number of loading loops. This represents the corrected wear coefficient.

[0097] Furthermore, step S4 also includes:

[0098] The fatigue limit strain of a material is obtained based on its fatigue limit stress and elastic modulus. The specific calculation formula is as follows:

[0099] ;

[0100] in, The fatigue limit strain of the representative material. B represents the fatigue limit stress of the material, and B represents the elastic modulus of the material.

[0101] By combining strain data with the number of loading cycles, the cumulative fatigue damage is calculated using the following formula:

[0102] ;

[0103] in, Represents the cumulative amount of fatigue damage. Represents the number of loading loops. This represents the maximum strain value measured in the temporary structural element during the i-th loading cycle. The fatigue limit strain of the material is represented by the index m, which represents the fatigue damage sensitivity index.

[0104] Specifically, the core objective of this step is to monitor in real time the local wear accumulation and fatigue damage accumulation at the interface between the outfitting temporary structural units and the permanent hull structure, and then calculate the interface integrity score to assess the potential structural damage risk.

[0105] After completing the real-time acquisition of pressure, acoustic, and strain data at the contact interface between the temporary outfitting structural units and the permanent hull structure, and forming a wear monitoring dataset, it is necessary to further quantify and model the local wear accumulation at the contact interface to reflect the potential long-term damage risk to the permanent hull structure caused by the temporary structure during outfitting operations. Therefore, this step constructs a local wear accumulation calculation model based on contact interface pressure, contact interface area, relative slip behavior, and the number of loading cycles.

[0106] First, pressure data from the wear monitoring dataset is acquired. This pressure data reflects the actual contact load level exerted by the unit on the permanent hull structure during the current operational phase. Based on this, the contact area between the outfitting temporary structural unit and the hull structure corresponding to the pressure sensor placement location is obtained by consulting the CAD design model or construction drawings. Simultaneously, to characterize the unavoidable minute interface relative slippage behavior during interface wear, the average displacement data calculated in the previous steps is introduced.

[0107] Subsequently, the number of loading cycles in the local wear accumulation calculation model is determined. The number of loading cycles characterizes the number of times that temporary outfitting structural units repeatedly apply periodic loads to the permanent hull structure through the contact interface during outfitting operations, and is an important time-scale parameter for measuring interface wear. To avoid subjective biases caused by human experience-based judgment, this step uses data centrally stored in the wear monitoring dataset to perform automated cycle identification and analysis of loading cycle behavior, thereby achieving objective acquisition of the number of loading cycles.

[0108] Specifically, pressure data collected by a pressure sensor and strain data collected by a miniature strain gauge array sensor are used as the raw input data for load cycle identification. It is important to note that these two types of data are actually two data sequences labeled with timestamps.

[0109] After obtaining two types of raw input data, a threshold for distinguishing between loaded and unloaded states is determined. This threshold is not fixed but adaptively obtained based on the baseline statistical characteristics under unloaded conditions. Specifically, before outfitting begins or during a period confirming no temporary structural loads are applied, a pressure baseline signal and a strain baseline signal are collected, and the mean and standard deviation of both signals are calculated. Based on this, thresholds for pressure loading and strain loading are set, with the specific formulas as follows:

[0110] Threshold for determining stress loading status: ;

[0111] Threshold for determining strain loading state:

[0112] in, This represents the threshold for determining the stress loading state. This represents the threshold for determining the strain loading state. The mean value representing the pressure baseline signal. The mean value of the strain baseline signal. The standard deviation of the pressure baseline signal, The standard deviation of the strain baseline signal, This represents the empirical amplification factor, used to distinguish between normal noise fluctuations and actual loading behavior. Its value is usually between 3 and 5, and it is set to 4 here to ensure that a valid load is only determined when the signal is significantly higher than the noise level.

[0113] Subsequently, during the entire outfitting operation monitoring period, the acquired pressure and strain data are compared with the judgment threshold. When the value of either the pressure or strain data rises from below the judgment threshold and first exceeds the judgment threshold, that moment is recorded as the starting point of a loading process. When the data value subsequently falls back below the judgment threshold, that moment is recorded as the ending point of that loading process. Thus, a complete cycle of change from "below the judgment threshold - above the judgment threshold - below the judgment threshold again" occurring between the starting and ending points is defined as one loading cycle.

[0114] To avoid short-term disturbances or transient impact signals being misidentified as loading cycles, a minimum duration constraint can be introduced to screen the validity of loading cycles. Specifically, a loading cycle will only be retained if the time difference between the start and end points is greater than 0.5 seconds, thereby eliminating pseudo-cycles caused by accidental collisions or electrical noise.

[0115] Finally, after identifying the loading cycles throughout the entire monitoring period, the number of loading cycles for the outfitting temporary structural unit during the current outfitting operation phase is obtained by statistically analyzing all loading cycles that meet the judgment criteria.

[0116] After obtaining pressure data, contact area, average displacement, and number of loading cycles, a wear coefficient is introduced to characterize the wear sensitivity under different material combinations and contact conditions. In the initial stage, the wear coefficient value is set based on the material type of the contact interface. Specifically, by identifying the material properties of the outfitting temporary structural units and the permanent hull structure, such as carbon structural steel, low-alloy high-strength steel, or stainless steel, and combining material wear databases, engineering design manuals, and existing friction and wear test literature, a reference range for the wear coefficient of the corresponding material combination under fretting or slight slippage conditions is determined. For common steel-steel contact interfaces, in outfitting operation scenarios with dry friction or weak lubrication conditions and small-amplitude periodic slippage, the initial value of the wear coefficient is usually set at... arrive The range of values ​​is used as a priori parameters in the initial stage of model calculation to ensure the stability and conservatism of wear accumulation calculation.

[0117] To further improve the applicability of the wear coefficient in actual outfitting operations, acoustic data is introduced to dynamically correct the wear coefficient. Acoustic emission sensors collect acoustic data related to energy release during fretting wear, microcrack initiation, and material spalling at the contact interface. By extracting features from the acoustic data, the cumulative acoustic emission energy, characterizing the intensity of wear activity, can be obtained, and its calculation method can be expressed as:

[0118] ;

[0119] in, Representing the cumulative acoustic emission energy, used to characterize the overall intensity of fretting wear and material damage activity at the contact interface during the monitoring period, A j This represents the amplitude of the acoustic data at the j-th sampling time. The sampling time interval is obtained by the sensor's acquisition frequency, and M represents the number of sampling points within the monitoring time period.

[0120] The wear coefficient correction factor is obtained based on the cumulative energy of acoustic emission. The specific calculation formula is as follows:

[0121] ;

[0122] in, This represents the wear coefficient correction factor, used to reflect the degree of deviation of the actual wear activity level from the baseline state during the current monitoring period. Represents the cumulative energy of acoustic emission. It represents the acoustic emission reference energy value obtained in advance under the same load level and operating conditions. It is used to characterize the reference wear acoustic emission level at the contact interface between the temporary outfitting structural unit and the permanent hull structure under the design allowable load and normal outfitting operation conditions.

[0123] Specifically, the acoustic emission reference energy value is obtained through controlled operating condition calibration during the initial system deployment. Before outfitting operations begin or during a representative operating period, the contact load applied by the temporary outfitting structural units to the permanent hull structure is controlled within the design load level, ensuring that the relative displacement and slippage are within the allowable range for normal operation. Under these conditions, acoustic emission sensors continuously collect acoustic wave data generated at the contact interface. By performing energy integration processing on the collected acoustic wave data, the cumulative acoustic emission energy for the corresponding time period is obtained. Furthermore, the acoustic emission reference energy value is formed by statistically averaging multiple time periods that meet the same load level and operating conditions.

[0124] Based on this, the wear coefficient is dynamically corrected to satisfy the following:

[0125] ;

[0126] in, This represents the corrected wear coefficient. Represents the wear coefficient correction factor. This represents the initial wear coefficient.

[0127] With all the above parameters determined, the local wear accumulation at the contact interface of the outfitting temporary structural unit is calculated based on the Archard wear model to comprehensively evaluate the macroscopic load conditions and the microscopic damage activity state. The specific calculation formula is as follows:

[0128] ;

[0129] in, This represents the cumulative amount of localized wear, indicating the cumulative wear at the contact interface during the current monitoring period. It reflects the degree of material loss caused by repeated contact, friction, and micro-movements. This cumulative localized wear serves as an important input parameter for subsequent interface integrity scoring calculations, assessing the potential long-term damage risk of outfitting temporary structural units to the ship's permanent structure, and providing a quantitative basis for risk warning and intervention decisions. Represents pressure, Represents the contact area. Represents the average displacement. Represents the number of loading loops. This represents the corrected wear coefficient.

[0130] After calculating the cumulative local wear at the contact interface, the fretting fatigue damage at the interface between the outfitting temporary structural unit and the permanent hull structure is further quantitatively evaluated based on fatigue damage theory. The core of this step is to use real-time acquired strain data and previously obtained loading cycle counts to calculate the cumulative fatigue damage at the contact interface under repeated loading, reflecting the degree of performance degradation of the local material due to periodic strain. The specific calculation formula is as follows:

[0131] ;

[0132] in, Represents the cumulative amount of fatigue damage, used to quantify the degree of fatigue damage to the contact interface caused by repeated loading during the current monitoring period. Represents the number of loading loops. This represents the maximum strain value measured in the temporary structural element during the i-th loading cycle. The fatigue limit strain represents the critical strain level at which a material can maintain stable performance under infinite or high-cycle fatigue conditions. The exponent m is the fatigue damage sensitivity index, which is used to adjust the influence of strain amplitude on the rate of fatigue damage accumulation. Its value is usually determined based on the fatigue characteristics of the material. For marine steel, the value is usually in the range of 3 to 4 in the high-cycle fatigue region.

[0133] The fatigue limit strain of a material is not determined empirically, but can be directly obtained through practical engineering methods. Specifically, the fatigue limit strain of a material can be calculated based on the relationship between the material's fatigue limit stress and elastic modulus, and the calculation method can be expressed as follows:

[0134] ;

[0135] in, The fatigue limit stress of a material can be obtained from material fatigue test data, marine steel standard databases, or relevant engineering handbooks. B represents the elastic modulus of the material, which is typically taken as 2.0 × 10⁻⁶ for ordinary marine steel. 11 Pa. Through the above method, existing material fatigue performance parameters can be converted into fatigue limit strain, ensuring that key parameters in the fatigue damage model have clear physical meaning and traceable data sources.

[0136] After obtaining the local wear accumulation and fatigue damage accumulation at the contact interface between the outfitting temporary structural unit and the permanent hull structure, it is necessary to further quantify the above two types of damage effects in order to form an interface integrity score that can directly reflect the overall damage state of the interface.

[0137] First, to eliminate the influence of differences in the dimensions of different physical quantities on the comprehensive evaluation results, the cumulative amount of local wear and the cumulative amount of fatigue damage are standardized separately. The standardized expression for the cumulative amount of local wear can be expressed as:

[0138] ;

[0139] in, This represents the standardized local wear index. This represents the cumulative amount of local wear calculated during the current monitoring period. This represents the wear reference threshold, used to characterize the upper limit of wear allowed at the contact interface under normal outfitting operation conditions.

[0140] Specifically, the wear reference threshold is set based on the design specification priority principle. First, the design allowable wear depth h of the permanent hull structure in the contact area is obtained from the ship's CAD design model and drawings. max and contact area The wear depth h max Typically, this is 5%-10% of the plate thickness. Then, based on these two figures, the total allowable wear volume is calculated. The calculation formula can be expressed as: Then, based on the planned total service life T of the temporary structure (in shifts, which needs to be obtained according to the actual project plan), the wear reference threshold for each monitoring shift is calculated. The specific calculation formula can be expressed as follows: .

[0141] Similarly, the cumulative fatigue damage, after standardization, can be expressed as:

[0142] ;

[0143] in, This represents the standardized fatigue damage index. This represents the calculated cumulative amount of fatigue damage. The fatigue damage reference threshold is usually taken as the critical damage level before the material fails due to fatigue. In engineering applications, it can be set to 1 based on Miner's linear cumulative damage theory. However, in actual engineering early warning, in order to reserve a safety margin, the fatigue damage reference threshold is often taken as a conservative value less than 1, such as 0.7.

[0144] After standardization, a weighted fusion model is introduced to calculate the interface integrity score, which comprehensively reflects the combined impact of local wear and fatigue damage on the integrity of the contact interface. The formula for calculating the interface integrity score can be expressed as:

[0145] ;

[0146] in, This represents the interface integrity score; the higher the score, the greater the degree of damage to the contact interface and the worse its integrity. and These represent the weighting coefficients for the local wear term and the fatigue damage term, respectively, used to adjust the influence of different damage mechanisms in the comprehensive evaluation. This represents the damage coupling weighting coefficient, used to characterize the nonlinear amplification effect of local wear and fatigue damage on the overall interface damage when they develop simultaneously.

[0147] Specific explanation, item one This term reflects the gradual weakening effect of materials caused by long-term fretting friction. As the accumulated local wear continues to increase, this term's contribution to the interface integrity index gradually strengthens; the second term... This term reflects the fatigue damage effect caused by repeated loading, and its value increases with the number of loading cycles and the strain amplitude; the third term... The nonlinear interaction term is used to characterize the coupling effect of fatigue damage accelerating its propagation while local wear weakens the material's load-bearing capacity. This allows the interface integrity index to exhibit a significant risk amplification characteristic when both types of damage are at high levels.

[0148] The values ​​of the three weighting coefficients mentioned above can be set based on engineering experience and experimental data. Generally, when the impact of wear and fatigue on interface damage is similar during outfitting operations, a value of [value missing] can be used. and The damage coupling coefficient is between 0.3 and 0.4. Typically, a value of 0.2 to 0.3 is used to ensure that the composite index is sufficiently sensitive to changes in risk under conditions of combined damage. Here, φ = 0.35, ψ = 0.35, and ω = 0.3 are set.

[0149] The final interface integrity score This serves as a comprehensive damage assessment result for the interface between the temporary outfitting structural unit and the permanent hull structure.

[0150] S5: Perform correlation analysis on stability score and interface integrity score to obtain the comprehensive risk index of outfitting temporary structural unit;

[0151] Furthermore, step S5 also includes:

[0152] Obtain stability scores and interface integrity scores, and construct unit-level risk assessment pairs;

[0153] A risk coupling model is introduced to perform fusion calculations on unit-level risk assessment pairs to obtain a comprehensive risk index. The specific calculation formula is as follows:

[0154] ;

[0155] in, The comprehensive risk index representing the outfitting temporary structural unit. The stability score represents the outfitting temporary structural unit. This represents a reference value for stability rating. The interface integrity score represents the outfitting temporary structural unit. The value represents the reference value for the interface integrity score, p and q are the weighting indices of the stability score and the interface integrity score, and r is the norm index.

[0156] Specifically, after obtaining the stability score and interface integrity score of each outfitting temporary structural unit, it is necessary to further integrate and analyze the two types of evaluation results to form a systematic risk assessment result that reflects the overall safety status of the outfitting operation. The core of this step is to correlate the stability risk of the structural unit itself with the interface damage risk that it may cause to the permanent structure of the hull within the same evaluation framework, thereby avoiding focusing only on a single failure mode and ignoring the risk superposition effect.

[0157] First, taking the outfitting temporary structural unit as the smallest risk assessment object, each outfitting temporary structural unit is associated with its stability score and interface integrity score to construct a unit-level risk assessment pair. , ).

[0158] After obtaining the unit-level risk assessment pair, a risk coupling model is introduced to fuse the stability score and interface integrity score, resulting in a comprehensive risk index characterizing the systematic risk level of the outfitting temporary structural unit. The formula for calculating the comprehensive risk index can be expressed as:

[0159] ;

[0160] in, The comprehensive risk index representing the outfitting temporary structural unit. The stability score represents the outfitting temporary structural unit, reflecting the contribution of the unit's local stress and micro-displacement state to the risk of instability. This represents a reference value for stability rating. The interface integrity score represents the temporary structural unit of the outfitting. This score reflects the cumulative amount of local wear and fatigue damage at the interface between the unit and the permanent hull structure. The interface integrity score is represented by the reference value. p and q are the weighting indices of the stability score and the interface integrity score, used to adjust the influence of the two scores on the comprehensive risk index. The values ​​of the two can be determined based on structural safety analysis, historical accident data, or simulation sensitivity analysis, and are usually between 1 and 2. If more attention is paid to the risk of instability, p can be set to q; if more attention is paid to interface damage, q can be set to p. r is the norm index, used to integrate the two normalized indicators of stability and interface integrity and control their joint amplification effect. The value is usually between 1 and 2 and can be set according to engineering safety requirements and risk tolerance.

[0161] Specific explanation, stability score reference value The specific value is set to 0.9 here. This is because various engineering structure safety assessment systems often normalize assessment indicators to a range of 0 to 1, and use 0.9 as a widely accepted high-risk critical limit. This value signifies that the condition has entered the upper end of the warning zone, approaching the theoretical safety limit. Simultaneously, this value setting matches the calculation logic of the stability score. A value ≥0.9 indicates that the average stress or displacement of the temporary structural unit has been consistently approaching more than 90% of its critical allowable value, significantly increasing the risk of instability. This necessitates triggering the highest level of warning and requiring immediate manual inspection and intervention. Therefore, 0.9 is defined as the initial default value for the stability score reference, but its value can be calibrated and optimized after obtaining design safety data or long-term statistical evidence for specific units.

[0162] Interface integrity score reference value The value is set to 1.0 here. The main reason is that the interface integrity score is a composite index that weights and integrates wear and fatigue damage; its formula has already been normalized for its sub-items during the design phase. Setting 1.0 as the reference threshold directly corresponds to the theoretical risk tolerance upper limit of this scoring scale. =1.0 provides an absolutely clear and unambiguous red line for risk assessment. When When the value is ≥1.0, the system can clearly determine that the cumulative damage at the contact interface has entered the unacceptable zone from the development stage, and maintenance measures must be taken immediately to prevent irreversible damage to the permanent structure of the hull.

[0163] The result obtained by the above formula It can simultaneously reflect the risk contribution of both the local structural stability of the unit and the integrity of the contact interface under outfitting conditions, fully demonstrating the coupling effect between the two. When the stability of the unit decreases or the integrity of the interface deteriorates, the normalization ratio increases, and the exponential calculation amplifies its impact on the overall risk, resulting in a significant increase in the overall risk index of high-risk units.

[0164] S6: Compare the comprehensive risk index with the preset risk level threshold, trigger the corresponding real-time graded early warning, and drive a clear engineering response.

[0165] Furthermore, step S6 also includes:

[0166] The comprehensive risk index of the outfitting temporary structural unit is compared with the preset risk level threshold to establish a three-level evaluation system;

[0167] when When the value is less than 0.8, it is judged as a low-risk level. At this time, the stability and interface integrity of the outfitting temporary structural unit are in good condition, the entire outfitting operation continues to proceed normally, and routine monitoring is maintained.

[0168] When 0.8≦ When the risk level is less than 1.0, it is determined to be a medium-risk level. At this time, the outfitting temporary structural unit shows a deteriorating trend in at least one risk dimension, or both dimensions are at a medium-risk level. An early warning should be issued, the monitoring frequency should be increased, and high-risk operations should be restricted.

[0169] when When the value is greater than 1.0, it is determined to be a high-risk level. At this time, the outfitting temporary structural unit has entered a high-risk state, and related operations are required to be stopped immediately for a comprehensive risk assessment.

[0170] Specifically, after obtaining the comprehensive risk index of each outfitting temporary structural unit, this value must be immediately compared with a preset risk level threshold to trigger a corresponding real-time graded early warning, thereby driving a clear engineering response. Based on calculation and analysis under typical parameter configurations, the principle of engineering conservatism, and common industry practices, this system uniformly classifies risks into three levels and sets corresponding trigger thresholds and response mechanisms, including:

[0171] when A score <0.8 is considered low-risk, indicating that the stability and interface integrity of the outfitting temporary structural unit are both in good condition, the structural response is within the normal fluctuation range, interface wear and fatigue damage are in the natural evolution stage, and the risk of instability and interface damage is low. This threshold corresponds to a state where both scores are simultaneously below 60%-70% of their reference values, for example... =0.55, =0.65. In this state, the outfitting temporary structural units have sufficient safety margin, and the entire outfitting operation can continue normally with routine monitoring, without the need for additional intervention measures.

[0172] When 0.8≦ A score <1.0 is considered a medium-risk level, indicating that the outfitting temporary structural unit shows a deteriorating trend in at least one risk dimension, or both dimensions are at a medium-risk level. The system needs to issue an early warning, prompting workers to pay closer attention and prepare intervention measures, including increasing monitoring frequency or restricting high-risk work activities. A score of 0.8, the starting point of this interval, corresponds to any score approaching its reference threshold. =0.72 or =0.8, or both scores are in the 70%-80% range of the reference value. The endpoint of 1.0 is a critical risk point.

[0173] when A score >1.0 indicates a high-risk level, signifying that the outfitting temporary structural unit has entered a high-risk state. This is typically triggered by two scenarios: a single risk exceeding the limit and the superposition of multiple risks. A single risk exceeding the limit indicates a high stability score. ≥0.9 or Interface Integrity Score ≥1.0. Composite risk superposition indicates that although neither score individually exceeds the limit, both are at a high level, for example, both greater than 0.8. Their coupling effect is amplified through the formula, making... If the error exceeds 1.0, the system must trigger the highest level alarm, requiring an immediate halt to related operations. A comprehensive manual inspection by professionals is necessary, and mandatory intervention measures such as hardening, uninstallation, or adjustment should be implemented based on the inspection results.

[0174] Example 2: Based on the same inventive concept as the ship outfitting operation status perception and early warning method in the foregoing examples, this application also provides a ship outfitting operation status perception and early warning system. Please refer to the appendix. Figure 2 The system includes:

[0175] Outfitting temporary structural unit identification module 11 is used to acquire three-dimensional point cloud data of the outfitting area through a three-dimensional laser scanning device, compare the three-dimensional point cloud data with the CAD design model of the ship, and identify the outfitting temporary structural units.

[0176] The dataset construction module 12 is used to construct a multi-parameter monitoring sensor network based on the outfitting temporary structural unit, obtain the real-time status of the outfitting temporary structural unit, and generate a steady-state monitoring dataset and a wear monitoring dataset. The steady-state monitoring dataset includes displacement data and stress data, and the wear monitoring dataset includes pressure data, acoustic data and strain value data.

[0177] Stability score calculation module 13 is used to set a stability score function and, in combination with a steady-state monitoring dataset, obtain the stability score of the outfitting temporary structural unit.

[0178] Interface integrity score calculation module 14 is used to set the calculation formula for local wear accumulation and fatigue damage accumulation, and obtain the interface integrity score of the outfitting temporary structural unit in combination with the wear monitoring dataset.

[0179] The comprehensive risk index fusion assessment module 15 is used to perform correlation analysis on the stability score and the interface integrity score to obtain the comprehensive risk index of the outfitting temporary structural unit.

[0180] The risk level determination and graded early warning module 16 is used to compare the comprehensive risk index with the preset risk level threshold, trigger the corresponding real-time graded early warning, and drive a clear engineering response.

[0181] The technical features of the above embodiments can be combined in any way. For the sake of brevity, not all possible combinations of the technical features in the above embodiments are described. However, as long as there is no contradiction in the combination of these technical features, they should be considered to be within the scope of this specification.

[0182] The above description of the disclosed embodiments enables those skilled in the art to make or use this application. Various modifications to these embodiments will be readily apparent to those skilled in the art, and the general principles defined herein may be implemented in other embodiments without departing from the spirit or scope of this application. Therefore, this application is not to be limited to the embodiments shown herein, but is to be accorded the widest scope consistent with the principles and novel features disclosed herein.

Claims

1. A method for sensing and early warning of ship outfitting operation status, characterized in that, The method includes: The three-dimensional point cloud data of the outfitting area is obtained by using a three-dimensional laser scanning device. The three-dimensional point cloud data is then compared with the CAD design model of the ship to identify the temporary outfitting structural units. A multi-parameter monitoring sensor network is constructed based on outfitting temporary structural units to obtain the real-time status of the outfitting temporary structural units and generate steady-state monitoring datasets and wear monitoring datasets. The steady-state monitoring datasets include displacement data and stress data, while the wear monitoring datasets include pressure data, acoustic data, and strain data. A stability scoring function is defined, and the stability score of the outfitting temporary structural unit is obtained by combining it with the steady-state monitoring dataset. Obtaining the stability score of the outfitting temporary structural unit also includes: Based on the stress and displacement data in the steady-state monitoring dataset, the average stress and average displacement of the outfitting temporary structural unit are calculated. The critical stress of the outfitting temporary structural unit is obtained based on the material's yield strength and safety factor; The maximum allowable displacement of the outfitting temporary structural unit is obtained based on the maximum span of the component and the allowable displacement ratio. Using mean stress, mean displacement, critical stress, and maximum allowable displacement as input parameters, a stability scoring function is defined to obtain the stability score of the outfitting temporary structural element. The specific calculation formula is as follows: ； in, σ represents the stability score of the outfitting temporary structural element, and σ represents the average stress of the outfitting temporary structural element. δ represents the critical stress of the outfitting temporary structural element, and δ represents the average displacement of the outfitting temporary structural element. represents the maximum allowable displacement of the outfitting temporary structural unit, max represents the maximum value function, and α, β and γ are the three weighting coefficients for the stress term, displacement term and interaction term, respectively; Formulas for calculating local wear accumulation and fatigue damage accumulation are established. Based on wear monitoring datasets, the interface integrity score of the outfitting temporary structural unit is obtained. Obtaining the interface integrity score of the outfitting temporary structural unit also includes: Based on the Archard wear model, a formula for calculating the local wear accumulation of outfitting temporary structural units is established to obtain the local wear accumulation. Based on fatigue damage theory, a formula for calculating the cumulative fatigue damage of outfitting temporary structural units is established to obtain the cumulative fatigue damage. The wear reference threshold is set based on the ship's CAD design model and the planned total service life. The specific calculation formula is as follows: ； in, Represents the wear reference threshold. T represents the total permissible wear volume, and T represents the planned total service life. The local wear accumulation is standardized using a wear reference threshold, and the specific calculation formula is as follows: ； in, This represents the standardized local wear index. This represents the cumulative amount of local wear calculated during the current monitoring period. Represents the wear reference threshold; Based on Miner's linear cumulative damage theory and combined with actual engineering conditions, a fatigue damage reference threshold is set. =0.7; The cumulative fatigue damage is standardized using a fatigue damage reference threshold. The specific calculation formula is as follows: ; in, This represents a standardized fatigue damage index. This represents the calculated cumulative amount of fatigue damage. This represents the reference threshold for fatigue damage; A weighted fusion model is introduced to calculate the interface integrity score. The specific calculation formula is as follows: ； in, The interface integrity score represents the outfitting temporary structural unit. and These represent the weighting coefficients for the local wear term and the fatigue damage term, respectively. Indicates the damage coupling weight coefficient; By performing correlation analysis on stability scores and interface integrity scores, a comprehensive risk index for outfitting temporary structural units can be obtained. By comparing the comprehensive risk index with the preset risk level threshold, corresponding real-time graded early warnings are triggered, driving a clear engineering response.

2. The method for sensing and early warning of ship outfitting operation status as described in claim 1, characterized in that, To obtain the local wear accumulation, including: Pressure and strain baseline signals under no-load conditions are acquired, and their mean and standard deviation are calculated. Based on these mean and standard deviations, threshold values ​​for pressure loading and strain loading are set. The specific formulas for setting these threshold values ​​are as follows: Threshold for determining stress loading status: ; Threshold for determining strain loading state: ; in, This represents the threshold for determining the stress loading state. This represents the threshold for determining the strain loading state. The mean value representing the pressure baseline signal. The mean value of the strain baseline signal. The standard deviation of the pressure baseline signal, The standard deviation of the strain baseline signal, Represents the empirical amplification factor; The pressure data is compared with the pressure loading state judgment threshold, and the strain value data is compared with the strain loading state judgment threshold. The number of times that either the pressure data or the strain value data exceeds the judgment threshold and then falls back to the judgment threshold is counted to obtain the loading cycle number. Feature extraction is performed on the acoustic wave data in the wear monitoring dataset to obtain the cumulative acoustic emission energy. The specific calculation formula is as follows: ； in, A represents the cumulative energy of acoustic emission. j This represents the amplitude of the acoustic data at the j-th sampling time. The sampling time interval is represented by M, which represents the number of sampling points within the monitoring time period. The wear coefficient correction factor is obtained based on the cumulative energy of acoustic emission. The specific calculation formula is as follows: ； in, Represents the wear coefficient correction factor. Represents the cumulative energy of acoustic emission. This represents the acoustic emission reference energy value obtained in advance under the same load level and operating conditions; The initial wear coefficient is set according to the material type of the contact interface, and then corrected by a wear coefficient correction factor to ensure that it meets the following requirements: ； in, This represents the corrected wear coefficient. Represents the wear coefficient correction factor. Represents the initial wear coefficient; Based on the location of the pressure sensors, the CAD design model is consulted to obtain the contact area between the temporary outfitting structural unit and the hull structure corresponding to the location of the sensors. By acquiring pressure and average displacement data, and combining them with the number of loading cycles, the corrected wear coefficient, and the contact area, the local wear accumulation is calculated. The specific calculation formula is as follows: ； in, Represents the cumulative amount of localized wear. Represents pressure, Represents the contact area. Represents the average displacement. Represents the number of loading loops. This represents the corrected wear coefficient.

3. The method for sensing and early warning of ship outfitting operation status as described in claim 1, characterized in that, To obtain the cumulative amount of fatigue damage, including: The fatigue limit strain of a material is obtained based on its fatigue limit stress and elastic modulus. The specific calculation formula is as follows: ； in, The fatigue limit strain of the representative material. B represents the fatigue limit stress of the material, and B represents the elastic modulus of the material. By combining strain data with the number of loading cycles, the cumulative fatigue damage is calculated using the following formula: ; in, Represents the cumulative amount of fatigue damage. Represents the number of loading loops. This represents the maximum strain value measured in the temporary structural element during the i-th loading cycle. The fatigue limit strain of the material is represented by the index m, which represents the fatigue damage sensitivity index.

4. The method for sensing and early warning of ship outfitting operation status as described in claim 1, characterized in that, Obtain the comprehensive risk index of the outfitting temporary structural units, including: Obtain stability scores and interface integrity scores, and construct unit-level risk assessment pairs; A risk coupling model is introduced to perform fusion calculations on unit-level risk assessment pairs to obtain a comprehensive risk index. The specific calculation formula is as follows: ； in, The comprehensive risk index representing the outfitting temporary structural unit. The stability score represents the outfitting temporary structural unit. This represents a reference value for stability rating. The interface integrity score represents the outfitting temporary structural unit. The value represents the reference value for the interface integrity score, p and q are the weighting indices of the stability score and the interface integrity score, and r is the norm index.

5. The method for sensing and early warning of ship outfitting operation status as described in claim 1, characterized in that, By comparing the comprehensive risk index with the preset risk level threshold, corresponding real-time graded early warnings are triggered, driving clear engineering responses, including: The comprehensive risk index of the outfitting temporary structural unit is compared with the preset risk level threshold to establish a three-level evaluation system; when When the value is less than 0.8, it is judged as a low-risk level. At this time, the stability and interface integrity of the outfitting temporary structural unit are in good condition, the entire outfitting operation continues to proceed normally, and routine monitoring is maintained. When 0.8≦ When the risk level is less than 1.0, it is determined to be a medium-risk level. At this time, the outfitting temporary structural unit shows a deteriorating trend in at least one risk dimension, or both dimensions are at a medium-risk level. An early warning should be issued, the monitoring frequency should be increased, and high-risk operations should be restricted. when When the value is greater than 1.0, it is determined to be a high-risk level. At this time, the outfitting temporary structural unit has entered a high-risk state, and related operations are required to be stopped immediately for a comprehensive risk assessment.

6. A ship outfitting operation status perception and early warning system, characterized in that, The system is used to implement the ship outfitting operation status perception and early warning method according to any one of claims 1 to 5, and the system includes: The outfitting temporary structural unit identification module is used to acquire three-dimensional point cloud data of the outfitting area through a three-dimensional laser scanning device, compare the three-dimensional point cloud data with the CAD design model of the ship, and identify the outfitting temporary structural units. The dataset construction module is used to construct a multi-parameter monitoring sensor network based on the outfitting temporary structural unit, obtain the real-time status of the outfitting temporary structural unit, and generate a steady-state monitoring dataset and a wear monitoring dataset. The steady-state monitoring dataset includes displacement data and stress data, and the wear monitoring dataset includes pressure data, acoustic data, and strain value data. The stability score calculation module is used to set a stability score function and, in conjunction with a steady-state monitoring dataset, obtain the stability score of the outfitting temporary structural unit. The interface integrity score calculation module is used to set the calculation formula for local wear accumulation and fatigue damage accumulation, and obtain the interface integrity score of the outfitting temporary structural unit by combining the wear monitoring dataset. The comprehensive risk index fusion assessment module is used to perform correlation analysis on stability score and interface integrity score to obtain the comprehensive risk index of outfitting temporary structural unit; The risk level determination and graded early warning module is used to compare the comprehensive risk index with the preset risk level threshold, trigger the corresponding real-time graded early warning, and drive a clear engineering response.

Images