A semi-physical simulation test evaluation method for high-speed maglev system

Abstract

The application provides a semi-physical simulation test evaluation method for a high-speed maglev system, comprising the following steps: configuring control parameters of a control system; setting a simulation test scene on the basis of completing the configuration of the control parameters of the control system; simulating the operation of a traction converter, a train and a trackside switch by a simulation platform based on the current simulation test scene to obtain simulation data; obtaining a first evaluation index, a second evaluation index and a third evaluation index in the case that the simulation test scene is a normal operation condition; obtaining a fourth evaluation index and a fifth evaluation index in the case that the simulation test scene is a fault condition; and obtaining an overall evaluation value based on the first evaluation index, the second evaluation index, the third evaluation index, the fourth evaluation index and the fifth evaluation index. The application can perform test tests on a semi-physical simulation platform, can preliminarily verify the correctness and effectiveness of the controller programs of the traction system, can accelerate the development process, and can release technical risks in advance.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of ultra-high-speed maglev system technology, and in particular to a hardware-in-the-loop simulation test and evaluation method for high-speed maglev systems. Background Technology

[0002] Against the backdrop of the current development of ultra-high-speed maglev trains, which can operate at speeds exceeding 1000 km / h, they have attracted widespread attention both domestically and internationally.

[0003] When the high-speed maglev train runs on the track, the ground traction converter equipment supplies power to the stator section of the linear motor and generates a traveling wave magnetic field, which drives the train. The traction control system adjusts the converter output voltage according to the current operating status of the train, and the switch controller controls the opening and closing of the trackside switching stations along the line according to the current position of the train and the step-changing strategy. It also controls the frequency, phase, and amplitude of the current output to the stator section of the linear motor, so that the train runs along the planned trajectory.

[0004] Before testing a high-speed maglev system, the controller logic and functions need to be tested and verified. If each test is conducted under the same conditions as actual application, the actual operating conditions of the high-speed maglev train place high demands on the test site, wasting a lot of manpower, resources, and time. Furthermore, an unverified system has low safety and cannot achieve the test objectives. Summary of the Invention

[0005] This invention provides a hardware-in-the-loop simulation test and evaluation method for high-speed maglev systems. It enables experimental testing on a hardware-in-the-loop simulation platform, which can preliminarily verify the correctness and effectiveness of the controller programs of the traction system, accelerate the development process, and release technical risks in advance.

[0006] This invention provides a hardware-in-the-loop simulation testing and evaluation method for high-speed maglev systems, the method comprising:

[0007] Configure the control parameters of the control system;

[0008] Based on the completed configuration of the control parameters of the control system, simulation test scenarios are set up; the simulation test scenarios include normal operating conditions and fault conditions.

[0009] The simulation platform performs simulations based on the current simulation test scenario to simulate the operation of the traction converter, train, and trackside switch, and acquire simulation data. The simulation data includes the actual running trajectory curve of the train, the current data output by the traction converter, the running attitude data of the train, the time response duration of the fault, and the interference value injected by the fault.

[0010] Under normal operating conditions, the simulation test scenario is as follows: the first evaluation index is obtained by comparing the train's running speed with the planned running trajectory curve based on the actual running trajectory curve and the planned running trajectory curve; the second evaluation index is obtained by comparing the current output of the traction converter with the target output value based on the current data and the target output value; and the third evaluation index is obtained by obtaining the train's running attitude based on the train's running attitude data.

[0011] In the simulation test scenario of fault conditions, the fourth evaluation index under fault conditions is obtained based on the fault time response duration; the fifth evaluation index of the anti-interference capability of the control system is obtained based on the interference value injected by the fault.

[0012] The overall evaluation value is obtained based on the first evaluation indicator, the second evaluation indicator, the third evaluation indicator, the fourth evaluation indicator, and the fifth evaluation indicator.

[0013] Preferably, the first evaluation index for comparing the train's operating speed with the planned curve is obtained by the following formula:

[0014]

[0015] In the formula, Q1 represents the first evaluation index, and v_real i v_target represents the actual speed of the train at time i. i V represents the target speed of the train at time i, V is the reference speed selected in the current simulation test scenario, and n represents the total test time.

[0016] Preferably, the second evaluation index is obtained by comparing the output current of the traction converter with the target output value using the following formula:

[0017]

[0018] In the formula, Q2 represents the second evaluation index, i_real i i_target represents the actual current at time i. i Let I represent the target current at time i, and let I represent the reference current selected in the current simulation test scenario.

[0019] Preferably, the third evaluation index of the train's running attitude is obtained by the following formula:

[0020] Q3=f(v_real,s x ,s y ,s z ,θ x ,θ y ,θ z )

[0021] In the formula, Q3 represents the third evaluation index, f(v_real,s) x ,s y ,s z ,θ x ,θ y ,θ z ) represents the train's attitude function, v_real represents the train's actual speed, and s x ,s y ,s z θ represents the displacement of the train in the three directions of propulsion, levitation, and guidance, respectively. x ,θ y ,θ z These represent the deflection angles of the train in the three directions of propulsion, levitation, and guidance, respectively.

[0022] Preferably, the fourth evaluation index under fault conditions is obtained by the following formula:

[0023]

[0024] In the formula, Q4 represents the fourth evaluation index, f(t) response ,t real ,t target ) represents the evaluation function under fault conditions, t response The response time of ground-based equipment is represented by t. real t represents the time interval from the occurrence of a fault to its recognition by the control system. target This indicates the technical requirement time interval between the occurrence of a fault and its recognition by the control system.

[0025] Preferably, the fifth evaluation index of the control system's anti-interference capability is obtained by the following formula:

[0026] Q5=f(v_real,v_target,i_real,i_target,Q3,E)

[0027] In the formula, Q5 represents the fifth evaluation index, f(v_real,v_target,i_real,i_target,Q3,E) represents the evaluation function of the anti-interference capability of the control system, v_real represents the actual running speed of the train, v_target represents the target running speed of the train, i_real represents the actual current, i_target represents the target current, and E represents the injected interference value.

[0028] Preferably, the overall evaluation value is obtained using the following formula:

[0029]

[0030] In the formula, Q represents the overall evaluation value, and P... jLet Q represent the weight corresponding to the j-th evaluation indicator. j Let represent the j-th evaluation indicator, and m represent the number of evaluation indicators.

[0031] Preferably, the simulation data further includes: trackside switch control timing, traction converter switch operation status and pulse commands, and the reception and issuance of traction start / stop commands; the method further includes: determining whether the trackside switch control timing, traction converter switch operation status and pulse commands, and the reception and issuance of traction start / stop commands meet their respective expected requirements.

[0032] Applying the technical solution of this invention, after the train starts running, the control system controls the output current of the traction converter, and the traction train runs according to the planned curve. During the semi-physical simulation, the control effect of each controller under various operating conditions is tested and evaluated based on various evaluation indicators, and the control performance of the control system is qualitatively and quantitatively assessed. This invention is mainly applied to maglev transportation control systems (such as operation control systems, traction control systems, etc.). Attached Figure Description

[0033] The accompanying drawings, which form part of this specification, are provided to further illustrate embodiments of the invention and, together with the textual description, explain the principles of the invention. It is obvious that the drawings described below are merely some embodiments of the invention, and those skilled in the art can obtain other drawings based on these drawings without any creative effort.

[0034] Figure 1 A flowchart of a hardware-in-the-loop simulation test and evaluation method for high-speed maglev systems, according to an embodiment of the present invention, is shown.

[0035] Figure 2 A hardware-in-the-loop simulation test and evaluation architecture diagram for high-speed maglev systems is shown, according to an embodiment of the present invention. Detailed Implementation

[0036] It should be noted that, unless otherwise specified, the embodiments and features described in this application can be combined with each other. The technical solutions of the embodiments of the present invention will be clearly and completely described below with reference to the accompanying drawings. Obviously, the described embodiments are only a part of the embodiments of the present invention, and not all of them. The following description of at least one exemplary embodiment is merely illustrative and is in no way intended to limit the present invention or its application or use. Based on the embodiments of the present invention, all other embodiments obtained by those skilled in the art without creative effort are within the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0037] It should be noted that the terminology used herein is for the purpose of describing particular embodiments only and is not intended to limit the exemplary embodiments according to this application. As used herein, the singular form is intended to include the plural form as well, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise. Furthermore, it should be understood that when the terms "comprising" and / or "including" are used in this specification, they indicate the presence of features, steps, operations, devices, components, and / or combinations thereof.

[0038] Unless otherwise specifically stated, the relative arrangement, numerical expressions, and values ​​of the components and steps set forth in these embodiments do not limit the scope of the invention. It should also be understood that, for ease of description, the dimensions of the various parts shown in the drawings are not drawn to actual scale. Techniques, methods, and devices known to those skilled in the art may not be discussed in detail, but where appropriate, such techniques, methods, and devices should be considered part of the specification. In all examples shown and discussed herein, any specific values ​​should be interpreted as merely exemplary and not as limitations. Therefore, other examples of exemplary embodiments may have different values. It should be noted that similar reference numerals and letters in the following figures denote similar items; therefore, once an item is defined in one figure, it need not be further discussed in subsequent figures.

[0039] like Figures 1-2 As shown, this invention provides a hardware-in-the-loop simulation testing and evaluation method for high-speed maglev systems, the method comprising:

[0040] Configure the control parameters of the control system;

[0041] Based on the completed configuration of the control parameters of the control system, simulation test scenarios are set up; the simulation test scenarios include normal operating conditions and fault conditions.

[0042] The simulation platform performs simulations based on the current simulation test scenario to simulate the operation of the traction converter, train, and trackside switch, and acquire simulation data. The simulation data includes the actual running trajectory curve of the train, the current data output by the traction converter, the running attitude data of the train, the time response duration of the fault, and the interference value injected by the fault.

[0043] Under normal operating conditions, the simulation test scenario is as follows: the first evaluation index is obtained by comparing the train's running speed with the planned running trajectory curve based on the actual running trajectory curve and the planned running trajectory curve; the second evaluation index is obtained by comparing the current output of the traction converter with the target output value based on the current data and the target output value; and the third evaluation index is obtained by obtaining the train's running attitude based on the train's running attitude data.

[0044] In the simulation test scenario of fault conditions, the fourth evaluation index under fault conditions is obtained based on the fault time response duration; the fifth evaluation index of the anti-interference capability of the control system is obtained based on the interference value injected by the fault.

[0045] The overall evaluation value is obtained based on the first evaluation indicator, the second evaluation indicator, the third evaluation indicator, the fourth evaluation indicator, and the fifth evaluation indicator.

[0046] This invention, after the train begins operation, controls the output current of the traction converter, causing the train to run according to a planned curve. During a semi-physical simulation, the control effectiveness of each controller under various operating conditions is tested and evaluated based on different evaluation indicators, qualitatively and quantitatively assessing the control performance of the control system. This invention is mainly applied to maglev transportation control systems (such as motion control systems, traction control systems, etc.).

[0047] According to one embodiment of the present invention, a first evaluation index comparing the train speed with the planned curve is obtained by the following formula:

[0048]

[0049] In the formula, Q1 represents the first evaluation index, and v_real i v_target represents the actual speed of the train at time i. i V represents the target speed of the train at time i, V is the reference speed selected in the current simulation test scenario, and n represents the total test time.

[0050] Among them, the first evaluation index, which uses square calculation, can effectively reflect the gap between the actual value and the theoretical value.

[0051] According to one embodiment of the present invention, a second evaluation index comparing the current output by the traction converter with the target output value is obtained by the following formula:

[0052]

[0053] In the formula, Q2 represents the second evaluation index, i_real i i_target represents the actual current at time i. i Let I represent the target current at time i, and let I represent the reference current selected in the current simulation test scenario.

[0054] According to one embodiment of the present invention, a third evaluation index of the train's running attitude is obtained by the following formula:

[0055] Q3=f(v_real,s x ,s y ,s z ,θ x ,θy ,θ z )

[0056] In the formula, Q3 represents the third evaluation index, f(v_real,s) x ,s y ,s z ,θ x ,θ y ,θ z ) represents the train's attitude function, v_real represents the train's actual speed, and s x ,s y ,s z θ represents the displacement of the train in the three directions of propulsion, levitation, and guidance, respectively. x ,θ y ,θ z These represent the deflection angles of the train in the three directions of propulsion, levitation, and guidance, respectively.

[0057] Where, f(v_real,s x ,s y ,s z ,θ x ,θ y ,θ z ) is about the parameters v_real,s x ,s y ,s z ,θ x ,θ y ,θ z The function.

[0058] According to one embodiment of the present invention, the fourth evaluation index under fault conditions is obtained by the following formula:

[0059]

[0060] In the formula, Q4 represents the fourth evaluation index, f(t) response ,t real ,t target ) represents the evaluation function under fault conditions, t response The response time of ground-based operating equipment is an inherent characteristic of the system and varies with different parameters of the ground-based operating equipment. real The time interval t represents the time from the occurrence of a fault to its recognition by the control system, and is a key performance indicator. target This indicates the technical requirement time interval between the occurrence of a fault and its recognition by the control system.

[0061] Where, f(t) response ,t real ,t target ) is about parameter t response ,t real,t target The function.

[0062] According to one embodiment of the present invention, the fifth evaluation index of the anti-interference capability of the control system is obtained by the following formula:

[0063] Q5=f(v_real,v_target,i_real,i_target,Q3,E)

[0064] Where f(v_real,v_target,i_real,i_target,Q3,E) is a function of parameters v_real,v_target,i_real,i_target,Q3,E.

[0065] In the formula, Q5 represents the fifth evaluation index, f(v_real,v_target,i_real,i_target,Q3,E) represents the evaluation function of the anti-interference capability of the control system, v_real represents the actual running speed of the train, v_target represents the target running speed of the train, i_real represents the actual current, i_target represents the target current, and E represents the injected interference value.

[0066] According to one embodiment of the present invention, the overall evaluation value is obtained by the following formula:

[0067]

[0068] In the formula, Q represents the overall evaluation value, and P... j Let Q represent the weight corresponding to the j-th evaluation index. j Let represent the j-th evaluation indicator, and m represent the number of evaluation indicators.

[0069] Different weights, P1-P5, are assigned according to different test scenarios to obtain the overall evaluation value Q.

[0070] According to one embodiment of the present invention, the simulation data further includes: trackside switch control timing, traction converter switch operation status and pulse commands, and the reception and issuance of traction start / stop commands; the method further includes: determining whether the trackside switch control timing, traction converter switch operation status and pulse commands, and the reception and issuance of traction start / stop commands meet their respective expected requirements.

[0071] To gain a further understanding of the present invention, the hardware-in-the-loop simulation test and evaluation method for high-speed maglev systems will be described in detail below.

[0072] In this embodiment, the hardware-in-the-loop simulation testing and evaluation method for high-speed maglev systems specifically includes the following steps:

[0073] Step 1: Connect the communication signals of each controller in the control system. Connect the communication interfaces between the controllers and the communication interfaces between the controllers and interface modules. After the connection is completed, check the communication. Only after checking and testing the communication protocol to ensure it is correct can subsequent tests be carried out.

[0074] Step 2: Control System Function Test. After verifying that the communication signals are correct, conduct a control function test, observing whether each controller can perform the test according to the design process, whether it responds normally to the communication control signals, and whether it provides feedback on the controller status information.

[0075] Step 3: Power on and check the control system and simulation platform equipment. Only after the power-on operation check is normal and there are no faults can the test continue.

[0076] Step 4: Configure the control system parameters to match the actual application. Set up the simulation test scenario, construct the current simulation test scenario, and send it to the control system. The simulation test scenario includes multiple test scenarios, such as normal operating conditions and fault conditions. The normal operating condition is consistent with the actual operating conditions, i.e., the train travels according to the planned operating curve, and the simulation results are observed to see if they meet the requirements. The test scenario is a scenario set up to independently test the controllers of each device in the test. This scenario allows for independent testing of the controller's control performance in advance, preparing for subsequent joint debugging tests. The fault condition is mainly used to simulate various faults that occur during train operation, as well as the system's operating status after a fault occurs.

[0077] Step 5: System integration testing begins. During the test, the corresponding test scenarios are injected, and the operating status of each device in the control system is observed.

[0078] Step 6: Analysis of test results. After the test, analyze the operating data of each controller and simulation system, and give a qualitative / quantitative test evaluation of the controller's control effect according to the requirements of the operating scenario.

[0079] Step 7: The experiment ends. Collect and store the experimental data for further in-depth analysis. Power off the system.

[0080] In summary, this invention provides a hardware-in-the-loop (HIL) simulation testing and evaluation method for high-speed maglev systems. After the train starts running, the control system controls the output current of the traction converter, and the traction train runs according to the planned curve. During the HIL simulation, the control effects of each controller under various operating conditions are tested and evaluated based on various evaluation indicators, qualitatively and quantitatively assessing the control performance of the control system. This invention is mainly applied to maglev transportation control systems (such as motion control systems, traction control systems, etc.).

[0081] The parts of this invention not described in detail are techniques known to those skilled in the art.

[0082] In the description of this invention, it should be understood that the orientation or positional relationship indicated by directional terms such as "front, back, up, down, left, right", "horizontal, vertical, horizontal" and "top, bottom" is generally based on the orientation or positional relationship shown in the accompanying drawings, and is only for the convenience of describing this invention and simplifying the description. Unless otherwise stated, these directional terms do not indicate or imply that the device or element referred to must have a specific orientation or be constructed and operated in a specific orientation, and therefore should not be construed as a limitation on the scope of protection of this invention; the directional terms "inner" and "outer" refer to the inner and outer contours relative to the outline of each component itself.

[0083] For ease of description, spatial relative terms such as "above," "on top of," "on the upper surface of," "above," etc., are used herein to describe the spatial positional relationship of a device or feature as shown in the figures to other devices or features. It should be understood that spatial relative terms are intended to encompass different orientations in use or operation beyond the orientation of the device as described in the figures. For example, if the device in the figures were inverted, a device described as "above" or "on top of" other devices or structures would subsequently be positioned as "below" or "under" other devices or structures. Thus, the exemplary term "above" can include both "above" and "below." The device may also be positioned in other different ways (rotated 90 degrees or in other orientations), and the spatial relative descriptions used herein will be interpreted accordingly.

[0084] Furthermore, it should be noted that the use of terms such as "first" and "second" to define components is merely for the purpose of distinguishing the corresponding components. Unless otherwise stated, the above terms have no special meaning and therefore should not be construed as limiting the scope of protection of this invention.

[0085] The above description is merely a preferred embodiment of the present invention and is not intended to limit the invention. Various modifications and variations can be made to the present invention by those skilled in the art. Any modifications, equivalent substitutions, improvements, etc., made within the spirit and principles of the present invention should be included within the scope of protection of the present invention.

Claims

1. A hardware-in-the-loop simulation testing and evaluation method for high-speed maglev systems, characterized in that, The method includes: Configure the control parameters of the control system; Based on the completed configuration of the control parameters of the control system, simulation test scenarios are set up; the simulation test scenarios include normal operating conditions and fault conditions. The simulation platform performs simulations based on the current simulation test scenario to simulate the operation of the traction converter, train, and trackside switch, and acquire simulation data. The simulation data includes the actual running trajectory curve of the train, the current data output by the traction converter, the running attitude data of the train, the time response duration of the fault, and the interference value injected by the fault. Under normal operating conditions, the simulation test scenario is as follows: the first evaluation index is obtained by comparing the train's running speed with the planned running trajectory curve based on the actual running trajectory curve and the planned running trajectory curve; the second evaluation index is obtained by comparing the current output of the traction converter with the target output value based on the current data and the target output value; and the third evaluation index is obtained by obtaining the train's running attitude based on the train's running attitude data. In the simulation test scenario of fault conditions, the fourth evaluation index under fault conditions is obtained based on the fault time response duration; the fifth evaluation index of the anti-interference capability of the control system is obtained based on the interference value injected by the fault. The overall evaluation value is obtained based on the first evaluation indicator, the second evaluation indicator, the third evaluation indicator, the fourth evaluation indicator, and the fifth evaluation indicator.

2. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The first evaluation index for comparing the train's operating speed with the planned curve is obtained using the following formula: In the formula, Q1 represents the first evaluation index, and v_real i v_target represents the actual speed of the train at time i. i V represents the target speed of the train at time i, V is the reference speed selected in the current simulation test scenario, and n represents the total test time.

3. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The second evaluation metric, obtained by comparing the output current of the traction converter with the target output value, is calculated using the following formula: In the formula, Q2 represents the second evaluation index, i_real i i_target represents the actual current at time i. i Let I represent the target current at time i, and let I represent the reference current selected in the current simulation test scenario.

4. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The third evaluation index of train running attitude is obtained by the following formula: Q3=f(v_real,s x ,s y ,s z ,i x ,i y ,i z ) In the formula, Q3 represents the third evaluation index, f(v_real,s) x ,s y ,s z ,θ x ,θ y ,θ z ) represents the train's attitude function, v_real represents the train's actual speed, and s x ,s y ,s z θ represents the displacement of the train in the three directions of propulsion, levitation, and guidance, respectively. x ,θ y ,θ z These represent the deflection angles of the train in the three directions of propulsion, levitation, and guidance, respectively.

5. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The fourth evaluation index under fault conditions is obtained using the following formula: In the formula, Q4 represents the fourth evaluation index, f(t) response ,t real ,t target ) represents the evaluation function under fault conditions, t response The response time of ground-based equipment is represented by t. real t represents the time interval from the occurrence of a fault to its recognition by the control system. target This indicates the technical requirement time interval between the occurrence of a fault and its recognition by the control system.

6. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The fifth evaluation index of the control system's anti-interference capability is obtained through the following formula: Q5=f(v_real,v_target,i_real,i_target,Q3,E) In the formula, Q5 represents the fifth evaluation index, f(v_real,v_target,i_real,i_target,Q3,E) represents the evaluation function of the anti-interference capability of the control system, v_real represents the actual running speed of the train, v_target represents the target running speed of the train, i_real represents the actual current, i_target represents the target current, and E represents the injected interference value.

7. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The overall evaluation value is obtained using the following formula: In the formula, Q represents the overall evaluation value, and P... j Let Q represent the weight corresponding to the j-th evaluation indicator. j Let represent the j-th evaluation indicator, and m represent the number of evaluation indicators.

8. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The simulation data also includes: trackside switch control timing, traction converter switch operation status and pulse commands, and the reception and issuance of traction start / stop commands; the method also includes: determining whether the trackside switch control timing, traction converter switch operation status and pulse commands, and the reception and issuance of traction start / stop commands meet their respective expected requirements.

Images