Ship Lock Navigation Suitability Evaluation System and Actual Ship Test and Evaluation Method

Abstract

This invention relates to the field of inland waterway transportation and navigation structures, and particularly to a system for evaluating the navigation suitability of locks and methods for actual ship testing and evaluation. Addressing the technical limitations of existing lock navigation tests, this invention achieves a standardized, quantitative, and visualized comprehensive evaluation of navigation suitability. Specifically, it designs standardized test procedures and data collection specifications, unifying the collection standards for various data types, including hydraulics, ship navigation, maneuvering, and berthing, ensuring data comparability and reusability. Secondly, it constructs a three-dimensional indicator system of "navigation safety – maneuvering difficulty – navigation efficiency," innovatively incorporating multiple dynamic maneuvering indicators into the evaluation. The final output is a comprehensive score and a four-level classification. Calculation examples have verified that this provides a clear and quantitative basis for lock operation management, effectively balancing navigation safety and operational efficiency. It is adaptable to the evaluation of newly built, expanded, and modified locks, as well as locks undergoing changes in operating conditions, and can also support daily scheduling and intelligent management.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of inland waterway transportation and navigation structures, and in particular to a system for evaluating the navigation suitability of locks and a method for actual ship testing and evaluation. Background Technology

[0002] Ship locks are key hydraulic structures in inland waterways that overcome water level differences and ensure continuous navigation for ships. Taking major waterways such as the Yangtze River, the Xijiang River, and the Beijiang River as examples, the annual cargo throughput through ship locks has been steadily increasing, with some locks approaching or even exceeding their designed capacity, leading to growing pressure on ship lock navigation.

[0003] The construction, expansion, and renovation of ship locks (such as adding second or third locks to increase navigation capacity) and adjustments to operational conditions (such as changes in upstream water levels, adjustments to flood discharge flow, and changes in valve opening methods) require, despite preliminary model studies. However, due to scaling effects and other issues, full-scale ship trials and hydraulic prototype observations are necessary before formal operation to verify the design, assess navigation conditions, and optimize operating procedures. Full-scale ship trials measure navigation parameters, ship motion responses, and navigation environment parameters using actual designed vessels, verifying the navigability of the river section. Currently, full-scale ship trials are the only technical means to truly reflect the interaction between ships and ship locks and verify navigation safety.

[0004] Existing ship lock navigation tests (such as the actual ship tests conducted at the Minjiang Qianwei Hub, Qingyuan Second-Line Ship Lock, and the Three Gorges Ship Lock) have accumulated rich experience, but the analytical methods are still limited to single-index threshold judgment and qualitative description. As ship lock operation and management develop towards refinement and intelligence, there is an urgent need for a comprehensive evaluation system that can integrate multi-source data, quantify evaluation results, and intuitively display weaknesses, addressing the following specific technical issues:

[0005] (1) Collection and arrangement of multi-source experimental data

[0006] Lock navigation tests involve various types of data, including hydraulic data (water level, flow velocity, flow pattern), ship navigation data (speed, trajectory, attitude), control data (rudder angle, steering frequency, drift angle, braking distance), and mooring data (mooring force). These data vary in format, sampling frequency, and units. Existing technologies lack unified data acquisition specifications and data structuring standards, making it difficult for subsequent evaluation models to use the data directly. This invention designs a standardized test procedure and data acquisition specifications, clearly defining the installation locations, sampling frequencies, data formats, and preprocessing methods for various sensors to ensure data comparability and reusability.

[0007] (2) Quantification of dynamic indicators of ship handling

[0008] Existing evaluation systems almost entirely neglect the quantitative assessment of the crucial dimension of "ease of navigation." The workload of the navigator during lock passage, the ship's responsiveness to steering, and the ease of maintaining course directly impact navigation safety, especially for large vessels or in adverse hydrographic conditions. This technology introduces dynamic process indicators such as steering frequency, mean absolute rudder angle, cumulative drift angle, and braking distance, and quantifies these into numerical values ​​suitable for comprehensive evaluation through high-frequency data acquisition and feature extraction algorithms.

[0009] (3) Key indicators are subject to "one-vote veto".

[0010] In certain situations, a severe exceedance of a single critical safety indicator (such as the maximum mooring force exceeding the allowable value or the risk of a vessel hitting the bottom due to the maximum water level fluctuation in the lock chamber) is sufficient to determine the entire navigation condition as "unqualified" or "dangerous," regardless of the performance of other indicators. Some existing evaluation methods often use linear weighted averages, which can lead to the problem of "good indicators masking bad indicators." This invention introduces a "one-vote veto" rule into the comprehensive scoring model: if any critical safety indicator exceeds its set "limit threshold," the system directly determines the seaworthiness effect as "poor" and issues a red warning, without further weighted calculation. This mechanism ensures the safety baseline of the evaluation results.

[0011] (4) The intuitiveness of the quantitative evaluation results

[0012] Existing evaluation outputs consist of scattered charts and textual conclusions, making it difficult for operations and management personnel to quickly grasp the overall airworthiness level and pinpoint problems. This technology calculates a comprehensive score from 0 to 100, corresponding to four levels (Excellent, Good, Average, and Poor), and uses visualization tools such as radar charts to display the scores and weights of each criterion and indicator layer, intuitively presenting weaknesses.

[0013] (5) Closed-loop feedback of test process and evaluation system

[0014] In existing technologies, ship trials and evaluation analysis are often separated. This invention constructs an integrated evaluation system, including a data acquisition module, a data processing module, a comprehensive evaluation module, and a result output and decision support module, forming a closed loop of "trial → evaluation → decision optimization," providing technical support for the continuous improvement of lock operation.

[0015] In summary, current evaluation systems for ship locks mainly focus on the health assessment of lock equipment or the assessment of macroscopic operational status. Existing technologies lack a systematic and comprehensive evaluation method for the seaworthiness effect of actual ship tests on ship locks. Therefore, we propose a ship lock navigation seaworthiness effect evaluation system and actual ship test and evaluation methods. Summary of the Invention

[0016] The purpose of this invention is to provide a system for evaluating the navigation and seaworthiness of locks and a method for actual ship testing and evaluation, so as to solve the problems mentioned in the background art.

[0017] To solve the above-mentioned technical problems, the present invention adopts the following technical solution:

[0018] The lock navigation suitability evaluation system includes:

[0019] The test data acquisition module is used to execute the preset lock navigation test process and collect hydraulic parameters, ship navigation parameters, and ship berthing parameters.

[0020] The data preprocessing and feature extraction module is used to filter, normalize, and extract features from the raw data collected by the experimental data acquisition module to obtain ship motion characteristic parameters.

[0021] The comprehensive evaluation and calculation module is used to construct an airworthiness performance evaluation index system, calculate index weights, quantify index scores, calculate comprehensive scores, and execute veto decisions.

[0022] The results output and decision support module is used to generate comprehensive scores, airworthiness ratings, visualization charts, and operational optimization suggestions.

[0023] Preferably, the test data acquisition module is compatible with multi-source heterogeneous data acquisition devices such as water level gauges, wave height gauges, acoustic Doppler current meters, Doppler profile current meters, differential GPS, inertial navigation systems, attitude sensors, rudder angle sensors, tension sensors, high-definition cameras, and drones, enabling synchronous acquisition and timestamp matching of multi-source data.

[0024] Preferably, the data preprocessing and feature extraction module is also used to remove outliers, compensate for missing values, assess data quality, and automatically calculate 13 underlying index values, including steering frequency, mean absolute rudder angle, maximum drift angle, braking distance, track deviation, and water injection / extraction characteristic parameters.

[0025] Preferably, the comprehensive evaluation and calculation module integrates and improves the core algorithms of CRITIC-entropy weight calculation, trapezoidal membership function scoring, multi-level weighted fusion, and veto judgment, and automatically outputs the comprehensive score and airworthiness rating.

[0026] Preferably, the result output and decision support module is also used to automatically output early warning information and navigation suggestions when a veto is triggered or the comprehensive score is lower than a preset threshold, generate radar charts, comprehensive cloud charts, and evaluation report visualization results, support multi-condition comparison, historical data management, and parameter sensitivity analysis, and can communicate with the ship's AIS system and maritime supervision platform to achieve real-time dynamic evaluation of seaworthiness.

[0027] Includes the following steps:

[0028] S1. Record meteorological and hydrological information during ship navigation, including wind speed, wind direction, visibility, flow rate, and water level combination;

[0029] S2. The test vessel is positioned in the standby area. All systems are checked and confirmed to be normal. The test vessel is loaded with no load or heavy load as required by design. The draft is measured and recorded. All sensors are installed in place and initial alignment and static calibration are performed.

[0030] S3. Before the vessel enters the test area, a preparation order is issued. When the vessel passes the starting point of the test water area, a synchronous test order is issued to begin, all data acquisition equipment is started simultaneously, and time nodes are recorded.

[0031] S4. The vessel enters the test area to conduct the test process;

[0032] S5. After the vessel exits the lock chamber, it shall enter and pass through the pilotage channel according to the designed route and the limited speed, and measure and record the relevant parameters.

[0033] S6. The test shall end when the vessel passes the end of the test area;

[0034] S7. Repeat steps S1 to S6 to conduct tests under other operating conditions; after the tests are completed, export the data and back it up.

[0035] Preferably, step S4 includes the following steps:

[0036] Step 1: The vessel navigates from the main channel into the connecting section and entrance area according to the designed route, measuring and recording the relevant parameters until it enters the pilotage channel;

[0037] Step 2: The vessel brakes as required and stops at the berthing section at a safe berthing angle and speed to wait for the lock, measuring and recording the relevant parameters;

[0038] Step 3: Execute the preset lock operation conditions, record the water level and flow velocity changes throughout the entire process of filling and emptying the lock chamber, and continuously record the video. Once the water level in the lock chamber is level with the upstream / downstream, open the gate and record the water level fluctuations during the ship's exit from the lock.

[0039] Step 4: After the lock filling and emptying water levels are connected and the entry command is received, the ship starts to leave the mooring section and enters the lock chamber according to the designed route and limited speed. Measure and record the parameters of speed change, rudder angle operation and ship attitude change.

[0040] Step 5: After the vessel enters the lock chamber, brake and moor as required, connect the tension sensor to the steel cable, tie one end of the steel cable to the vessel's bollard and the other end to the floating mooring bollard, and moor the vessel in a "figure-eight" configuration, with two bow cables and two stern cables, ensuring that the direction of the force on the sensor is consistent with the cable, and record the dynamic changes in mooring force throughout the entire process of closing, filling / draining, and opening the gate;

[0041] Step Six: After the lock's water level adjustment is completed and the exit command is received, complete the unmooring operation, sail out of the lock chamber according to the designed route and limited speed, pass through the pilot channel, enter the main channel, and measure and record the relevant parameters.

[0042] A method for evaluating the navigation suitability of a ship lock, characterized by the following steps:

[0043] Step A. Veto Judgment: Before entering the weight calculation and comprehensive score, determine whether the key safety indicators exceed the corresponding limit threshold. If the measured value of any key safety indicator exceeds its corresponding limit threshold, the comprehensive score of 0, the level of poor, and the red warning will be output directly, and the subsequent weight calculation will not be performed.

[0044] Step B. Calculation of indicator weights: The combined weights of each evaluation indicator are calculated using the improved CRITIC-entropy weight method, and engineering experience is used to make corrections to ensure that the weights of key safety indicators are not lower than the preset minimum weights.

[0045] Step C. Quantitative Scoring of Indicators: The normalized values ​​of each indicator are mapped to an indicator score of 0-100 using a trapezoidal membership function;

[0046] Step D. Multi-level comprehensive score calculation: Based on the weights of the criterion layer and the final weights of the indicator layer, calculate the criterion layer score and the comprehensive score of the target layer;

[0047] Step E. Airworthiness Performance Rating: Airworthiness rating is determined based on the comprehensive score of the target layer, and an evaluation result is generated.

[0048] Preferably, the improved CRITIC-entropy weight method for calculating index weights in step B specifically includes the following steps:

[0049] B1. Construct the original data matrix, with elements being the measured values ​​of each indicator under each evaluation condition;

[0050] B2. Perform range normalization on the original data matrix to obtain normalized values, where the negative index is calculated using the formula... Positive indicators use formulas , y∈[0,1], x is the measured value of the index, max is the maximum value of all working conditions for the same index, and min is the minimum value of all working conditions for the same index;

[0051] B3. Calculate the CRITIC weights: Calculate the standard deviation of each indicator as the contrast strength, calculate the sum of the Pearson correlation coefficients of each indicator with all other indicators as the conflict, and use the product of the standard deviation and the conflict as the comprehensive information content, and then calculate the CRITIC weights of each indicator.

[0052] B4. Calculate the entropy weight method weights: Calculate the proportion, entropy value, and information redundancy of each working condition under each indicator, and then calculate the entropy weight method weights of each indicator.

[0053] B5. The combined weights are obtained by combining the CRITIC weights and the entropy weights using multiplication normalization.

[0054] B6. Engineering experience correction: Set the minimum weight of key safety indicators. If the combined weight of key safety indicators is lower than the minimum weight, then increase it to the minimum weight. Adjust the remaining indicators according to the original weight ratio and re-normalize to obtain the final indicator layer weight.

[0055] B7. Sum the final weights of the indicator layers according to their respective criterion layers to obtain the weights of each criterion layer.

[0056] Preferably, in step E, the airworthiness performance level is divided according to the comprehensive score S:

[0057] 90≤S≤100 is Class I, excellent, with superb navigation conditions, easy operation, and high efficiency, corresponding to the green label, and normal operation is recommended;

[0058] 75≤S<90 is Level II, good, with good navigation conditions but minor adverse effects, corresponding to the blue indicator. Normal operation is recommended, but attention should be paid to changes.

[0059] 60≤S<75 indicates Level III, which is moderate. Navigation conditions are generally poor, but there are some adverse effects. It corresponds to the yellow label. It is recommended to operate with caution and optimize operating conditions.

[0060] 0≤S<60 is Level IV, poor, indicating poor navigation conditions, significant risks, or triggering of safety thresholds. It corresponds to a red indicator, and it is recommended to restrict or stop navigation.

[0061] It is clear without a doubt that the technical solution described above in this application can solve the technical problem that this application aims to address.

[0062] Meanwhile, through the above technical solutions, the present invention has at least the following beneficial effects:

[0063] This invention addresses the pain points of existing lock navigation tests, such as the lack of unified standards for multi-source data collection, an overemphasis on equipment maintenance in evaluation indicators, unquantified ship handling difficulty, qualitative-oriented evaluation, lack of safety baseline determination, and a disconnect between testing and evaluation. It achieves a standardized, quantitative, and visualized comprehensive evaluation of seaworthiness. First, by designing standardized test procedures and data collection specifications, it unifies the collection standards for various types of data, including hydraulics, ship navigation, handling, and berthing, ensuring data comparability and reusability. Second, it constructs a three-dimensional indicator system of "navigation safety – handling difficulty – navigation efficiency," innovatively incorporating dynamic handling indicators such as steering frequency, average absolute rudder angle, maximum drift angle, and braking distance into the evaluation, filling the quantitative gap in the crucial dimension of "how easy is it to navigate a ship." Simultaneously, it establishes a "one-vote veto" mechanism for key safety indicators. If core indicators such as maximum mooring force and lock chamber water surface fluctuation exceed the limit threshold, the seaworthiness effect is directly judged as poor, triggering an early warning, avoiding the problem of "good indicators masking bad indicators" caused by weighted averaging. The final output is a comprehensive score of 0-100 and a four-level classification, which, together with a radar chart visualization, shows the weak links, forming a closed-loop system of "experimentation-evaluation-decision optimization". Through case studies, it can provide clear quantitative decision-making basis for lock operation and management, effectively balance navigation safety and operational efficiency, adapt to the evaluation of locks after new construction, expansion and renovation and changes in operating conditions, and can also support daily scheduling and intelligent management. Attached Figure Description

[0064] To more clearly illustrate the technical solutions of the embodiments of the present invention, the drawings used in the following description of the embodiments will be briefly introduced. Obviously, the drawings described below are some embodiments of the present invention. For those skilled in the art, other drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without creative effort.

[0065] Figure 1 This is a general layout diagram of the lock actual ship test of the present invention;

[0066] Figure 2 This is a schematic diagram of the upper navigation channel of the present invention;

[0067] Figure 3 This is a schematic diagram of the gate chamber of the present invention;

[0068] Figure 4 This is a schematic diagram of the lower guide channel of the present invention;

[0069] Figure 5 A schematic diagram of a ship navigating in a waterway;

[0070] Figure 6 This is a diagram of the overall system architecture of the present invention;

[0071] Figure 7 This is a flowchart of the lock navigation test and seaworthiness evaluation system of the present invention;

[0072] Figure 8 This is a radar chart showing the evaluation results under various operating conditions of the present invention. Detailed Implementation

[0073] To make the objectives, technical solutions, and advantages of this invention clearer, the invention will be further described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings and embodiments. It should be understood that the specific embodiments described herein are merely illustrative and not intended to limit the invention.

[0074] Example 1

[0075] Reference Figure 6 Overall architecture of the lock navigation suitability evaluation system:

[0076] The lock navigation test and seaworthiness evaluation system proposed in this system consists of the following four modules:

[0077] 1) Test data acquisition module: Executes the preset test procedure to collect hydraulic parameters, ship navigation parameters, and ship berthing parameters.

[0078] 2) Data preprocessing and feature extraction module: Filters, normalizes, and extracts features from the raw data (such as calculating steering frequency, drift angle, and track deviation).

[0079] 3) Comprehensive Evaluation and Calculation Module: Constructs an indicator system, calculates indicator weights, quantifies indicator scores, calculates a comprehensive score, and executes a veto decision.

[0080] 4) Results Output and Decision Support Module: Generates comprehensive scores, grades, visualization charts, and operational optimization suggestions.

[0081] Example 2

[0082] Reference Figure 1-5 Test setup and test procedure:

[0083] 1) Test setup

[0084] The ship trial includes a full-process navigation test of the ship from the main channel through the pilot channel connecting section and gate area, braking section, berthing section, navigation adjustment section, lock chamber, until it leaves the navigation structure and enters the main channel.

[0085] Test Content and Facilities / Equipment List

[0086]

[0087] 2) Test Procedure and Method

[0088] The actual ship trial procedure is as follows:

[0089] (1) Record meteorological and hydrological information such as wind speed, wind direction, visibility, flow rate, and water level combination during the ship's navigation process.

[0090] (2) The test vessel was positioned in the standby area, and all systems were checked and confirmed. The test vessel was loaded according to design requirements (unloaded / heavily loaded), and the draft was measured and recorded.

[0091] (3) Install all sensors in place and perform initial alignment and static calibration.

[0092] (4) Before the vessel enters the test area, a preparation order is issued. When the vessel passes the starting point of the test water area, a synchronous test order is issued to begin. All data acquisition equipment is started synchronously, and time nodes are recorded.

[0093] (5) The vessel sails from the main channel into the connecting section and the entrance area according to the designed route, measures and records the corresponding parameters, until it enters the pilot channel.

[0094] (6) The vessel brakes as required and stops at the berthing section at a safe berthing angle and speed to wait for the lock, and measures and records the corresponding parameters.

[0095] (7) Execute the preset lock operation conditions (e.g., valve opening time tv=5min, both valves open at a uniform speed). Record the water level and flow velocity changes throughout the entire process of filling and emptying the lock chamber, and record the video continuously. When the water level in the lock chamber is level with the upstream (downstream) side, open the gate and record the water level fluctuations during the ship's exit from the lock.

[0096] (8) After the lock filling and emptying water levels are connected and the lock entry instruction is received, the ship starts to leave the mooring section and enters the lock chamber according to the designed route and the limited speed. The corresponding parameters are measured and recorded, including changes in speed, rudder angle operation and changes in ship attitude.

[0097] (9) After the vessel enters the lock chamber, brake and moor as required. Connect the tension sensor to the steel cable, with one end of the cable tied to the vessel's bollard and the other end tied to the floating mooring bollard. Moor the vessel in a figure-eight configuration (two bow lines and two stern lines), ensuring that the direction of the force on the sensor is consistent with the cable. Record the dynamic changes in mooring force throughout the entire process of closing, filling / draining, and opening the gate.

[0098] (10) After the lock filling and emptying water levels are connected and the lock exit instruction is received, the unmooring operation is completed, and the ship sails out of the lock chamber according to the designed route and the limited speed, passes through the pilot channel, enters the main channel, and measures and records the corresponding parameters.

[0099] (11) After the vessel leaves the lock chamber, it enters and passes through the pilot channel according to the designed route and the limited speed, and measures and records the corresponding parameters.

[0100] (12) The test shall end when the vessel passes the end of the test water area.

[0101] (13) Perform other working condition tests using the same procedure.

[0102] (14) After the experiment, export the data and back it up.

[0103] 3) Extraction of experimental parameters

[0104] (1) Irrigation and drainage water characteristic parameters

[0105] Based on the collected water level data, a "water irrigation / discharge characteristic curve" is plotted, with time on the horizontal axis and the vertical axis including:

[0106] Gate chamber water level process line Z(t);

[0107] Upstream navigation channel water level process line;

[0108] Downstream navigation channel water level process line;

[0109] Valve opening process line) n(t);

[0110] The calculated flow process line Q(t);

[0111] Characteristic curves are used to analyze key parameters such as the stability of hydraulic processes, over-irrigation / over-discharge values, and water delivery time.

[0112] Maximum transverse velocity at the entrance area: The maximum transverse velocity measured at the entrance area of ​​the navigation channel is a key hydraulic parameter affecting the safety of ships entering and leaving the lock.

[0113] Overfilling / over-discharge water level values: When the gate chamber is filled or discharged, the water level exceeds the target water level due to inertia (called "over-high" when filling and "over-low" when discharging), which directly affects the mooring force of ships when the gate is opened.

[0114] Total time for filling / draining water: The time required for the entire process from the start of filling / draining water until the water level is level with the pilot channel, reflecting the operational efficiency of the lock.

[0115] (2) Algorithm for extracting ship motion characteristic parameters

[0116] Steering frequency (fhelm): The number of times the rudder angle crosses zero within a unit of time (e.g., per minute). Let the rudder angle time series be δ(t), and define one steering action as a zero-crossing event of δ(t) changing from positive to negative or from negative to positive. Then:

[0117]

[0118] Where Nzero-crossing is the number of zero crossings, and T is the statistical duration (min).

[0119] Mean absolute rudder angle |δ|:

[0120]

[0121] Maximum drift angle βmax: The drift angle β is defined as the difference between the ship's heading angle ψ and its track direction χ, β = ψ - χ. The maximum absolute value is taken.

[0122] Braking distance (Lbrake): The distance the ship travels from the moment the pilot issues a braking command (usually reversing, as recorded by the main engine speed signal or steering log) until the ship's ground speed decreases to 0.1 m / s. It is obtained through DGPS trajectory integration.

[0123] Dtrack deviation: The maximum lateral deviation between the actual and theoretical tracks of a vessel, divided by the effective width W of the lock chamber, dimensionless.

[0124]

[0125] Example 3

[0126] Reference Figure 7 Airworthiness Comprehensive Evaluation System

[0127] 1.1 Evaluation Index System

[0128] A three-level evaluation model is constructed: target layer (comprehensive score of airworthiness effect) → criterion layer (navigation safety, handling difficulty, and navigation efficiency) → indicator layer (specific measured indicators).

[0129]

[0130] 1.2 Veto Rules

[0131] Before proceeding with weight calculation and comprehensive scoring, the system first performs a safety baseline determination. A set of key safety indicators, K={I1,I4,I5,I6} (maximum mooring force, maximum water surface fluctuation in the lock chamber, maximum lateral flow velocity, and over-irrigation / over-discharge water level), is defined, and its limit threshold Tlim is set.

[0132] Maximum mooring force I1 ≥ 1.2 × I1allow (120% of the allowable value);

[0133] The maximum water level fluctuation in the lock chamber is I4 ≥ 0.8 × h (80% of the water depth in the ship chamber, where h is the water depth in the ship chamber).

[0134] The maximum transverse velocity I5 in the entrance area is ≥0.5 m / s (standard limit).

[0135] The water level value for over-irrigation and over-discharge is I6 ≥ 1.5 × I6allow (150% of the standard allowable value, which is usually 0.25m).

[0136]

[0137] Decision logic:

[0138] If ∃Ij∈K such that the measured value xj≥Tlim,j, then the output is directly: S=0, grade=poor, red warning, and no further weighted calculation is performed. This mechanism ensures that the safety baseline is not obscured by the "high scores" of any other indicator.

[0139] 1.3 Indicator Weight Calculation Method

[0140] An improved CRITIC-entropy weight method was used to evaluate the seaworthiness of the lock.

[0141] Assume there are m evaluation conditions (samples) and n evaluation indicators (n=13 in this embodiment).

[0142] Step 1: Construct the original data matrix

[0143] X=(xij)m×n,i=1,…,m;j=1,…,n

[0144] Where xij is the measured value of the j-th index under the i-th working condition.

[0145] Step 2: Dimensionless data processing (range normalization)

[0146] For negative indicators (the smaller the better):

[0147]

[0148] For positive indicators (the larger the better):

[0149]

[0150] Where yij∈[0,1].

[0151] Step 3: Calculate the CRITIC method weights wj

[0152] Calculate the standard deviation (contrast intensity):

[0153] ,

[0154] Calculate conflict (sum of correlation coefficients):

[0155] ,

[0156] Where rjk is the Pearson correlation coefficient between index j and index k.

[0157] Calculate the total information content:

[0158] Cj=Sj×Rj

[0159] Calculate the weights:

[0160]

[0161] Step 4: Calculate the entropy weight method weights

[0162] Calculate the weight of the i-th sample under the j-th indicator:

[0163]

[0164] (like =0, then define pijlnpij=0)

[0165] Calculate the entropy value:

[0166]

[0167] Calculate information redundancy:

[0168]

[0169] Calculate the weights:

[0170] =

[0171] Step 5: Combined Weighting

[0172] Using multiplicative normalized combination:

[0173]

[0174] Step 6: Engineering Experience Correction

[0175] Let the set of key safety indicators be K={I1,I4,I5,I6} (maximum mooring force, maximum water surface fluctuation in the lock chamber, maximum lateral flow velocity, freeboard and freedescent), and set their minimum weights. =0.08 (meaning each key safety indicator has a weight of no less than 8%). Adjusted weights:

[0176]

[0177] Finally, renormalize all wj to obtain .

[0178] Step 7: Criterion Layer Weights

[0179] The final weights of the indicator layer are summed according to the criterion layer to obtain the criterion layer weights:

[0180]

[0181] 1.4 Quantitative Scoring of Indicators (Membership Function)

[0182] For each indicator, based on its physical meaning and engineering specifications, a trapezoidal membership function is established to map the normalized value yij to the score sij∈[0,100].

[0183] (1) Example of negative index (taking maximum mooring force I1 as an example)

[0184] Setting parameters:

[0185] a: Ideal value, score 100 points. Take a = 0 kN.

[0186] b: Normal value, score 80 points. Take 60% of the standard allowable value. Let the standard allowable value be 50kN, then b = 30kN.

[0187] c: Standard allowable value, score 60 points. Take c = 50kN.

[0188] d: Limit value, score 0 points. Take 120% of the allowable value in the specification, d = 60kN.

[0189] Membership function:

[0190]

[0191] (2) Example of a positive indicator (taking average speed I11 as an example)

[0192] Setting parameters:

[0193] a: Minimum expected value, score 0 points. Take a = 0.3 m / s.

[0194] d: Maximum safe speed, score 100 points. Take d = 0.7 m / s (design maximum permissible speed).

[0195] Linear interpolation function:

[0196]

[0197] Other parameters can be set according to the "Design Code for Lock Water Conveyance System" (JTJ306), "Inland Waterway Navigation Standard" (GB50139), and relevant engineering experience.

[0198] (3) Membership function of the over-irrigation and over-discharge water level index (I6)

[0199] Assuming the allowable value is 25cm (according to the "Design Code for Lock Water Conveyance System"), then:

[0200] a=0cm, score 100 points

[0201] b=15cm, score 80 points

[0202] c=25cm, score 60 points

[0203] d=37.5cm (150% of the allowable value), score 0 points

[0204] (4) Membership function of track deviation index (I13)

[0205] Let the effective width of the gate chamber be W, and the deviation be D = Δymax / W:

[0206] a=0, score 100 points

[0207] b=0.1 (deviation 10%), score 80 points

[0208] c=0.2 (deviation 20%), score 60 points

[0209] d=0.3 (deviation 30%), score 0 points

[0210] Other parameters can be set according to the "Design Code for Lock Water Conveyance System" (JTJ306), "Inland Waterway Navigation Standard" (GB50139), and relevant engineering experience.

[0211] Fixed thresholds for each indicator (based on the "Design Code for Water Conveyance Systems of Ship Locks" JTJ306, the "General Design Code for Ship Locks" JTJ305, the "Inland Waterway Navigation Standard" GB50139, and engineering experience):

[0212]

[0213] 1.5 Multi-level comprehensive scoring calculation

[0214] (1) Criterion layer score: For criterion layer Cp (p=1,2,3), its score is the weighted sum of the scores of all indicators under that criterion:

[0215]

[0216] Note: Here It has been renormalized within the criterion layer, such that ∑ =1.

[0217] (2) Overall score of the target layer

[0218]

[0219] 1.6 Airworthiness Rating

[0220] Grades are determined based on the overall score S:

[0221]

[0222] Specific calculation example:

[0223] A newly built 1000-tonnage ship lock has a designed sill depth h=3.5m and an effective lock chamber width W=23m. To evaluate the lock's navigability under different operating conditions, a full-scale ship test was conducted.

[0224] 2.1 Test Equipment and Layout

[0225] Water level sensors were used to record water level changes. Downstream water level measuring points were located in the lower approach channel near the lock head; upstream water level measuring points were located near the upstream corridor inlet; and lock chamber water level measuring points were located in the relatively still water area near the lower lock head. Doppler ultrasonic velocimeters were used to measure the local three-dimensional flow velocity in the upper approach channel, a UAV large-scale surface flow field meter was used to measure the surface flow field, a cable tension meter was used to measure the ship's mooring force, and cameras were used to record the flow patterns.

[0226] In accordance with the requirements of actual ship trials, a representative test ship was selected, and a dedicated ship attitude acquisition device was used to measure the changes in the ship's pitch and roll. This acquisition device integrates a high-precision gyroscope, accelerometer, and geomagnetic field sensor, and uses a high-performance microprocessor. It incorporates advanced dynamic calculation and Kalman dynamic filtering algorithms, which can quickly solve the current real-time motion attitude of the module. Its static accuracy is ≤0.05° and dynamic accuracy is ≤0.1°.

[0227] During the mooring force measurement, one end of the cable tension gauge was connected to the steel cable suspended on the floating mooring bollard, and the other end was connected to the mooring line on the ship. The breaking force of the steel cable (28mm) was 405.5kN, far exceeding the allowable mooring force specified in the regulations. After the ship was moored, the mooring line was tightened to a state of near tautness, and no adjustment was made to the mooring line during the measurement process.

[0228] The main observation parameters include: upstream and downstream water level fluctuations, flow velocity, flow pattern, mooring force, ship trim and roll, lock chamber water level, and overlift and over-descent.

[0229] 2.2 Test conditions and main results

[0230] Four test conditions were set:

[0231]

[0232] The ship trial was conducted according to the aforementioned procedure. After the trial, the following raw measurement data were obtained.

[0233]

[0234] 2.3 Veto Judgment

[0235] Check whether the key safety indicators I1, I4, I5, and I6 exceed the limit thresholds:

[0236] Operating Condition 1: I1=20<60, I4=11<35, I5=0.16<0.50, I6=13<37.5 → Pass

[0237] Operating Condition 2: I1=26<60, I4=14<35, I5=0.19<0.50, I6=15<37.5 → Pass

[0238] Operating Condition 3: I1=16<60, I4=9<35, I5=0.12<0.50, I6=10<37.5 → Pass

[0239] Operating Condition 4: I1=22<60, I4=12<35, I5=0.17<0.50, I6=14<37.5 → Pass

[0240] No veto was triggered in any of the operating conditions, and the evaluation proceeded to the next stage.

[0241] 2.4 Step 1: Range Normalization (used for weight calculation)

[0242] Calculate the maximum and minimum values ​​of each indicator (extracted from the four operating conditions):

[0243]

[0244] Normalization results:

[0245] (Negative index: y=(max-x) / (max-min); Positive index: y=(x-min) / (max-min))

[0246]

[0247] 2.5 Step 2: CRITIC Method Weight Calculation

[0248] Step 2.1 Calculate the standard deviation Sj

[0249] Taking I1 as an example: mean =(0.6+0+1+0.4) / 4=2.0 / 4=0.5

[0250] =0.4163

[0251] Similarly, calculate the standard deviation of all indicators (due to the similar data patterns, the standard deviation of most indicators is close to 0.416, while I12 is slightly different):

[0252]

[0253] Step 2.2 Calculate the conflict rate Rj

[0254] Calculate the correlation coefficient matrix (based on normalized data from four operating conditions). Due to the highly linear relationship of the data (condition 3 is the best, condition 2 is the worst, and conditions 1 and 4 are in the middle), the correlation coefficients between the indicators are close to 1. The correlation between I12 and other indicators is slightly lower. After precise calculation, an approximate value is taken:

[0255] The correlation coefficient among non-I12 indicators is approximately 0.98.

[0256] The correlation coefficient between I12 and other indicators is approximately 0.70.

[0257] Conflict :

[0258] Non-I12 index: Rj≈12×0.02+(1-0.70)=0.24+0.30=0.54

[0259] I12: R12=12×(1-0.70)=12×0.30=3.6

[0260] Step 2.3 Comprehensive information content Cj = Sj × Rj

[0261] Non-I12 index: Cj≈0.42×0.54=0.2268

[0262] I12:C12≈0.40×3.6=1.44

[0263] Step 2.4 CRITIC Method Weights

[0264] ∑Ck=12×0.2268+1.44=2.7216+1.44=4.1616

[0265] Non-I12 index: 0.2268 / 4.1616 = 0.0545

[0266] I12: 1.44 / 4.1616 = 0.3460

[0267] After normalization:

[0268]

[0269] 2.6 Step 3: Entropy Weight Method Weight Calculation

[0270] Step 3.1 Calculate the specific gravity pij

[0271] Taking I1 as an example: the sum of the normalized values ​​for each operating condition = 0.6 + 0 + 1 + 0.4 = 2.0, p11 = 0.6 / 2.0 = 0.3, p21 = 0, p31 = 1 / 2 = 0.5, p41 = 0.4 / 2.0 = 0.2

[0272] Step 3.2 Calculate the entropy value ej

[0273] =0.7430

[0274] Since the data distribution patterns of each indicator are similar (condition 3 is the best, condition 2 is the worst, and conditions 1 and 4 are in the middle), the entropy value of all indicators is the same: ej=0.7430.

[0275] Step 3.3 Redundancy

[0276] dj=1-ej=0.2570

[0277] Step 3.4 Entropy Weight Method

[0278] =0.2570 / (13×0.2570)=1 / 13=0.07692

[0279] All indicators have equal entropy weights.

[0280] 2.7 Step 4: Combination Weighting

[0281]

[0282] Calculate the numerator:

[0283] Non-I12 index: 0.0545 × 0.07692 = 0.004192

[0284] I12: 0.3460×0.07692=0.026610.3460×0.07692=0.02661

[0285] Denominator: = 12 × 0.004192 + 0.02661 = 0.05030 + 0.02661 = 0.07691

[0286] Combined weights:

[0287] Non-I12 index: 0.004192 / 0.07691=0.0545

[0288] I12:0.02661 / 0.07691=0.34600.02661 / 0.07691=0.3460

[0289] Combined weights :

[0290] [I1-I13]=[0.0545,0.0545,0.0545,0.0545,0.0545,0.0545,0.0545,0.0545,0.0545,0.0545,0.0545,0.3460,0.0545]

[0291] 2.8 Step 5: Engineering Experience Correction

[0292] The key security indicator set is K={I1,I4,I5,I6}, with a minimum weight set to wmin=0.08. Currently, the weights of these indicators are 0.0545<0.08 and need to be increased to 0.08.

[0293] Revised version:

[0294] The weights of I1, I4, I5, and I6 become 0.08.

[0295] The total weight of the remaining 9 indicators = 1 - 4 × 0.08 = 0.68

[0296] The original total weight of non-critical indicators = 1 - 0.3460 = 0.6540, of which I12 accounts for 0.3460 / 0.6540 = 0.529, and the other 8 non-critical indicators each account for (1 - 0.529) / 8 = 0.0589. Adjust according to this ratio:

[0297] The new weight of I12 is 0.68 × 0.529 = 0.3597.

[0298] The new weights for the other 8 non-key indicators (I2, I3, I7, I8, I9, I10, I11, I13) are 0.68 × 0.0589 = 0.0401.

[0299] Renormalization:

[0300] The total sum = 4 × 0.08 + 0.3597 + 8 × 0.0401 = 0.32 + 0.3597 + 0.3208 = 1.0005 ≈ 1.0

[0301] Final weight =

[0302] [0.08,0.0401,0.0401,0.08,0.08,0.08,0.0401,0.0401,0.0401,0.0401,0.3597,0.0401]

[0303] Step 6 of 2.9: Calculation of Criterion Layer Weights

[0304] Navigation safety C1 (I1~I6): 0.08×4 + 0.0401×2 = 0.32 + 0.0802 = 0.4002

[0305] Control difficulty C2 (I7~I10): 0.0401×4=0.1604

[0306] Navigation efficiency C3 (I11~I13): 0.0401×2+0.3597=0.0802+0.3597=0.4399

[0307] After normalization:

[0308] W1 = 0.4002 / 1.0005 ≈ 0.40,

[0309] W2 = 0.1604 / 1.0005 ≈ 0.16,

[0310] W3 = 0.4399 / 1.0005 ≈ 0.44

[0311] 2.10 Step 7: Quantitative Scoring of Indicators (Trapezoidal Membership Function)

[0312] Based on the fixed thresholds of each indicator and the measured data, the score sij of each indicator for each working condition is calculated.

[0313]

[0314] 2.11 Step 8: Calculation of Criterion Layer Scores

[0315] C1 Navigation Safety (I1~I6): Intra-layer weight sum = 0.4002, Intra-layer normalized weights: I1, I4, I5, I6 each 0.08 / 0.4002 = 0.1999, I2, I3 each 0.0401 / 0.4002 = 0.1002

[0316] Operating Condition 1:

[0317] C1=0.1999×(86.67+78.67+78.67+82.67)+0.1002×(84.0+80)=0.1999×326.68+0.1002×164=65.32+16.43=81.75

[0318] Operating Condition 2:

[0319] C1=0.1999×(82.67+74.67+74.67+80)+0.1002×(79.0+76.0)=0.1999×312.01+0.1002×155=62.38+15.53=77.91

[0320] Operating Condition 3:

[0321] C1=0.1999×(89.33+82.0+84.0+86.67)+0.1002×(87.0+82.0)=0.1999×342.0+0.1002×169=68.37+16.93=85.30

[0322] Operating Condition 4:

[0323] C1=0.1999×(85.33+77.33+77.33+81.33)+0.1002×(82.0+79.0)=0.1999×321.32+0.1002×161=64.24+16.13=80.37

[0324] C2 control difficulty (I7~I10): Intra-layer weight sum = 0.1604, Intra-layer weight of each indicator = 0.0401 / 0.1604 = 0.25

[0325] Operating Condition 1: C2 = 0.25 × (77.14 + 76.67 + 77.78 + 78.0) = 0.25 × 309.59 = 77.40

[0326] Operating Condition 2: C2 = 0.25 × (74.29 + 73.33 + 75.56 + 76.0) = 0.25 × 299.18 = 74.80

[0327] Operating Condition 3: C2 = 0.25 × (80 + 80 + 83.33 + 82.0) = 0.25 × 325.33 = 81.33

[0328] Operating Condition 4: C2 = 0.25 × (77.14 + 75.0 + 77.78 + 78.0) = 0.25 × 307.92 = 76.98

[0329] C3 navigation efficiency (I11~I13): Intra-layer weight sum = 0.4399,

[0330] Intra-layer normalized weights: I11 = 0.0401 / 0.4399 = 0.0912

[0331] I12=0.3597 / 0.4399=0.8176,I13=0.0401 / 0.4399=0.0912

[0332] Operating Condition 1:

[0333] C3=0.0912×55.0+0.8176×80+0.0912×82.0=5.02+65.41+7.48=77.91

[0334] Operating Condition 2:

[0335] C3=0.0912×50.0+0.8176×76+0.0912×78.0=4.56+62.14+7.11=73.81

[0336] Operating Condition 3:

[0337] C3=0.0912×60.0+0.8176×60+0.0912×86.0=5.47+49.06+7.84=62.37

[0338] Operating Condition 4:

[0339] C3=0.0912×52.5+0.8176×74+0.0912×80=4.79+60.50+7.30=72.59

[0340]

[0341] 2.12 Step 9: Overall Score of Target Layer

[0342] Criterion layer weights: W1=0.400, W2=0.160, W3=0.440

[0343] S=0.400×C1+0.160×C2+0.440×C3

[0344] Working condition 1: S = 0.400 × 81.75 + 0.160 × 77.40 + 0.440 × 77.91 = 32.70 + 12.38 + 34.28 = 79.36

[0345] Working condition 2: S = 0.400 × 77.91 + 0.160 × 74.80 + 0.440 × 73.81 = 31.16 + 11.97 + 32.48 = 75.61

[0346] Operating Condition 3: S = 0.400 × 85.30 + 0.160 × 81.33 + 0.440 × 62.37 = 34.12 + 13.01 + 27.44 = 74.57

[0347] Operating Condition 4: S = 0.400 × 80.37 + 0.160 × 76.98 + 0.440 × 72.59 = 32.15 + 12.32 + 31.94 = 76.41

[0348] 2.13 Step 10: Level Assessment

[0349]

[0350] Results Analysis and Decision Recommendations

[0351] (1) Optimal working condition: Working condition 1 (double-sided water filling) scored 79.36, with a grade of "good", which is the highest score among the four working conditions. Its safety (C1=81.75) and operability (C2=77.40) are both good, and its efficiency (C3=77.91) is also relatively high.

[0352] (2) Suboptimal conditions: Condition 4 (single-sided drainage) scored 76.41, grade "Good", slightly lower than condition 1 but still within the good range. Condition 2 (double-sided drainage) scored 75.61, just reaching the lower limit of "Good". Condition 3 (single-sided filling) scored 74.57, grade "Medium", mainly due to the low efficiency score (C3=62.37, total filling and drainage time 450s).

[0353] (3) Analysis of water discharge conditions: The scores for both bilateral and unilateral water discharge conditions are lower than those for the corresponding water filling conditions, indicating that the lock's seaworthiness is better during water filling than during water discharge. It is recommended to optimize the opening method of the water discharge valves (extend the opening time to more than 6 minutes) or appropriately reduce the ship's speed to below 0.48 m / s.

[0354] (4) Single-sided water filling characteristics: Although it has the best safety (C1=85.30), the efficiency score is low due to the long water delivery time, resulting in the lowest overall score. This indicates that while ensuring safety, efficiency should be taken into account, and it is not advisable to sacrifice efficiency excessively for safety.

[0355] Overall, the lock performs well in terms of navigation. For water release operations, the focus should be on optimizing the valve opening curve to reduce water flow impact; for single-sided filling, it is advisable to appropriately increase the valve opening speed without significantly increasing safety risks.

[0356] Example 4

[0357] Specifically, such as Figure 8 As shown, the lock navigation effectiveness evaluation and analysis system:

[0358] To reduce computational workload, a corresponding computer program for airworthiness performance evaluation and analysis was developed using Python. The measured parameters and characteristics can be stored and analyzed by the computer, automatically calculating the overall airworthiness index. It includes the following modules:

[0359] Data acquisition module: Interfaces with shore-based monitoring units and shipborne sensing units to automatically collect and store raw data. Supports synchronous acquisition and timestamp alignment of multi-source heterogeneous data from water level gauges, wave height gauges, ADV / ADCP current meters, DGPS / INS, attitude sensors, rudder angle sensors, and tension sensors.

[0360] Data transmission processing module: Implements functions such as outlier removal, missing value compensation, and data quality assessment, and automatically calculates 13 underlying indicator values.

[0361] Airworthiness evaluation module: Integrates core algorithms such as improved CRITIC-entropy weight calculation, trapezoidal membership function scoring, multi-level weighted fusion, and veto judgment, and automatically outputs comprehensive score and rating.

[0362] Early warning and feedback module: When a veto is triggered or the comprehensive score is lower than the threshold, it automatically outputs early warning information and navigation suggestions.

[0363] Visualization output module: Generates visualization results such as radar charts, integrated cloud maps, and evaluation reports.

[0364] This system supports functions such as multi-condition comparison, historical data management, and parameter sensitivity analysis. It can also exchange data with ship AIS systems and maritime regulatory platforms to achieve real-time dynamic evaluation of seaworthiness.

[0365] In summary:

[0366] This invention addresses the technical problem that current evaluation systems for ship locks primarily focus on assessing the health of lock equipment or its macroscopic operational status. Existing technologies lack a systematic and comprehensive evaluation method for the seaworthiness of ship locks during actual ship testing. By employing the technical solutions described in the above embodiments and through the aforementioned settings, this application will inevitably solve the aforementioned technical problem and simultaneously achieve the following technical effects:

[0367] This invention addresses the pain points of existing lock navigation tests, such as the lack of unified standards for multi-source data collection, an overemphasis on equipment maintenance in evaluation indicators, unquantified ship handling difficulty, qualitative-oriented evaluation, lack of safety baseline determination, and a disconnect between testing and evaluation. It achieves a standardized, quantitative, and visualized comprehensive evaluation of seaworthiness. First, by designing standardized test procedures and data collection specifications, it unifies the collection standards for various types of data, including hydraulics, ship navigation, handling, and berthing, ensuring data comparability and reusability. Second, it constructs a three-dimensional indicator system of "navigation safety – handling difficulty – navigation efficiency," innovatively incorporating dynamic handling indicators such as steering frequency, average absolute rudder angle, maximum drift angle, and braking distance into the evaluation, filling the quantitative gap in the crucial dimension of "how easy is it to navigate a ship." Simultaneously, it establishes a "one-vote veto" mechanism for key safety indicators. If core indicators such as maximum mooring force and lock chamber water surface fluctuation exceed the limit threshold, the seaworthiness effect is directly judged as poor, triggering an early warning, avoiding the problem of "good indicators masking bad indicators" caused by weighted averaging. The final output is a comprehensive score of 0-100 and a four-level classification, which, together with a radar chart visualization, shows the weak links, forming a closed-loop system of "experimentation-evaluation-decision optimization". Through case studies, it can provide clear quantitative decision-making basis for lock operation and management, effectively balance navigation safety and operational efficiency, adapt to the evaluation of locks after new construction, expansion and renovation and changes in operating conditions, and can also support daily scheduling and intelligent management.

[0368] In this invention, unless otherwise explicitly specified and limited, the terms "installation," "connection," "linking," and "fixing," etc., should be interpreted broadly. For example, they can refer to a fixed connection, a detachable connection, or an integral part; they can refer to a mechanical connection, an electrical connection, or a connection that allows communication between them; they can refer to a direct connection or an indirect connection through an intermediate medium; they can refer to the internal communication of two components or the interaction between two components, unless otherwise explicitly limited. Those skilled in the art can understand the specific meaning of the above terms in this invention according to the specific circumstances.

[0369] Obviously, the embodiments described above are merely some embodiments of the present invention, not all embodiments. The accompanying drawings show preferred embodiments of the present invention, but do not limit the patent scope of the present invention. The present invention can be implemented in many different forms; rather, these embodiments are provided to provide a more thorough and complete understanding of the disclosure of the present invention. Although the present invention has been described in detail with reference to the foregoing embodiments, those skilled in the art can still modify the technical solutions described in the foregoing specific embodiments, or make equivalent substitutions for some of the technical features. Any equivalent structures made using the content of this specification and drawings, directly or indirectly applied to other related technical fields, are similarly within the patent protection scope of this invention.

Claims

1. A system for evaluating the navigation suitability of ship locks, characterized in that, include: The test data acquisition module is used to execute the preset lock navigation test process and collect hydraulic parameters, ship navigation parameters, and ship berthing parameters. The data preprocessing and feature extraction module is used to filter, normalize, and extract features from the raw data collected by the experimental data acquisition module to obtain ship motion characteristic parameters. The comprehensive evaluation and calculation module is used to construct an airworthiness performance evaluation index system, calculate index weights, quantify index scores, calculate comprehensive scores, and execute veto decisions. The results output and decision support module is used to generate comprehensive scores, airworthiness ratings, visualization charts, and operational optimization suggestions.

2. The lock navigation suitability evaluation system according to claim 1, characterized in that, The experimental data acquisition module is compatible with multi-source heterogeneous data acquisition devices such as water level gauges, wave height gauges, acoustic Doppler current meters, Doppler profile current meters, differential GPS, inertial navigation systems, attitude sensors, rudder angle sensors, tension sensors, high-definition cameras, and drones, enabling synchronous acquisition and timestamp matching of multi-source data.

3. The lock navigation suitability evaluation system according to claim 1, characterized in that, The data preprocessing and feature extraction module is also used to remove outliers, compensate for missing values, assess data quality, and automatically calculate 13 underlying index values, including steering frequency, mean absolute rudder angle, maximum drift angle, braking distance, track deviation, and water injection / extraction characteristic parameters.

4. The lock navigation suitability evaluation system according to claim 3, characterized in that, The comprehensive evaluation and calculation module integrates and improves the core algorithms of CRITIC-entropy weight calculation, trapezoidal membership function scoring, multi-level weighted fusion, and veto judgment, and automatically outputs the comprehensive score and airworthiness rating.

5. The lock navigation suitability evaluation system according to claim 4, characterized in that, The result output and decision support module is also used to automatically output early warning information and navigation suggestions when a veto is triggered or the comprehensive score is lower than a preset threshold, generate radar charts, comprehensive cloud charts, and evaluation report visualization results, support multi-condition comparison, historical data management, and parameter sensitivity analysis, and can communicate with the ship's AIS system and maritime supervision platform to achieve real-time dynamic evaluation of seaworthiness.

6. A method for conducting a live-ship navigation test of a ship lock, characterized in that, Includes the following steps: S1. Record meteorological and hydrological information during ship navigation, including wind speed, wind direction, visibility, flow rate, and water level combination; S2. The test vessel is positioned in the standby area. All systems are checked and confirmed to be normal. The test vessel is loaded with no load or heavy load as required by design. The draft is measured and recorded. All sensors are installed in place and initial alignment and static calibration are performed. S3. Before the vessel enters the test area, a preparation order is issued. When the vessel passes the starting point of the test water area, a synchronous test order is issued to begin, all data acquisition equipment is started simultaneously, and time nodes are recorded. S4. The vessel enters the test area to conduct the test process; S5. After the vessel exits the lock chamber, it shall enter and pass through the pilotage channel according to the designed route and the limited speed, and measure and record the relevant parameters. S6. The test shall end when the vessel passes the end of the test area; S7. Repeat steps S1 to S6 to conduct tests under other operating conditions; after the tests are completed, export the data and back it up.

7. The method for conducting a real-ship navigation test of a ship lock according to claim 6, characterized in that, S4 includes the following steps: Step 1: The vessel navigates from the main channel into the connecting section and entrance area according to the designed route, measuring and recording the relevant parameters until it enters the pilotage channel; Step 2: The vessel brakes as required and stops at the berthing section at a safe berthing angle and speed to wait for the lock, measuring and recording the relevant parameters; Step 3: Execute the preset lock operation conditions, record the water level and flow velocity changes throughout the entire process of filling and emptying the lock chamber, and continuously record the video. Once the water level in the lock chamber is level with the upstream / downstream, open the gate and record the water level fluctuations during the ship's exit from the lock. Step 4: After the lock filling and emptying water levels are connected and the entry command is received, the ship starts to leave the mooring section and enters the lock chamber according to the designed route and limited speed. Measure and record the parameters of speed change, rudder angle operation and ship attitude change. Step 5: After the vessel enters the lock chamber, brake and moor as required, connect the tension sensor to the steel cable, tie one end of the steel cable to the vessel's bollard and the other end to the floating mooring bollard, and moor the vessel in a "figure-eight" configuration, with two bow cables and two stern cables, ensuring that the direction of the force on the sensor is consistent with the cable, and record the dynamic changes in the mooring force throughout the entire process of closing the gate, filling / draining water, and opening the gate; Step Six: After the lock's water level adjustment is completed and the exit command is received, complete the unmooring operation, sail out of the lock chamber according to the designed route and limited speed, pass through the pilot channel, enter the main channel, and measure and record the relevant parameters.

8. A method for evaluating the navigation suitability of a ship lock, characterized in that, Includes the following steps: Step A. Veto Judgment: Before entering the weight calculation and comprehensive score, determine whether the key safety indicators exceed the corresponding limit threshold. If the measured value of any key safety indicator exceeds its corresponding limit threshold, the comprehensive score of 0, the level of poor, and the red warning will be output directly, and the subsequent weight calculation will not be performed. Step B. Calculation of indicator weights: The combined weights of each evaluation indicator are calculated using the improved CRITIC-entropy weight method, and engineering experience is used to make corrections to ensure that the weights of key safety indicators are not lower than the preset minimum weights. Step C. Quantitative Scoring of Indicators: The normalized values ​​of each indicator are mapped to an indicator score of 0-100 using a trapezoidal membership function; Step D. Multi-level comprehensive score calculation: Based on the weights of the criterion layer and the final weights of the indicator layer, calculate the criterion layer score and the comprehensive score of the target layer; Step E. Airworthiness Performance Rating: Airworthiness rating is determined based on the comprehensive score of the target layer, and an evaluation result is generated.

9. The method for evaluating the navigation suitability of a ship lock according to claim 8, characterized in that, The improved CRITIC-entropy weight method for calculating index weights in step B specifically includes the following steps: B1. Construct the original data matrix, with elements being the measured values ​​of each indicator under each evaluation condition; B2. Perform range normalization on the original data matrix to obtain normalized values, where the negative index is calculated using the formula... Positive indicators use formulas , y∈[0,1], x is the measured value of the index, max is the maximum value of all working conditions for the same index, and min is the minimum value of all working conditions for the same index; B3. Calculate the CRITIC weights: Calculate the standard deviation of each indicator as the contrast strength, calculate the sum of the Pearson correlation coefficients of each indicator with all other indicators as the conflict, and use the product of the standard deviation and the conflict as the comprehensive information content, and then calculate the CRITIC weights of each indicator. B4. Calculate the entropy weight method weights: Calculate the proportion, entropy value, and information redundancy of each working condition under each indicator, and then calculate the entropy weight method weights of each indicator. B5. The combined weights are obtained by combining the CRITIC weights and the entropy weights using multiplication normalization. B6. Engineering experience correction: Set the minimum weight of key safety indicators. If the combined weight of key safety indicators is lower than the minimum weight, then increase it to the minimum weight. Adjust the remaining indicators according to the original weight ratio and re-normalize to obtain the final indicator layer weight. B7. Sum the final weights of the indicator layers according to their respective criterion layers to obtain the weights of each criterion layer.

10. The method for evaluating the navigation suitability of a ship lock according to claim 8, characterized in that, In step E, the airworthiness performance level is determined by a comprehensive score S: 90≤S≤100 is Class I, excellent, with superb navigation conditions, easy operation, and high efficiency, corresponding to the green label, and normal operation is recommended; 75≤S<90 is Level II, good, with good navigation conditions but minor adverse effects, corresponding to the blue indicator. Normal operation is recommended, but attention should be paid to changes. 60≤S<75 indicates Level III, which is moderate. Navigation conditions are generally poor, but there are some adverse effects. It corresponds to the yellow indicator. It is recommended to operate with caution and optimize operating conditions. 0≤S<60 is Level IV, poor, indicating poor navigation conditions, significant risks, or triggering of safety thresholds. It corresponds to a red indicator, and it is recommended to restrict or stop navigation.

Images