CN114897439A

CN114897439A - Safety assessment model for ship berthing-against scheduling

Info

Publication number: CN114897439A
Application number: CN202210678640.2A
Authority: CN
Inventors: 甘永嘉; 何天元; 李靖; 张志真; 杨凯; 姚煜峰; 余飞
Original assignee: Guangzhou Port Data Technology Co ltd
Current assignee: Guangzhou Port Data Technology Co ltd
Priority date: 2022-06-15
Filing date: 2022-06-15
Publication date: 2022-08-12

Abstract

The invention discloses a safety evaluation model for ship berthing-dependent scheduling, which relates to the technical field of ship management, and comprises ST1 and defined risk items to be evaluated; ST2, defining safety factors, and matching safety rules for each risk to-be-evaluated item; ST3, establishing safety assessment logics for each risk to-be-assessed project, and presetting weight values according to the actual hydrological environment of the port and the actual situation of the facility equipment respectively; and checking the reasonability of the ship planning time, if the ship planning time is reasonable, transmitting corresponding information of the ship plan, the related ship plan and the traffic control plan into each safety assessment logic, independently scoring each safety assessment logic, finally summarizing and calculating weighted values, and outputting a risk scoring result of the ship plan. The method and the device can be used for improving the efficiency of analyzing the ship berthing-dependent scheduling plan risk and reducing the error possibly existing in the manual analysis result.

Description

Safety assessment model for ship berthing-against scheduling

Technical Field

The application relates to the technical field of ship management, in particular to a safety assessment model for ship berthing-dependent scheduling.

Background

The ship berthing and departing scheduling plan is a plan arrangement of a ship berthing and departing from a wharf, and the contents of the plan arrangement comprise plan types (berthing/shifting/departing), plan time, plan places (wharf/berthing/anchor/buoy), use channels, ship draft, whether to pilot, the number of tugboats and the like. Safety accidents such as ship grounding, ship collision, wharf collision and ship overturn may occur in the process of ship berthing and berthing, and the accident reasons are generally divided into: the method comprises the following steps of (1) carrying out scheduling errors on a ship scheduling plan, driving errors of a ship, piloting errors and towboat cooperation errors; the misscheduling of the ship scheduling plan is a relatively large one of the causes of the safety accident.

In order to avoid the scheduling errors of the ship scheduling plan, whether the scheduling is safe and feasible is generally analyzed according to hydrologic data when the ship is planned near the berthing scheduling plan, the analysis method is purely dependent on the working experience of planning personnel, the manual analysis is lack of efficiency, the global risk factors cannot be comprehensively analyzed, and higher safety risk exists.

The patent with publication number CN112668778A discloses an intelligent ship scheduling system, method and computer storage medium, the system includes the following modules, a data access module, which is used to access weather data, process time data, dock data and ship data in real time; and the ship arranging core module is used for arranging ships to be arranged by adopting an intelligent berth ship scheduling method according to the weather data, the process time data, the wharf data and the ship data which are accessed in real time to obtain a ship arranging result, performing time optimization on the ship arranging result by utilizing a berth time axis object, and taking the ship arranging result after the time optimization as an optimal scheduling scheme.

According to the technical scheme, a computer can help a worker to plan a ship berthing scheduling plan, and the safety of ship berthing and departing is improved, but the following defects exist: the risk assessment of the existing ship berthing and departing scheduling plan is inconvenient, so a new technical scheme is provided in the application.

Disclosure of Invention

In order to improve the efficiency of analyzing the risk of a ship berthing-alongside scheduling plan and reduce errors possibly existing in the result of manual analysis, the application provides a ship berthing-alongside scheduling safety evaluation model.

The application provides a ship berthing-dependent scheduling safety assessment model, which adopts the following technical scheme:

a ship berthing-alongside scheduling security assessment model, comprising:

ST1, defining the risk item to be evaluated, which comprises: defining whether the ship can be stranded and whether the ship is safe to lean away from the tidal flow speed;

wherein whether the vessel will be stranded comprises: channel grounding risk and wharf harbor basin grounding risk; whether the ship is safe against the tidal flow rate comprises: risk of over-fast water flow and water expansion and recession conflict in a harbor basin;

ST2, defining safety factors, and matching safety rules for each risk to be evaluated item, which comprises:

defining a ship plan, a related ship plan and a traffic control plan as plan factors and explaining the plan factors; and (c) a second step of,

defining a ship navigation path, a tide table, a channel water depth rule, a harbor basin water depth rule, a tide safety rule and a water rising and retreating rule as safety rules, establishing corresponding functions, and matching to corresponding risk items to be evaluated;

ST3, establishing safety assessment logics for each risk to-be-assessed project, and presetting weight values according to the actual hydrological environment of the port and the actual situation of the facility equipment respectively; and the number of the first and second groups is,

checking the reasonability of the ship planning time, if the ship planning time is reasonable, transmitting corresponding information of the ship plan, the related ship plan and the traffic control plan into each safety assessment logic, independently scoring each safety assessment logic, and finally summarizing and calculating weighted values to output a risk scoring result of the ship plan.

Optionally, the ship planning includes: defining that the English identification ShPl is ship planning information of the evaluation, and comprises planning time ShPl.PlTi, planning approach dock ShPl.Dock, ship planning draft ShPl.PDr, planning time ShPl.PlTi-B of a berthing plan, planning time ShPl.PlTi-L of a berthing plan, planning time ShPl.PlTi-M of a berthing plan, ship type ShPl.ShT, ship length ShPl.ShL, ship loading weight ton ShPl.DWT, planning piloting mark ShPl.PiM, planning berth (with anchor ground buoy) ShPl.Ber, planning type ShPl.SPT, total number of tug wheels ShPl.TBN, tug list TugList [ tug power ShPl.gTugType ] [ tug power corresponding number ShPl.PrP ], planning front ShPl.ShPl.CST, planning rear pile position, original point of the ship with pile distance, and current planning position of pile (with anchor ground buoy) through one-way Pl.Pl.PlP. PlP, and the one-way control of the ship;

the correlated vessel plan, comprising: defining English identification OTSP is a group of ship plan information which is found according to the association of safety rules and generates safety conflict with a ship plan of the evaluation, and the ship plan information comprises a ship plan number OTSP.No, a planned approach wharf OTSP.Dock, a planned front pile position OTSP.PrP, a planned rear pile position OTSP.NeP, a planned front pile position OTSP.PrPD from an origin meter, a planned rear pile position OTSP.NePD from an origin meter, a ship length OTSP.ShL, a planned berth (including an anchor buoy) OTSP.Ber, a plan type OTSP.SPT, a plan time OTSP.PlTi, a planned berth plan time OTSP.PlTi-B, a planned berth plan time OTSP.PlTi-L of a berth plan, a planned passing one-way OTSP.OnCh and a current buoy position (including a berth) OTSP.CuBe;

the traffic control plan, comprising: defining English identification TCP is a group of control plan information made by traffic management department, which includes traffic control plan number TCP.No, traffic control ship type TCP.CST, control ship import and export mark TCP.IEMa, control ship arrival key node name TCP.KeyPo and control ship arrival key node plan time TCP.KeyTi.

Optionally, the checking the rationality of the planned time of the ship comprises: defining an English identifier as PTRC, and obtaining whether the planning time is reasonable or not according to the ship berthing planning time, the berthing planning time and the departing planning time; and the number of the first and second electrodes,

the function represents the symbol: f (ShPl. PlTi-B, ShPl. PlTi-M, ShPl. Dock-L); the internal elements of the function comprise berthing planning time PTRC.PlTi-B, berthing planning time PTRC.PlTi-M, departing planning time PTRC.dock-L and reasonable flag PTRC.RaMa;

rules for application of the set of functions, comprising:

receiving parameters ShPl.PlTi-B, ShPl.PlTi-M and ShPl.Dock-L and calling internal elements;

assigning, which comprises:

ShPl.PlTi-B＝PTRC.PlTi-B；

ShPl.PlTi-M＝PTRC.PlTi-M；

ShPl.Dock-L＝PTRC.Dock-L；

judging whether PTRC.PlTi-B is less than PTRC.PlTi-M, if yes, executing the next judgment; if not, ptrc. rama ═ N;

judging whether ShPl.PlTi-M is equal to PTRC.PlTi-M < PTRC.Dock-L is true, and if true, determining that PTRC.RaMa is equal to Y; rama ═ N if not true.

Optionally, the safety assessment logic for establishing the channel grounding risk includes:

importing planned time ShPl.PlTi, planned leaning-to-dock ShPl.Dock, planned draught ShPl.PDr of a ship, current position ShPl.CuBe and planned berth ShPl.Ber;

calling a ship navigation path function to obtain a channel serial number SNP.num passed by a ship and a channel name SNP.Chan passed by the ship;

calling a tide table function to obtain a previous integral tide TiD.PrT corresponding to the planning time and a next integral tide TiD.NeT corresponding to the planning time, and calculating an average tide height TiD.MTH corresponding to the planning time according to a formula 1-1; wherein, formula 1-1: (tid.prt + tid.net)/2;

circularly carrying out risk assessment of each channel according to the channel serial number SNP.Num through which a ship passes, wherein the initial default of the risk weight value is 0; calling a channel water depth rule function to obtain channel water depth ChRu.ChD and a channel water depth warning value ChRu.WaV;

substituting each data into equation 1: the method comprises the steps of (1) judging whether a formula 1 is established or not, recording risk evaluation information, and if the formula is established, keeping a risk weight value unchanged, wherein ChRu, ChD + TiD, MTH > ShPl.PDr × (ChRu. WaV); if the risk weight value is not 1;

and after all the channels passed by the ships are processed in a circulating mode, summarizing the risk assessment information and the risk weight value, and ending the process.

Optionally, the safety assessment logic for establishing the wharf harbor basin stranding risk includes:

introducing planning time ShPl.PlTi, planning leaning-to-dock ShPl.Dock and planning draft ShPl.PDr of a ship;

calling a harbor pool water depth rule function to obtain the harbor pool used water depth HaRu.HaD and the harbor pool used water depth warning value HaRu.WaV;

calling a tide table function, acquiring a previous integral tide TiD.PrT corresponding to the planning time and a next integral tide TiD.NeT corresponding to the planning time, and calculating an average tide height TiD.MTH corresponding to the planning time according to the formula 1-1;

substituting each data into the calculation formula 2: HaRu, HaD, TiD, MTH > ShPl, PDr + HaRu, WaV, judging whether the formula 2 is established, recording risk evaluation information, and if so, determining that the risk weight value is 0; if the risk weight value is not 1;

and summarizing the risk evaluation information and the risk weight value, and ending the process.

Optionally, the safety assessment logic for establishing the risk of the rapid water flow in the harbor basin includes:

the planned time of transmission, ShPl.PlTi, the planned approach to the dock, ShPl.Dock;

calling a tide safety rule function to obtain a tide fall warning value TSRu. TiWaV;

calling a tide table function to obtain a previous integral tide TiD.PrT corresponding to the planned time and a next integral tide TiD.NeT corresponding to the planned time, and calculating an average tide height TiD.TIDiV corresponding to the planned time according to a formula 3-1; wherein, formula 3-1: tid.tidiv ═ tid.net-tid.prt;

substituting each data into calculation formula 3: determining whether formula 3 is true or not, recording risk evaluation information, and if true, setting a risk weight value to 1; if the risk weight value is not equal to 0;

Optionally, the safety assessment logic established for the risk of water flooding and flooding conflicts includes:

the incoming plan is close to and departs from a wharf, ShPl.Dock, the berthing plan time ShPl.PlTi-B and the departing plan time ShPl.PlTi-L;

calling a tide table function, respectively obtaining previous integral tide TiD.PrT-B and TiD.PrT-L corresponding to the planning time of the berthing plan and next integral tide TiD.NeT-B and TiD.NeT-L corresponding to the planning time, and calculating average tide height TiD.TIDiV-B and TiD.TIDiV-L corresponding to the planning time; wherein, TiD.TIDiV-B ═ TiD.NeT-B-TiD.PrT-B, TiD.TIDiV-L ═ TiD.NeT-L-TiD.PrT-L

Calling a rising and retreating function to obtain a rising and retreating water state RFRu.ExAll allowed by the depoising;

substituting each data into calculation formula 4: determining whether formula 4 is true or not by using TiD.ExRFW.ExAll, recording risk evaluation information, and if true, determining the risk weight value to be 0; if the risk weight value is not 1;

Optionally, ST1, defining the risk item to be evaluated, further includes: whether the arrangement of the piloting tug is defined reasonably or not;

whether the piloting tug arrangement is reasonable comprises: piloting demand risk and tug demand risk;

the ST2, defining security factors, and matching security rules for each risk to be evaluated item, further includes:

and defining a piloting requirement rule and a tug requirement rule as safety rules, establishing a corresponding function, and matching the corresponding function to a corresponding risk to-be-evaluated project.

Optionally, the safety assessment logic established for the piloting demand risk includes:

the ship type ShPl.ShT is introduced, the planned leaning-to-and-departing wharf ShPl.Dock, the ship length ShPl.ShL, the ship planned draft ShPl.PDr, the ship load ton ShPl.DWT and the planned pilotage mark ShPl.PiM;

calling a piloting demand rule function to obtain a piloting demand mark PiRu. PiM;

substituting each data into calculation formula 5: judging whether the formula 5 is established or not by the ShPl.PiM-PiRu.PiM, recording risk evaluation information, and if so, determining the risk weight value to be 0; if the risk weight value is not 1;

Optionally, the safety assessment logic established for the tug demand risk includes:

the method comprises the following steps of (1) transmitting ship length ShPl.ShL, ship planned draft ShPl.PDr, planned berth (including an anchor buoy) ShPl.Ber, planned type ShPl.SPT, ship type ShPl.ShT, total number of tug wheels ShPl.TBN, tug list ShPl.TugList [ tug power ShPl.TugType ] [ corresponding number of tug power ShPl.TTNum ];

calling a tug demand rule function to obtain a minimum value TBS.MinTBN of tug demand total number, a maximum value TBS.MaxTBN of tug demand total number, a special power type TBS.SPType, a minimum value TBS.MinSPTBN of special power tug demand number and a maximum value TBS.MaxSPTBN of special power tug demand number;

substituting each data into the calculation formula 6-1: total (tbn) ═ shpl.tbn ∈ [ tbs.mintbn, tbs.maxtbn ];

substituting each data into the calculation formula 6-2: (shpl. tugtypec 1, shpl. ttnum1) + (shpl. tugtypec 2, shpl. ttnum2) +. + -. (shpl. tugtypen, shpl. ttnumn), calculating the total number of tug wheels with tug power greater than demand;

substituting each data into calculation formula 6-3: sp (tta) ═ ttammount e [ tbs. minsptbn, tbs. maxssptbn ], determining whether formula 6-3 holds, and recording risk assessment information;

substituting the results of equations 6-1 and 6-3 into equation 6: total (tbn) - Λ sp (tta) -TRUE, determining whether formula 6 is TRUE, and recording risk assessment information, if formula is TRUE, then the risk weight value is 0; if the risk weight value is not 1;

In summary, the present application includes at least one of the following beneficial technical effects: the safety evaluation of the ship berthing-alongside scheduling plan comprises an evaluation process of multiple factors, multiple scenes and multiple rules; compared with inefficient manual analysis, the evaluation model can realize automatic and rapid evaluation of the service system, complete a complex evaluation flow instantly and greatly improve the analysis efficiency.

Drawings

Fig. 1 is a schematic overall flow diagram of the present application.

FIG. 2 is a schematic diagram of a functional set application flow of a vessel's navigation path according to the present application;

FIG. 3 is a schematic diagram of a function set application flow of the tidal table of the present application;

FIG. 4 is a schematic view of a functional set application flow of the channel depth rule of the present application;

FIG. 5 is a schematic diagram of a functional set application flow of the harbor basin water depth rule of the present application;

FIG. 6 is a flow chart illustrating the application of a set of functions of the tidal safety rules of the present application;

FIG. 7 is a schematic diagram illustrating a functional set application flow of the water rising and falling rule of the present application;

fig. 8 is a flowchart illustrating the rationality check of the ship planning time according to the present application.

Detailed Description

The present application is described in further detail below with reference to fig. 1.

The embodiment of the application discloses a safety assessment model for ship berthing-alongside scheduling.

Example 1:

referring to fig. 1, the ship berthing-dependent scheduling safety evaluation model includes:

ST1, defining a risk item to be evaluated;

ST2, defining safety factors, matching safety rules for each risk to-be-evaluated item, establishing corresponding functions aiming at the safety rules, and matching the functions to the corresponding risk to-be-evaluated items;

ST3, establishing safety assessment logics for each risk to-be-assessed project, and presetting weight values according to the actual hydrological environment of the port and the actual situation of the facility equipment respectively; and the number of the first and second electrodes,

For each item, 0 represents no obvious risk, and if 1 represents higher risk: the summary output risk score result ranges from 0 to 10 points, with 0 representing no significant risk and 10 representing significant risk.

The method aims to provide a rapid assessment tool containing a plurality of safety risk factors for a ship berthing-alongside scheduling plan, and effectively solves the problems that the analysis of the existing manual analysis lacks efficiency, and the analysis result possibly has errors, so that the actual production cannot be guided.

The method and the device can realize automatic and rapid evaluation, greatly improve analysis efficiency, and are specifically explained in other embodiments with multiple factors and multiple scenes, so that the details are not repeated.

Example 2, which differs from example 1 in that:

ST1, comprising: it is defined whether the vessel will be stranded and whether it will be safe to lean off the tidal flow.

Whether the ship is stranded or not refers to whether the ship has a channel or port pool bottom grounding risk or not in the process of berthing; it includes:

1) the channel stranding risk refers to the bottom stranding risk of a ship when the ship navigates in a public channel.

2) And the risk of grounding of the dock harbor basin refers to the risk of grounding and grounding of a ship when the ship leans against or leaves the dock.

Whether a ship is safe by leaning away from a tidal flow rate refers to whether the tidal flow rate of a wharf harbor basin can threaten the safety of the ship in the process of leaning away from the ship, and the method comprises the following steps:

1) and the risk of too fast water flow in the harbor basin means that the water flow speed of the harbor basin of the wharf exceeds a warning value, the safety of ship berthing is influenced, and the risk of collision with the wharf exists.

2) And the water rising and retreating collision risk refers to the safety risk existing when the ship does not accord with the water rising and retreating berthing rules of traffic control during berthing.

ST2, comprising:

defining a ship plan, a related ship plan and a traffic control plan as plan factors and explaining the plan factors; and the number of the first and second groups,

and defining a ship navigation path, a tide table, a channel water depth rule, a harbor basin water depth rule, a tide safety rule and a water rising and retreating rule as safety rules, establishing corresponding functions, and matching the functions to corresponding risk items to be evaluated.

It is understood that, in order to ensure content consistency and at the same time to be used for differentiation, there are the following examples of the padding (1), (2), and (3); note, however, that the execution order of the steps of the model, such as (1), (2), and (3) described above, is not necessarily the order in which the steps of the model are executed, and therefore, there is a shift, and the execution logic of the model is linked by the description of the text, at least from ST1 to ST 3.

With respect to the three planning factors described above, specifically:

(1) the vessel planning comprises: defining that the English identification ShPl is ship planning information of the evaluation, and comprises planning time ShPl.PlTi, planning approach dock ShPl.Dock, ship planning draft ShPl.PDr, planning time ShPl.PlTi-B of a berthing plan, planning time ShPl.PlTi-L of a berthing plan, planning time ShPl.PlTi-M of a berthing plan, ship type ShPl.ShT, ship length ShPl.ShL, ship load omega tShPl.DWT, planning piloting mark ShPl.PiM, planning berth (with anchor buoy) ShPl.Ber, planning type ShPl.SPT, total number of tug wheels ShPl.TBN, tug list TugList [ tug power ShPl.gType ] [ tug power corresponding number ShPl.PrP ], planning front ShPl.ShPl.CST, planning post-planning pile position of NepNe.Pl.PlP, and the number of the one-way planning target position of the ship.

(2) A correlated vessel plan, comprising: defining English identification OTSP is a group of ship plan information which is found according to the safety rule association and generates safety conflict with the ship plan of the evaluation, and comprises a ship plan number OTSP.No, a planned approaching dock OTSP.Dock, a planned front pile position OTSP.PrP, a planned rear pile position OTSP.NeP, a planned front pile position OTSP.PrPD from an origin meter, a planned rear pile position OTSP.NePD from an origin meter, a ship length OTSP.ShL, a planned berth (including an anchor buoy) OTSP.Ber, a plan type OTSP.SPT, a plan time OTSP.Plti, a plan time of an approaching berth plan OTSP.Plti-B, a plan time of an departing berth plan OTSP.Plti-L, a plan time of a berth plan OTSP.Plti-M, a planned passing one-way OTSP.OnCh and a current buoy position (including a berth) OTSP.CuBe.

(3) A traffic control plan, comprising: defining English identification TCP is a group of control plan information made by traffic management department, which includes traffic control plan number TCP.No, traffic control ship type TCP.CST, control ship import and export mark TCP.IEMa, control ship arrival key node name TCP.KeyPo and control ship arrival key node plan time TCP.KeyTi.

Regarding each rule and the function established correspondingly, specifically:

(5) and a ship navigation path: the English mark is SNP, a function set of a ship navigation path is obtained according to the current position and the target position of the ship, the representative symbol is f (ShPl. CuBe, ShPl. Ber), the ShPl. CuBe represents the current position of the ship, and the ShPl. Ber represents the planned berth (including an anchor buoy).

The internal elements of the function comprise the current position SNP. CuBe of the ship, the planned berth (including an anchor buoy) SNP. Ber, the channel serial number SNP. num of the ship and the channel name SNP. Chan of the ship.

The function set application includes acquiring a channel snp that the ship passes through when sailing.

Referring to fig. 2, it is a schematic diagram of the application flow of the function set.

(6) And a tide meter: the english symbol is TiD, and is a function set for acquiring tidal height and flow direction data according to time and place, and the symbol is f (shpl.

The internal elements of the function include the whole-point time TiD.PlTi, the site TiD.Dock, and the whole-point tide height TiD.TH (unit: cm).

The function application includes acquiring a previous whole-point tide corresponding to the planned time (prt ═ f ([ shpl.plti ], shpl.dock), acquiring a next whole-point tide corresponding to the planned time (tid.net ═ f ([ shpl.plti ] +1), shpl.dock), acquiring a previous whole-point tide corresponding to the berthing plan (prt-B ═ f ([ shpl.plti-B ], shpl.dock-B), acquiring a next whole-point tide corresponding to the berthing plan (tid.net-B ═ f ([ shpl.plti-B ] +1), shpl.dock-B), acquiring a previous whole-point tide corresponding to the berthing plan (prt-L ═ f ([ shpl.plti-L ], shpl.doll-L), acquiring a next whole-point tide corresponding to the berthing plan (prt-L ═ f), acquiring a next whole-point tide corresponding to the berthing plan (shpl.plt-B), acquiring a next whole-point tide corresponding to the berthing plan (prt.prt ═ f [ + 2.plt [ +1 ], acquiring a high tide The tide difference value TiD.TIDiV-B ═ TiD.NeT-B-TiD.PrT-B of the berthing plan, the tide difference value TiD.TIDiV-L ═ TiD.NeT-L-TiD.PrT-L of the berthing plan, the swelling and water-withdrawing state TiD.ImRFW ═ of the berthing plan (TiD.TIDiV-B > 0 is swelling, TiD.TIDiV-B < 0 is water-withdrawing), and the swelling and water-withdrawing state TiD.ExRFW ═ of the berthing plan (TiD.TIDiV-L > 0 is swelling, TiD.TIDiV-L < 0 is water-withdrawing).

Referring to fig. 3, it is a schematic diagram of an application flow of the function set.

(7) The water depth rule of the channel is as follows: the English mark is ChRu, the function set of channel water depth and channel water depth warning value data is obtained according to the channel name, the representing symbol is f (SNP. Chan, Ele), SNP. Chan represents the channel through which the ship navigates, and Ele represents the names of the internal elements of the function.

The internal elements of the function comprise a channel name ChRu. Chan, a channel water depth ChRu.ChD (unit: meter) and a channel water depth warning value ChRu.WaV (unit: meter).

The function application comprises acquiring channel water depth chru.chd ═ f (snp.chan, ChD), and acquiring channel water depth warning value chru.wav ═ f (snp.chan, WaV).

Referring to fig. 4, it is a schematic diagram of an application flow of the function set.

(8) And the water depth of the harbor basin is regulated: the English mark is HaRu, the function set of the harbor basin water depth using data and the harbor basin water depth warning value data are obtained according to the wharf name, the representative symbol is f (ShPl.Dock, Ele), ShPl.Dock represents that a ship plans to lean against and leave the wharf, and Ele represents the names of elements inside the function.

The internal elements of the function comprise a wharf harbor basin name HaRu.Dock, a harbor basin use water depth HaRu.HaD (unit: meter), and a harbor basin use water depth alarm value HaRu.WaV (unit: meter).

The function application comprises acquiring harbor basin use water depth h ru.

Referring to fig. 5, it is a schematic diagram of an application flow of the present function set.

(9) Tidal safety rules: the English symbol is TSRu, the function set for acquiring the tide fall warning value according to the planned approach and departure of the wharf represents f (ShPl.dock), and the ShPl.dock represents that the ship plans to approach and depart from the wharf.

The internal elements of the function comprise wharfs TSRu.Dock and tide fall warning values TSRu.TiWaV (unit: centimeter).

The function application is to obtain the tide fall alert value tsru.

Referring to fig. 6, it is a schematic diagram of the application flow of the function set.

(10) And water expansion and water withdrawal rules: the English identification is RFRu, and is a function set for acquiring the allowable water swelling and withdrawing states when the ship leaves the berth according to the water swelling and withdrawing states when the ship is planned to lean away from the wharf and moored, wherein the representative symbol is f (ShPl. dock, TiD. ImRFW), the ShPl. dock represents the planned approach and departure of the ship, and the TiD. ImRFW represents the water swelling and withdrawing states when the ship is moored.

The internal elements of the function comprise a wharf RFRu.Dock, a berthing rising and falling water state RFRu.ImRFW and a rising and falling water state RFRu.ExAll allowed to be out of berth.

The function application is to obtain the rising and falling water state allowed by the debarking, rfru.

Referring to fig. 7, it is a schematic diagram of an application flow of the present function set.

Regarding the matching of the above-described rules with the respective items, see the detailed explanation of ST3 of other embodiments.

Example 3, which differs from example 2 in that:

regarding the rationality of the ship planning time checked in ST3, specifically:

(4) checking the rationality of the planned time of the ship, which comprises: defining an English identifier as PTRC, and obtaining whether the planning time is reasonable or not according to the ship berthing planning time, the berthing planning time and the departing planning time; and the number of the first and second electrodes,

referring to fig. 8, the rule of application of the function set includes:

assigning, which comprises:

ShPl.PlTi-B＝PTRC.PlTi-B；

ShPl.PlTi-M＝PTRC.PlTi-M；

ShPl.Dock-L＝PTRC.Dock-L；

The foregoing is considered a antecedent that is actually also a specific risk assessment, and is therefore labeled with (4).

Example 4, which differs from example 3 in that:

transmitting corresponding information of the ship plan, the related ship plan and the traffic control plan into each safety assessment logic, wherein each safety assessment logic is independently scored, and specifically:

safety assessment logic established for channel grounding risks, comprising:

Safety assessment logic established for wharf port pool stranding risks comprises the following steps:

Safety assessment logic established for risk of rapid water flow in a harbor basin comprises the following steps:

Safety assessment logic established for the risk of water flood conflict, comprising:

calling a tide table function, respectively obtaining previous integral tide TiD.PrT-B and TiD.PrT-L corresponding to the planning time of the berthing plan and next integral tide TiD.NeT-B and TiD.NeT-L corresponding to the planning time, and calculating average tide height TiD.TIDiV-B and TiD.TIDiV-L corresponding to the planning time; wherein, tid.tidiv-B ═ tid.net-B-tid.prt-B, tid.tidiv-L ═ tid.net-L-tid.prt-L;

Example 5, which differs from example 4 in that:

ST1, defining the risk item to be evaluated, which also includes: and whether the arrangement of the piloting tug is reasonably defined.

Whether the piloting tug arrangement is reasonable or not refers to whether the piloting arrangement and the tug arrangement of a ship plan are safe and reasonable or not, and the piloting tug arrangement method comprises the following steps:

1) and the piloting demand risk refers to whether the piloting arrangement of the ship plan meets the piloting demand or not and whether the safety risk exists or not.

2) And tug demand risk refers to whether the tug arrangement of the ship plan meets the tug demand or not and whether safety risk exists or not.

ST2, defining safety factors, and matching safety rules for each risk to be evaluated item, which also includes: and defining a piloting requirement rule and a tug requirement rule as safety rules, establishing a corresponding function, and matching the corresponding function to a corresponding risk to-be-evaluated project.

With regard to the two rules mentioned above, in particular:

(11) and piloting requirement rules: the English sign is PiRu, the function set of the piloting demand mark is obtained according to the ship type, the planned approaching and departing wharf, the ship length, the ship planned draft and the ship load ton, the representative symbols are f (ShPl.ShT, ShPl.Dock, ShPl.ShL, ShPl.PDr and ShPl.DWT), ShPl.ShT represents the ship type, ShPl.Dock represents the planned approaching and departing wharf, ShPl.ShL represents the ship length, ShPl.PDr represents the ship planned draft and ShPl.DWT represents the ship load ton.

The internal elements of the function comprise a ship type PiRu.ShT, a wharf PiRu.Dock, a ship length minimum PiRu.MinL (unit: meter), a ship length maximum PiRu.MaxL (unit: meter), a ship planned draft minimum PiRu.MinD (unit: meter), a ship planned draft maximum PiRu.MaxD (unit: meter), a ship load ton minimum PiRu.MinDWT, a ship load ton maximum PiRu.MaxWT and a piloting demand mark PiRu.PiM.

The function application is to obtain the piloting demand flag piru. pim ═ f (shpl. sht, shpl. dock, shpl. shl, shpl. pdr, shpl. dwt).

(12) And the tug demand rule is as follows: the English symbol is TBS, which is a function set of the total quantity of tug requirements and the number of special power tug requirements obtained according to the ship length, the ship planned draft, the planned berth, the planned type, the ship type, and the representative symbol is f (ShPl.ShL, ShPl.PDr, ShPl.Ber, ShPl.SPT, ShPl.ShT, Ele), ShPl.ShL represents the ship length, ShPl.PDr represents the ship planned draft, Sh.Ber represents the planned berth, ShPl.SPT represents the planned type, ShPl.ShPt represents the ship type, and Ele represents the name of the internal element of the function.

The internal elements of the function comprise a minimum ship length TBS.MinL (unit: meter), a maximum ship length TBS.MaxL (unit: meter), a minimum ship planned draft TBS.MinD (unit: meter), a maximum ship planned draft TBS.MaxD (unit: meter), a berth TBS.Ber, a plan type TBS.SPT, a ship type TBS.ShT, a minimum tow wheel total number TBS.MinTBN, a maximum tow wheel total number TBS.MaxTBN, a special power type TBS.SPType, a minimum special power tow wheel number TBS.MinSPTBN and a maximum special power tow wheel number TBS.MaxSPTBN.

The function application includes obtaining a tow wheel demand total minimum tbs. MinTBN ═ f (shpl.shl, shpl.pdr, shpl.ber, shpl.spt, shpl.sht, MinTBN), obtaining a tow wheel demand total maximum tbs. MaxTBN ═ f (shpl.shl, shpl.pdr, shpl.ber, shpl.spt, shpl.sht, MaxTBN), obtaining a special power type SPType ═ f (shpl.shl, shpl.pdr, shpl.ber, shpl.spt, shpl.sht, SPType), obtaining a special power tow wheel demand number minimum.

On the basis, the safety assessment logic established for the piloting demand risk comprises the following steps:

Safety assessment logic established for tug demand risk, comprising:

Example 6, which differs from example 5 in that:

ST1, further comprising: whether the wharf has a vacancy or not and whether the ship has a collision risk or not are defined.

Whether the wharf has a vacancy or not means whether the wharf has a sufficient vacancy or not, and whether the ship collides with other ships berthed at the same wharf or not during berthing is judged; it includes: and (5) risk of pile position safety conflict.

The pile position safety conflict risk refers to the conflict between the planned pile position of the ship and other ships, the pile position rule is not met, and the collision safety risk exists.

Whether the ship has the encounter collision risk or not refers to whether the ship has the encounter collision risk or not in the process of sailing; it includes:

1) and the risk of safety collision of the berth refers to the collision of the berthing time and the berthing position of the ship plan with other ship plans, which does not accord with the berthing rule and has the risk of collision safety.

2) And the traffic control ship conflict risk refers to the conflict between a ship plan and a traffic control ship plan, and the conflict safety risk exists.

3) And the risk of the one-way channel right of passage conflict refers to the safety risk of collision caused by the conflict of the passing directions when the ship passes through the one-way channel.

Correspondingly, to match the security logic execution of the above items, ST2, which further includes defining the following security rules, including:

(13) and pile position safety regulation: the English mark is PpR, which is a function set for obtaining a safety warning value between two ships according to the planned leaning and departing wharf, the planned front pile position and the planned rear pile position, and the representative symbol is f (ShPl.Dock, ShPl.PrP and ShPl.NeP), wherein ShPl.Dock represents the planned leaning and departing wharf, ShPl.PrP represents the planned front pile position and ShPl.NeP represents the planned rear pile position.

The internal elements of the function comprise a planned wharf PpR. Dock, an allowed starting pile position PpR. BeP, an allowed ending pile position PpR. EnP and a safety warning value PpR. DisWV (unit: meter) between two ships.

The function application is to obtain a parameter set containing a planned wharf, an allowed start pile position, an allowed end pile position and a safety warning value between two ships, and is expressed as PpRu { Dock, BeP, EnP, dispv } ═ f (shpl.

(14) And a berth safety rule: the English symbol is BeRu, which is a function set for acquiring the associated wharf, the associated berth, the associated warning plan type and the safety warning starting and ending time according to the plan approaching and departing wharf, the plan berth, the plan time and the plan type, and the representative symbol is f (ShPl.Dock, ShPl.Ber, ShPl.PlTi and ShPl.SPT), the ShPl.Dock represents the plan approaching and departing wharf, the ShPl.Ber represents the plan berth, the ShPl.PlTi represents the plan time, and the ShPl.SPT represents the plan type.

The internal elements of the function comprise a wharf BeRu.Dock, a planned berth BeRu.Ber, a plan type BeRu.SPT, an associated wharf BeRu.ReDo, an associated berth BeRu.ReBer, an associated alert plan type BeRu.BWTy and a security alert time BeRu.BWTi (unit: hour).

The function application is to obtain a parameter set containing an associated wharf BeRu.ReDo, an associated berth BeRu.ReBer, an associated alert plan type BeRu.BWTV, a security alert start time BeRu.SeBeTi and a security alert end time BeRu.SeEnTi, which are expressed as BeRu { ReDo, ReBer, BWTy, SeBeTi and SeEnTi } ═ f (ShPl.Dock, ShPl.Ber, ShPl.PlTi and ShPl.SPT), and the result obtained by operating the function is a multi-group parameter set.

(15) And traffic control ship regulation: the English identification is CoRu, and is a function set for acquiring the type of a traffic control ship, an entrance and exit sign of the control ship, the name of a key node of the control ship, the forward pushing time of the control ship to reach the key node and the backward delay time of the control ship to reach the key node according to the planned approaching and departing wharf, the planned berth, the planned type, the planned time, the type of the control ship and the name of a channel through which the ship passes, wherein the representative symbols are f (ShPl.Dock, ShPl.Ber, ShPl.SPT, ShPl.PlTi, ShPl.CST and SNP.Chan), the ShPl.Dock represents the planned approaching and departing wharf, ShPl.Ber represents the planned berth, ShPl.SPT represents the planned type of the ship, ShPl.PlTi represents the planned time, ShPl.CST represents the controlled type, and SNP.Chan represents the name of the channel through which the ship passes.

The internal elements of the function comprise a wharf CoRu.Dock, a planned berth CoRu.Ber, a planned type CoRu.SPT, a traffic control ship type CoRu.CST, a control ship inlet and outlet mark CoRu.IEMa, a ship passing channel name CoRu.Chan, a control ship arrival key node name CoRu.KeyPo, forward push time CoRu.PrTi (unit: min) and backward delay time CoRu.NeTi (unit: min).

The function application is to obtain a parameter set comprising a traffic control ship type, a control ship import and export sign, a control ship arrival key node name, a forward time of the control ship arrival key node, and a backward time of the control ship arrival key node, and the parameter set is represented as CoRu { CST, IEMa, KeyPo, KeyPrTi, KeyNeTi } ═ f (ShPl.Dock, ShPl.Ber, ShPl.SPT, ShPl.PlTi, ShP1.CST, SNP Chan), and the result obtained by operating the function is a multi-group parameter set.

(16) And the one-way channel right of way rule: the English mark is SCRu, a function set of an associated dock, an associated plan type, an associated plan forward time and an associated plan backward delay time is obtained according to a plan approaching and leaving dock, a plan berth, an associated plan type, an associated plan forward time and an associated plan backward delay time, and the representative symbol is f (ShPl.Dock, ShPl.Ber, ShPl.SPT, ShPl.PlTi and ShPl.OnCh), the ShPl.Dock represents the plan approaching and leaving dock, the ShPl.Ber represents the plan berth, the ShPl.SPT represents the plan type, the ShPl.PlTi represents the plan time, and the ShPl.OnCh represents the plan-specified passing one-way channel name.

The internal elements of the function comprise a plan approach wharf SCRu.PlDo, a plan berth SCRu.PlBer, a plan type SCRu.PlSPT, a one-way channel name SCRu.OnCh, an associated approach wharf SCRu.ReDo, an associated berth SCRu.ReBer, an associated plan type SCRu.ReSPT, a forward push time SCRu.PrTi (unit: min) and a backward delay time SCRu.NeTi (unit: min).

The function application is to obtain a parameter set containing a one-way channel name, an associated wharf, an associated berth, an associated plan type, an associated plan forward-push time and an associated plan backward-delay time, which are expressed as SCRu { OnCh, ReDo, ReBer, ReSPT, RePrTi, ReNeTi } ═ f (shpl.

Based on the above rules, for the security evaluation logic of each item matching in this embodiment, specifically:

the pile position safety conflict risk assessment logic uses the following safety factors:

1) and the ship plan evaluated this time: the method comprises the following steps of planning ship berthing-approaching wharf ShPl.Dock, planning ship berthing time ShPl.PlTi-B, planning ship berthing-departing time ShPl.PlTi-L, ship length ShPl.ShL, pile position ShPl.PrP before planning, pile position ShPl.NeP after planning, number of meters ShPl.PrPD from origin of the pile position before planning and number of meters ShPl.NePD from origin of the pile position after planning;

2) and the associated ship plan of the evaluation: the method comprises the following steps of (1) planning number OTSP.No of a ship, planning leaning and departing wharf OTSP.Dock of the ship, planning time OTSP.PlTi-B of ship leaning and berthing, planning time OTSP.PlTi-L of ship departing and berthing, length OTSP.ShL of the ship, pile position OTSP.PrP before planning, pile position OTSP.NeP after planning, number OTSP.PrPD of the pile position before planning from the origin in meters, and number OTSP.NePD of the pile position after planning from the origin in meters;

3) and pile position safety regulation: and the parameter set containing the planned wharf, the allowed starting pile position, the allowed ending pile position and the safety warning value between the two ships is represented as PpRu { Dock, BeP, EnP, DisWV }.

The calculation formula is as follows:

equation 7 contains equation 7-1.

Equation 7: the length of the planned ship, the length of the other planned ship and the safety warning value between two ships are equal to the maximum pile position distance between the two ships;

ShPl.ShL+OTSP..ShL+PpRu.DisWV＞＝MaxDP；

equation 7-1: if the pile position before the plan is smaller than the pile position after the other plan, the maximum pile position distance between the two ships is equal to the number of meters from the original point of the pile position after the other plan-the number of meters from the original point of the pile position before the plan; if the front pile position of another plan is less than the rear pile position of said plan, the maximum pile position distance between two ships is equal to the number of meters from original point of said rear pile position of said plan-the number of meters from original point of another front pile position of said plan

If shpl. prp ≦ otsp.nep holds, then MaxDP ≦ otsp.nepd-shpl.prpd;

if otsp.prp ≦ shpl.nep holds, then MaxDP ≦ shpl.nepd-otsp.prpd;

the evaluation procedure was as follows:

1) the ship berthing planning time ShPl.PlTi-B, the ship berthing planning time ShPl.PlTi-L, the ship length ShPl.ShL, the pile position ShPl.PrP before planning, the pile position ShPl.NeP after planning, the meter number ShPl.PrPD from the origin of the pile position before planning and the meter number ShPl.NePD from the origin of the pile position after planning.

2) And calling a pile position safety rule function to obtain a parameter set of a planned wharf PpR. Dock, an allowed starting pile position PpR. BeP, an allowed ending pile position PpR. EnP and a safety warning value PpR. DisWV between two ships.

3) And processing each group of parameter set in a large cycle, and comparing the ship plan evaluated this time with all other ship plans.

4) And finding out the associated ship plans through the small circulation, comparing each associated ship plan, substituting each data into a calculation formula 7-1, and calculating the maximum pile position between the two ships.

5) Substituting the data into a calculation formula 7, namely the length of the planned ship, the length of the other planned ship and a safety warning value between two ships, namely the maximum pile position distance between the two ships, judging whether the formula 7 is established, and recording risk evaluation information. Equation 7 holds true risk weight value 1, and equation 7 holds false risk weight value 0.

6) And finishing the small circulation after the small circulation finishes processing all the related ship plans.

7) After all parameter sets are processed in a large loop, risk evaluation information and risk weight values are summarized, and the process is ended.

The berth security conflict risk assessment logic uses the following security factors:

1) and the ship plan evaluated this time: the ship plans to lean against the wharf ShPl.Dock, the planned berth (including an anchor buoy) ShPl.Ber, the planned time ShPl.PlTi and the planned type ShPl.SPT;

2) and the associated ship plan of the evaluation: the number of a ship plan number OTSP.No, the plan leaning-to-dock OTSP.Dock, the plan berth (including an anchor buoy) OTSP.Ber, the plan time OTSP.PlTi and the plan type OTSP.SPT;

3) and a berth safety rule: and the parameter set containing the associated wharf, the associated berth, the associated alert plan type, the security alert starting time and the security alert ending time is represented as BeRu { ReDo, ReBer, BWTy, SeBeTi and SeEnTi }.

The calculation formula is as follows:

equation 8: the planned time of other ship plans belongs to the safety warning starting time and the safety warning ending time;

OTSP.PlTi∈[BeRu.SeBeTi，BeRu.SeEnTi]；

the evaluation procedure was as follows:

1) the ship is transferred to a planned berth ShPl.Dock, a planned berth (including an anchor buoy) ShPl.Ber, a planned time ShPl.PlTi and a planned type ShPl.SPT.

2) And calling a berth safety rule function to obtain a parameter set of 'associated wharf BeRu. ReDo, associated berth BeRu. ReBer, associated warning plan type BeRu.BWTy, safety warning starting time BeRu. SeBeTi and safety warning ending time BeRu. SeEnTi'.

3) And processing each group of parameter set in a major loop, and comparing the parameter set with all other ship plans.

4) And finding out the associated ship plans in the small loop, comparing each associated ship plan, substituting each data into a calculation formula 8, wherein the plan time of other ship plans belongs to the [ safety guard starting time and safety guard ending time ] ", judging whether the formula 8 is established, and recording risk evaluation information. Equation 8 holds true risk weight value 1, and equation 8 holds false risk weight value 0.

5) And finishing the small circulation after the small circulation finishes processing all the related ship plans.

6) After all parameter sets are processed in a large loop, risk evaluation information and risk weight values are summarized, and the process is ended.

The traffic control ship conflict risk assessment logic uses the following safety factors:

1) and the ship plan evaluated this time: the method comprises the following steps of planning ship approaching and departing a wharf ShPl.Dock, current position (including mooring anchor buoy) ShPl.CuBe of a ship, planning berth (including anchoring buoy) ShPl.Ber, planning type ShPl.SPT, planning time ShPl.PlTi and control ship type ShPl.CST;

2) and a ship navigation path: number SNP.Num of a channel through which the ship passes and name SNP.Chan of the channel through which the ship passes;

3) and traffic control plan: the traffic control plan number TCP.No, the traffic control ship type TCP.CST, the control ship import and export mark TCP.IEMa, the control ship arrival key node name TCP.KeyPo and the plan time TCP.KeyTi for the control ship to arrive at the key node;

4) and traffic control ship regulation: the parameter set including the traffic control ship type, the control ship import and export mark, the control ship arrival key node name, the forward time of the control ship arrival key node, and the backward time of the control ship arrival key node is represented as CoRu { CST, IEMa, KeyPo, KeyPrTi, KeyNeTi }.

The calculation formula is as follows:

equation 9: the planned time for the control ship to reach the key node belongs to the time limit of the forward push of the control ship to reach the key node and the time delay of the control ship to reach the key node;

TCP.KeyTi∈[CoRu.KeyPrTi，CoRu.KeyNeTi]；

the evaluation procedure was as follows:

1) the ship is transferred to a planned berthing wharf ShPl.Dock, the current position (including a berth anchor buoy) ShPl.CuBe of the ship, the planned berth (including an anchor buoy) ShPl.Ber, the plan type ShPl.SPT, the plan time ShPl.PlTi and the controlled ship type ShPl.CST.

2) And calling a ship navigation path function to obtain a channel serial number SNP.num passed by the ship and a channel name SNP.Chan passed by the ship.

3) And transmitting ship plan information and channel information passed by a ship into a traffic control ship rule function, and acquiring parameter sets of traffic control ship type CoRu.

4) And processing each group of parameter set in a large loop, and comparing the parameter set with all the traffic control plans.

5) And finding out the associated traffic control plans in a small loop, comparing each associated traffic control plan, substituting each data into a calculation formula 9, wherein the plan time when the control ship reaches the key node belongs to [ the forward time when the control ship reaches the key node, and the backward time when the control ship reaches the key node ] ", judging whether the formula 9 is established, and recording risk evaluation information. Equation 9 holds true risk weight value 1, and equation 9 holds false risk weight value 0.

6) And finishing the small loop after the small loop finishes processing all the related traffic control plans.

The one-way channel right of way conflict risk assessment logic uses the following safety factors:

1) and the ship plan evaluated this time: the ship plans to lean against a wharf ShPl.Dock, the plan berth (including an anchor buoy) ShPl.Ber, the plan type ShPl.SPT, the plan time ShPl.PlTi and the plan appointed passing one-way channel ShPl.OnCh;

2) and the associated ship plan of the evaluation: the system comprises a ship plan number OTSP.No, a plan leaning-to-dock OTSP.Dock, a plan berth (including an anchor buoy) OTSP.Ber, a plan type OTSP.SPT, a plan time OTSP.PlTi and a plan appointed passing one-way channel OTSP.OnCh;

3) and the one-way channel right of way rule: the parameter set containing the one-way navigation channel name, the associated wharf, the associated berth, the associated plan type, the associated plan forward-pushing time and the associated plan backward-delaying time is expressed as SCRU { OnCh, ReDo, ReBer, ReSPT, RePrTi and ReNeTi }.

The calculation formula is as follows:

equation 10: the plan time of other ship plans belongs to [ correlation plan forward-push time and correlation plan backward-delay time ];

OTSP.PlTi∈[SCRu.RePrTi，SCRu.ReNeTi]；

the evaluation procedure was as follows:

1) the system comprises a plurality of stations, an incoming ship planning approach-departure wharf ShPl.Dock, a planning berth (including an anchor buoy) ShPl.Ber, a planning type ShPl.SPT, a planning time ShPl.PlTi and a planning-specified passing one-way channel ShPl.OnCh.

2) And calling a one-way channel right of way rule function to obtain a parameter set of a one-way channel name SCRu.

4) And finding out the associated ship plans in the small loop, comparing each associated ship plan, substituting each data into a calculation formula 8 'the plan time of other ship plans belongs to [ the forward time of the associated plan, the backward time of the associated plan ]', judging whether the formula 8 is established, and recording risk evaluation information. Equation 10 holds the risk weight value equal to 1, and equation 10 holds the risk weight value equal to 0.

In summary, the safety evaluation of the ship berthing-alongside scheduling plan described in the present application includes an evaluation process of a multi-factor, multi-scenario and multi-rule; compared with inefficient manual analysis, the evaluation model can realize automatic and rapid evaluation of the service system, complete a complex evaluation flow instantly and greatly improve the analysis efficiency.

The perfect multi-factor evaluation can reduce the error of the analysis result to the maximum extent, the safety evaluation of the ship berthing-close scheduling plan comprises 10 evaluation items in 5 scenes, and all risk factors existing in the ship berthing-close process are included; meanwhile, because the risk factors are independently evaluated and then summarized and comprehensively analyzed, the analysis result error can be reduced to the maximum extent.

The above embodiments are preferred embodiments of the present application, and the protection scope of the present application is not limited by the above embodiments, so: all equivalent changes made according to the structure, shape and principle of the present application shall be covered by the protection scope of the present application.

Claims

1. A ship berthing-alongside scheduling security assessment model, comprising:

ST1, defining the risk items to be evaluated, which includes: defining whether the ship can be stranded and whether the ship is safe to lean away from the tidal flow speed;

2. The ship-to-berth dispatch safety assessment model of claim 1, wherein the ship plan comprises: defining that the English identification ShPl is ship planning information of the evaluation, and comprises planning time ShPl.PlTi, planning approach dock ShPl.Dock, ship planning draft ShPl.PDr, planning time ShPl.PlTi-B of a berthing plan, planning time ShPl.PlTi-L of a berthing plan, planning time ShPl.PlTi-M of a berthing plan, ship type ShPl.ShT, ship length ShPl.ShL, ship loading weight ton ShPl.DWT, planning piloting mark ShPl.PiM, planning berth (with anchor ground buoy) ShPl.Ber, planning type ShPl.SPT, total number of tug wheels ShPl.TBN, tug list TugList [ tug power ShPl.gTugType ] [ tug power corresponding number ShPl.PrP ], planning front ShPl.ShPl.CST, planning rear pile position, original point of the ship with pile distance, and current planning position of pile (with anchor ground buoy) through one-way Pl.Pl.PlP. PlP, and the one-way control of the ship;

3. The ship berthing-alongside scheduling security assessment model according to claim 2, characterized in that: the checking of the rationality of the planned time of the ship comprises: defining an English identifier as PTRC, and obtaining whether the planning time is reasonable or not according to the ship berthing planning time, the berthing planning time and the departing planning time; and the number of the first and second electrodes,

rules for application of the set of functions, comprising:

assigning, which comprises:

ShPl.PlTi-B＝PTRC.PlTi-B；

ShPl.PlTi-M＝PTRC.PlTi-M；

ShPl.Dock-L＝PTRC.Dock-L；

4. The ship berthing-alongside scheduling security assessment model according to claim 2, wherein the security assessment logic established for the channel grounding risk comprises:

5. The ship berthing-alongside scheduling security assessment model according to claim 2, characterized in that: safety assessment logic established for the wharf harbor basin stranding risk comprises the following steps:

6. The ship berthing-alongside scheduling security assessment model according to claim 2, characterized in that: safety assessment logic established for the risk of excess water flow in the harbor basin comprises the following steps:

7. The ship berthing-alongside scheduling security assessment model according to claim 2, characterized in that: safety assessment logic established for the water-swelling conflict risk, comprising:

8. The ship berthing-alongside scheduling security assessment model according to claim 2, characterized in that: the ST1, defining the risk item to be evaluated, further includes: whether the arrangement of the piloting tug is defined reasonably or not;

9. The ship berthing-alongside scheduling security assessment model according to claim 2, characterized in that: safety assessment logic established for the piloting demand risk, comprising:

10. The ship berthing-alongside scheduling security assessment model according to claim 2, characterized in that: safety assessment logic established for the tug demand risk, comprising:

substituting each data into the calculation formula 6-2: (shpl. tugtype1, shpl. ttnum1) + (shpl. tugtype2, shpl. ttnum2) +. + (shpl. tugtypen, shpl. ttnumn), calculating the total number of tug power that is greater than the demand;