• Chinese Journal of Ship Research
  • Vol. 20, Issue 1, 232 (2025)
Yong XIONG, Siwen ZHOU, XianFei WANG, and Zhiyuan LYU
Author Affiliations
  • School of Navigation, Wuhan University of Technology, Wuhan 430063, China
  • show less
    DOI: 10.19693/j.issn.1673-3185.03542 Cite this Article
    Yong XIONG, Siwen ZHOU, XianFei WANG, Zhiyuan LYU. Data-driven ship trajectory tracking control method[J]. Chinese Journal of Ship Research, 2025, 20(1): 232 Copy Citation Text show less
    [in Chinese]
    Fig. 1. [in Chinese]
    [in Chinese]
    Fig. 2. [in Chinese]
    [in Chinese]
    Fig. 3. [in Chinese]
    [in Chinese]
    Fig. 4. [in Chinese]
    [in Chinese]
    Fig. 5. [in Chinese]
    [in Chinese]
    Fig. 6. [in Chinese]
    [in Chinese]
    Fig. 7. [in Chinese]
    [in Chinese]
    Fig. 8. [in Chinese]
    [in Chinese]
    Fig. 9. [in Chinese]
    [in Chinese]
    Fig. 10. [in Chinese]
    [in Chinese]
    Fig. 11. [in Chinese]
    [in Chinese]
    Fig. 12. [in Chinese]
    [in Chinese]
    Fig. 13. [in Chinese]
    [in Chinese]
    Fig. 14. [in Chinese]
    [in Chinese]
    Fig. 15. [in Chinese]
    [in Chinese]
    Fig. 16. [in Chinese]
    [in Chinese]
    Fig. 17. [in Chinese]
    [in Chinese]
    Fig. 18. [in Chinese]
    序号参数数值序号参数数值
    1$ {\boldsymbol{\theta }}_{11} $0.265 138 669 258 72413$ {\boldsymbol{\theta }}_{25} $0.305 785 017 250 565
    2$ {\boldsymbol{\theta }}_{12} $−0.593 139 836 433 81714$ {\boldsymbol{\theta }}_{26} $0.817 640 200 880 232
    3$ {\boldsymbol{\theta }}_{13} $0.055 061 829 481 85315$ {\boldsymbol{\theta }}_{31} $0.061 005 725 705 921
    4$ {\boldsymbol{\theta }}_{14} $0.193 328 379 010 96916$ {\boldsymbol{\theta }}_{32} $−0.247 108 873 113 790
    5$ {\boldsymbol{\theta }}_{15} $0.004 535 423 216 80117$ {\boldsymbol{\theta }}_{33} $−0.071 435 501 716 979
    6$ {\boldsymbol{\theta }}_{16} $0.001 500 027 456 60718$ {\boldsymbol{\theta }}_{34} $−0.067 124 874 659 099
    7$ {\boldsymbol{\theta }}_{17} $−0.00 001 031 479 30319$ {\boldsymbol{\theta }}_{35} $0.150 310 762 377 552
    8$ {\boldsymbol{\theta }}_{18} $−2.101 476 849 154 E-0920$ {\boldsymbol{\theta }}_{36} $0.156 863 665 033 070
    9$ {\boldsymbol{\theta }}_{21} $−0.057 189 322 465 89621$ {\boldsymbol{\theta }}_{37} $−0.000 528 418 571 230
    10$ {\boldsymbol{\theta }}_{22} $−0.107 906 938 569 00922$ {\boldsymbol{\theta }}_{38} $−0.001 535 487 343 785
    11$ {\boldsymbol{\theta }}_{23} $−0.021 188 406 958 89223$ {\boldsymbol{\theta }}_{39} $7.379 676 517 343 E-06
    12$ {\boldsymbol{\theta }}_{24} $−0.343 953 417 948 50324$ {\boldsymbol{\theta }}_{30} $−6.976 693 955 860 E-07
    Table 1. Identification parameters
    参数峰值纵向误差/m误差平方总和/m2峰值艏向角/rad平稳艏向角时间/s平稳速度时间/s
    $ {\boldsymbol{S}}_{0} $−2.805911.0367.2122.7
    $ {2\boldsymbol{S}}_{0} $−2.122461.0970.971.4
    $ {3\boldsymbol{S}}_{0} $−1.781511.1373.452.4
    $ 4{\boldsymbol{S}}_{0} $−1.571141.1575.742.0
    Table 2. Data comparison table of different S
    参数峰值纵向误差/m误差平方总和/m2峰值艏向角/rad平稳艏向角时间/s平稳速度时间/s
    $ {\boldsymbol{Q}}_{0} $−2.805911.03259.1122.7
    $ {3\boldsymbol{Q}}_{0} $−2.514401.03862.8115.1
    $ {6\boldsymbol{Q}}_{0} $−2.203051.04665.3109.2
    $ 9{\boldsymbol{Q}}_{0} $−1.972241.05267.2107.1
    Table 3. Data comparison table of different Q
    参数峰值纵向误差/m误差平方总和/m2峰值艏向角/rad平稳艏向角时间/s平稳速度时间/s
    $ {\boldsymbol{R}}_{1} $−1.691321.1371.653.6
    $ {\boldsymbol{R}}_{2} $−2.343341.0763.888.6
    $ {\boldsymbol{R}}_{0} $−2.785911.0367.2122.7
    $ {\boldsymbol{R}}_{3} $−3.118871.0077.3150.0
    Table 4. Data comparison table of different R