-
摘要: 电熔镁群炉需量指当前时刻k和(k-1),…,(k-n+1)时刻群炉功率的平均值,用于度量高耗能电熔镁群炉用电量.(k+1)时刻群炉需量取决于功率变化率.本文建立了功率变化率与电流控制系统输出电流之间由线性项与未知非线性项组成的动态模型,其中线性项通过电流被控对象的参数和控制器的参数计算,未知非线性项采用基于偏自相关函数(Partial autocorrelation function,PACF)输入变量决策的径向基函数神经网络(Radial basis function neural network,RBFNN)来估计.本文提出了由当前k时刻的需量和功率,(k-n+1)时刻功率及k时刻功率变化率的估计组成的(k+1)时刻需量的计算模型.通过某电熔镁砂厂实际数据的仿真实验和工业实验表明所提方法可准确预报需量变化趋势,可以防止因原料变化引起需量尖峰导致错误切断电熔镁炉供电造成电熔镁砂质量降低.Abstract: The demand of fused magnesium furnace group (FMFG) is the average value of powers at times k, (k-1), …, (k-n+1). The demand indicates the electricity consumption of the FMFG. The demand at time (k+1) depends on the rate of power change. In this paper, we develop a dynamic model of the rate of power change and the output current. The model consists of a linear term and an unknown nonlinear term, where the linear term can be calculated by the parameters of the controlled current and the controller, and the unknown nonlinear term can be estimated using the radial basis function neural network (RBFNN). The input variables of RBFNN are decided based on partial autocorrelation function (PACF). Then a computing model of demand at time (k+1) is proposed, which consists of the demand at time k, the powers at times k and (k-n+1) and the estimate of the rate of power change at time k. Simulations based on actual data and industrial experiments at a fused magnesia plant show that the proposed method can accurately forecast demand trends and can prevent reduction of fused magnesia grade caused by unnecessary cut off due to the demand spikes caused by change of raw materials.
-
1. Introduction
Recent years wind energy conversion systems have advanced rapidly, due to the increasing concern for the environment pollution caused by the traditional energy sources. Through tracking the changing wind speed by adjusting the shaft speed, the variable speed wind turbines (VSWTs) enable the turbine to operate at its maximum power coefficient over a wide range of wind speeds [1]. To achieve the major task of power efficiency maximization, the VSWT should track the maximum power point despite wind variations [2].
Originally, the VSWT control system is designed based on the linear system theory [3]-[5]. The linear control encountered difficulties since VSWT system is a complex and highly nonlinear system with strong coupling features and uncertainty in both the aerodynamics and the electrical parts. To account for the nonlinear behavior, and to deal with the recognized problem of parameter variations, various advanced control strategies have been proposed, such as neural networks [6], adaptive control [7], feedback linearization technique [8], predictive control [9] and sliding mode approach [10]-[11]. Among these control strategies, sliding mode control (SMC) has proven to be very robust with respect to system parameter variations and external disturbances, and thus suitable for realizing VSWT system control. However, the standard first-order sliding mode (FOSM) control generally shows significant drawback of chattering phenomenon. Some key components in the wind turbine (WT), such as gear box, would get damaged by the abrupt commutation in forces and torques [12].
Instead of influencing the first order time derivative of sliding variable, the second-order sliding mode (SOSM) control acts on the second order derivatives of the sliding surfaces, which can help reduce the chattering phenomenon and provide higher sliding precision. Particularly, the SOSM super-twisting algorithm has been an effective way of controlling the VSWT system, since it only requires measurement of the sliding variable without using information about derivatives of the sliding constraint. A number of contributions on this control strategy have recently appeared for the realization of maximum power point tracking (MPPT) of VSWT system. Valenciaga et al.[13] obtained the control objective of wind energy conversion optimization of brushless doubly fed reluctance machine (BDFRM) based VSWT. Beltran et al. [14] presented a SOSM controller that facilitates the generator torque tracking the optimal torque, and maximized the power extraction of doubly fed induction generator (DFIG) based VSWT. Evangelista et al. [15] synthesized a super-twisting sliding mode control with variable gain, and showed a better performance in terms of mechanical loads and power tracking. However, in the aforementioned literatures, the SOSM control mainly concentrated on the electrical side dynamic control. For achieving the control objective of maximum power extraction, the generator torque was set to track the optimal aerodynamic torque, and it means that the energy loss caused by friction and mechanical rotational inertia in the transmission system was neglected in such circumstance. In other words, the captured power from wind was assumed to be equal to generator output power. This assumption is not always consistent with the actual situation, especially in turbulent wind scenarios.
Therefore, this paper aims to investigate a new SOSM control method for the DFIG based VSWT system. A complete dynamic model of the VSWT system is established by integrating both aerodynamic and electrical parts, together with parameter uncertainties and perturbations. The control objective is to make the wind turbine rotor speed track the desired speed (the speed that is given by a MPPT) in spite of system uncertainties, and maintain the rotor current at rated value which can minimize the reactive power. This control strategy can provide a faster control action as the wind speed variations can be reflected instantaneously and significantly on the rotor speed reference signal, and yield more energy. Besides, by adopting quadratic Lyapunov function [16], the range of control parameters is obtained to guarantee the finite time convergence of the SOSM control system.
The article is organized as follows. The modeling of the VSWT system is presented in Section 2. Section 3 explains the problem formulation and the detailed control strategy. The comparative simulation results for the 1.5 MW three-blade DFIG-based WT system are investigated in Section 4. Finally, the conclusion is stated in Section 5.
2. VSWT System Modeling
The VSWT system is mainly composed of a turbine, a gearbox, and a generator, which are combined to convert wind energy into electric energy. According to different wind speeds, the VSWT system works at four different operating regions, as shown in Fig. 1. While the wind speed is below the cut-in speed $ v_{\rm cut\_in} $ , the produced torque is insufficient to drive the turbine, thus it cannot realize the startup function. While the wind speed increases over the cut-in speed $ v_{\rm cut\_in} $ and below the rated speed $ v_{\rm rated} $ , the VSWT system tries to capture the maximum wind energy by adjusting the rotor speed of WT. This region is called the partial load region. With the increasing wind speed satisfying $ v_{\rm rated} <v<v_{\rm cut\_off} $ , the WT tries to maintain the rated output power by regulating the pitch angle, called the full load region. There is an additional region, called the shutdown region, where the turbine stops operation due to high wind speed.
Obviously, the control task in the partial load region is more challenging, since the dynamics in this region is quite complex. Thus the study in this paper concentrates on the modeling and control in this region. The mathematical model in this region consists of formulas accounting for the electrical dynamics of the rotor and the dynamics of the mechanical rotational speed, including also the damping and resistance uncertainties caused by long-term mechanical wear and ambient temperature changes [8], [14]. It is expressed as:
$ \begin{align} \label{eq1}\begin{cases} \dot {\omega }_w =\frac{T_w }{J}-\frac{K+\Delta K}{J}\omega _w +\frac{3L_m \phi _s n_p n_g }{2L_s J}I_{rq} \\[2mm] \dot {I}_{rd} =\frac{L_s (R_r +\Delta R_r )}{L_m ^2-L_r L_s }I_{rd} +\omega _1 I_{rq} -n_p n_g \omega _w I_{rq} \\[1mm] \qquad\ \ +~\frac{L_s }{L_r L_s -L_m ^2}U_{rd} \\[2mm] \dot {I}_{rq} =\frac{L_m \phi _s n_p n_g }{L_r L_s -L_m ^2}\omega _w -\omega _1 I_{rd} +\frac{L_s (R_r +\Delta R_r )}{L_m ^2-L_r L_s }I_{rq} \\[1mm] \qquad\ \ +~n_p n_g \omega _w I_{rd} +\frac{L_s }{L_r L_s -L_m ^2}U_{rq} -\frac{L_m \phi _s \omega _1 }{L_r L_s -L_m ^2} \end{cases} \end{align} $
(1) where $ \Delta K $ and $ \Delta R_r $ represent the parameter uncertainties of the damping and resistance respectively, and the constraints $ \left| {\Delta K} \right|\le 0.5K $ and are satisfied. The other symbols in (1) are described as:
$ \omega _w $ wind turbine rotor speed; $ I_{rd} $ the $d$ -axis component of rotor current; $ I_{rq} $ the $q$ -axis component of rotor current; $ U_{rd} $ the $d$ -axis component of the rotor voltage; $ U_{rq} $ the $q$ -axis component of the rotor voltage; $ J $ the inertia of the combined rotating parts; $ K $ turbine total external damping; $ n_g $ gearbox ratio; $ \phi _s $ stator flux; $ L_m $ mutual inductance; $ L_s $ stator leakage inductance; $ L_r $ rotor leakage inductance; $ R_r $ rotor resistance; $ \omega _1 $ synchronous speed; $ n_p $ pole pair number. In order to concisely express (1), define
$ \begin{align*}&k_1 =\frac{1}{J}, \hspace{20mm} k_2 =\frac{K}{J} \\&\Delta k_2 ={\Delta K}{J}, \hspace{12.6mm}k_3 =\frac{3L_m \phi _s n_p n_g }{2L_s J}\\& k_4 =\frac{L_s R_r }{L_m ^2-L_r L_s }, \hspace{6.1mm}\Delta k_4 =\frac{\Delta R_r L_s }{L_m ^2-L_r L_s } \\ &k_5 =\omega _1, \hspace{20mm} k_6 =n_p n_g\\ & k_7 =\frac{L_s }{L_r L_s -L_m ^2}, \hspace{6.5mm} k_8 =\frac{L_m \phi _s n_p n_g }{L_r L_s -L_m ^2}\\& k_9 =\frac{L_m \phi _s \omega _1 }{L_r L_s -L_m ^2} \end{align*} $
this leads to
$ \begin{align} \label{eq2} \begin{cases} \dot {\omega }_w =k_1 T_w -(k_2 +\Delta k_2 )\omega _w +k_3 I_{rq} \\ \dot {I}_{rd} =(k_4 +\Delta k_4 )I_{rd} +k_5 I_{rq} -k_6 \omega _w I_{rq} +k_7 U_{rd} \\ \dot {I}_{rq} =(k_4 +\Delta k_4 )I_{rq} -k_5 I_{rd} +k_6 \omega _w I_{rd} +k_7 U_{rq}\\ \qquad\ \ +~k_8 \omega _w -k_9. \end{cases} \end{align} $
(2) The VSWT system model (2) is composed of two parts, e.g., the turbine model and the DFIG model. The single mass model of the turbine is [8]:
$ \begin{align} \label{eq3} J\dot {\omega }_w =T_w -K\omega _w -n_g T_{em} \end{align} $
(3) where $ T_w $ is the aerodynamic torque and $ T_{em} $ is the generator electromagnetic torque.
The nonlinear characteristics of $ T_w $ is established based on the aerodynamic principles [14], e.g.,
$ \begin{align} \label{eq4} T_w =\frac{P_w }{\omega _w }=\frac{1}{2}\rho \pi R^3\frac{C_p (\lambda, \beta )}{\lambda }v^2 \end{align} $
(4) where $ P_w $ is the aerodynamic power and is the power coefficient relating to a nonlinear function affected by the blade pitch angle $ \beta $ and the tip-speed ratio $ \lambda $ , defined as
$ \begin{align} \label{eq5} \lambda =\frac{\omega _w R}{v}. \end{align} $
(5) The DFIG model in the synchronously rotating frame $dq$ is established as (6) based on the stator flux orientation, whose phase diagram is shown in Fig. 2.
$ \begin{align} \label{eq6} \begin{cases} U_{sd} =0 \\ U_{sq} =\omega _1 \phi _{sd} =U_s \\ U_{rd} =R_r I_{rd} +\left( {L_r -\frac{L_m ^2}{L_s }} \right)\dot {I}_{rd} -\left( {L_r -\frac{L_m ^2}{L_s }} \right)I_{rq} \omega _s \\ U_{rq} =R_r I_{rq} +\left( {L_r -\frac{L_m ^2}{L_s }} \right)\dot {I}_{rq} +\left( {L_r -\frac{L_m ^2}{L_s }} \right)I_{rd} \omega _s \\\qquad\ \ +~\frac{L_m \phi _S }{L_s }\omega _s \\ T_{em} =-\frac{3}{2}n_p \frac{L_m \phi _S }{L_s }I_{rq}. \end{cases} \end{align} $
(6) 3. The VSWT System Control Strategy
3.1 Problem Formulation
Considering (4) and (5) in Section 2, the aerodynamic power that can be captured by a wind turbine is:
$ \begin{align} \label{eq7} P_w =\frac{1}{2}\rho \pi R^2C_p (\lambda, \beta )v^3. \end{align} $
(7) As the main control objective of the above VSWT system in the partial load region is to track the maximum power point and harvest more wind energy, the power conversion coefficient must reach the maximum value $ C_{p\max } $ in various wind speeds.
$ C_p (\lambda, \beta ) $ is generally expressed as [17]:
$ \begin{align} \label{eq8} C_p \left(\lambda, \beta \right)=c_1 \left(\frac{c_2 }{\Lambda }-c_3 \beta -c_4 \right)\times e^{\frac{-c_5 }{\Lambda }}+c_6 \lambda \end{align} $
(8) with . The coefficients $ c_1 -c_6 $ depend on the WT design characteristics. And the following coefficient values are adopted in this work: $ c_1$ $=$ $0.5176 $ , $ c_2$ $=$ $116 $ , $ c_3 =0.4 $ , , $ c_5 =21 $ , $ c_6=0.0068 $ .
Actually, in the partial load region, the pitch angle $ \beta $ is fixed at zero, to achieve the maximum power conversion coefficient $ C_{p\max } $ [2]. Then the $ C_p -\lambda $ characteristic with a constant pitch angle $ \beta =0^\circ $ is shown in Fig. 3. The tip-speed ratio $ \lambda $ must be maintained at an optimal point for achieving the maximum power coefficient $ C_{p\max } $ .
Considering Fig. 3 and the definition of $ \lambda $ in (5), it is thus necessary to adjust the rotor speed $ \omega _w $ according to the wind speed variation in the partial load region, to maintain the tip-speed ratio $ \lambda $ at an optimal point $ \lambda _{\rm opt} $ . This could guarantee the maximum power coefficient $ C_{p\max } $ , and from (7), when is controlled at the maximum value, maximum output power $ P_{a\max } $ is extracted from wind. Thus, the optimal WT rotor speed is given by:
$ \begin{align} \label{eq9} \omega _{\rm opt} =\frac{\lambda _{\rm opt} v}{R}. \end{align} $
(9) In the DFIG based VSWT system (2), this maximum wind energy capture objective can be achieved by means of the rotor voltage regulation in the generator. The rotor voltage can also control the rotor current $ I_{rd} $ , and thus regulate the stator-side reactive power $ Q_s $ , which can be expressed as:
$ \begin{align} \label{eq10} Q_s =\frac{3}{2}(U_{sd} I_{sq} +U_{sq} I_{sd} )=\frac{3U_s (\phi _s -L_m I_{rd} )}{2L_s }. \end{align} $
(10) Thus the designed SOSM control system should accomplish two major objectives. One is to maximize power extraction, by controlling the rotor speed to track the optimal rotor speed , which is regulated by $q$ -axis component of generator rotor voltage. The other is to minimize the reactive power by controlling $ I_{rd} $ to follow an external reference, which is regulated by $d$ -axis component of generator rotor voltage.
Here, $ Q_s $ is set to zero to ensure a unity power factor operation of the studied VSWT system which renders the rotor reference current $ I_{rdr} $ as
$ \begin{align} \label{eq11} I_{rdr} =\frac{U_s }{L_m \omega _1 }. \end{align} $
(11) 3.2 SOSM Controller Design
In order to achieve the control objectives in the partial load region, the nonlinear SMC scheme is presented in this section. The schematic diagram of the DFIG-based WT system is shown in Fig. 4.
In designing a general SMC for the VSWT system, the tracking error between the actual rotor speed and the desired value , and also the error between the actual and the desired $d$ -axis component of rotor current, are defined as:
$ \begin{align} \label{eq12} \begin{cases} e_1 =\omega _w -\omega _{\rm opt} \\ e_2 =I_{rd} -I_{rdr}. \end{cases} \end{align} $
(12) Then the sliding variables are defined as follows:
$ \begin{align} \label{eq13} \sigma _1 &=ce_1 +\dfrac{{d}}{{d}t}e_1\notag \\ &=\dot {\omega }_w +c\omega _w -c\omega _{\rm opt} -\dot {\omega }_{\rm opt} \end{align} $
(13) where $ c>0 $ .
$ \begin{align} \label{eq14} \sigma _2 =e_2 =I_{rd} -I_{rdr}. \end{align} $
(14) Respecting the VSWT system model (2), the first-order derivatives of sliding variables are
$ \begin{align} \dot {\sigma }_1 =&\ \ddot {e}_1 +c\dot {e}_1 \notag\\ =&\ k_1 \dot {T}_w +(c-k_2 -\Delta k_2 )\dot {\omega }_w +k_3 k_7 U_{rq}\notag\\ &-\ddot {\omega }_{\rm opt} -c\dot {\omega }_{\rm opt} +k_3 ( (k_4 +\Delta k_4 )I_{rq}\notag \\ & -k_5 I_{rd} +k_6 \omega _w I_{rd} +k_8 \omega _w -k_9 ) \notag\\ =&\ G_1 +k_3 k_7 U_{rq} \end{align} $
(15) $ \begin{align} \dot {\sigma }_2 =&\ \dot {e}_2 =\dot {I}_{rd} -\dot {I}_{rdr} \notag\\ =&\ (k_4 +\Delta k_4 )I_{rd} -\dot {I}_{rdr} +k_5 I_{rq} -k_6 \omega _w I_{rq} +k_7 U_{rd}\notag \\ =&\ G_2 +k_7 U_{rd} \end{align} $
(16) where $ G_1 $ and $ G_2 $ contains the state variables, VSWT parameters and parameter perturbations:
$ \begin{align} G_1 =&\ k_1 \dot {T}_w +(c-k_2 -\Delta k_2 )\dot {\omega }_w -\ddot {\omega }_{\rm opt} -c\dot {\omega }_{\rm opt} \notag \\ & +k_3 \left( {(k_4 +\Delta k_4 )I_{rq} -k_5 I_{rd} +k_6 \omega _w I_{rd} +k_8 \omega _w -k_9 } \right) \end{align} $
(17) $ \begin{align} \label{eq18} G_2 =&\ (k_4 +\Delta k_4 )I_{rd} -\dot {I}_{rdr} +k_5 I_{rq} -k_6 \omega _w I_{rq}. \end{align} $
(18) In (13) and (15), since and , the relative degree with respect to $ \sigma _1 $ equals to $ 1 $ . Similarly, from (14) and (16), the relative degree with respect to $ \sigma _2 $ is $ 1 $ as well.
Using the standard SMC with the approaching law method [18], the so-called exponential approaching law is selected as
$ \begin{align} \label{eq19} \dot {\sigma }=-\varepsilon {\rm sgn}(\sigma )-\delta \sigma \end{align} $
(19) where $ \sigma $ is the sliding variable, $ \varepsilon $ and are the designed parameters.
Then the $dq$ -axis components of rotor voltages are deduced as
$ \begin{align} \label{eq20} &U_{rq} =\frac{1}{k_3 k_7 }(-\varepsilon _1 {\rm sgn}(\sigma _1 )-\delta _1 \cdot \sigma _1 -G_1 ) \end{align} $
(20) $ \begin{align} \label{eq21} &U_{rd} =\frac{1}{k_7 }(-\varepsilon _2 {\rm sgn}(\sigma _2 )-\delta _2 \cdot \sigma _2 -G_2 ). \end{align} $
(21) Since the switching term $ \varepsilon {\rm sgn}(\sigma ) $ acts on the controller directly, it makes the control inputs $ U_{rd} $ and $ U_{rq} $ discontinuous and leads to intensive chattering effect.
Using the super-twisting algorithm [19], the control inputs and $ U_{rq} $ are reconstructed as
$ \begin{align} \label{eq22} \begin{cases} U_{rq} =u_1 +u_2 \\ u_1 =-\gamma _1 \vert \sigma _1 \vert ^\frac{1}{2}{\rm sgn}(\sigma _1 ) \\ \dot {u}_2 =-\phi _1 {\rm sgn}(\sigma _1 ) \end{cases} \end{align} $
(22) $ \begin{align} \begin{cases} U_{rd} =u_3 +u_4 \\ u_3 =-\gamma _2 \vert \sigma _2 \vert ^\frac{1}{2}{\rm sgn}(\sigma _2 ) \\ \dot {u}_4 =-\phi _2 {\rm sgn}(\sigma _2 ) \end{cases} \end{align} $
(23) where $ \gamma _1 $ , $\phi _1 $ , $\gamma _2 $ , $\phi _2 $ are undetermined control parameters.
Notice that the discontinuity of super-twisting SOSM control appears only in its derivative term, such that the control inputs $ U_{rd} $ and $ U_{rq} $ in system (2) are actually continuous. Namely, the SOSM reduces the chattering effect while preserving all the advantages of standard SMC.
By using this SOSM scheme, it is very important to choose suitable control parameters for stable operation of WT system. Here a Lyapunov method is employed to determine the range of control parameters, and then guarantee stable operation of the WT system.
In order to ensure $ \sigma _1 \to 0 $ , $ \dot {\sigma }_1 \to 0 $ in finite time, which means achieving a precise tracking of optimal rotor speed, the ranges of $ \gamma _1 $ and $ \phi _1 $ are needed to be addressed. Firstly, a state transformation is introduced as
$ \begin{align} \label{eq24} y=H_1 -k_3 k_7 \phi _1 \int_0^t {{\rm sgn}(\sigma _1 )} d\tau \end{align} $
(24) and taking into consideration (22), then, (15) is deduced as
$ \begin{align} \label{eq25} \begin{cases} \dot {\sigma }_1 =-k_3 k_7 \gamma _1 \vert \sigma _1 \vert ^\frac{1}{2}{\rm sgn}(\sigma _1 )+y \\[1mm] \dot {y}=-k_3 k_7 \phi _1 {\rm sgn}(\sigma _1 )+\dot {G}_1. \end{cases} \end{align} $
(25) As shown in (17), the perturbation $ G_1 $ is differentiable, and its first-order derivative is uniformly bounded, such that it satisfies
$ \begin{align} \label{eq26} \left| {\dot {G}_1 } \right|\le \Pi _1 {\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}\forall t>0 \end{align} $
(26) where $ \Pi _1 $ is a positive constant.
Now, choose the quadratic Lyapunov function
$ \begin{align} \label{eq27} V(\sigma, y)=\zeta ^TP\zeta \end{align} $
(27) where , and $ P $ is a particular symmetric and positive definite matrix chosen as
$ P=\left[ {\begin{array}{l} 2k_3 k_7 \phi _1 +\frac{1}{2}k_3 ^2k_7 ^2\gamma _1 ^2{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}-\frac{1}{2}k_3 k_7 \gamma _1 \\[1mm] {\kern 1pt}-\frac{1}{2}k_3 k_7 \gamma {\kern 1pt}_1 {\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}1 \\ \end{array}} \right].{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt} $
From $ \frac{{ d}\left| x \right|}{{d}t}=\dot {x}{\rm sgn}(x) $ and (25), $ \dot {\zeta } $ is deduced as
$ \begin{align} \label{eq28} \dot {\zeta }=\frac{1}{\left| {\zeta _1 } \right|}\left(A\zeta +B\hat {\dot {G}}_1 \right) \end{align} $
(28) where the matrix , , $ \hat {\dot {G}}_1$ $=$ .
Setting the matrix , the derivative of the Lyapunov function along the trajectories of the perturbed system (25) is deduced as
$ \begin{align} \dot {V}(\sigma, y)=&\ 2\dot {\zeta }^TP\zeta \notag\\ =&\ \frac{1}{\left| {\zeta _1 } \right|}(2\zeta ^TA^T+2\hat {\dot {G}}_1 B^T)P\zeta\notag \\ \le&\ \frac{1}{\left| {\zeta _1 } \right|}(2\zeta ^TA^TP\zeta +2\hat {\dot {G}}_1 B^TP\zeta +\Pi _1 ^2\left| {\zeta _1 } \right|-\hat {\dot {G}}_1 ^2)\notag \\ =&\ \frac{1}{\left| {\zeta _1 } \right|}(2\zeta ^TA^TP\zeta +2\hat {\dot {G}}_1 B^TP\zeta +\Pi _1 ^2\zeta ^TC^TC\zeta\notag\\ & -\hat {\dot {G}}_1 ^2)\notag \\ \le&\ \frac{1}{\left| {\zeta _1 } \right|}(\zeta ^TA^TP\zeta +\zeta ^TPA\zeta +\Pi _1 ^2\zeta ^TC^TC\zeta\notag \\ &+\zeta ^TPBB^TP\zeta )\notag \\ =&\ \frac{1}{\left| {\zeta _1 } \right|}\zeta ^T(A^TP+PA+\Pi _1 ^2C^TC+PBB^TP)\zeta. \end{align} $
(29) Choose $ Q=-(A^TP+PA+\Pi _1 ^2C^TC+PBB^TP) $ , then
$ \begin{align} \label{eq30} \dot {V}\le -\frac{1}{\left| {\zeta _1 } \right|}\zeta ^TQ\zeta. \end{align} $
(30) $ \begin{align} Q&=-(A^TP+PA+\Pi _1 ^2C^TC+PBB^TP)\notag \\ &=\left[{\begin{array}{l} k_3 ^2k_7 ^2\Big(\dfrac{1}{2}k_3 k_7 \gamma _1 ^3+\gamma _1 \phi _1 -\dfrac{1}{4}\gamma _1 ^2\Big)-\Pi _1 ^2{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}\dfrac{1}{2}k_3 k_7 \Big(\gamma _1-k_3 k_7 \gamma _1 ^2\Big) \\[2mm] {\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}\dfrac{1}{2}k_3 k_7 \Big(\gamma _1 -k_3 k_7 \gamma _1 ^2\Big){\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}\dfrac{1}{2}{\kern 1pt}k_3 k_7 \gamma _1 -{\kern 1pt}1{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt} \\ \end{array}} \right] \end{align} $
(31) When $ Q $ is a symmetric and positive definite matrix, there exists , which satisfies the Lyapunov theorem. Then the control system will converge to origin in finite time [16].
The matrix $ Q $ is given as (31), see the bottom of this page.
Set $ Q $ to be a positive definite matrix, and for finite time convergence characteristics the ranges of $ \gamma _1 $ and must be satisfied with
$ \begin{align} & {\begin{cases} \gamma _1 >\dfrac{2}{k_3 k_7 }\\ \phi _1 >\dfrac{k_3 k_7 \gamma _1 ^2}{4(k_3 k_7 \gamma _1 -2)}+\dfrac{\Pi _1 ^2}{k_3 k_7 \gamma _1 } \end{cases}} {\kern 1pt} \notag\\[2mm] &\quad\ \ \Rightarrow \begin{cases} \gamma _1 >\dfrac{4J(L_r L_s -L_m ^2)}{3n_g n_p L_m \phi _s } \\ \phi _1 >\dfrac{3L_m \phi _s n_p n_g \gamma _1 ^2}{12L_m \phi _s n_p n_g \gamma _1 -16J(L_r L_s -L_m ^2)}\\[4mm] \qquad\ \ +\dfrac{2J\Pi _1 ^2(L_r L_s -L_m ^2)}{3L_m \phi _s n_p n_g \gamma _1 }. \end{cases} \end{align} $
(32) Similarly, the perturbation $ G_2 $ is differentiable as shown in (18), and its first-order derivative is uniformly bounded, so that it satisfies
$ \begin{align} \label{eq31} \left| {\dot {G}_2 } \right|\le \Pi _2 {\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}\forall t>0. \end{align} $
(33) The ranges of $ \gamma _2 $ and $ \phi _2 $ , which ensure , $ \dot {\sigma }_2 \to 0 $ in finite time, are deduced as
$ \begin{align} \label{eq32}&\begin{cases} \gamma _2 >\dfrac{2}{k_7 } \\ \phi _2 >\dfrac{k_7 \gamma _2 ^2}{4(k_7 \gamma _2 -2)}+\dfrac{\Pi _2 ^2}{k_7 \gamma _2 } \end{cases} {\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt}{\kern 1pt} \notag\\[2mm] &\quad\ \ \Rightarrow \begin{cases} \gamma _2 >\dfrac{2(L_r L_s -L_m ^2)}{L_s } \\ \phi _2 >\dfrac{L_s \gamma _2 ^2}{4L_s \gamma _2 -8(L_r L_s -L_m ^2)}+\dfrac{\Pi _2 ^2(L_r L_s -L_m ^2)}{L_s \gamma _2 }. \end{cases} \end{align} $
(34) As long as the control parameters $ \gamma _1 $ , $ \phi _1 $ , and $ \phi _2 $ fall into the range of (32) and (34), the whole DFIG-based WT system may operate steadily.
4. Simulation Results
The proposed SOSM was simulated on a 1.5 MW WT system. The system parameters based on a 1.5 MW wind turbine are shown in Table Ⅰ [14]. The parameter perturbations of resistances $ \Delta K $ and the turbine damping in $ \Delta k_2 $ and $ \Delta k_4 $ , are taken into account as $ \pm 20 \% $ of their nominal values and shown in Table Ⅰ. The simulation step size is set as 0.001 s. In designing the SOSM controller for WT system, the parameters are deliberately chosen according to the conditions (32) and (34), together with a thorough analysis and comprehensive computer simulation, to guarantee its finite time stability. Finally, these parameters are chosen as $ \phi _1 =20 $ , $ \gamma _1 =1\times 10^5 $ , , $ \gamma _2 =1000 $ .
表 Ⅰ Characteristic of the Simulated Wind Turbine SystemTable Ⅰ Characteristic of the Simulated Wind Turbine SystemWind turbine parameters Value Number of blades 3 Rotor radius 35 m Hub height 84.3 m Rated power 1.5 MW $ J$ $4.4532\times 10^5 {\rm kg\cdot m^2}$ $K$ $200 {\rm N\cdot m\cdot s/rad}$ $n_g$ $83.531$ $\lambda_{\rm opt} $ 8 $n_p$ $2$ $\rho$ $1.2 {\rm g/m^3}$ $U_s$ $690 {\rm V}$ $R_r$ $0.0089 {\rm \Omega}$ $\omega _1$ $1500 {\rm r/\min}$ $L_m $ $0.016 {\rm mH}$ $L_r$ $0.299 {\rm mH}$ $L_s$ $0.407 {\rm mH}$ $ \Delta K$ $40\sin (\pi / {300})t $ $ \Delta R_r$ $0.00178\sin (\pi / {300})t $ In order to verify the control effect under different operating environment, two case studies are considered in this section. Case 1 uses a stepwise-varying wind speed to test the validity of the proposed SOSM control strategy under a sudden wind change. A PID control and a standard first order sliding mode (FOSM) control are also constituted in this case, to show the robustness and chattering-free behavior of the SOSM controller. The effectiveness has been further demonstrated using the turbulent wind speed in Case 2, to test validity of the proposed SOSM control strategy under realistic VSWT conditions.
Generally, the cut-in wind speed of 1.5 MW WT is 3 m/s, the cut-out wind speed is 25 m/s, and the rated wind speed is in the range of 11 m/s to 13 m/s. Therefore, in these simulations, the wind speed varies within the range between 3 m/s and 12 m/s, making the WT system operates in the partial load region. Two case studies are described as follows.
4.1 Case 1: Stepwise Wind Speed
In order to show the controller performances under a sudden wind change, the fast step variations of the wind speed are used in this simulation, as shown in Fig. 5. For comparing purpose, a PID control and a FOSM control are also constituted. The PID control parameters are chosen as $ k_{p1} =1.2 $ , $ k_{i1} =0.08 $ , ; $ k_{p2} =6.9 $ , $ k_{i2} =20.6 $ , $ k_{d2}=7.6 $ , and the FOSM control parameters are $ \varepsilon _1 =5 $ , $=$ $100 $ ; $ \varepsilon _2 =3 $ , $ \delta _2 =10 $ .
Fig. 6 shows the regulation performances of the wind turbine rotor speed $ \omega _w $ , the generator rotor current $ I_{rd} $ and the power coefficient $ C_p $ . It can be observed from Fig. 6 (a) that all the three controllers can make the rotor speed track the optimal speed under the same wind speed variation. How-ever, the tracking accuracy of the rotor speed with the proposed SOSM control strategy is higher, and the response time is shorter. The resulting generator d-axis rotor current $ I_{rd} $ shown in Fig. 6 (b) demonstrates that the PID control scheme is not robust for parameter uncertainties. Since the wind turbine rotor speed can track its optimal value tightly, the power coefficient will reach its maximum value $ C_{p\max } $ . As shown in Fig. 6 (c), the SOSM control strategy gives a faster response during sudden change of the wind speed, and makes the recover to $ C_{p\max } $ in 0.2 s after the sudden drop, yielding the maximum aerodynamic power.
The actual controller output $ U_{rd} $ and $ U_{rq} $ are shown in Fig. 7. The switching term appears directly in control input (20) and (21) for the FOSM controller, while the discontinuity in the SOSM controller (22) and (23) is hidden in their derivative term. Therefore, as is shown in Fig. 7, the chattering phenomenon, which is rather serious under FOSM method, is almost eliminated under the proposed SOSM control strategy. Actually, smooth $ U_{rd} $ and $ U_{rq} $ can reduce the mechanical stress on the VSWT system.
4.2 Case 2: Randomly Varying Wind Speed
In order to evaluate the tracking performance, robustness and chattering-free behavior of the proposed SOSM control strategy under realistic VSWT conditions, a 10-min randomly varying wind speed is adopted in the simulation. As shown in Fig. 8, the wind speed is ranging between 3 m/s and 10 m/s. The evolution of the rotor speed and the optimal speed is depicted in Fig. 9 (a). Compared with the PID controller, the SOSM controller features more accurate and faster response in rotor speed tracking. is shown in Fig. 9 (b). The result shows that, the SOSM controller is robust for the internal disturbances and external disturbances, which are caused by parameter uncertainties and wind speed fluctuations respectively. And this yields a very good tracking performance of rotor current. Fig. 9 (c) shows the power conversion coefficient, since the SOSM control strategy gives an accurate tracking of the optimal rotor speed, the $ C_p $ successfully maintains at , which yields the maximum aerodynamic power. The three simulation results in Fig. 10 indicate that the control objectives of maximum power point tracking and minimized stator reactive power are achieved effectively.
The evolution of the SOSM controller output $ U_{rd} $ and are shown in Fig. 10. As can be seen from the figures, the SOSM controller does not cause any intense chattering, and the smooth features determined by the use of SOSM control strategy will reduce the mechanical stress on the system.
5. Conclusion
In this paper, a new SOSM control approach for DFIG-based VSWT system is proposed to achieve the objectives of maximum power point tracking and minimum stator reactive power. The two SOSM controllers are designed based on the super-twisting algorithm, which only require measurement of the sliding variables without using information about the time derivatives of the sliding constraint. Quadratic form Lyapunov function method is employed to choose controller parameters, and guarantee the finite time stabilization of closed-loop system. The controllers are simulated based on a complete model of the DFIG-based VSWT, which includes both the mechanical and the electric dynamics, together with parameter uncertainties and perturbations. A PID control method and a standard SMC are also carried out for comparison. The simulation results indicate that the proposed control strategy is rather suitable for controlling the DFIG-based VSWT system, and the control objectives are successfully achieved in both step wise-varying wind speed and a randomly varying turbulent wind speed. Compared with the PID controller and conventional first-order SMC, the proposed control strategy shows a higher robustness, and the chattering phenomenon of rotor control voltage is almost eliminated.
-
表 1 ∆p(k)预报误差指标
Table 1 Forecast error indicators of ∆p(k)
方差 RMSE 1.1481E+6 1 071.3 表 2 需量预报误差指标
Table 2 Forecast error indicators of demand
方法 方差 PB (%) RMSE MAPE (%) 文献[5] 1 533.0 97.05 39.1921 0.0979 本文 1 275.7 97.55 35.7104 0.1054 表 3 超限拉闸时段需量预报误差
Table 3 Demand forecast errors during cut off time period
时间 需量实际值(kW) 需量预报值(kW) 误差(kW) 22 : 36 : 50 21 626 21 635 -9 22 : 36 : 57 21 654 21 650 4 22 : 37 : 04 21 692 21 685 7 22 : 37 : 11 21 728 21 725 3 22 : 37 : 18 21 754 21 751 4 22 : 37 : 25 21 788 21 787 1 22 : 37 : 32 21 812 21 829 -17 22 : 37 : 39 21 834 21 849 -15 22 : 37 : 46 21 835 21 839 -4 22 : 37 : 53 21 833 21 829 4 22 : 38 : 00 21 826 21 822 4 22 : 38 : 07 21 691 21 819 -128 22 : 38 : 14 21 510 21 463 47 22 : 38 : 21 21 335 21 318 17 22 : 38 : 28 21 191 21 176 15 22 : 38 : 35 21 049 21 056 -7 22 : 38 : 42 20 908 20 907 1 22 : 38 : 49 20 751 20 769 -18 22 : 38 : 56 20 581 20 577 4 22 : 39 : 03 20 407 20 385 22 表 4 工业实验需量预报误差指标
Table 4 Demand forecast error indicators of industrial experiment
方差 PB (%) RMSE MAPE 1 049.8 97.68 32.3981 0.0996 -
[1] Paparoditis E, Sapatinas T. Short-term load forecasting:the similar shape functional time-series predictor. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 2013, 28(4):3818-3825 doi: 10.1109/TPWRS.2013.2272326 [2] Ceperic E, Ceperic V, Baric A. A strategy for short-term load forecasting by support vector regression machines. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 2013, 28(4):4356-4364 doi: 10.1109/TPWRS.2013.2269803 [3] Quan H, Srinivasan D, Khosravi A. Short-term load and wind power forecasting using neural network-based prediction intervals. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems, 2014, 25(2):303-315 doi: 10.1109/TNNLS.2013.2276053 [4] Kebriaei H, Araabi B N, Rahimi-Kian A. Short-term load forecasting with a new nonsymmetric penalty function. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 2011, 26(4):1817-1825 doi: 10.1109/TPWRS.2011.2142330 [5] Yang J, Chai T Y. Data-driven demand forecasting method for fused magnesium furnaces. In: Proceedings of the 12th World Congress on Intelligent Control and Automation. Guilin, China: IEEE, 2016. 2015-2022 http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7578831/ [6] Wu Z, Chai T Y, Sun J. Intelligent operational feedback control for fused magnesium furnace. In: Proceedings of the 19th World Congress on International Federation of Automatic Control. Cape Town, South Africa: IFAC, 2014. 8516-8521 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1474667016429575 [7] Ozgun O, Abur A. Flicker study using a novel arc furnace model. IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, 2002, 17(4):1158-1163 doi: 10.1109/TPWRD.2002.804013 [8] 王其平.电器电弧理论.北京:机械工业出版社, 1991.Wang Qi-Ping. Arc Theory of Electrical Appliances. Beijing:Metallurgical Industry Press, 1991. [9] Shigley J E, Mischke C R, Budynas R G. Mechanical Engineering Design. New York, USA: McGraw-Hill, 1989. [10] 郭茂先.工业电炉.北京:冶金工业出版社, 2002.Guo Mao-Xian. Industry Furnace. Beijing:Metallurgical Industry Press, 2002. [11] Wu Z W, Wu Y J, Chai T Y, Sun J. Data-driven abnormal condition identification and self-healing control system for fused magnesium furnace. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, 2015, 62(3):1703-1715 doi: 10.1109/TIE.2014.2349479 [12] Cecati C, Kolbusz J, Rózycki P, Siano P, Wilamowski B. A novel RBF training algorithm for short-term electric load forecasting and comparative studies. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, 2015, 62(10):6519-6529 doi: 10.1109/TIE.2015.2424399 [13] Yu H, Xie T T, Paszczynski S, Wilamowski B M. Advantages of radial basis function networks for dynamic system design. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, 2011, 58(12):5438-5450 doi: 10.1109/TIE.2011.2164773 [14] Xie T T, Yu H, Hewlett J, Rózycki P, Wilamowski B. Fast and efficient second-order method for training radial basis function networks. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems, 2012, 23(4):609-619 doi: 10.1109/TNNLS.2012.2185059 [15] Du K L, Swamy M N S. Radial basis function networks. Neural Networks and Statistical Learning. London, UK: Springer, 2014. 299-335 [16] Chen S, Cowan C F N, Grant P M. Orthogonal least squares learning algorithm for radial basis function networks. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks, 1991, 2(2):302-309 doi: 10.1109/72.80341 [17] Park J, Sandberg I W. Universal approximation using radial-basis-function networks. Neural Computation, 1991, 3(2):246-257 doi: 10.1162/neco.1991.3.2.246 [18] Gomm J B, Yu D L. Selecting radial basis function network centers with recursive orthogonal least squares training. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks, 2000, 11(2):306-314 doi: 10.1109/72.839002 [19] Armstrong J S, Collopy F. Error measures for generalizing about forecasting methods:empirical comparisons. International Journal of Forecasting, 1992, 8(1):69-80 doi: 10.1016/0169-2070(92)90008-W [20] Dai W, Chai T Y, Yang S X. Data-driven optimization control for safety operation of hematite grinding process. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, 2015, 62(5):2930-2941 doi: 10.1109/TIE.2014.2362093 [21] 代伟, 柴天佑.数据驱动的复杂磨矿过程运行优化控制方法.自动化学报, 2014, 40(9):2005-2014 http://www.aas.net.cn/CN/abstract/abstract18472.shtmlDai Wei, Chai Tian-You. Data-driven optimal operational control of complex grinding processes. Acta Automatica Sinica, 2014, 40(9):2005-2014 http://www.aas.net.cn/CN/abstract/abstract18472.shtml [22] 吴志伟, 柴天佑, 吴永建.电熔镁砂产品单吨能耗混合预报模型.自动化学报, 2013, 39(12):2002-2011 http://www.aas.net.cn/CN/abstract/abstract18239.shtmlWu Zhi-Wei, Chai Tian-You, Wu Yong-Jian. A hybrid prediction model of energy consumption per ton for fused magnesia. Acta Automatica Sinica, 2013, 39(12):2002-2011 http://www.aas.net.cn/CN/abstract/abstract18239.shtml [23] 黄宇斌, 袁景淇, 汪瑞清, 赵平伟.数据驱动的上海市日需水量预报建模研究.控制工程, 2010, 17(S2):58-60 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=QK201003398025Huang Yu-Bin, Yuan Jing-Qi, Wang Rui-Qing, Zhao Ping-Wei. Data-driven modeling for daily water demand forecast of Shanghai city. Control Engineering of China, 2010, 17(S2):58-60 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=QK201003398025 [24] Landau I D, Zito G. Digital Control Systems: Design, Identification and Implementation. London, UK: Springer, 2006 期刊类型引用(5)
1. 谌卓玲,卢绍文,张亚军,潘庆玉. 工业过程指标的平滑交替辨识预报算法. 控制理论与应用. 2024(09): 1539-1547 . 百度学术
2. 雷声媛. 电熔镁冶炼自动上料过程控制系统的设计. 电子技术. 2023(08): 364-365 . 百度学术
3. 张菁雯,柴天佑,李慷. 电熔镁砂生产用电需量多步智能预报方法. 自动化学报. 2023(09): 1868-1877 . 本站查看
4. 陶金梅,牛宏,张亚军,李旭生. 基于随机配置网络的非线性系统智能建模方法. 控制与决策. 2022(10): 2559-2564 . 百度学术
5. 王维洲,吴志伟,柴天佑. 电熔镁砂熔炼过程带输出补偿的PID控制. 自动化学报. 2018(07): 1282-1292 . 本站查看
其他类型引用(18)
-