Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T02:35:11.007Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Alternative trajectory-tracking control approach for marine surface vessels with experimental verification

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 March 2012

Farbod Fahimi  and
Chris Van Kleeck
Farbod Fahimi*
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, The University of Alabama in Huntsville, Huntsville, AL 35899, USA
Chris Van Kleeck
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB T6G 2G8, Canada
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Experiments with a nonlinear trajectory-tracking controller for marine unmanned surface vessels are reported. The tracking controller is designed using a nonlinear robust model-based sliding mode approach. The marine vehicles can track arbitrary desired trajectories that are defined in Cartesian coordinate as continuous functions of time. The planar dynamic model used for the controller design consists of 3 degrees of freedom (DOFs) of surge, sway, and yaw. The vessel only has two actuators, so the vessel is underactuated. Therefore, only two outputs, which are functions of the 3-DOF, can be controlled. The Cartesian position of a control point on the vessel is defined as the output. The orientation dynamics is not directly controlled. It has been previously shown that the orientation dynamics, as the internal dynamics of this underactuated system, is stable. The result of field experiments show the effectiveness of tracking control laws in the presence of parameter uncertainty and disturbance. The experiments were performed in a large outdoor pond using a small test boat. This paper reports the first theoretical development and experimental verification of the proposed model-based nonlinear trajectory-tracking controller.

Keywords

Control of robotic systemsNavigation, Unmanned surface vesselsNonlinear controlTrajectory-trackingField experiments
Type
Articles
Information
Robotica , Volume 31 , Issue 1 , January 2013 , pp. 25 - 33
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Sorensen, A., Sagatun, S., and Fossen, T., “Design of a dynamic positioning system using model-based control,” Control Eng. Pract., 4 (3), 359–368 (1996) (online). Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0967-0661(96)00013-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Holzhueter, T., “LQG approach for the high-precision track control of ships,” IEE Proc. Contr. Theor. Appl. 144 (2), 121–127 (1997) (online). Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1049/ip-cta:19971032CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Morawski, L. and Pomirski, J., “Ship track-keeping: Experiments with a physical tanker model,” Control Eng. Pract. 6 (6), 763–769 (1998) (online). Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0967-0661(98)00082-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Godhavn, J.-M., Fossen, T. and Berge, S., “Non-linear and adaptive backstepping designs for tracking control of ships,” Int. J. Adapt. Control Signal Process. 12 (8), 649–670 (1998) (online). Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1115(199812)12:8<649::AID-ACS515>3.0.CO;2-P3.0.CO;2-P>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Pettersen, K. and Nijmeijer, H., “Global practical stabilization and tracking for an underactuated ship – a combined averaging and backstepping approach,” Model. Identif. Control 20 (4), 189–199 (1999).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Pettersen, K. Y. and Nijmeijer, H., “Underactuated ship tracking control: Theory and experiments,” Int. J. Control 74 (14), 1435–1446 (2001) (online). Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00207170110072039CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Casado, M. and Velasco, F., “Surface ship trajectory control using non-linear backstepping design,” Proc. Inst. Mar. Eng. Sci. Technol. A (J. Mar. Eng. Technol. 3, 3–8 (2003).Google Scholar
8.Velagic, J., Vukic, Z. and Omerdic, E., “Adaptive fuzzy ship autopilot for track-keeping,” Control Eng. Practice 11 (4), 433–443 (2003) (online). Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0967-0661(02)00009-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Do, K., Jiang, Z. and Pan, J., “Underactuated ship global tracking under relaxed conditions,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 47 (9), 1529–1536 (2002) (Online). Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TAC.2002.802755CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10.Lefeber, E., Pettersen, K. Y. and Nijmeijer, H., “Tracking control of an underactuated ship,” IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 11 (1), 52–61 (Jan. 2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Pettersen, K. Y., “Global uniform asymptotic stabilization of an underactuated surface vessel: Experimental results,” IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 12 (6), 891–903 (Nov. 2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12.Yu, K.-W. and Wu, C.-E., “Tracking control of a ship by PI-type sliding controller,” J. Marine Sci. Technol. 12 (3), 183–188 (2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13.Do, K., Jiang, Z. and Pan, J., “Global partial-state feedback and output-feedback tracking controllers for underactuated ships,” Syst. Control Lett. 54 (10), 1015–1036 (2005) (online). Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sysconle.2005.02.014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.Do, K. D. and Pan, J., “Global tracking control of underactuated ships with non-zero off-diagonal terms in their system matrices,” Automatica 41 (1), 87–95 (2005) (online). Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.automatica.2004.08.005Google Scholar
15.Saeed, A., Attia, E., Helmy, A. and Awad, T., “Design of a neuro-autopilot maneuvering controller for underactuated ships,” AEJ – Alexandria Eng. J. 44 (4), 493–500 (2005).Google Scholar
16.Ghommam, J., Mnif, F., Benali, A. and Derbel, N., “Asymptotic backstepping stabilization of an underactuated surface vessel,” IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 14 (6), 1150–1157 (2006) (online). Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TCST.2006.880220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17.Gierusz, W., Cong Vinh, N. and Rak, A., “Maneuvering control and trajectory tracking of very large crude carrier,” Ocean Eng. 34 (7), 932–945 (2007) (online). Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2006.06.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18.Cheng, J., Yi, J. and Zhao, D., “Design of a sliding mode controller for trajectory tracking problem of marine vessels,” IET Control Theory Appl. 1 (1), 233–237 (2007) (online). Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1049/iet-cta:20050357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19.Ashrafiuon, H., Muske, K. R., McNinch, L. C. and Soltan, R. A., “Sliding-mode tracking control of surface vessels,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 55 (11), 4004–4012 (2008) (online). Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TIE.2008.2005933CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20.Gyoungwoo, L., Surendran, S. and Kim, S.-H., “Algorithms to control the moving ship during harbour entry,” Appl. Math. Modelling 33 (5), 2474–2490 (May 2009).Google Scholar
21.Aguiar, A. P. and Hespanha, J. P., “Position tracking of underactuated vehicles,” In: Proceedings of the American Control Conference, vol. 3, Denver, CO, USA (June 4–6, 2003), pp. 1988–1993 (online). Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ACC.2003.1243366Google Scholar
22.Schoerling, D., Van Kleeck, C., Fahimi, F., Koch, C. R., Ams, A. and Lober, P., “Experimental test of a robust formation controller for marine unmanned surface vessels,” Auton. Robots. 28 (2), 213–230 (2010) (online). Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10514-009-9163-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23.Fossen, T. I., Guidance and Control of Ocean Vehicles (John Wiley, Chichester, UK, 1994).Google Scholar