138 views

Uploaded by yamraj86

- ME564hw04 UM
- RT2_140714_e
- Control
- EESD_zhang2002_1
- 1376
- 1erOrden
- PDR AUV-NIOT
- Autonomous Underwater Vehicles Intech
- Mcs Jan2010
- CSTR
- week6-all
- Comparison of Pole Placement and LQR Applied.pdf
- Stste Space
- models_for_simulation_and_control_of_underwater_vehicles
- sol7.pdf
- Prdictive Control Scheme
- Z Language
- Observer Design for State and Parameter Estimation in IM With Simulation and Experimental Validation
- Flight Trajectory Simulation of Fluid Payload Projectiles
- Model-Based Vehicle Dynamics Control for Active Safety

You are on page 1of 7

S. Prabhudesai, S.Afzulpurkar, A. Gouveia, S. Naroji, L. Sebastiao†

Goa, India

maurya@nio.org

†

IST/ISR ,Lisbon, Portugal ( antonio@isr.ist.utl.pt)

††

University of SãoPaulo, SP, Brazil ( eabarros@usp.br)

Abstract: The paper describes the design and testing of the depth and heading

autopilots for a small Autonomous Underwater Vehicle (AUV) named Maya.

Control system design is done using the LQ (Linear-Quadratic) optimization

technique based on a mathematical model of the AUV obtained by resorting to

analytical and semi-empirical methods. Details of system implementation are

given and the results of tests with the prototype vehicle are discussed. The

paper concludes with a discussion of the interaction between motions in the

horizontal and vertical planes due to an asymmetry in the placement of the stern

control planes.

1. INTRODUCTION

AUV for Oceanography began in 1998 with the

suggestion that ship time at a cruise station could be

exploited by having small autonomous underwater

vehicles, suitably equipped with oceanographic

sensors, to sample the ocean in the vertical and

horizontal dimensions of the space around the ship.

In other words, we were thinking of an ‘extended

arm of an oceanographic research vessel’, so the

evolution of Maya took place. Maya is a small

AUV developed at the National Institute of

Oceanography (NIO), Goa, India. Fig 2. Maya cruising underwater

MAYA was carried out in the scope of an on-going

Indian-Portuguese collaboration programme that

aims to build and test the joint operation of two

AUVs for marine science applications. This

collaborative research was also extended to the Univ.

São Paulo, Brazil to take advantage of their expertise

on AUV modeling and parameter estimation.

2. VEHICLE MODEL

Weight (W) = 53 x 9.8 Kgf

The MAYA AUV has a streamlined torpedo-like Buoyancy (B) = 53.4 x 9.8 Kgf

body propelled by a single thruster. For vehicle The dimensionless values of hydrodynamic

maneuvering, two stern planes and a single stern coefficients for the vehicle are shown in table 1

rudder underneath the hull are used. For simplicity,

we assume that the complete six degrees of freedom Parameter Value

model for the AUV can be split into two Vertical Plane

noninteracting models for the vertical and horizontal Z´w - 1.027e-1

planes, see (Bjorn Jalving, 1994). The linearized Z´δ - 4.03e-2

dynamic equations of motion for the vertical and M´w - 8.33e-3

horizontal planes are represented in matrix form as M´δ - 7.87e-3

Z´q - 1.96e-2

M´q - 6.42e-3

coefficients

Barros et. al., 2004) and moments of inertia for the

vehicle are shown in table 2.

Parameter Value

and Vertical Plane

Z ´ w& -2.98e-2

Z´q& 8.22e-4

M ´w& 8.22e-4

M ´q& -1.91e-3

Iyy 1.02e-3

respectively. The notation used in this paper is in

accordance with (SNAME, 1950). The generalized Table 2. Added masses and moments of inertia

velocity vector υ = [u v w p q r]´ consists of surge,

sway, heave, roll rate, pitch rate, and yaw rate and is The derivatives for the horizontal plane are similar.

expressed in body coordinates. The vector of Euler The difference in signs and the effect of only one

angles η = [φ θ ψ]´ consist of roll, pitch, and yaw rudder used for horizontal plane has been taken into

angles. Following the partition above, the state consideration.

variables adopted are [w, q, θ z]´ for the vertical

plane and [v, r, ψ]´ for the horizontal plane. The The vehicle speed for the vehicle is set externally by

control vector u = [δr δs]´ consists of rudder the propeller revolutions and is not controlled

explicitly. The only inputs considered are therefore

deflection δr and stern plane deflection δs. B G z is

common mode stern plane deflection and stern rudder

the separation between the centre of mass and the

deflection for the vertical and horizontal planes,

centre of buoyancy, W is the weight of the vehicle,

respectively. However, the simplifying assumption

and u0 is the steady state speed of the surge speed of

that the vehicle motions in both planes are essentially

the vehicle about which the above linearized models

non-interacting is not strictly valid. A depth-heading

are computed. The vehicle parameters were estimated

interaction was observed in field tests and this is

by resorting to analytic and semi-empirical methods,

discussed in Section 5.

see (Barros et. al., 2004). The models were then

linearized about the nominal cruising speed of 1.2

3. CONTROL IN THE VERTICAL PLANE

m/s. Details of the vehicle model for Maya are given

In our control system design only three states [q, θ,

below.

z]´ were accessible for measurement. The heave

equation was neglected. This procedure is often

Physical Parameters

adopted in practice to simplify the controller design,

Nominal Vehicle Speed (u0): 1.2 m/s

see (Bjοrn Jalving, 1994). In our case, this strategy

Reynolds Number: 1.6692e+006,

proved adequate because the vehicle is stern

Sea Water Density: ρ = 1025 kg/m3

dominant and simulation results with the full model

showed that the model simplification did not impact

Vehicle Parameters

negatively on closed-loop maneuvering

Length (Lpp): 1.8 m,

performance. Of course, this procedure cannot be

Centre of mass (Zg): 0.52e-2 m (w.r.t body axis)

accepted universally and may fail completely when

Centre of Buoyancy (Zb): -0.172e-2 m (w.r.t body

the vehicle is bow dominant (open-loop “unstable”)

axis)

while the artificial, reduced order mode is stable. the solution to the above minimization problem

This is not the case with the MAYA AUV. yields a stabilizing state-feedback control law

where K is a matrix of feedback gains. The Control

Control system design was done by resorting to the System Tool box of Matlab™ was used to compute

LQ (linear, quadratic) design methodology (Lurie et. the optimal gain matrix K.

al, 2000). This was done by including the depth state

z, together with its integral ∫z in the state variables to Weighting matrix: Q = CTC

be penalized. This technique has the purpose of C = [Wq Wθ Wz W∫z ]

ensuring zero steady state error in response to step = [ 1 1 0.01 0.1]

commands in depth. At the same time, it allows for

simple implementation of the final controller using R = 0.5

the Delta-implementation strategy described in

(Kaminer et. al, 1995). Thus, in the final state space After several iterations aimed at meeting time and

model the state vector is [q, θ, z, ∫z]´. To apply the frequency-domain requirements, the gains were

LQ design methodology, the extended vertical plane found to be

model was written in state-space form as

K = [ -0.90353 -1.3544 0.3817 0.044721]

where matrices A and B can be derived from eq. (1), The corresponding bandwidth of the closed loop

and x(t) and u(t) represents state and control vector, system is 0.214 rad/sec, well within the natural

respectively. The cost criterion to be minimized, bandwidth of the actuators. The closed loop eigen

adopted in the LQR design, was values are

-0.264 1.00e+000 2.64e-001

-0.289 + 0.257i 7.47e-001 3.87e-001

where Q and R are weighting matrices. Under -0.289 – 0.257i 7.47e-001 3.87e-001

-1.12 1.00e+000 1.12e+000

generic stabilizability and detectability assumptions,

commands in depth (figure 3). The final structure The performance of the depth control system was

adopted was obtained by following the methodology assessed in simulation and the results are shown in

described in (Kaminer et. al, 1995). The control law figures 4 and 5. In the simulation, the controller was

with the delta implementation is discretized at a sampling time of 0.1 seconds. A pre-

filter on depth commands was used as a depth rate

limiter to limit high pitch angles during descent and

ascent of the vehicle. Anti-windup was used to switch

off the integral action during saturation of the

actuator which is set to + 20˚. In simulation, the

where zd is the desired depth, z is the measured depth, vehicle was commanded to dive to the depths of 1.5

θ is the pitch angle, and q is the pitch rate. and 2 meters and to return to 1.5 meters. The

corresponding pitch angle, pitch rate and stern planes

are also shown as in figures 4 (b), (c) and (d).

(c) Pitch rate (d) Stern Planes

system demonstrate zero steady state error in Figure 6 Field Test results: (a) depth (b) Pitch Angle

response to step commands in depth (figure 5) (c) Pitch rate (d) Stern Panes (e) Sign convention for

stern planes in Maya (the signs are opposite in Model

and Actual data, what is plotted in fig 4(d) is negative

of stern planes)

simulation and actual performance at Amthnem, Goa,

Maya was then further tested at Idukki Lake in

Kerala for a depth up to 21 meters in a stair case

mission. The results of the dives are shown in figure

7.

described in section 3.1 and is implemented on a high

performance embedded PC104. The controller loops

in the software are set to run at 10 Hz.

in Goa in early 2006 and the results are shown in

figure 6. The comparison of time responses in depth

for simulation and actual test match each other Figure 7 Stair case missions at Idukki:(a) Depth (b)

closely. The steady state pitch angle to maintain a Pitch Angle

depth in simulation is 1˚ less than the actual test data.

A possible reason for this could be that the net The high pitch angles (200 to 250) during the staircase

positive buoyancy used in simulation could be case change in depth are due to the low meta-centric

slightly different from that realized in the field. height of ~7mm. The pitch excursions can be reduced

by adjusting the rate limiter gain shown in figure 3.

control is similar to that used in the depth control

system. As before, the horizontal plane model

mentioned in (2) is used for the design of the heading

autopilot. However, in this case only two states [r, ψ]

are accessible out of three [v, r, ψ] and the effect of

sway is neglected.

R = 0.1

Figure 9 Simulation output (a) Heading angle

Closed loop Eigen values are (b) Rudder planes (c) Yaw rate

Eigenvalue Damping Freq. (rad/s) The field test data for heading control is shown in

-3.76e-001 + 3.09e-001i 7.73e-001 4.87e-001 figure (10). The heading command of 0 degree was

-3.76e-001 - 3.09e-001i 7.73e-001 4.87e-001 given while the vehicle was maintaining heading of

-1.22e+000 1.00e+000 1.22e+000 90 degree. The time responses in heading for

simulation and actual test show acceptable

Bandwidth of the closed loop system is 0.412 rad/sec. agreement. Sign convention in model and in actual

AUV are opposite for Rudder planes (figure 10e).

Figure 8(a) and 7(b) show the step and frequency

responses of heading angle and actuator to command

in heading, respectively.

Rudder planes (c) Yaw rate (d) Sign convention in

AUV for rudder plane

5. DEPTH-HEADING INTERACTION

Figure 8 (a) Step response (b) Frequency response

As shown in fig 1, instead of having a rudder on top,

The delta implementation of heading control system a communication stub is mounted on the rudder port

was simulated in Matlab™. The results of the for convenience and testing. As a result of an

simulation are shown in figure 8. A rate limiter at the asymmetry in control planes, an interaction between

input was not used in the case. the heading and depth systems of Maya would be

expected. Field test results shown in figure 11

The resulting control law is confirm this expectation. It is observed that a change

in heading during depth control causes a change in

⎡ d ⎤

δ = ∫ ⎢ K 3 (ψ d −ψ ) − (K1r + K 2ψ )⎥ dt (7) instantaneous depth. This is clearly captured in

⎣ dt ⎦ figures 11a and 11c which show the correspondence

where ψd is desired heading, ψ is measured heading, between reduction in depth and change in heading

and r is yaw rate. angle at the same time.

the condition

( B - W ) = X sin(θ) + LB(α, Re) (8)

vehicle, X the Surge force and LB the body lift force

which is a function of angle of attack (α) and

Reynolds no(Re). A change in heading command

disturbs the vertical plane balance resulting in the

inequality

the rudder which generates the lift force Lr and a roll

moment Mr about the C.G. of the vehicle and as a

consequence a roll angle φ, see figure 12 (b). As

there is only one rudder, there is practically no

counter acting moment to prevent rolling of the

vehicle (the metacentric height is small). As

consequence of the uncompensated roll φ, the lift Figure 12. (a) Schematic of forces and moment for

forces on the stern planes which are responsible for maintaining a depth. (b) Schematic of forces and

maintaining the depth are reduced by the factor moments for roll during turn.

cos(φ), with a consequent reduction in pitch angle

(θ), pitching moment (M) and angle of attack (α). 6. CONCLUSIONS

This leads to a reconfiguration of the balance in

forces where, the net buoyancy force (B-W) Control systems for depth and heading control of a

overrides the downward ward Force X sin(θ) + LB small AUV were designed and tested in field. The

leading to inequality (9). LQR methodology with delta implementation has

proved useful in the development of the control

The stern and rudder plane angles are shown in figure systems for the MAYA AUV. The performance of

11b and the corresponding changes in roll and pitch controllers meets the requirement of performance and

angle are shown in figure 11d during the depth- stability in both the vertical and horizontal planes. In

heading interaction. addition, the delta implementation removes the bias

from the stern planes obviating the need of a special

sensor for precise measurement of control plane

angles.

centric height leads to an observed interaction

between the depth and heading systems. A qualitative

explanation of this effect has been presented in this

paper.

the roll dynamics and designing an active roll

compensation system. This is very important in

shallow water surveys like bathymetry and bottom

video/photography mosaicking. However, in

oceanographic applications in which MAYA is being

used, the roll effect can be tolerated.

Figure 11 Field Test result for Heading and depth

interaction (a) Depth (b) Control Planes (c) Yaw ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. We thank the DIT, New Delhi

Angle (d) Pitch Angle and Roll Angle for the funding support extended to The National Institute

of Oceanography, Marine Instrumentation Division, Goa on

the development of the small AUV, MAYA. We also thank

DST, New Delhi and GRICES, Portugal for exchange visit

support under Indo-Portuguese Cooperation in S&T. A.

Pascoal and L. Sebastião gratefully acknowledge the

financial support of the AdI, Portugal (MAYASub project).

The work of Ettore Barros was supported by the FAPESP

Foundation in Brazil.

7. REFERENCES

system.”, IEEE Journal of Ocean Engineering,

Vol. 19, No 4, October 1994.

Dynamics: Modeling and parameter estimation

using analytical and semi-empirical, and CFD

methods”, Proceeding of the CAMS IFAC

Conference, Ancona, Italy, 2004. [The data used

is from a revised version of this paper which is to

be published ]

Control with Matlab, Marcel Dekker Inc. New

York, 2000.

and Edward E. Coleman, “A velocity algorithm

for the implementation of gain-scheduled

controllers” Automatica, Vol 31, No. 8, pp 1185

-1191, 1995.

Architects and Marine Engineers. Nomenclature

for treating the motion of submerged body

through a fluid.” Technical Research Bulletin

No. 1-5

- ME564hw04 UMUploaded byNASO522
- RT2_140714_eUploaded byLuis Carvalho
- ControlUploaded byJorge Mejia
- EESD_zhang2002_1Uploaded bythang272
- 1376Uploaded byAnonymous LU3Dz3TKtV
- 1erOrdenUploaded byEdgar Uriel
- PDR AUV-NIOTUploaded byroy thomas
- Autonomous Underwater Vehicles IntechUploaded byEdgar Rojas ZAcarias
- Mcs Jan2010Uploaded bybe6351
- CSTRUploaded byRuri Agung Wahyuono
- week6-allUploaded byAland Bravo
- Comparison of Pole Placement and LQR Applied.pdfUploaded byAnonymous Gmk3t4Q
- Stste SpaceUploaded byAbhijeet Redekar
- models_for_simulation_and_control_of_underwater_vehiclesUploaded bymohsen123
- sol7.pdfUploaded byMichael ARK
- Prdictive Control SchemeUploaded bysai1290
- Z LanguageUploaded byParas Bansal
- Observer Design for State and Parameter Estimation in IM With Simulation and Experimental ValidationUploaded bysajs201
- Flight Trajectory Simulation of Fluid Payload ProjectilesUploaded byjames
- Model-Based Vehicle Dynamics Control for Active SafetyUploaded byAntonio Navarrete
- Actuator FailurUploaded bySamarjit Patnaik
- ME121 MatlabHomework OutlineUploaded byDavid Chon
- hwkUploaded byRaunaqAdvani
- Modeling & Simulation of UAV Trajectory Planning on GAsUploaded byescanus
- 2013_2014_report1_copy (1)Uploaded byChristian Gonzalez Aranda
- lec18Uploaded bywin alfalah
- Digital Control Sys SyllabusUploaded byAndre Silva
- Stability & Control Deriv EstUploaded byScramblejams
- A MODEL BASED CONTROL CONCEPTUploaded bynanoruizpar
- 2009-IE-Adaptive Control for Virtual Steering Characteristics on EV Using SBWUploaded byAnkit Kumar

- USB SecurityUploaded byvinaygedam
- Katalog-MHPPUploaded byDina Butković
- Reviewer (4)Uploaded byAriel Mark Pilotin
- OTC107401 OptiX NG WDM Optical Layer Grooming ISSUE1.04Uploaded byClaudio Saez
- VHDLsimCMSGUploaded bylitoduter
- dbmsUploaded bysagar rao
- Is Premix Carpet really good for roads in India?Uploaded byProf. Prithvi Singh Kandhal
- LT-1040_FX-350_Programming_Manual.pdfUploaded by997147088
- Using the BayStack 450 10 100 1000 Series SwitchUploaded byDerward Pate
- asfafUploaded bybanala.kalyan
- NBR 6118 Design of Structural Concrete - ProcedureUploaded byfllc
- Nicotine Ph EurUploaded byAkshat Mittal
- Ant Colony WsnUploaded byafjald
- Polytechnique Montreal Design Paper 2011Uploaded byjmbnot
- 1.Basic of TransmissionUploaded byaniket
- MechatronicsUploaded bygbcoquilla5104
- 3-D Seismic Attributes Applied to CarbonatesUploaded byEuler Cauchi
- A Compact Frequency-Reconfigurable Patch AntennaUploaded byRadhika Sethu
- TM.A1000SW.029.pdfUploaded bych prabu
- Chapter 7 Technical Manual 2012Uploaded bygecobox
- Spring ProtectionUploaded byOxfam
- [001044]Uploaded byEberth Cardozo
- 7291-pcc_4.2.0_setupguideUploaded byYura Zver
- A Project Report on Analysis of Working Capital ManagementUploaded byParveen Narwal
- ReynoldsUploaded byNick Cordeta
- Directing and Managing the Project TeamUploaded byEhab Shata
- dreamweaver_cs5_apireferenceUploaded byDeon Darnell
- ATN+910B-English-version (3).pdfUploaded byDeyaniraOjeda
- Solar Energy Vol70Uploaded byMarko Šestan
- Report CBMUploaded byShahadat Hossain