Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
The attached
copy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial research
and education use, including for instruction at the authors institution
and sharing with colleagues.
Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or
licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party
websites are prohibited.
In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of the
article (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website or
institutional repository. Authors requiring further information
regarding Elseviers archiving and manuscript policies are
encouraged to visit:
http://www.elsevier.com/copyright
Ocean Engineering
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/oceaneng
a r t i c l e in fo
abstract
Article history:
Received 18 January 2008
Accepted 29 August 2008
Available online 27 September 2008
An efcient solution for the multivariable submarine control design at low-depth conditions under the
inuence of wave disturbances is presented. The analysis and control design process is carried out under
the framework of individual channel analysis and design (ICAD), which is based on the multivariable
structure function (MSF). Classical frequency-domain control techniques based on Bode and Nyquist
plots are used. Robustness is stated in terms of gain and phase margins. The closed-loop system
includes low-order diagonal controllers facilitating its implementation, assessment, and tuning. ICAD
discloses new physical insights of the submarine dynamical behaviour. Previous designs based on
diagonal controllers consider the inputoutput channels dened by pairing the bow hydroplane angle
with the depth and the stern hydroplane angle with the pitch angle. The alternative inputoutput
pairing leads to unstable closed-loop systems. This phenomenon is associated with hydroplane reverse
control. Here it is shown that MSF-based diagonal controllers can be applied effectively for both sets of
channel congurations. Emphasis is placed on satisfying design specications aiming at maintaining the
depth low. The solution presented is more feasible and clearer to apply in practice than those so far
reported in the literature.
& 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords:
Multivariable control systems
Frequency-domain design
Individual channel analysis and design
Submarine
Depth control
1. Introduction
The analysis and design of low-depth-keeping multivariable
autopilots for the well-validated 80-m British submarine model
are presented.
Submarines operating at deep submergence can be considered
to be in a wave-free environment. This is due to the fact that the
effect of wave disturbances decreases exponentially with depth. In
general, the design of high submergence submarine depthkeeping controllers is a straightforward task. On the other hand,
at shallow submergence, under rough sea conditions and low
speed, the design of effective depth-keeping autopilots requires
further analysis and full comprehension of the effects of sea-wave
disturbances on the boat. Shallow submergence operations rely on
keeping the submarine at constant depth relative to a calm
surface with zero mean pitch angle (Marsheld, 1991; Marsheld
et al., 1992; Williams and Marsheld, 1990, 1991a; Ferranti
International, 1993). Low depth-keeping controllers must be
designed considering the characteristics of the wave disturbances
Corresponding author. Tel.: +34 91 624 59 25; fax: +34 91 624 94 30.
Nomenclature
w
q
heave velocity
the pitch rate
y
pitch angle
z
submarine depth
dB
bow hydroplane angle
dS
stern hydroplane angle
u0
boat speed
y z; yT output vector
u dB ; dS T input vector
Gs
transfer matrix
g ij s
scalar transfer function elements of Gs
Ks
multivariable controller
kii s
ith diagonal element of Ks
ei s
ith error signal
r i s
ith plant reference
yi s
ui s
C i s
gs
hi s
Gcl s
RHPP
RHPZ
P
N
Q
ga s
gb s
ith output
ith input
ith individual channel
multivariable structure function
individual subsystem transfer function
closed-loop matrix transfer function
right hand plane pole
right hand plane zero
number of RHPPs of gshi s
number of clockwise encirclements of the Nyquist
plot of gshi s to the point 1; 0 of the complex plane
number of RHP eigenvalues of the state-space representation
multivariable structure function when pairing ith
input to ith output
multivariable structure function when pairing ith
input to jth output
1749
1
ss 0:0629s 0:0336 0:0472is 0:0336 0:0472i
!
0:0076s 0:5461s 0:0494 0:0229s 0:0604s 0:1815
.
0:0017ss 0:0306
0:0022ss 0:0556
(1)
(2)
y2 s
g 21 s g 22 s
u2 s
where g ij s represents scalar transfer functions, yi s the outputs,
and ui s the inputs of the system, with i; j 1; 2. If diagonal
controller
2. Submarine dynamics
The well-validated longitudinal model of the 80-m standard
British submarine has been the centre of attention of several
research programmes (Booth, 1983; Daniel, 1981; Daniel and
Richards, 1982, 1983; Marsheld, 1991; Marsheld et al., 1992;
Richards and Stoten, 1981; Ferranti International, 1993; Williams
and Marsheld, 1990, 1991a,b). In particular, the model used in
this paper is summarised in Marsheld (1992).
The results reported in Licega-Castro and van der Molen
(1995a, b) were obtained by using the six-degrees-of-freedom
us Kses
(3)
,
u2 s
e2 s
0
k22 s
with ei s r i s yi s, where r i s represents the plant references. The inputoutput pairs are referred to as channels. The
open-loop inputoutput channels are clearly dened from Figs. 2
and 3 as,
C i s kii sg ii s1 gshj s,
Controller
Mean depth z
u
x
(4)
(s)
e (s)
k (s)
(5)
Plant
(s)
g (s)
z(s)
g (s)
g (s)
(s)
e (s)
k (s)
(s)
g (s)
(s)
w
Fig. 1. Submarine depth variables and hydroplanes conguration.
1750
Table 1
Open-loop channel poles and zeros
Channel 1
r (s)
k (s)
u (s)
g (s)h (s)
g (s)
r (s)
k (s)
d (s)
y (s)
gs
g 12 sg 21 s
,
g 11 sg 22 s
(6)
Transmittance
Zeros
Poles
Channel 1
Channel 2
Zeros of 1 gsh2 s
Zeros of 1 gsh1 s
Poles of g 11 s; g 12 s; g 21 s; h2 s
Poles of g 22 s; g 12 s; g 21 s; h1 s
d (s)
g (s)h (s)
g (s)
u (s)
y (s)
kii sg ii s
,
1 kii sg ii s
(7)
which dene the impact of controller kii s in the jth control loop
(with iaj).
From Eqs. (2)(7), the closed-loop system outputs are
!
!
y1 s
r 1 s
Gcl s
,
(8)
y2 s
r 2 s
where Gcl s is the closed-loop matrix transfer function and,
Gcl s I GsKs1 GsKs.
(9)
(10)
(10)
kii s
then
i; j
where
Proof. Appendix A.
Ri s
C i s
;
1 C i s
Pi s
1
;
1 C i s
Q i s
g ij shj s
,
g jj s
(11)
with i; j 1; 2 and iaj. Eqs. (8) and (9) are equivalent to Eqs. (10)
and (11), that is, no simplications have been introduced. The
system representation given by (8)(9) contains the same
information as the representation (10)(11) does.
By representing the closed-loop system as in (10)(11), two
very important advantages are gained. First, it is possible to
describe the system dynamics in terms of the poles and the zeros
explicitly. Second, the relationship between the inputs and the
outputs is clearly given by means of the term Ri s. Furthermore,
the cross-coupling between channels is suitably expressed by
means of the term P i sQ i s. Classical control techniques can be
applied if the system is described in the form of the individual
channels Eq. (10). Moreover, the closed-loop response yi s can be
considered to be driven by the reference r i s subject to the
disturbance r j s. Therefore, controllers kii s can be designed in
order to satisfy specications dened in terms of single-inputsingle-output systems. The nature of the design is determined by
the poles and the zeros of the open-loop system. The poles and the
zeros of the open-loop channels are summarised in Table 1
(Leithead and OReilly, 1992a).
&
(12)
The potential restrictions on the performance due to nonminimum phase behaviour can be established from the RHPZs
or purely imaginary zeros of 1 gs. Note that the RHPZs of
1 gs are the RHP transmission zeros of the multivariable
system. Moreover, the system has purely imaginary transmission
gb s
g 11 sg 22 s
.
g 12 sg 21 s
(17)
In the past, this conguration resulted in unstable closedloop systems. The unstability of the system is associated with
reverse hydroplane control (Spencer, 1980). In this section, this
problem is overcome by means of the MSF-based design.
ga s 2:3617
(18)
(19)
(20)
0.2
0
-0.2
Imaginary Axis
Z N P Q,
1751
(13)
-0.4
-0.6
-0.8
-1
-1.2
-1.4
-1.6
-2.5
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
Real Axis
0.5
Magnitude [dB]
10
(a) Bow hydroplane angle r 1 depth y1 ;
Stern hydroplane angle (r 2 )pitch angle (y2 ).
With this inputoutput pairing the open-loop system is:
!
!
!
!
y1 s
g 11 s g 12 s
e1 s
0
k11 s
(14)
y2 s
g 21 s g 22 s
e2 s
0
k22 s
The corresponding MSF is
(15)
. (16)
y2 s
g 21 s g 22 s
e2 s
0
k21 s
0
-5
-10
405
Phase [deg]
g sg s
ga s 12 21 .
g 11 sg 22 s
360
315
270
225
180
10-2
10-1
100
Frequency [rad/s]
101
Fig. 4. (a) Nyquist diagram of the MSF ga s, (b) Bode diagram of the MSF ga s.
1752
0.9
0.7
0.3
0
-0.1
-0.5
0.5
1
Real Axis
1.5
(22)
(23)
(24)
Magnitude [dB]
10
gb s 0:4234
0.4
0.1
g ij sg ji s
kii sg ii s
,
g ii sg jj s 1 kii sg ii s
g ii s1 ga shj s and g ii s,
0.5
0.2
5
0
-5
-10
180
Phase [deg]
ga shi s
0.6
Imaginary Axis
s!1
0.8
135
90
45
0
10-2
10-1
100
Frequency [rad/s]
101
102
Fig. 5. (a) Nyquist diagram of the MSF gb s, (b) Bode diagram of the MSF gb s.
where
h1 s
k12 sg 21 s
;
1 k12 sg 21 s
h2 s
k21 sg 12 s
.
1 k21 sg 12 s
but in this case, gb 041. That is, the Nyquist plot starts to
the right of 1; 0.
(b.2) gb s contains one RHPP and its Nyquist plot encircles the
point 1; 0 in counterclockwise direction. Thus, 1 gb s
does not contain any RHPZ.
(b.3) In this case, the functions hi s may inuence the channel
structure. For instance, the bandwidth of one of the channels
may be required to be limited. Obviously, this characteristic
will be also reected in hi s. Note that at low frequencies
jgb sj41. Thus, an early roll-off induced by k21 s may cause
gb shi s not to encircle the point 1; 0. In general, it is
desirable not only that gb s and gb shi s preserve the same
gb sh2 s
Note that, from Fig. 5(b), the gain margins and phase margin of
(25)
(26)
5. Control design
g 11 sg 22 s
k21 sg 12 s
,
g 12 sg 21 s 1 k21 sg 12 s
1753
K mp sg nmp s
1 K mp sg nmp s
1754
Table 2
Structural robustness of the channels and control system using ga s
Measure
C 1 s
k11 sg 11 s
ga sh2 s
C 2 s
k22 sg 22 s
ga sh1 s
Bandwidth (rad/s)
Gain margin (dB)
Phase margin (deg)
0.03
24
104
0.09
30
50
6
50.210
0.5
1
60
0.508
1
70
6
90.130
1
a(s)
0.5
-50
Imaginary Axis
Magnitude [dB]
50
Phase [deg]
-100
-45
-90
-135
a(s)h2(s)
a(s)h1(s)
-0.5
-1
-1.5
-180
-225
10-3
10-2
10-1
100
-2
-2.5
101
-2
-1.5
Frequency [rad/s]
-1
-0.5
Real Axis
0.5
50
Magnitude [dB]
Magnitude [dB]
50
-50
a(s)
a(s)h2(s)
-100
a(s)h1(s)
Phase [deg]
Phase [deg]
-50
-150
450
-100
-45
-90
-135
360
270
180
90
-180
10-2
10-1
100
101
Frequency [rad/s]
102
103
s 0:07s 0:05
s 0:3s 0:2
s 0:12
ss 10
0
10-3
10-2
10-1
100
101
Frequency [rad/s]
102
103
Fig. 7. (a) Nyquist diagrams of ga sh2 s and ga sh1 s, (b) Bode diagrams of
ga sh2 s and ga sh1 s.
and
k12 s 1400
s 0:1s 0:03
ss 5
were obtained.
and
k21 s 0:4
s 0:025
s 0:25
(29)
(30)
It must be stressed the fact that h2 s should contain one RHPP,
which is achieved due to the fact that k21 sg 12 s does not have
any RHPP and its Nyquist plot encircles the point 1; 0 once
clockwise. The counterclockwise encirclement to the point 1; 0 of
the Nyquist plot of gb s is also preserved by gb sh1 s and
gb sh2 s as shown in Fig. 10(a).
1755
50
Magnitude [dB]
Magnitude [dB]
50
0
-50
-100
-50
-100
-45
-90
Phase [deg]
Phase [deg]
-150
-45
-135
-180
-225
10-3
10-2
10-1
100
Frequency [rad/s]
101
-90
-135
-180
10-3
102
10-2
10-1
100
Frequency [rad/s]
101
102
100
Magnitude [dB]
Magnitude [dB]
50
50
0
-50
-100
180
-90
-135
-180
10-3
-50
90
Phase [deg]
Phase [deg]
-100
-45
10-2
10-1
100
101
Frequency [rad/s]
102
0
-90
-180
10-3
103
10-2
10-1
Frequency [rad/s]
100
101
Table 3
Structural robustness of the channels and control system using gb s
Measure
C 1 s
k11 sg 11 s
ga sh2 s
C 2 s
k22 sg 22 s
ga sh1 s
Bandwidth (rad/s)
Gain margin (dB)
Phase margin (deg)
0.5
20
82
0.5
1
100
5.15
26
0.04
1
77
0.086
1
170
5.4
38
1756
Magnitude [dB]
b(s)h2(s)
0.8
b(s)h1(s)
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
-0.2
-0.5
-50
-100
-90
Phase [deg]
Imaginary Axis
50
b(s)
0.5
1
Real Axis
1.5
-135
-180
-225
-270
10-3
10-2
10-1
100
Frequency [rad/s]
101
102
50
Magnitude [dB]
Magnitude [dB]
50
0
-50
b(s)
-100
b(s)h2(s)
b(s)h1(s)
135
90
45
0
-45
10-3
-50
-100
-90
Phase [deg]
Phase [deg]
-150
180
10-2
10-1
100
Frequency [rad/s]
101
102
Fig. 10. (a) Nyquist diagrams of gb sh2 s and gb sh1 s, (b) Bode diagrams of
gb sh2 s and gb sh1 s.
-135
-180
10-3
10-2
10-1
Frequency [rad/s]
100
101
Fig. 11. (a) Bode diagram of C 1 s (pitch) with gb s, (b) Bode diagram of C 2 s
(depth) with gb s.
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
References
0
0
50
100
150
Time [s]
200
250
300
10-3
4
3
2
1
0
-1
-2
Response with a(s)
-3
-4
0
50
100
150
Time [s]
200
250
300
Fig. 12. (a) Step response for the controlled submarine depth with gb s and ga s,
(b) controlled pitch angle with gb s and ga s.
1757
Acknowledgements
This research was founded by the MOD under Grant no.
ASE045 and SERC Grant no. GR/F/92435.
Appendix
Proof of Proposition 1. The stability of yi s is determined by the
poles of the transfer functions Ri s, P i s, and Q i s.
Akbar, M.A., Leithead, W.E., OReilly, J.O., Robertson, S.S., 1994. Design of robust
controllers for a 3-input 3-output supersonic aircraft powerplant using ICD. In:
Proceedings of the 3rd IEEE Conference on Control Applications. Glasgow, UK,
pp. 9599.
Arentzen, E.S., Mandel, P., 1960. Naval architectural aspects of submarine design.
The Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers Transactions 68.
Booth, T., 1983. Optimal depth control of an underwater vehicle under a seaway.
Proceedings of the Royal Institution of Naval Arquitects. International
Symposium on Naval Submarines. London, pp. 1719
Bovis, A.G., 1988. Optimal control, safety and silence. Trends in design of
manoeuvring systems for French submarines. Proceedings of Warship 88
International Symposium on Conventional Naval Submarines. London, UK.
Braugnier, W., 1966. Automatic depth control of submarine split plane mode. Naval
Ship Systems Command Technical News 15, part 7, July.
Burges, R.F., 1975. Ships Beneath the Sea: A History of Submarines and
Submersibles. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Daniel, C.J., 1981. Submersible Vehicle Control. M. Phil. Thesis, University of
Cambridge, UK.
Daniel, C.J., Richards. R.J., 1982. A multivariable controller for depth control of a
submersible vehicle. Proceedings of the Institute of Measurement and Control
Conference: Applications of Multivariable System Theory, October 1982.
Daniel, C.J., Richards. R.J., 1983. Control of Underwater Vehicles. Department of
Engineering, University of Cambridge, UK, Report no. 2020/0156, August.
Dudgeon, G.J.W., Gribble, J.J., 1998. Helicopter translational rate command using
individual channel analysis and design. Control Engineering Practice 6 (1), 1523.
Dudgeon, G.J.M., Leithead, W.E., OReilly, J., McDonald, J.R., 2000. Prospects for the
decentralised control of small-scale power networks with embedded generation. Proceedings of the Power Engineering Society Winter Meeting,
13991404.
Edwards, F.V., Dudgeon, G.J.W., McDonald, J.R., Leithead, W.E., 2000. Dynamics of
distribution networks with distributed generation. In: Proceedings of the
Power Engineering Society Summer Meeting, pp. 10321037.
Fadlalmula, Z., Robertson, S.S., OReilly, J., Leithead, W.E., 1998. Individual channel
analysis of the turbogenerator with a power system stabilizer. International
Journal of Control 69 (2), 175202.
Freudenberg, J.S., Looze, D., 1988. Right half plane poles and zeros and design
tradeoffs in feedback systems. IEEE Transactions in Automatic Control 30,
555565.
Goodwin, G.C., Graebe, S.F., Salado, M.E., 2001. Control System Design. PrenticeHall, USA.
Gueler, G.F., 1989. Modelling, design, and analysis of an autopilot for submarine
vehicles. International Shipbuilding Progress 36, 5185.
Keel, L.H., Bhattacharyya, S.P., 1997. Robust, fragile, or optimal? IEEE Transactions
on Automatic Control 42 (8), 10981106.
Leithead, W.E., OReilly, J., 1991a. Performance issues in the individual channel
design of 2-input 2-output systems. Part 1: Structural issues. International
Journal of Control 54, 4782.
Leithead, W.E., OReilly, J., 1991b. Uncertain SISO systems with xed stable
minimum-phase controllers: relationship of closed-loop systems to plane RHP
poles and zeros. International Journal of Control 53, 771798.
Leithead, W.E., OReilly, J., 1992a. Performance issues in the individual channel
design of 2-input 2-output systems. Part 2: robustness issues. International
Journal of Control 55, 347.
Leithead, W.E., OReilly, J., 1992b. m-Input m-Output feedback control by individual
channel design. Part 1. Structural Issues. International Journal of Control 56 (6),
13471397.
Leithead, W.E., OReilly, J., 1994. Investigation of the ICD structure of systems
dened by state space models. International Journal of Control 60 (1), 7189.
Liceaga-Castro, J.U., 1994. Helicopter Flight Control by Individual Channel Design.
Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Glasgow, UK.
Liceaga-Castro, E., Liceaga-Castro, J., 1998. Submarine depth control by individual
channel design. In: Proceedings of the 37th IEEE Conference on Decision and
Control, Tampa, Florida, USA, pp. 31833188.
Liceaga-Castro, E., van der Molen, G., 1995a. A submarine depth control system
design. International Journal of Control 61 (2), 279308.
Liceaga-Castro, E., van der Molen, G., 1995b. Submarine H1 depth control under wave
disturbances. IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology 3 (3), 338346.
Lively, K.A., 1983. Multivariable Control System Design for a Submarine. M.Sc.
Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA, May.
Marsheld, W.B., 1991. Submarine periscope depth-keeping using an H1 controller
together with sea noise reduction notch lters. Proceedings of the Institute of
Measurement and Control Symposium: Robust Control System Design Using
H1 and Related Methods Meeting, Cambridge, UK, pp. 31833188.
Marsheld, W.B., 1992. Submarine data for the use in autopilot research. Defense
Research Agency, Haslar, Gosport, Hampshire, U.K. Private communication.
Marsheld, W.B., Hirom, C., Meek, S.F., 1992. Submarine SEA, to calculate the forces
and moments on a submerged submarine due to waves. Defense Research
Agency, Haslar, Gosport, Hampshire, U.K. Private communication.
Nesline, F.W., Zarchan, P., 1982. Why modern controllers can go unstable in
practice. In: Proceedings of the AIAA Guidance and Control Conference. San
Diego, California, USA.
Nonweiler, T.R.F., 1961. The stability and control of deeply submerged submarines.
Transactions RINA.
OReilly, J., Leithead, 1991. Multivariable control by individual channel control.
International Journal of Control 54, 146.
Presentation to RDM by the Submarine Control Group of Ferranti Naval Systems,
1993. Ferranti International, Ref. 15106-60227-45, North Crawley Road, New
Port Pagnell, Bucks MK16 9HT, UK, March.
Richards, R.J., Stoten, D.P., 1981. Depth control of a submersible vehicle.
International Shipbuilding Progress 28, 3039.
Spencer, J.B., 1982. Stability and control of submarines. Parts IIV. Reprint of the
Royal Naval Scientic Science 23, 187205, 265281, 327345.