![References
[1] A. Zaerpoora and M. Nili, “Distributed object transportation on a desired path based on Constrain and Move strategy,” Rob. Auton. Syst., vol. 50, pp. 115–128, 2005.
[2] N. Michael, J. Fink, and V. Kumar, “Cooperative manipulation and transportation with aerial robots,” Auton. Robots, pp. 1–14, 2010.
[3] T. I. Fossen, Handbook of Marine Craft Hydrodynamics and Motion Control, 1st Ed. Sussex: John Wiley & sons, 2011.
[4] W. H. Wang, X. Q. Chen, A. Marburg, J. G. Chase, and C. E. Hann, “Design of Low-Cost Unmanned Underwater Vehicle for Shallow Waters,” IEEE/ASME Int. Conf. Mechatron. Embed.
Syst. Appl., pp. 204–209, 2008.
[5] O. Yildiz, R. B. B. Gokalp, and A. E. E. Yilmaz, “A review on motion control of the Underwater Vehicles,” Electr. Electron. Eng., pp. II-337-II–341, 2009.
[6] J. Ghommam, H. Mehrjerdi, M. Saad, and F. Mnif, “Formation path following control of unicycle-type mobile robots,” Rob. Auton. Syst., vol. 58, no. 5, pp. 727–736, 2010.
[7] F. U. Rehman, G. Thomas, and E. Anderlini, “Development of a Simulation Platform for Underwater Transportation using two Hovering Autonomous Underwater Vehicles (HAUVs),” in
Proceedings of the 6th International Conference of Control, Dynamic Systems, and Robotics (CDSR’19), 2019, pp. 1–8.
[8] A. Phillips, M. Furlong, and S. R. Turnock, “The use of Computational Fluid Dynamics to Determine the Dynamic Stability of an Autonomous Underwater Vehicle,” 10th Numer. Towing
Tank Symp. (NuTTS’07), Hamburg, Ger., 2007.
[9] C. D. Williams, “AUV systems research at the NRC-IOT: An update,” Int. Symp. Underw. Technol., pp. 59–73, 2004.
[10] D. Mellinger, “Trajectory Generation and Control for Quadrotors,” Mechanical Engineering and Applied Mechanics PhD Thesis, University of Pennsylvania, 2012.
[11] F. U. Rehman, G. Thomas, and E. Anderlini, “Centralized Control System Design for Underwater Transportation using two Hovering Autonomous Underwater Vehicles (HAUVs),” IFAC-
PapersOnLine, vol. 52, no. 11, pp. 13–18, 2019.
[12] O. A. Eidsvik, “Identification of Hydrodynamic Parameters for Remotely Operated Vehicles,” Marine Technology Master Thesis, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 2015.
[13] S. S. Sandøy, “System Identification and State Estimation for ROV uDrone,” Marine Technology Master Thesis, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 2016.
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
16](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/controlsystemdesignforautonomousunderwatertransportationusingfourseaperchhauvs-230517084305-0ecbd992/85/Control-System-Design-for-Autonomous-Underwater-Transportation-using-four-Seaperch-HAUVS-pdf-16-320.jpg)
Control System Design for Autonomous Underwater Transportation using four Seaperch HAUVS.pdf
- 1. Autonomous Ships Conference 17-18 June 2020, London, UK Control System Design for Autonomous Underwater Transportation using four Seaperch HAUVS Faheem Ur Rehman (MRINA), University College London MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
- 2. Motivation • Main modes of transportation • Higher underwater hull resistance • Advantages • Short range operation • Recommended procedure MECHANICAL ENGINEERING 2
- 3. Unmanned Underwater Vehicles • Autonomous Underwater Vehicle (AUV) • Remotely Operated Vehicle (ROV) • Hovering Autonomous Underwater Vehicle (HAUV) MECHANICAL ENGINEERING 3 ROV (MBARI, 2017) AUV (NOAA, 2018)
- 4. Types of Connections MECHANICAL ENGINEERING 4 (Zaerpoora at el., 2004) (Michael at el., 2010) Fig 01 Fig 02 • Flexible links ✓ Relative motions ✓ Decentralized control system • Solid links ✓ Whole system a single rigid body ✓ Centralized control system
- 5. Underwater Challenges • Nonlinear highly coupled dynamics • Uncertain hydrodynamic parameters Technical Requirements • Stability – no compromise • Tracking accuracy - within ±5% • Robust control system MECHANICAL ENGINEERING 5
- 6. System Description MECHANICAL ENGINEERING 6 Fig 01: Seaperch HAUV • 04 x Seaperch HAUV • Pipes, Elbows and T-joints • Vertical thrusters • Axial thrusters • 04 x Manipulator plate • Cubic payload Fig 02: System setup
- 7. Nonlinear Coupled Dynamic Model • Newton-Euler formulation • Kinematics: ሶ 𝜼 = 𝑱𝒗. • Kinetics: 𝑴 ሶ 𝒗 + 𝑫 𝒗 𝒗 + 𝑪 𝒗 𝒗 + 𝒈 𝜼 = 𝝉. 𝑴 = 𝑴𝑹𝑩 + 𝑴𝑨. 𝑪 𝒗 = 𝑪𝑹𝑩 𝒗 + 𝑪𝑨 𝒗 . MECHANICAL ENGINEERING 7 Assumptions • Rigid body of constant mass • Deeply submerged • Interaction and sea current effects ignored • CO is at centre of payload • Neutrally buoyant Reference frames
- 8. Propulsion Model • 08 axial thrusters • 08 vertical thrusters • Experimental maximum axial thrust force i.e. 1.6N • Same was assumed for all the thrusters • Thrust Allocation matrix MECHANICAL ENGINEERING 8 Fig 01: Experimental setup for axial thrust force of a Seaperch
- 9. 9 Verification Tests: System Response without Control Test 01: Axial thrusters were applied at the maximum inward thrust Test 02: Vertical thrusters were applied at the maximum positive thrust (experimental velocity for 02 Seaperch = 0.144m/sec) Test 03: Axial thrusters were applied for motion MECHANICAL ENGINEERING Test 02 – Velocity response Test 03 – Motion response in the horizontal plane x y
- 10. 10 Centralized Control System Design MECHANICAL ENGINEERING Legend: • Error vector 𝒆 • Desired state vector 𝜼𝒅 • Actual state vector 𝜼 • Desired thrust vector about E 𝝉𝒆 • Transformation matrix from BFF to EFF (𝑱) • Desired thrust vector about O 𝝉𝒅 • Thrust allocation matrix (𝑻𝒂) • Thrust force vector (𝒇𝒅) • Actual thrust force vector 𝒇 • Actual thrust vector (𝝉)
- 11. 11 Motion Response With Control MECHANICAL ENGINEERING Test 04: Displacement response Test 04 – Thrust force response Test 04: Desired vertical distance = 2m Zero motion in other directions 𝑲𝒑 𝑲𝒊 𝑲𝒅 Surge 3 0 1 Sway 3 0 1 Heave 10 0 10 Yaw 3 0 1
- 12. 12 Trajectory Generation MECHANICAL ENGINEERING • Safe trajectory requirement • Minimum Snap Trajectory • Seventh order polynomial • Segment time = 20secs • Time step = 0.01sec
- 13. 13 Trajectory Implementation - Test 05 MECHANICAL ENGINEERING Test 05: displacement response Test 05 – thrust force response • Three segments • Segment 01: to reach 2m in heave • Segment 02: to reach 4m in surge • Segment 03: to get back to 0m depth 𝑲𝒑 𝑲𝒊 𝑲𝒅 Surge 3 0 3 Sway 1 0 0 Heave 3 0 3 Yaw 1 0 0 • Low PID gains
- 14. 14 Trajectory Implementation - Test 06 MECHANICAL ENGINEERING Test 06: displacement response Test 06 – thrust force response • Same trajectory • High PID gains 𝑲𝒑 𝑲𝒊 𝑲𝒅 Surge 10 0 10 Sway 1 0 0 Heave 50 0 40 Yaw 1 0 0
- 15. Conclusion • Development of simulation model • Carrying out verification tests • Design of Control system with PID controllers ✓ Successful in reaching the desired goal location at low PID gains • Generation of trajectory and control system implementation ❖ Unacceptable time lag at low PID gains ✓ Acceptable response at higher PID gains • Sea current and other disturbances will be included in the future work MECHANICAL ENGINEERING 15
- 16. References [1] A. Zaerpoora and M. Nili, “Distributed object transportation on a desired path based on Constrain and Move strategy,” Rob. Auton. Syst., vol. 50, pp. 115–128, 2005. [2] N. Michael, J. Fink, and V. Kumar, “Cooperative manipulation and transportation with aerial robots,” Auton. Robots, pp. 1–14, 2010. [3] T. I. Fossen, Handbook of Marine Craft Hydrodynamics and Motion Control, 1st Ed. Sussex: John Wiley & sons, 2011. [4] W. H. Wang, X. Q. Chen, A. Marburg, J. G. Chase, and C. E. Hann, “Design of Low-Cost Unmanned Underwater Vehicle for Shallow Waters,” IEEE/ASME Int. Conf. Mechatron. Embed. Syst. Appl., pp. 204–209, 2008. [5] O. Yildiz, R. B. B. Gokalp, and A. E. E. Yilmaz, “A review on motion control of the Underwater Vehicles,” Electr. Electron. Eng., pp. II-337-II–341, 2009. [6] J. Ghommam, H. Mehrjerdi, M. Saad, and F. Mnif, “Formation path following control of unicycle-type mobile robots,” Rob. Auton. Syst., vol. 58, no. 5, pp. 727–736, 2010. [7] F. U. Rehman, G. Thomas, and E. Anderlini, “Development of a Simulation Platform for Underwater Transportation using two Hovering Autonomous Underwater Vehicles (HAUVs),” in Proceedings of the 6th International Conference of Control, Dynamic Systems, and Robotics (CDSR’19), 2019, pp. 1–8. [8] A. Phillips, M. Furlong, and S. R. Turnock, “The use of Computational Fluid Dynamics to Determine the Dynamic Stability of an Autonomous Underwater Vehicle,” 10th Numer. Towing Tank Symp. (NuTTS’07), Hamburg, Ger., 2007. [9] C. D. Williams, “AUV systems research at the NRC-IOT: An update,” Int. Symp. Underw. Technol., pp. 59–73, 2004. [10] D. Mellinger, “Trajectory Generation and Control for Quadrotors,” Mechanical Engineering and Applied Mechanics PhD Thesis, University of Pennsylvania, 2012. [11] F. U. Rehman, G. Thomas, and E. Anderlini, “Centralized Control System Design for Underwater Transportation using two Hovering Autonomous Underwater Vehicles (HAUVs),” IFAC- PapersOnLine, vol. 52, no. 11, pp. 13–18, 2019. [12] O. A. Eidsvik, “Identification of Hydrodynamic Parameters for Remotely Operated Vehicles,” Marine Technology Master Thesis, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 2015. [13] S. S. Sandøy, “System Identification and State Estimation for ROV uDrone,” Marine Technology Master Thesis, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 2016. MECHANICAL ENGINEERING 16