Comparison of station keeping strategies for long endurance autonomous surface vehicle

  • Hyondong OhEmail author
  • Seungkeun Kim
  • Antonios Tsourdos
  • Al Savvaris
Original article


This paper presents energy-efficient guidance strategies of autonomous surface vehicles for a long endurance mission where station keeping (also known as dynamic positioning) is required to keep the vehicle at a fixed point or within the specified area. A small size vehicle with two thrusters is considered, which is underactuated and can be greatly affected by environmental effects such as wind, wave, and currents. Several station keeping algorithms are proposed including the vector field approach and the variation of conventional dynamic positioning approaches. Their performance in terms of fuel consumption is compared by numerical simulations with both ideal and realistic environmental conditions.


Autonomous surface vehicle Station keeping Dynamic positioning Long endurance Vector field 



This work was supported by the 2018 Research Fund (1.180015.01) of UNIST (Ulsan National Institute of Science and Technology) and Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Education (2017R1D1A1B03029992).


  1. 1.
    Higinbotham JR, Hitchener PG, Moisan JR, Development of a new long duration solar powered autonomous surface vehicle, IEEE Oceans, 2006Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Long Endurance Maritime Unmanned Surface Vehicle, ASV Unmanned Marine Systems Ltd., Accessed in Dec. 2018
  3. 3.
    Savvaris A, Niu H, Oh H, Tsourdos A (2014) Development of collision avoidance algorithms for the C-Enduro USV. In: 19th IFAC world congress, Cape Town, South AfricaGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Zhang J, Zhang D, Yan X, Haugen S, Soares CG (2015) A distributed anti-collision decision support formulation in multi-ship encounter situations under COLREGs. Ocean Eng 105:336–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Nguyen TD, Sorensen AJ, Quek ST (2008) Multi-operational controller structure for station keeping and transit operation of marine vessels. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol 16(3):491–498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Li Y, Wei C, Wu Q, Chen P, Jiang Y, Li Y (2015) Study of 3 dimension trajectory tracking of underactuated autonomous underwater vehicle. Ocean Eng 105:270–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fossen TI (1994) Guidance and control of ocean vehicles. Wiley, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pereira A, Das J, Sukhatme GS (2008) An experimental study of station keeping on an underactuated ASV. In: IEEE/RSJ International conference on intelligent robots and systems, Nice, FranceGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Matos A, Cruz N (2008) Positioning control of an underactuated surface vessel, IEEE OceansGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lawrence DA, Frew EW, Pisano WJ (2008) Lyapunov vector fields for autonomous UAV flight control. AIAA J Guid Control Dyn 31(5):1220–1229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kongsberg DP System, Accessed in Aug. 2018
  12. 12.
    Perez T, Smogeli ØN, Fossen TI, Sørensen AJ (2006) An overview of the marine systems simulator (MSS):a Simulink toolbox for marine control systems. Model Ident Control 27(4):259–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Earth and space research. OSCARS surface currents, Accessed in Jan. 2019
  14. 14.
    Khalil K (2002) Nonlinear systems (3rd Edition). Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Japan Society of Naval Architects and Ocean Engineers (JASNAOE) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Mechanical, Aerospace and Nuclear EngineeringUNIST (Ulsan National University of Science and Technology)UlsanRepublic of Korea
  2. 2.Department of Aerospace EngineeringChungnam National UniversityDaejeonRepublic of Korea
  3. 3.School of Aerospace, Transport and ManufacturingCranfield UniversityCranfieldUK

Personalised recommendations