Mitigating surge–pitch coupled motion by a novel adaptive fuzzy damping controller for a semisubmersible platform
- 7 Downloads
For dynamic positioning systems, a three degree-of-freedom motion control in the horizontal plane has usually been regarded as adequate for practical applications. However, for marine structures with a small water-plane area and low metacentric height, unintentional surge–pitch coupled motion will be induced by thruster actions. To effectively mitigate the thruster-induced pitch motion, we first apply a pitch damping controller for the dynamic positioning of a semisubmersible platform. Quantitative studies are conducted to select the optimal control coefficient for this damping controller, and its influence on surge–pitch coupled motion is analyzed theoretically and numerically. Furthermore, a novel adaptive fuzzy damping controller is proposed to improve the pitch mitigating effect. The fuzzy controller takes low-frequency pitch angle and pitch rate as inputs, and outputs time-varying damping control coefficient through fuzzy inference. Comparisons are made between the fixed damping controller and the proposed fuzzy damping controller. Finally, a parametric analysis is conducted to investigate the influence of the maximum damping control coefficient on pitch motion. The overall simulation results show that the proposed fuzzy damping controller has better performance than the fixed damping controller.
KeywordsDynamic positioning system Surge–pitch coupled motion control Adaptive fuzzy control Time-domain simulation
The authors greatly acknowledge the support of the China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (Grant no. 2017M621479), the Open Foundation of State Key Laboratory of Ocean Engineering (Grant no. 1717), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant no. 51709170), and the Shanghai Sailing Program (Grant no. 17YF1409700).
- 2.Balchen JG, Jenssen NA, Sælid S (1976) Dynamic positioning using kalman filtering and optimal control theory. In: IFAC/IFIP symposium on automation in offshore oil field operation. Bergen, Norway, vol 183, p 186Google Scholar
- 3.Jenssen N (1981) Estimation and control in dynamic positioning of vessels. NTH (NTNU), TrondheimGoogle Scholar
- 7.Bertin D, Bittanti S, Meroni S, Savaresi SM (2000) Dynamic positioning of a single-thruster vessel by feedback linearization. In: Proceedings of the IFAC conference on manoeuvring and control of marine craft. Aalborg, Danemark, pp 275–280Google Scholar
- 10.Fannemel AV (2008) Dynamic positioning by nonlinear model predictive control. Master’s thesis, Institutt for teknisk kybernetikkGoogle Scholar
- 14.Chang WJ, Chen GJ, Yeh YL (2002) Fuzzy control of dynamic positioning systems for ships. J Mar Sci Technol 10(1):47–53Google Scholar
- 20.Jenssen NA, Maritime K (2010) Mitigating excessive pitch and roll motions on semi-submersibles. In: Dynamic positioning conference. Marine Technology Society Houston, Houston, USAGoogle Scholar
- 21.Xu S, Wang X, Wang L, Li J, et al (2013) Dynamic positioning with roll-pitch motion control for a semi-submersible. In: The twenty-third international offshore and polar engineering conference. International Society of Offshore and Polar Engineers, Anchorage, Alaska, USAGoogle Scholar
- 22.Jin X, Wang L, Xu S, Yang L, et al (2014) Positioning accuracy analysis for a dp platform with roll and pitch motion control. In: The twenty-fourth international ocean and polar engineering conference. International Society of Offshore and Polar Engineers, Busan, KoreaGoogle Scholar
- 27.Faltinsen O (1993) Sea loads on ships and offshore structures, vol 1. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar