Approaches to a Descent Underwater Vehicle Stabilization in Conditions of a Sea Disturbance

  • Sergey An. Gayvoronskiy
  • Tatiana Ezangina
  • Ivan Khozhaev
Conference paper


The article deals with the position stabilization mode of a descent underwater vehicle under the conditions of sea disturbance. This descent underwater vehicle is connected with a carrier—ship by an elastic rope. A shock-absorbing hoist installed on the descent underwater vehicle is used to damp its oscillation. The analysis of the automatic positioning of the descent underwater vehicle at a selected depth using various stabilization systems is carried out. The systems difference is in the use of various sensors (measuring converter of the rope length, tension deviation sensor and their combination), measuring external disturbance from sea disturbance. The considered systems were simulated and the conclusions were made.


Descent underwater vehicle Measuring converter of the rope length Robust control Sea disturbance Stabilization systems Tension deviation sensor 



The reported study is supported by the Ministry of Education and Science of Russian Federation (project #2.3649.2017/4.6).


  1. 1.
    B.W. Nam, S.Y. Hong, Y.S. Kim, Effects of passive and active heave compensators on deepwater lifting operation. Eng. Lett. 23(1), 33–37 (2013)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    J. Kim, Thruster modeling and controller design for unmanned underwater vehicles (UUVs). Underwater Vehicles, pp. 235–250, 2008Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    G.E. Kuvshinov, K.V. Chupina, D.V. Radchenko, P.I. Chepurin, Analysis of towed underwater vehicle system conduct under rough sea conditions, in Proceedings of the Sixth International Symposium on Underwater Technology (UT2009), 2009, pp. 193–200Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    S. Ueki, H. Doi, S, Miyajima, K. Hasegava, H. Satoh, Hoisting device with vertical motion compensation function, U.S. Patent 2009/0166309 July, 2, 2009Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    U.A. Korde, Active heave compensation on drill-ships in deep water. Ocean Eng. 25(7), 541–561 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    S.I. Sagatun, Active control of underwater installation. IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 10(5), 743–748 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    S. Rowe, B. Mackenzie, R. Snell, Deepwater installation of subsea hardware, in Proceedings of the 10th Offshore Symposium, Houston, TX, 2001, pp. 1–9Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    J. Neupert, T. Mahl, B. Haessig, O. Sawodny, K. Schneider, A Heave, Compensation Approach for Offshore Cranes, American Control Conference, Seattle, Washington, USA, 2008, pp. 538–543Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Giuseppe Conte, Andrea Serranu, Robust control of a remotely operated underwater vehicle. Automatica 34(2), 193–198 (1998)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    V. Vesely, Robust control methods a systematic survey. J. Electr. Eng. 64(1), 59–64 (2013)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    J. Yu, Z. Yan, J. Wang, Q. Li, Robust stabilization of ship course via convex optimization. Asian J. Control 16, 871–877 (2013)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Y.-W. Liang, S.-D. Xu, T.-C. Chu, Robust control of the robot manipulator via an improved sliding mode scheme, in International Conference on Mechatronics and Automation—Harbin, China: Proceeding of conference, 1, pp. 1593–1598, 2007Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    S.A. Gayvoronskiy, T. Ezangina, I. Khozhaev, L. Gunbo, Maximization of the robust stability degree of interval systems by means of a linear controller in the presence of limits. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 803(1), pp. 1–5 (012045) (2017)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    S.A. Gayvoronskiy, T. Ezangina, I Khozhaev, The interval-parametric synthesis of a linear controller of speed control system of a descent submersible vehicle. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 93, 1–7(012055) (2015)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    S.V. Efimov, M.I. Pushkarev, Determining direct measures of performance based on the location of zeros and pole of the transfer function. Optoelectron. Instrum. Data Process. 47, 297–302 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    D.P. Kim, Synthesis regulator maximum degree of stability. Driv Technol. 52–57 (2003)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    G.V. Rimsky, A.A. Nesenchuk, Root locus methods for robust control systems quality and stability investigations, in Proceedings of Conference, 1996 IFAC 13th Triennial World Congress—San Francisco, USA, pp. 469–474Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    A.A. Nesenchuk, Parametric synthesis of qualitative robust control systems using root locus fields, in Proceedings of the 15th Triennial World Congress of The International Federation of Automatic Control (IFAC), Barcelona, Spain, 21–26 July 2002, pp. 387–387Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    A.V. Tatarinov, A.M. Tsirlin, Mathematical programming problems containing complex variables, and the maximum degree of stability of linear dynamical systems. Bull. RAS. Ser. Comput. Syst. 1, 28–33 (1995)MATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    O.S. Vadutov, S.A. Gayvoronskiy, Application of edge routing to stability analysis of interval polynomials. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. Int. 42(6), 833–838 (2003)MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    S.A. Gayvoronskiy, T. Ezangina, I. Khozhaev, The analysis of different methods to stabilize the location of Descent Underwater Vehicles, in Proceedings of the International MultiConference of Engineers and Computer Scientists 2017. Lecture Notes in Engineering and Computer Science, Hong Kong, 15–17 Mar 2017, pp. 240–244Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sergey An. Gayvoronskiy
    • 1
  • Tatiana Ezangina
    • 1
  • Ivan Khozhaev
    • 1
  1. 1.National Research Tomsk Polytechnic UniversityTomskRussia

Personalised recommendations