J Mar Sci Technol (1997) 2:77-86 Journal of

Marine Science
and Technology
9 SNAJ 1997

A design for ship stabilization by activated antiroll tanks

WEN-JENG HSUEH and YA-JUNG LEE
Department of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, National Taiwan University, 73 Chow-Shan Rd., Taipei, Taiwan, ROC

Abstract: An activated antiroll tank system design for ship P-(k) a priori error covariance
roll reduction was investigated. Considering the dynamics of qi generalized coordinates of the system
the ship motion, tank flow, and variable-pitch impeller, a con- Qr covariance of the wave slope
trol law is derived based on optimal control and estimation Qi nonconservative forces or moments acting on the
theory. Finally, a series of numerical computations for a 1174 coordinates q~
tonne ship without an antiroll tank system, with a passive tank Rr covariance of the measurement noise
system, and with the proposed activated antiroll tank system is R~ resistance coefficient of the ship and tank fluid
performed. The results show that the proposed activated tank motion
system has superior antiroll properties for free rolling, regular, T total kinetic energy of the ship and tank fluid
and irregular sea loads to the passive tank system. In addition, L sampling period
this design has a very low sensitivity to variations in ship and V potential energy of the ship and tank fluid
tank dynamics. It shows that the proposed system is reliable XG surge displacement of the ship
and valid for practical use. ~(k) the ith state value of X(k)
X(k) estimated value of X(k)
Key words: activated antiroll tanks, roll stabilization system, X-(k) a priori estimate value of X(k)
optimal control Y(k) measurable states of the system
Yc sway displacement of the ship
List of symbols Zc; heave displacement of the ship
ai weighting coefficient for the state x~(k)
A, local cross-sectional area normal to the tank water
weighting coefficient for the input pressure
centerline
A displacement of the ship
A v cross-sectional area of the vertical tank
b, distance between the centerline of both vertical
or.o~, roll, pitch, and yaw angle of the ship
and 0v
tanks
restoring moment coefficient
0, rotation angle of the tank motion
C 0. wave slope in the y direction
E viscous energy of the ship and tank fluid
v, absolute velocity of the tank fluid
Fy hydrodynamic force in the y direction
VOr~ VOt , measurement noise of Or, 0,, Or, and O,
hGM metacentric arm of ship roll
VOr,
L virtual moment of inertia of the ship without tank
and v0,
fluid
P, density of the tank fluid
l girthlike coordinate along the center line of the tank
r,, time constant of the impeller system
L estimator gain
Mr hydrodynamic mome0t about the x direction
ms virtual mass of the ship without tank fluid Subscripts
Pd demanded control command h heave motion of the ship
Pp pressure difference between the face and the back of p pitch motion of the ship
the impeller r roll motion of the ship
s sway motion of the ship
t rotation motion of the tank
y yaw motion of the ship
Address correspondence to: W.-J. H s u e h
R e c e i v e d for p u b l i c a t i o n o n M a y 7, 1996; a c c e p t e d on
Jan. 17, 1997
78
Introduction
Rolling has always been a problem subject for naval
architects because of its effects not only on the comfort
of passengers and crew, but also on the operation of the
ship. To reduce the roll motion of ships, many kinds of
roll stabilizing devices have been successfully applied in
the last century including bilge keels, fin stabilizers, and
antiroll tanks, t.2 Of these devices, bilge keels are the
simplest and the most widely used, but their efficiency is
limited. Fin stabilizers can achieve high efficiency in
high-speed ships, but their efficiency will be decreased if
the ship's speed is slow. Thus, fin stabilizers are usually
used in moderate- or high-speed ships. 3 A m o n g the sta-
bilizing devices mentioned above, antiroll tanks are
comparatively useful in slow or fast ships because their
efficiency is independent of ship speed. Antiroll tank
systems are especially suitable for ships which operate
in very low or zero speed environments, such as ballistic
missile launching ships or oceanographic research ves-
sels. The concept of using fluid tanks for roll reduction
was conceived by Froude in 1874, and Frahm intro-
duced the U-tank for better motion stabilization in
1910. 4.5 Many researchers 6-n have developed math-
ematical and experimental methods for the design
of passive tank systems, and many passive stabiliza-
tion tank systems have been successfully installed on
ships.12 ~5Although the use of passive stabilization tanks
is economic and reliable, the efficiency of the rolling
reduction generated by these systems is generally
confined to within 4 0 % - 6 0 % . 3
The activated antiroll tank was first proposed in
1928 to achieve better stabilization efficiency. 12 A full-
scale system of this type was first installed on a US
destroyer. Later, various types of activated tank systems
were evolved, and some of them were actually installed.
In activated tank systems, variable-pitch or variable-
speed impellers are installed in the middle of the central
channel to pump water from one vertical tank to
the other. A controller is used to calculate the desired
operation based on the ship's motion, which is mea-
sured by motion sensors. 2,16-1sThe efficiency of activated
tank systems is primarily dependent on the config-
uration of tank geometry, pump power, and control
methods. In general, the optimum configuration is
selected early in the design process, based on the
power supply and ship space. Therefore, the controller
design becomes very important to the efficiency of the
system.
In most previous applications of activated tanks for
roll reduction, the motion of the flow tank was designed
to approach a 90 ~ lag with respect to the ship roll angle.
These designs offer a high damping effect for roll mo-
tion and a high efficiency of antiroll moment under
regular wave loads. However, the performance of roll
W.-J. Hsueh and Y.-J. Lee: Activated antiroll tanks
reduction in a seaway may be inadequate owing to the
irregular wave loads. Moreover, the efficiency of the
system may be significantly decreased because it is sen-
sitive to the modeling accuracy of the ship roll, tank
flow, and activated components. Thus, the performance
of the real system is generally decreased, although it
may have a high efficiency in numerical simulations. To
overcome these drawbacks, optimal control theory is
applied for the controller design. Based on a perfor-
mance index defined by the summation of roll response
and activated power, and optimal control law is derived.
One of the advantageous properties of the optimal con-
troller is its robustness in countering the effects of mod-
eling error and model variation. Thus, this design will
maintain the efficiency of the antiroll tank system in a
real ship even if there exist some differences between
the mathematical model used in the design and the
actual ship model. In addition, the design usually has
enough gain margin and phase margin to cover the non-
linear and time-delay characteristics which exist in real
ship dynamics. 19.2~In the activated antiroll tank design
described here, the states of system dynamics, such as
ship roll motion, tank angle, and the pressure difference
between the face and the back of blade, must be ob-
tained in order to calculate the control command to
drive the impeller. Since the pressure difference on the
blade is difficult to measure, a Kalman filter is utilized to
estimate it. The filter is also used to distinguish the noise
from the measurement signals of rolling and tank. A
1174 tonne ship is simulated under different sea loads to
determine the efficiency of this design method. In addi-
tion, the effect of rolling reduction is examined by the
variations in ship dynamics and tank dynamics to assess
the deign's reliability.
Theory
Dynamics o f motion
In order to design an effective controller for an acti-
vated antiroll tank system, it is necessary to have a
reliable dynamic model of the ship roll and tank flow
motion. Two right-hand Cartesian coordinate systems
are considered in the formulation of the dynamic equa-
tions. One is the ship-fixed coordinate system o - x y z ,
with its origin located at the ship's center of gravity. The
x-axis is directed forward and the y-axis to port. The
other is the initial coordinate system o - x y z . The ~-axis
is directed horizontally forward. The Z-axis is directed
vertically upward. The o - x y plane rests on the calm
water surface (Fig. 1). The absolute displacement and
rotation of the ship-fixed coordinates, denoted as r G and
coG, are given by
r~ = XGi + YcJ + ZGk (1)
W.-J. Hsueh and Y.-J. Lee: Activated antiroll tanks
0~
I
y
--
-: ,
I ZSZ-0,
J
Fig. 1. Coordinate system of the activated antiroll tank
coG = O,i + Opj + Oyk (2)
where i, j, and k are the unit vectors along the x, y, and
z axis, respectively. Assume that the initial coordinate
system is selected. As the y axis passes through the
origin of the ship-fixed coordinate, xa, YG, and z~; would
be the displacement in surge, sway, and heave, and Or,
0p, and 0,' the rotational angle in roll, pitch, and yaw,
respectively. The U-type fluid tank is located amidships
to generate the antiroll m o m e n t by fluid movement. In
the central channel of the tank, a variable-pitch impeller
is installed to control the velocity and direction of tank
flow. Assuming that the surge is neglected and the dis-
placements, velocities, and accelerations of the ship and
tank motions are small, then linearization can be ap-
plied to simplify the expressions of the kinetic, poten-
tial, and viscous energies of the system given by
T = ~1 m,yG
2 +lm,2z+ll,O2r+llpO~
+llyO2y+lp, IAtv,2dl (3)
+ C.,zOp + C.,O.O, (4)
E=~
1Rhea, + 2 R , Y~ + l Rr02 +~RpO 2
+~RyO 2 + I R, O~ (5)
where T, V, and E are the total kinetic energy, potential
energy, and viscous energyl respectively, of the ship and
tank fluid, mr is the virtual mass of the ship without tank
fluid,/9, is the density of the tank fluid, A, is the local
area normal to the tank water center line, v, is the abso-
79
lute velocity of the tank fluid, I is a girthlike coordinate
alone the centerline of the tank water, Ii is the virtual
m o m e n t of inertia of the ship without tank fluid as
appropriate motion, 0, is the rotational angle of the tank
motion, Ci is the restoring m o m e n t coefficient of the
ship or tank motion, Ri is the resistance coefficient of
the ship and tank fluid movements, the subscripts h, s, r,
p, and y refer to the heave, sway, roll, pitch, and yaw
motions of the ship, respectively, and the subscript t
refers to the tank. By coordinate transformation, the
last item of the kinetic energy expression can be de-
scribed as a function of the heave, sway, and roll mo-
tions. The dynamic equations of ship and tank can then
be derived from the Lagrangian equations
d(ar~ 0T aV aE
. . . . +__ ~/
dt~cgOi ) ~gqi Oqi + =Qi (6)
where q~ are the generalized coordinates of the system,
and Q~ are the nonconservative forces or moments act-
ing on the coordinates q, From Eqs. 3-5 we know that
six generalized coordinates are considered in the sys-
tem. Therefore, six coupling differential equations can
be obtained from Eq. 6. If we pay attention to the
motion of ship rolling and tank motion, the dynamic
equations can be simply expressed as a coupling among
the swaying of the ship, the rolling of the ship, and the
flow motion of the tank?
a~y~+byyy+c,,yy+GrO , + byfl~, +c,,,O, = F,, (7)
afror + brrOr + CrrOr "}-a~yy + bo,~V+ a~,O, + Cr,O, = M. (8)
a,O, + b,,O, + c,O, + a~,,~+ a,,O, + ct, O r = pp (9)
where the E, and Mr are the sway and roll exciting loads,
and pp is the pressure difference between the face and
back of the impeller. In general, the actual pressure
developed across the impeller has a response lag with
respect to the command. Thus, the action of the impel-
ler represented by a first-order differential equation is
assumed to be
pp + rppp = p,~ (10)
where Pd is the demanded pressure difference and v, is
the time constant representing the time taken for the
pressure difference to reach the demanded value. Since
the sway motion of ships dominates in the y direction of
the wave slope in a seaway, the sway effect on rolling
can be approximated by a function of wave slope. The
dynamics of ship rolling and tank motion can then be
combined as a set of first-order differential equations as
J( = A X + Bpp d + BwOw (11)
where
80 W.-J. Hsueh and Y.-J. Lee: Activated antiroll tanks

the motion of the ship rolling and the movement of

X-'<OrO, O O, po/" the tank flow. Therefore, the object of this design is to
find a suitable tuning law so that the rolling motion can
0 0 1 0 0 be reduced to a reasonable level and the operation of
0 0 0 1 0 the impeller is reasonable. Using this law, we can
attCrr -- artCtr attCrt -- artCtt attbrr -artbtt --art define the performance index to express the total per-
formance of the rolling reduction and the power con-
D. Drt Drt D~, Drt
A= sumption as
arrCtr -- atrCrr arrCtt -- atrCrt -atrbrr arrbtt arr
D, D., Drt Dr, Dr,
0 0 0 0
1
Tp
J= 212
k:OLi=l
)
a~x k + flPd k ( (13)

where xi(k) is the ith state value of the system, ct~is the
weight of the state x~(k), and fl is the weight of the input

( >T
pressure.
Bp= 0000 1
By the theory of calculus of variation, the optimal
control input leads to
_ ,
a.haM A ar~2Ptgb~A~ + Bp PcBp) BTp~X(k) (14)

Bw = 0 0 -ar'2p'gb2A~ -at~haMA 0 where Pc satisfies the matrix Riccati equation

Drt Drt
+BpP~Bp) BprPeA- = 0
(15)
Drt = atrart -- arratt
and Qc is a diagonal matrix with the diagonal element at.
where 0~ is the wave slope in the y direction, hem is the In order to ensure the stability of the feedback system,
metacentric arm, A is the displacement of the ship, b, is it is necessary that the pair [A, HI be completely observ-
the distance between the centerline of both vertical able, where H is any matrix such that
tanks, and A~ is the cross-sectional area of the vertical
tank. HHT = Qc (16)

Since Eq. 15 does not involve the state X(k), informa-

Controller design
For easy implementation and computation, the dynamic
equation can be expressed by discrete-time type with
sampling period Ts. If the state of X(kT~) is simply de-
scribed as X(k), the dynamic equation of both the ship
roll and tank motion becomes
X ( k + 1)= AX(k)+ -BpPd(k)+ -BwOw(k)
where
X--exp(Z )
~p = fexp(A r)BpdT
Bw = I exp(A v)Bwdv
0
Since the last term of Eq. 12 is the wave exciting load,
which is an uncontrollable disturbance in the system,
the rolling response is dependent on the control action
Pd only. In order to suppress the rolling of the ship
effectively, the value Pd must be adjusted based on
tion about the initial condition to find Pc is not required.
The calculation of the Riccati equation may be replaced
by the backward recursive operation
Pc(k) = Ar[Pc(k + 1)- Pc(k + 1)Bp
(fl+B~Pc(k + 1)Bp)-'B~P~(k + 1)IA + Qc (17)
(12)
If the closed-loop system is stable, Pc can be determined
by iterating the recursive equation using any starting
value PeN. In general, the identity matrix is a good
choice for PcN"
From Eq. 14, we know that the controlled pressure is
a function of the motion of the ship, the motion of the
tank flow, and the pressure difference of the impeller. In
practice, it is difficult to measure the pressure differ-
ence. In addition, the measurement noise will be incor-
porated into the measured signal. Thus, as shown in Fig.
2, an observer is used to estimate each state of the
system for compensation. Assuming that the rolling of
the ship and the elevation of the flow in the tank are
given, the relationship between the measurable and
unmeasueable states is expressed by
W.-J. Hsueh and Y.-J. Lee: Activated antiroll tanks 81

=
J Kalmangain I L(k+O
calculation
Stabilizing
RollAngle
Moment
e-(k+l) 2(k+l) Tank Angle

Time ] Measurement
update update J Impeller J

l Pc(k),2(k) f
i co=,,e I- Estimator

Fig. 2. The recursive algorithm of the estimator

Fig. 3. Block diagram of the ship with the activated antiroll
tank system

where
Step 1: time update

= 0, Or 0,/ (23)

(24)
"0,
VOr,VO,,9o; and 90r are measurement noise. Step 2: Kalman gain calculation
The mathematical model of this observer can be de-
scribed by (25)

X(k + 1)= A-X(k) + Bppd(k)+ L(Y(k)-CX(k)) (19)

Step 3: measurement update
where A(k) is the estimated value of X(k). Our objec-
tive is to find a suitable L such that the estimation error P,(k + 1 ) : ( , - L ( k + 1)C)PT(k + 1) (26)
will be as small as possible. We assume that the wave
slope is a stationary white noise with zero mean and ~'(k + 1)= X - ( k + 1)+ L(k + 1)(Y(k + 1)
known covariance Q# The measurement noise is also
assumed to be a stationary white noise with zero mean
-cA + 11) (27)
and known covariance of R# Qy is positive and Rr is where X-(k) is the a priori estimate, which is the esti-
semipositive. Moreover, Qr and Rr are symmetric. The mated value of X at time k before the measurement
functions G(k) and v(k) are mutually uncorrelated, so Y(k) is made. P-(k) is the a priori error covariance. The
that flow chart of the estimator is shown in Fig. 2.
With each estimated state being used in turn, the
E{Ow(j)vV(k)}=O for allj and k (20)
control law can be rewritten as
It has been proved that the mean square value of the
pa (k) = -(/3 + B--p
r PcB--p)-' ~pTP~A(k) (28)
estimate error will be minimum if the observer gain is
equal to the Kalman filter gain, given by The dynamics of the ship roll motion with the activated
antiroll system are a combination of Eqs. 12 and 23-28.
L=APICr(CPfCT +Ri) ' (21)
Figure 3 gives the block diagram for the dynamics of the
where Pi satisfies the matrix Riccati equation ship with the activated antiroll tank system.

ArpiZ - Py + -BwQIBJ
--ArPICT(CPICr + RI)-'CPIAr =O
For real-time control and estimation, the calculation
of the Kalman filter can be expressed by a recursive
formulation. The recursive algorithm consists of three
steps: time update, measurement update, and the
Kalman gain calculation described as follows:
S i m u l a t i o n and results
(22)
A 1174 tonne ship was studies to illustrate the efficiency
of rolling reduction by the proposed method. The prin-
cipal parameters of the sample ship are given in Table 1.
Three types of ship configurations (ship without tanks,
ship with the passive antiroll tank, and ship with the
82 W.-J. Hsueh and Y.-J. Lee: Activated antiroll tanks

activated antiroll tank system) are considered to com-
pare the efficiencies of devices of the activated type and
the passive type. In the example, the tanks used in the
activated system and the passive system are the same.
The section areas of the vertical and horizontal channels
are 8 m 2 and 1.8m 2, respectively. The water height is
3.5m. The dimensions of the antiroll tank are deter-
mined by a high efficiency condition in the passive type.
To understand the relationship between the weight of
each of the states and the p e r f o r m a n c e of the activated
system, different weight selections in each state are con-
sidered as follows: (1) activated type 1, ql = 100, q2 = 1;
(2) activated type 2, ql = 100, q2 = 10; (3) activated type
3, ql = 1000, q2 = 1 (where ql is the weight for the states
of the roll angle, and q2 is that for the tank angle). The
weight of the other states is set to zero, and the weight
for the input signal r is set to 0.1.
Figure 4 is the roll response in a regular b e a m wave.
W e see that the resonance can be suppressed, but two
minor peaks are still generated at frequencies near
0.04Hz and 0.11Hz in the passive type. However, the
frequency responses of rolling in all activated type sys-
tems are decreased to an equivalent value over a wide
frequency range. Moreover, the larger the value of ql
Table 1. Principle parameters of the sample ship
Lpp
Breadth
Draft
Depth
cb
GM
Displacement
assigned, the higher the efficiency of the rolling reduc-
tion. Figure 5 shows that the amplitude of tank angle
will be enlarged if the value of q~ is increased. F r o m
the figure, we see that the effect of q2 increasing is
similar to that of q~ decreasing. To know the effect of
the system for different r values, the system types 1, 2,
and 3 are modified by changing the r values f r o m 0.1 to
1.0, redefined as activated types 4, 5, and 6. Figures 6
and 7 illustrate that both the efficiency of the roll reduc-
tion and the response of the tank angle will be de-
creased if r is increased. Figure 8 shows that the
pressure difference should be increased if a higher roll
reduction effect if required. For simplification, only the
type 1 activated system is used in the following com-
parative studies.
In the free decay test, if the initial conditions of the
ship are a roll angle of 10 ~ and zero roll velocity, the roll
response for the different system types is given in Fig. 9.
The rolling of the ship without tanks has a significant
oscillation, with a peak overshoot of 7.5 ~ and a settling
time of 60 for the 1 ~ criterion. This result is decreased to
a peak overshoot of 3 ~ and a settling time of 25 s by the
passive tank. If the type 1 activated antiroll tank is used,
the peak overshoot will be reduced to 1.5 ~ and settling
time is less than 6s. The largest value of the tank angle
of the activated type is 15 ~, which is about 150% of the
initial listing.
In the case of the ship in the irregular seaway, a
66.7 m
9.7 m significant wave height, hw, of 7 m in b e a m sea is first
3.2 m considered. Figure 10a is the wave elevation history
6.1 m obtained f r o m the International Towing T a n k Confer-
0.56 ence ( I T T C ) spectrum formulation. 15In the period from
1.0m 0 to 200 s, the m a x i m u m p e a k value of the roll response
1174 tonne
in the activated type 1 case is 7 ~ This is less than the

6.00

without tanks
5.00
& passive type //
0 t ~
-- --- activated1 / /
-~ 4.00
. --s ac',Jvated2 / /

.~ 3.00

2.00

1.00

0.00 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

0.01 0.10 1.00 Fig. 4. Roll response in a regular beam

Wave f r e q u e n c y (Hz) wave
W.-J. H s u e h a n d Y.-J. Lee: A c t i v a t e d antiroll t a n k s 83

5.00
i'~,
passive type
/
4.00 - /
....... activated 1 /
0
activated 2 /
> /
nn -- -- . . . . activated 3 /~ ,.-,
m 3.00

__o
A/'-'" t
t'-
2.00
\ , '\

t- ....... kk , 4\
I-- 1.00 - - . ....................
..... \ "..", ,,
......... 7 k --~, '\
0.00 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

0.01 0.10 1.00 Fig. 5. T a n k r e s p o n s e in a r e g u l a r b e a m

W a v e f r e q u e n c y (Hz) wave

o_ 3.00
0

> activated 4
m 2.00 - -
....... activated 5

activated 6
1.00
(1~ __

0 0.00 i i i i I I I I i I i I I I I I
n."
0.01 0.10 1.00 Fig. 6. Roll r e s p o n s e of t h e a c t i v a t e d sys-
W a v e f r e q u e n c y (Hz) tems in a regular b e a m wave

5.00

activated 4
Q. 4.00 - -
....... activated 5
0 ,/\,
o~ ..... activated 6 / \
(D
> / \
3.00
/ i

O~
C
2.00 -
./. ...... \ ',,
.................. -J" '\\
1.00
.-- '\

0.00 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

0.01 0.10 1.00 Fig. 7. T a n k r e s p o n s e of t h e a c t i v a t e d sys-

Wave frequency (Hz) tems in a regular b e a m wave
84 W.-J. Hsueh and Y.-J. Lee: Activated antiroll tanks

7.00

6.00
activated 1 / / ~
....... activated 2 /
5.00

4.00
(JO
0
3.00

2.00 m
U)
1.00 - -
13.

0.00

0.01 0.10 1.00 Fig. 8. Pressure response in a regular

Wave frequency (Hz) beam wave

10.0 "', Fig. 11a-d. Most significantly, the rolling response will
be magnified in the passive type. The reason for the
magnification is that the dominant part of the wave
0.0--
spectrum is distributed near the frequency 0.15Hz,
o
n,"
-5.0 -- which is close to one of the resonance peaks in the
-10.0 i i i i i
frequency response function.
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0
Since the damping coefficient ~, of the rolling dy-
T i m e (sec) namic equation is the dominant factor influencing the
rolling action, three cases of the damping coefficient for
20.0 the ship roll model (model 1, ~ = 0.4; model 2, ~ = 0.2;
~ 10.0 4 ;~ model 3, ~, = 0.05) are considered to compare the sensi-
tivity property of this controller. F r o m the results shown
is Fig. 12a-c, we find that the rolling responses of the
-• -10.0 ship without an antiroll tank system of with a passive
I--
-2o.0 I ' I
tank system are very sensitive to damping coefficient
' I '
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 changes. However, a very low sensitivity to the changes
T i m e (sec) in the ship damping are observed in the activated sys-
tem. In addition, three cases of the tank model with
Fig. 9. Free decay during rolling test. For roll angle: solid line,
without tanks; short dashes, passive type; long dashes, acti- different damping coefficients ~, (model 1, ~', = 0.4;
vated type. For tank angle: solid line, passive type; dashes, model 2, ~, = 0.1; model 3, ~, = 0.05) with respect to the
activated type designed model of ~, = 0.2 are analyzed to determine the
sensitivity of the system to tank modeling errors. Figure
13a,b shows that the performance of the passive antiroll
maximum peak value in the passive type of 13 ~ and in tank system is affected significantly by the dynamic
the unstabilized type of 27 ~ If the percentage roll re- characteristics of the tank. However, the performance
duction is defined as the difference between one and the of the activated tank in this scheme is almost indepen-
ratio of the mean value of one-third of the highest roll dent of the tank dynamics.
angle, the roll reduction of the activated type system of
70% is better than the 38% of the passive system, as
shown in Fig. 10b-d. From Fig. 10e,f, we see that the Discussion
peak value of the tank angle response in the passive
system is 24 ~ but this value increases to 40 ~ in the An optimal controller with a Kalman estimator for an
activated system. When a mean sea condition with a activated antiroll tank system was studied. The dynam-
significant wave height of 2 m is considered, the roll ics of the ship motion, tank flow, and variable-pitch
reduction by the activated type is limited, as shown in impeller were determined, and the control law was de-
W.-J. Hsueh and Y.-J. Lee: Activated antiroll tanks 85

5,0 40.0

~D 0.0--

-2.5 --
o
n~
-5o [ ' I ' I ' -40.0
0.0 40.0 80.0 120.0 160.0 2000 0.0 40.0 80.0 120.0 160.0 200.0
Time (sec) Time (sec)
40.0 .
40.0

;= ~ 0.0
is=
o
It"
I-.-
-40,0
-40.0
0.0 40,0 80.0 120.0 160.0 200.0
0.0 40,0 80.0 120.0 160.0 200.0
Time (sec)
Time (sec)
40.0 40.0

~ 0.0 0.0

o
F-
-40.0 -40.0

0.0 40,0 80,0 120.0 160.0 200.0 0.0 40.0 80.0 120.0 160.0 200.0 f
Time (sec) Time (sec)

Fig. 10. Time history of the test in irregular waves of h,, = 7.0m. a wave elevation, b roll angle without tank, c roll angle with
passive tank, d roll angle with activated tank, e tank angle (p~/ssive), f tank angle (activated)

~
~
2.0

0.0

-2.o ' I ' I ~ I ' I '

~

m
N
0.0
10.0

-10.0

0.0 40.0 80.0 120.0 160.0 200.0 0.0 40.0 80.0 120.0 160.0 200.0
Time (sec) Time (sec)

10_0 10.0

O,D
~ 0.0 ~ 0.0
m
o 0
re"
-10.0 -10.0

0.0 40.0 60.0 120.0 180.0 200.0 0.0 40.0 80.0 120.0 160.0 200.0
Time ( s e c ) Time (sec)

Fig. 11. Time history of the test in irregular waves of h w = 2.0m. a wave elevation, b roll angle without tanks, e roll angle with
passive tank, d roll angle with activated tank

rived. F r o m the derived results, w e can select the weight
of each of the states to obtain a suitable control law for
the controller according to the required efficiency for
roll reduction. Since the o p t i m a l control law is stable, it
is u n n e c e s s a r y to c h e c k the stability in the design proce-
dure. F r o m the analysis results, w e s e e that the rolling
r e s p o n s e of a ship with an activated stabilizer can be
r e d u c e d to a l o w level o v e r a w i d e f r e q u e n c y range
under a regular w a v e load. T h e efficiency of the acti-
v a t e d s y s t e m is also superior for ship roll r e d u c t i o n in an
86 W.-J. H s u e h a n d Y.-J. Lee: A c t i v a t e d antiroll t a n k s

40.0 . 40,0

0l
0.0
IS
o
nr

-40.0
-4o.o I ' I ' I ' I ' I '
0.0 40.0 80,0 120.0 160.0 200.0 0.0 40.0 80.0 120.0 160.0 200.0
Time (sec) Time (sec)
40.0 40.0
c~

-~ o.o 0.0

o o

-40.0 -40.0

0.0 40.0 80.0 120.0 160.0 200.0 0.0 40.0 80.0 120.0 160.0 200.0
T i m e (sec) T i m e (sec)

40.0
Fig. 13. T h e effect of the antiroll t a n k s for different t a n k
models, a passive tank, b activated tank. Solid line, short
dashes, a n d long dashes r e p r e s e n t t a n k m o d e l s 1, 2, a n d 3,
0.0
respectively
o
n,
-40.0

0.0 40.0 80.0 120.0 180.0 200.0

T i m e (sec)
Fig. 12. T h e effect of the antiroll t a n k s for d i f f e r e n t ship
models, a w i t h o u t tanks, b passive tanks, c activated tank.
Solid line, short dashes, a n d long dashes r e p r e s e n t ship m o d e l s
1, 2, a n d 3, respectively
irregular seaway. Moreover, the activated system has a
low sensitivity to the modeling error of the ship and the
tank dynamics. This property is very important for
implementation, since the controller is normally de-
signed by the estimated model, which is usually differ-
ent from the real system. These results also indicate that
the activated system is highly reliable.
Acknowledgments. This research was supported by the
National Science Council of the Republic of China un-
der grant NSC 85-2611-E-002-033.
References
1. Lewis EV (1989) Principles of naval architecture. 2nd reversion,
vol IlL Motions in waves and controllability. SNAME, N J, pp
126-136
2. Bhattacharyya R (1978) Dynamics of marine vehicles. Wiley,
New York, pp 278-295
3. Sellars FH, Martin JP (1992) Selection and evaluation of ship roll
stabilization systems. Mar Technol 29:84-101
4. Froude W (1861) On the rolling of ships. Trans INA 2:180-227
5. Frahm H (1911) Results of trials of the anti-rolling tanks at sea.
Trans INA 53:183-201
6. Watanabe Y (1930) On the design of anti-rolling tanks. (in
Japanese) J Soc Nav Archit Jpn 46:125 153
7. Stigter IrC (1966) The performance of U-tanks as a passive anti-
rolling device. Int Shipbuild Prog 13:249-275
8. Goodrich GJ (1969) Development and design of passive roll
stabilisers. Trans RINA 111:81-95
9. Hirano M (1972) On the equations of motion of a ship equipped
with anti-rolling tank in beam seas. (in Japanese) J Soc Nav
Arcbit West Jpn 43:87-96
10. Field SB, Martin JP (1976) Comparative effects of U-tube and
free surface type passive roll stabilisation systems. Trans RINA
118:73-92
11. Cox GG, Lloyd AR (1977) Hydrodynamic design basics for
navy ship roll motion stabilization. Trans SNAME 85:51-93
12. Vasta J, Giddings A J, Taplin A, Stilwell JJ (1961) Roll stabiliza-
tion by means of passive tanks. Trans SNAME 69:411-460
13. Lewison BA, Williams B (1972) An assessment of NPL roll
stabilisers in service. Trans RINA 114:93-126
14. Webster WC, Dalzell JF, Barr RA (1988) Prediction and mea-
surement of the performance of free-flooding ship antiroll tanks.
Trans SNtkME 96:333-364
15. Martin JP (1994) Roll stabilization of small ships. Mar Technol
31:286-295
16. Bell J, Walker WP (1967) Activated and passive control fluid
tank system for ship stabilization. Trans SNAME 75:1-22
17. Webster WC (1968) Analysis of the control of activated antiroll
tanks. Trans SNAME 76:296-331
18. Yamaguchi S, Shinkai A (1992) On activating and optimizing
procedures of a fluid tank system for ship stabilization. (in
Japanese) J Soc Nav Archit Jpn 17h125-131
19. Lewis FL (1992) Applied optimal control and estimation.
Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, pp 526-573
20. Anderson BDO, Moore JB (1990) Optimal control. Prentice-
Hall, Englewood Cliffs, pp 101-138