This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

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
**

roll reduction was investigated. Considering the dynamics of the ship motion, tank flow, and variable-pitch impeller, a control law is derived based on optimal control and estimation theory. Finally, a series of numerical computations for a 1174 tonne ship without an antiroll tank system, with a passive tank system, and with the proposed activated antiroll tank system is performed. The results show that the proposed activated tank system has superior antiroll properties for free rolling, regular, and irregular sea loads to the passive tank system. In addition, this design has a very low sensitivity to variations in ship and tank dynamics. It shows that the proposed system is reliable and valid for practical use.

P-(k)

qi Qr Qi Rr R~ T

L

V

XG

**Key words: activated antiroll tanks, roll stabilization system,
**

optimal control

~(k) X(k) X-(k) Y(k)

Yc

Zc;

List of symbols

A,

A v

b, E

C

Fy

hGM

L

l L

Mr

ms Pd

Pp

local cross-sectional area normal to the tank water centerline cross-sectional area of the vertical tank distance between the centerline of both vertical tanks restoring moment coefficient viscous energy of the ship and tank fluid hydrodynamic force in the y direction metacentric arm of ship roll virtual moment of inertia of the ship without tank fluid girthlike coordinate along the center line of the tank estimator gain hydrodynamic mome0t about the x direction virtual mass of the ship without tank fluid demanded control command pressure difference between the face and the back of the impeller

ai A

or.o~,

and 0v

a priori error covariance generalized coordinates of the system covariance of the wave slope nonconservative forces or moments acting on the coordinates q~ covariance of the measurement noise resistance coefficient of the ship and tank fluid motion total kinetic energy of the ship and tank fluid sampling period potential energy of the ship and tank fluid surge displacement of the ship the ith state value of X(k) estimated value of X(k) a priori estimate value of X(k) measurable states of the system sway displacement of the ship heave displacement of the ship weighting coefficient for the state x~(k) weighting coefficient for the input pressure displacement of the ship roll, pitch, and yaw angle of the ship rotation angle of the tank motion wave slope in the y direction absolute velocity of the tank fluid measurement noise of Or, 0,, Or, and O,

0, 0.

v,

VOr~ VOt , VOr,

and v0, P, r,,

density of the tank fluid time constant of the impeller system

Subscripts

h p r s t y heave motion of the ship pitch motion of the ship roll motion of the ship sway motion of the ship rotation motion of the tank 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

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 sensitive 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 performance 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 controller is its robustness in countering the effects of modeling 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 nonlinear 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 obtained 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 addition, the effect of rolling reduction is examined by the variations in ship dynamics and tank dynamics to assess the deign's reliability.

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 stabilizing 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 vessels. The concept of using fluid tanks for roll reduction was conceived by Froude in 1874, and Frahm introduced the U-tank for better motion stabilization in 1910. 4.5 Many researchers 6-n have developed mathematical and experimental methods for the design of passive tank systems, and many passive stabilization 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 fullscale 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 variablespeed 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 measured by motion sensors. 2,16-1sThe efficiency of activated tank systems is primarily dependent on the configuration 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 motion and a high efficiency of antiroll moment under regular wave loads. However, the performance of roll

Theory

Dynamics o f motion

In order to design an effective controller for an activated 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 equations. 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

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 described as a function of the heave, sway, and roll motions. The dynamic equations of ship and tank can then be derived from the Lagrangian equations . d(ar~ 0T aV . . . +__ aE ~/

0~

I

y

--

-:

,

I

ZSZ-0,

J

Fig. 1. Coordinate system of the activated antiroll tank

dt~cgOi )

~gqi Oqi +

=Qi

(6)

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 displacements, velocities, and accelerations of the ship and tank motions are small, then linearization can be applied to simplify the expressions of the kinetic, potential, and viscous energies of the system given by

where q~ are the generalized coordinates of the system, and Q~ are the nonconservative forces or moments acting on the coordinates q, From Eqs. 3-5 we know that six generalized coordinates are considered in the system. 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) (8)

**afror + brrOr + CrrO "}-a~yy + bo,~V+ a~,O, + Cr,O, = M. r
**

a,O, + b,,O, + c,O, + a~,,~+ a,,O, +

ct, O r =

pp

(9)

1 2 T = ~ m,yG + l m , 2 z + l l , O 2 r + l l p O ~ +llyO2y+lp, IAtv,2dl

(3)

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 impeller represented by a first-order differential equation is assumed to be

pp + rppp = p,~ + C.,zOp + C.,O.O, 1Rhea, E=~ + 2 R , Y~ + l Rr02 +~RpO 2 +~RyO 2 + I R, O~

(10)

(4)

(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-

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

where

(11)

80

W.-J. Hsueh and Y.-J. Lee: Activated antiroll tanks the motion of the ship rolling and the movement of the tank flow. Therefore, the object of this design is to find a suitable tuning law so that the rolling motion can be reduced to a reasonable level and the operation of the impeller is reasonable. Using this law, we can define the performance index to express the total performance of the rolling reduction and the power consumption as

X-'<OrO, O O, po/"

0 0

attCrr -- artCtr

0 0

attCrt -- artCtt Drt arrCtt -- atrCrt

1 0

attbrr Drt -atrbrr

0 1

-artbtt D~, arrbtt

0 0

--art Drt arr

A=

D.

arrCtr -- atrCrr

D, 0

D., 0

Drt

Dr,

0

0

Dr, 1

Tp

J=

212

a~x k + flPd k

k:OLi=l

)

(

(13)

Bp=

**a.haM A ar~2Ptgb~ A~ Bw = 0 0 -ar'2p'gb2A~ -at~haMA 0
**

Drt Drt

(

0000

1

>T

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 pressure. By the theory of calculus of variation, the optimal control input leads to

+ Bp PcBp) BTp~X(k)

where Pc satisfies the matrix Riccati equation

_ ,

(14)

+BpP~Bp) BprPeA- = 0

(15)

Drt = atrart -- arratt

where 0~ is the wave slope in the y direction, hem is the metacentric arm, A is the displacement of the ship, b, is the distance between the centerline of both vertical tanks, and A~ is the cross-sectional area of the vertical tank.

and Qc is a diagonal matrix with the diagonal element at. In order to ensure the stability of the feedback system, it is necessary that the pair [A, HI be completely observable, where H is any matrix such that

HHT = Qc

(16)

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 described as X(k), the dynamic equation of both the ship roll and tank motion becomes

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

X ( k + 1)= AX(k)+ -BpPd(k)+ -BwOw(k)

where

(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 difference. In addition, the measurement noise will be incorporated 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

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

W.-J. Hsueh and Y.-J. Lee: Activated antiroll tanks

81

= e-(k+l)

J Kalmangain I L(k+O

calculation

**RollAngle Stabilizing Moment
**

Tank

2(k+l) ]

Measurement

Angle

Time 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 = 0,

Step 1: time update

Or 0,/

Step 2: Kalman gain calculation

(23) (24)

"0,

**VOr,VO,,9o; and 90r are measurement noise.
**

The mathematical model of this observer can be described by X(k + 1)= A-X(k) + Bppd(k)+ L(Y(k)-CX(k)) (19)

(25) Step 3: measurement update P,(k + 1 ) : ( , - L ( k

where A(k) is the estimated value of X(k). Our objective is to find a suitable L such that the estimation error will be as small as possible. We assume that the wave slope is a stationary white noise with zero mean and known covariance Q# The measurement noise is also assumed to be a stationary white noise with zero mean and known covariance of R# Qy is positive and Rr is semipositive. Moreover, Qr and Rr are symmetric. The functions G(k) and v(k) are mutually uncorrelated, so that

+ 1)C)PT(k + 1) + 1)(Y(k + 1)

(26)

~'(k + 1)= X - ( k + 1)+ L(k

-cA

+ 11)

(27)

E{Ow(j)vV(k)}=O

for allj and k

(20)

where X-(k) is the a priori estimate, which is the estimated value of X at time k before the measurement Y(k) is made. P-(k) is the a priori error covariance. The flow chart of the estimator is shown in Fig. 2. With each estimated state being used in turn, the control law can be rewritten as pa (k) = -(/3 + B--pPcB--p ~pTP~A(k) r )-' (28)

It has been proved that the mean square value of the estimate error will be minimum if the observer gain is equal to the Kalman filter gain, given by

L=APICr(CPfCT +Ri) '

where

(21)

**Pi satisfies the matrix Riccati equation
**

(22)

The dynamics of the ship roll motion with the activated antiroll system are a combination of Eqs. 12 and 23-28. Figure 3 gives the block diagram for the dynamics of the ship with the activated antiroll tank system.

**ArpiZ - Py + -BwQIBJ --ArPICT(CPICr + RI)-'CPIAr =O
**

S i m u l a t i o n and results

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:

A 1174 tonne ship was studies to illustrate the efficiency of rolling reduction by the proposed method. The principal 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 activated antiroll tank system) are considered to compare 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 determined 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 considered 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 systems are decreased to an equivalent value over a wide frequency range. Moreover, the larger the value of ql

W.-J. Hsueh and Y.-J. Lee: Activated antiroll tanks assigned, the higher the efficiency of the rolling reduction. 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 reduction and the response of the tank angle will be decreased 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 comparative 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 significant wave height, hw, of 7 m in b e a m sea is first considered. Figure 10a is the wave elevation history obtained f r o m the International Towing T a n k Conference ( I T T C ) spectrum formulation. 15In the period from 0 to 200 s, the m a x i m u m p e a k value of the roll response in the activated type 1 case is 7 ~ This is less than the

Table 1. Principle parameters of the sample ship

**Lpp Breadth Draft Depth
**

cb

GM Displacement

66.7 m 9.7 m 3.2 m 6.1 m 0.56 1.0m 1174 tonne

6.00 without tanks

&

0

5.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 0.00 0.01

-. --s ---

passive type

activated1 ac',Jvated2 /

-~ .~

// t ~ / / /

I

I

I

I

I I I I I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I I

0.10 Wave f r e q u e n c y (Hz)

1.00

Fig. 4. Roll response in a regular beam 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 5.00

83

passive

type 1 2 3 /~

/

/

/ /

i'~,

4.00 0

.......

activated activated

m __o

t't-

>

nn 3.00

--

-- . . . .

activated

A/'-'"

\ ,

,.-,

/

t

'\ , 4\

2.00

.......

kk

I--

1.00 - - . .................... .....

\

7 k

I I I I I I I I

"..",

--~,

I

,,

'\

I I I I I I

.........

0.00 0.01

I

I

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

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 wave

o_

0

>

3.00

activated 4

m

2.00 - .......

activated 5

activated 6

1.00

(1~ __

n."

0

0.00

i

i

i

i

I

I

I I i

I

i

I

I

I

I

I

0.01

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

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 systems in a regular b e a m wave

5.00

activated Q. 0 o~ (D >

4 5 6 ,/\,

4.00 - -

....... .....

activated activated

/ /

/

\

\ i

3.00

O~ C

2.00 -

./. ...... \ ',,

..................

.--J"

1.00

'\\

'\

0.00 0.01

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I I

0.10 Wave frequency (Hz)

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 systems in a regular b e a m wave

84 7.00

6.00 .......

activated 1

W.-J. Hsueh and Y.-J. Lee: Activated antiroll tanks

/ / ~

5.00

activated 2

/

(JO 0

4.00 3.00 2.00 m

U)

1.00 - 13.

0.00 0.01 0.10 Wave frequency 1.00 (Hz)

Fig. 8. Pressure response in a regular beam wave

10.0

"',

0.0-o n," -5.0 --10.0 0.0 i 10.0 i i 20.0 30.0 T i m e (sec) i 40.0 i 50.0

20.0

~

10.0

4

;~

-•

I--

-10.0

-2o.0

0.0 10.0

I

'

I

'

I

'

20.0 30.0 T i m e (sec)

40.0

50.0

Fig. 9. Free decay during rolling test. For roll angle: solid line, without tanks; short dashes, passive type; long dashes, activated type. For tank angle: solid line, passive type; dashes, activated type

maximum peak value in the passive type of 13 ~ and in the unstabilized type of 27 ~ If the percentage roll reduction is defined as the difference between one and the ratio of the mean value of one-third of the highest roll 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 peak value of the tank angle response in the passive system is 24 ~ but this value increases to 40 ~ in the activated system. When a mean sea condition with a significant wave height of 2 m is considered, the roll reduction by the activated type is limited, as shown in

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 spectrum is distributed near the frequency 0.15Hz, which is close to one of the resonance peaks in the frequency response function. Since the damping coefficient ~, of the rolling dynamic equation is the dominant factor influencing the rolling action, three cases of the damping coefficient for the ship roll model (model 1, ~ = 0.4; model 2, ~ = 0.2; model 3, ~, = 0.05) are considered to compare the sensitivity property of this controller. F r o m the results shown is Fig. 12a-c, we find that the rolling responses of the ship without an antiroll tank system of with a passive tank system are very sensitive to damping coefficient changes. However, a very low sensitivity to the changes in the ship damping are observed in the activated system. In addition, three cases of the tank model with different damping coefficients ~, (model 1, ~', = 0.4; model 2, ~, = 0.1; model 3, ~, = 0.05) with respect to the 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 tank system is affected significantly by the dynamic characteristics of the tank. However, the performance of the activated tank in this scheme is almost independent of the tank dynamics.

Discussion

An optimal controller with a Kalman estimator for an activated antiroll tank system was studied. The dynamics of the ship motion, tank flow, and variable-pitch impeller were determined, and the control law was de-

**W.-J. Hsueh and Y.-J. Lee: Activated antiroll tanks
**

5,0 40.0

85

~D

0.0--2.5 --

o n~

-5o

0.0 40.0 . 40.0

[

'

I

'

I

160.0

'

2000

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

80.0 120.0 Time (sec)

;=

is=

o It" -40,0 0.0 40,0 80.0 120.0 Time (sec) 160.0 200.0

~

0.0

I-.-40.0

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

40.0

40.0

~ o

0.0

0.0

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

f

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)

g

2.0

~

10.0

0.0

~

m

~ -2.o

0.0

N ' I

40.0

0.0

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

'

I

~

I

'

I

160.0

'

200.0

-10.0

80.0 120.0 Time (sec)

10_0

10.0

O,D

~

m

0.0

~ 0 re"

0.0

o -10.0

0.0 40.0 60.0 120.0 Time ( s e c ) 180.0

-10.0

200.0

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 activ 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

40.0 .

40,0

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

0l 0.0 IS o nr

-4o.o

I

0.0

'

I

40.0

'

I

80,0

' Time (sec)

I

120.0

'

I

160.0

'

200.0

-40.0

0.0

40.0

80.0

120.0

160.0

200.0

Time 40.0

(sec)

40.0

c~

-~

o

o.o

o

0.0

-40.0

-40.0

0.0

40.0

80.0 120.0 T i m e (sec)

160.0

200.0

0.0

40.0

80.0 120.0 T i m e (sec)

160.0

200.0

40.0

0.0

o

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, respectively

n,

-40.0 0.0 40.0 80.0 120.0 T i m e (sec) 180.0 200.0

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 designed by the estimated model, which is usually different 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 under 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 antirolling 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 stabilization 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 measurement 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. PrenticeHall, Englewood Cliffs, pp 101-138

- VisualSMP - A Practical and Reliable Tool for Ship Motion Prediction
- Effect of Fin Area and Control Methods on Reduction of Roll Motion
- Dynamical stability
- Barge Stability Guidelines
- Recent Research on Intact Stability
- Maneuvering & Control of Marine Vehicles
- Proceedings of 25th ITTC – Volume I
- Preliminary Trim and Stability Booklet
- Recommendations of 22th ITTC on stability
- Chapter3 - Transverse Stability
- Stability Criteria
- Hydrodynamic Forces Sailing Yachts
- ship stability
- SIMPLIFIED SHIP COLLISION MODEL
- Ship Resistance and Propulsion
- Container Ship Types
- Stability
- Stability
- Grain Loading Plan & Stability Booklet
- Intact Stability Code msc-267-85 08
- DDS079-1
- Ballast & Rig Stability Handbook [t,163]
- 14 Stability Trim
- ship stability formulae
- ship stability
- ECL6 Bunkering Safety Checklist
- 682 Verification of EEDI
- 12.Chapter8 Safety.doc
- Different Types of Roll Stabilization Systems Used for Ships
- Ballast Water Management - Accumulated Experience on Exchange Methods
- A Design for Ship Stabilization by Activated Antiroll Tanks

Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

We've moved you to where you read on your other device.

Get the full title to continue

Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.

scribd