© All Rights Reserved

0 views

© All Rights Reserved

- Cyber Motion Presentation on Mechtronics
- Basics Adaptive Control DDEB
- NASA Design and Analysis of Rotorcraft - Wayne Johnson
- 2011 Goupil, P. AIRBUS State of the Art and Practices on FDI and FTC in FCS
- Activity Based Modeling Course
- borgognoni instructionallp
- autocontrol
- motionmountain-volume1
- Using Time Trigger
- AE2301-QB
- motionmountain-volume1
- 19830011870_1983011870
- Control of Multiple UAV
- WARWICK, KEVIN - Controlling a Mobile Robot With a Biological Brain
- mod and identification
- 416678_731334298_773159429
- s11771-007-0130-0
- 1. Overview of Mts
- 62_Dynamics.pdf
- phet in the classroom

You are on page 1of 6

Maui, Hawaii USA,December 2003 TuP08-3

Nonlinear Path Following with Applications to the Control of Autonomous Underwater Vehicles

Institute for Systems and Robotics and

Dept. Electrical Engineering and Computers

Instituto Superior Tkcnico

AV. Rovisco Pais, 1, 1049-001 Lisboa, Portugal

E-mail: {lpl, didik, antonio} @isr.ist.utl.pt

Abslracl-This paper derives a control law to steer the It is important to remark that even though the problem of

dynamic model of an autonomous underwater vehicle (AUV) path following is essentially solved for land vehicles, the

along a desired path. The methodology adopted for path same does not hold true for marine craft. This is due to the

following deals explicitly with vehicle dynamics. Furthermore, it

overcomes stringent initial condition constraintsthat are present fact that dynamics play a key role in the motion of the latter,

in a number of path follo-ing control strategies described in thus requiring the development of methodologies for accurate

the literature. Controller design builds on Lypaonov theory path following that take explicitly into account the presence

and backstepping techniques. The multing nonlinear feedback of possibly complex, nonlinear hydrodynamic terms. This is

control law yields convergence of the path follo-ing error tra- in striking contrast with land vehicles, where methodologies

jectories to zero. Simulation results illustrate the performance

of the control system proposed. that build on pure vehicle kinematics are often adequate for

control.

I. INTRODUCTION The present paper builds on previous results obtained in

Fast paced progresses in marine robotics are steadily [4], [5], where the work of [SI, [9] was extended to deal with

affording scientists advanced tools for ocean exploration and the control of marine vehicles in three dimensional space and

exploitation. However, much work remains to be done before to address explicitly the presence of non-negligible marine

marine robots can roam the oceans freely, acquiring scientific vehicle dynamics. The methodology for path following pro-

data at the temporal and spatial scales that are naturally posed in [5] can be easily understood by recalling that the

imposed by the phenomena under study. To meet these goals, total velocity vector of an AUV is not necessarily aligned

robots must be equipped with systems to steer them accu- with the vehicles main axis, as in the case of wheeled robots

rately and reliably in the harsh marine environment. For this ( A W s sideslip). However, by drawing a simple analogy

reason, there has been over the last few years considerable between the problems of path following for wheeled robots

interest in the development of advanced methods for marine and A W s , the latter can be cast as the equivalent problem of

vehicle motion control. Namely, point stabilization, trajectory aligning the total AUV velocity vector with the tangent to the

tracking, and path following control. path by manipulating the vehicles yaw rate. It is important to

Point stabilization refers to the problem of steering a vehi- remark that in spite of its broader scope of applications, the

cle to a final target point, with a desired orientation. Trajec- results in [51 inherit the major shortcoming already present

tory tracking requires a vehicle to track a time-parameterized in the path following control strategy for wheeled robots

reference curve. Finally, path following control aims at described for example in [9] : the initial position of the

forcing a vehicle to converge to and follow a desired spatial vehicle is restricted to lie inside a tube around the path,

path, without any temporal specifications. The latter objective the radius of which must be snialler than the sniallest radius

occurs for example when it is required that an AUV examine of curvature that is present in that path.

an area by performing a lawn mowing maneuver along The work reported in this paper lifts this restriction

desired tracks with great accuracy, at speeds determined entirely. This is done by controlling explicitly the rate of

by a scientific end-user. The underlying assumption in path progression of a virtual target to be tracked along the path,

following control is that the vehicles forward speed tracks a thus bypassing the problems that arise when the position

desired speed profile, while the controller acts on the vehi- of the virtual target is simply defined by the projection of

cles orientation to drive it to the path. Typically, smoother the actual vehicle on that path. See [ l l ] where a similar

convergence to a path is achieved when path following technique was first proposed for wheeled robots. This design

strategies are used instead of trajectory tracking control laws, procedure effectively creates an extra degree of freedom that

and the control signals are less likely pushed to saturation. can then be explored to avoid the .singularities that occur

This paper proposes a new methodology for the design when the distance to path is not well defined (this occurs

of path following systems for AUVs. The reader is referred for example when the vehicle is located exactly at the center

to [8], [9] and the references therein for related ground of curvature of a circular path). Controller design starts at

breaking work in the field of land robots, where powerful a kinematic level and evolves to a dynamic setting using

nonlinear path following control structures were introduced. backstepping techniques. The resulting control strategy yields

Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDADE DE BRASILIA. Downloaded on November 26, 2008 at 14:52 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

global convergence of the actual path of the vehicle to the where U and U are the longitudinal (surge) and transverse

desired path. (sway) velocities, respectively.

As remarked in 1111, the idea of exploring the extra With this notation, the kinematic equations of the AUV

degree of freedom that comes from controlling the motion can he written as

of a virtual target along a path seems to have appeared X = UCOS($B)- vsin($B)

for the first time in [l] for the control of wheeled robots. y = us in($.^) + a c o s ( + ~ ) (1)

This idea was later extended to the control of marine craft $JB = r

in [ 2 ] . However. none of these references addresses the

issues of vehicle dynamics. Furthermore, the methodologies where T is the vehicle's angular speed (yaw rate). Assuming

adopted in [l], [2] for control system design build on an U is never equal to zero, define the sideslip angle 0 =

entirely different technique that requires the introduction arctan(v/a) and consider the reference frame {W)that is

of a nonsingular transformation in the original error space. obtained from { B )by rotating it around the Z B axis through

Interestingly enough, a very recent publication explores the angle p in the positive direction . The above equations can

same concept of a virtual target for path following of wheeled then be re-written to yield

robots 131. X = tJtCOS($Mr)

The paper is organized as follows. Section I1 formulates Y = ut sin(+w) (2)

the problem of path following control for an A W . Section $w=r+p

I11 develops a nonlinear path following control law that

deals explicilty with vehicle dynamics. The performance of

+

where $Jw7 = +B p and ut is the x w component of the

the control system proposed in illustrated in simulation in

tot? vehicle velocity expressed in {W).Clearly, ut = (U' +

U ' ) 12. In the aircraft literature { W }is called the wind frame

Section IV. Finally, Section V contains the conclusions and

and will henceforth be called the flow frame. Notice how

describes some problems that warrant research.

the choice of a new frame simplified the first two kinematic

11. PROBLEM FORMULATION equations and brought out their similarities with those of a

wheeled robot. See 191, [ill.

This section introduces the simplified dynamic model of

Neglecting the equations in heave, roll, and pitch the

an AUV in the horizontal plane and provides a rigorous simplified equations for surge, sway and yaw can be written

formulation of the problem of steering it along a desired

path. as [61, U01

F = m,u +d,

The type of AUV considered in this paper is equipped 0 = m,it m,,ur + d, + (3)

with two identical hack thrusters mounted symetrically with l- = m,? d, +

respect to its longitudinal axis. Thus, the vehicle is un-

deractuated since it lacks a lateral thruster. The common where

and differential modes of the thrusters generate a force F mu = m-XC d, = -X =,U2 - X""W2

along the vehicle's longitudinal axis and a torque r about its m, = m-Y, d, = -Y,uu - Y"l"l"l"/

vertical axis, respectively. In this study, a full dynamic model m, = I, - N+ d, = -N,,uu - N,~&J

of the INFANTE AUV operated by the Institute for Systems mu? = m - Y , -Nrur

and Robotics (ISR) of Lisbon will be used, see Table I . It is The symbols m and I , denote the mass and moment of

assumed that only the hack thrusters are used to maneuver inertia of the AUV respectively, X(.i,Y(.},and N{.) are

in the horizontal plane. classical hydrodynamic derivatives, and [ F I?]= defines the

A. Vehicle Modeling. Kinematics and Dynamics. input vector of force and torque that are applied to the AUV.

The model presented in this paper is based on the model of

The following notation will he used in the sequel. The the INFANTE A W described in [lo], to which the reader

symbol { A } := { Z A , ya, Z A } denotes a reference frame is referred for complete details.

with origin OA and unit vectors Z A , ~ A ,and ZA. Given

two reference frames { A } and { B ) , :R is the rotation B. Path Following. Error Coordinates.

matrix from { B } to { A } . Following standard practice, the The solution to the problem of path following proposed

general kinematic and dynamics equations of a vehicle can here builds on the following intuitive explanation [9], [ 5 ]

be developed using a global coordinate frame { U } and a (see Figure 1): a simple path following controller should

body-fixed coordinate frame { B } ,as depicted in Figure 1. compute i) the distance between the vehicle's center of mass

Let Q denote the center of mass of the vehicle, which we Q and the closest point P on the path and ii) the angle

assume is coincident with OB, and let q = [z, y, OIT he the between the vehicle's total velocity vector wt and the tangent

position of Q in { U ) . Further let +rg denote the yaw angle to the path at P , and reduce both to zero. This motivates

that parametrizes the rotation matrix from { B } to { U } . Let the development of the "kinematic" model of the vehicle in

W I = [ U , u, 0IT he the velocity of Q in { U } expressed in { B } , terms of a Serret-Frenet frame {F} that moves along the

1257

Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDADE DE BRASILIA. Downloaded on November 26, 2008 at 14:52 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

It is also straightfomard to compute the velocity of Q in

{U} as

(s),= (f),+R-'($) F +R-'(wFx~)

equation on the left by R gives the velocity of Q in {I}

expressed in {F} as

path; {F} plays the role of the body axis of a "virtual target

vehicle" that should he tracked by the "real vehicle". Using

($)F= [ ;] i

the coordinates of the ermr space where the control problem

is formulated and solved. In this paper, however, a Frenet

frame {F} that moves along the path to be followed is used

with a significant difference: the Frener frame is not attached

to the point on the path that is closest to the vehicle.,Instead,

the origin OF = P of {F} along the path is made to evolve

according to a conveniently defined control law, effectively

yielding an extra controller design parameter. As will be seen, equation (5) can be rewritten as

[] [

this seemingly simple procedure is instrumental in lifting the

+

stringent initial condition constraints that are present in the

work of [9] for path following of wheeled robots and in that

of [51 for marine vehicles. The notation that follows is by

now standard.

Consider Figure 1, where P is an arbitrary point on the

Solving for

R =

SI and y1 yields

i ( 1- C&)Yl)

y 1 +c,(s)Ss~

0

s1

1

path to be followed. Associated with P, consider the cor-

responding Serret-Frenet frame {F}. The signed curvilinear

abscissa of P along the path is denoted s. Clearly, Q can

either be expressed as q = [z, y, 0IT in {U} or as [SI, y1, 0IT

in {F}. Stated equivalently, Q can be given in ( q y ) or

(SI,y1) coordinates. Let Finally, replacing the top two equations of (2) in (6) and

E= [ cos$^

cosGF 0

0

-sin$F

0

1

sin$F 0

1

introducing the variable $ = ?,6w- $JF gives the "kinematic"

model of the A W in (s, y) coordinates as

s1 = - B ( 1 - C&) +

w,cos$

be the rotation matrix from {U} to {F}, parameterized

yl = -c&l +

ut sin@ (7)

$ = W W - c,B

locally by the angle @ F . Define W F = +F. Then,

WF= 4 F = C&)S

where WI.V = ?i),y = r p. +

(4) At this point it is important to notice that in [5] and [91

CdS) = gc(s)j.

s1 = 0 for all t, since the location of point P is defined

where ce(s) and (gc(s) = denote the path curvature by the projection of Q on the path, assuming the projection

and its derivative, respectively. The velocity of P in {U} can is well defined. One is then forced to solve for S in the

he expressed in {F} to yield equation above. However, by doing so 1 - c,yl appears in

the denominator, thus creating a singularity at y1 = As 2.

a result, the control laws derived in [9] and [5] require that

the initial position of Q be restricted to a tube around the

1258

Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDADE DE BRASILIA. Downloaded on November 26, 2008 at 14:52 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

path, the radius of which must he less than -, where limt-, vt(t) is different fnmi zem. S u p p m the path to be

c,,,,, denoted the maximum curvature of the path. Clearly, fidlowed is parametrized by its cunilinear abscissa s arid

this constraint is very conservative since the occurrence of a assume that for each s the variables dJ, SI, y 1 and

~ cc are

large c,,,,, in just a small section of the path will impose a well defined. Then the kinematic conrml law

rather strict constraint on the initial vehicles position, even

if it happens to start in a region that is far away from the

problematic section. By making s1 not necessarily equal to

zero, a virtual target that is not coincident with the projection

(where kl and k2 are arbitrary positise conctants) drives y1.

of the vehicle on the path is created, thus introducing an

SI. and $ asymptofically to zero.

extra degree of freedom for controller design. By specifying

how fast the newly defined target moves, the occurrence of

a singularity at y1 = $ is removed. Indication of Proof Consider the candidate Lyapunov

function VI = h($

- 6). The control law

C. Problem Formulation . .

With the above notation, the problem under study can be ~ = 6 - P - k1(11,-6)+cc(s)S

formulated as follows: makes VI = -kl(O - 6) 5 0. Since VI is positive and

Consider the AUV model with kinematic and dynamic monotonically decreasing function, limt,, VI ( t ) is well

equations given b)) ( I ) and (3), respectively Given a path defined. Moreover, since VI is uniformly continuous, an,

to be followed and a desired pnifile u d ( t ) > u,in > 0 for application of,Barbalats lemma allows for the conclusion

the surge speed U , derive feedback control laws for the force that limt,, V, = 0. A simple argument shows that with

F , torque I?, and rate of evolution S qfthe curvilinear abcissa the control laws proposed the variables y ~ ? s l and , d~ are

s of the virtual target point P along the path so tlwt y1. hounded and approach the set E defined by V, = 0. Examine

SI, $, and U - u d tend to zem asyntptotically. now the motion of the feedback control system restricted

111. NONLINEAR PATH FOLLOWING to E. To do this, consider the candidate Lyapunov function

CONTROLLER DESIGN candidate V , = $(s: +

y:) and compute its derivative

VE = ylut sinJ-K.& 5 0. Since VE is bounded, Barbalats

This section introduces a nonlinear closed loop control law

lemma allows for the conclusion that limt-, V , = 0. This

to steer the dynamic model of an AUV described by (1)-(3)

in turn implies that all trajectories in E satisfy 1imf-- y1 =

along a desired path. Controller design builds on previous

0 and limt4, SI = 0. An argument of continuity can now

work by [5] and [9] on path following control and relies

be used to conclude the proof of the theorem.

heavily on backstepping techniques. The reader will find in

[7] a lucid exposition of interesting theoretical and practical B. The Dynamic controller

issues involved in backstepping. Controller design is done

The above feedback control law applies to the kinematic

in two steps. The first step yields a kinematic controller

model of the A W only. However, using backstepping tech-

by adopting the yaw rate T = @B as a virtual control

niques this control law can be extended to deal with the

input and assuming that the actual surge speed equals the

vehicle dynamics. In the kinematic design the total velocity

desired speed u d ( t ) . The second step addresses the vehicle

ut(t) of the vehicle was left free but implicitly dependent on

dynamics, builds on the kinematic controller derived, and

a desired profile.ud(t) for surge speed u(t). In the dynamic

uses backstepping techniques to obtain control laws for the

design the variable U will be brought explicitly into the

input variables F and I?.

picture and a control law will he derived so that u ( t )- u d ( t )

A. Controller Design using the Kinematic Model tends to zero. Notice also that the robots angular speed r

This section derives a kinematic controller for the AUV. was assumed to be a control input. This assumption is lifted

As in [9], we let by taking into account the vehicle dynamics. The following

result holds.

Proposition 2: Consider the kinematic and dynamic

models of an AUV described in ( I ) and (3) respectiwly,

be a desired approach angle parameterized by k,j > 0 and and rhe corresponding path fiillowing ermr model in (7).

0< < T / Z , satisfying ylut6(y1,ut) I 0 fur all y1 and Let the appmach angle 6( y1, u t ) be defined as in (8)and let

ut. The approach angle is instrumental in shaping transient a desired speed pmfle u d ( t ) for u(t)be given. Assume that

maneuven during the path approach phase. u d ( t ) is a G function and tlwt limt-m u d ( t ) is different

Proposition 1: Consider the kinematic model of an AUV from zero. Suppose the path to be followed is paranietrized

described in ( I ) and the corresponding path following error by its curvilinear abscissa s and assume rhut for each s the

model (7). Let the appmach angle 6(yl, u t ) be dejined as variables 8, SI, yl,and c, %

are well defined. Then the

in (8). Assume the total velociry of the vehicle is such that dynamic contnil law

1259

Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDADE DE BRASILIA. Downloaded on November 26, 2008 at 14:52 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

where

a, = 8 - j - (kl+ k3)($ - 8)

- ( k 5 + k 1 k 3 ) ( $ - 6 ) + c c S + %i,

k l through k5 are arbitrury positive gains, and d, and d,

are cunis .fhydrodynamic coeficienrs, drives y1, SI, and $

asynptorically to zero.

(desired behaviour of r in (9)) as

. .

C=s-p-kl($-s)+c,(s)S

and let e = T - C be the difference between actual and desired

+

values of T. Set T = z C and consider the total candidate

Lyapunov function

1

--t

2

- Ud), (11)

with k5 positive. Tedious but straightfonvard computations

will show that with the control law proposed

Vz = - k i k s ( $ - 6)' - k3ez

-kq(U - ud)' 50 -'

from successive applications of Barbalat's lemma.

Note. The dynamic control law in (10) requires the com-

putation of a.

Since this variable cannot be measured in

practice, one must resort to the dynamic model of the A W

to compute it. Using simple algebraic manipulations it can

be shown that the problem of computing fi is indeed well

posed because the vehicle is stem dominant.

IV. SIMULATION RESULTS

This section illustrates the performance of the path follow-

ing control law derived in simulation. Table I summarizes

the key parameters of the AUV model used. This is a simple

modification of the Infante A W model described in [IO] to

account for the fact that only thrusters are used to maneuver

in the horizontal plane.

The reference and actual robot paths are shown in the top

diagram of Figure 2. The desired surge speed U d ( t ) was set

to lms-'. The controller design parameters are displayed in

Table I1

Figure 2 shows the results of the simulation. The top

diagram shows the envelope defined by the initial condition

constraint imposed in [9]. Notice how the coordinate sl and

y1 tend to zero asymptotically. This is equivalent to stating

that: i) the position of the virtual target (origin of frame

{ F } ( s )along the path) approaches the projection of the A W

on that path, and ii) the lateral distance of the AUV to the

path is driven to zero. Notice also that the actual surge speed

u ( t ) converges to u d = 1ms-'.

Fig. 2. Simulation ~ S U I I S

1260

Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDADE DE BRASILIA. Downloaded on November 26, 2008 at 14:52 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

VI. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

P

This work was supported by the Portuguese FCT POSI

. . . Programme under framework QCA I11 and by projects

MAROV of the FCT and MAYA of the A d . The first author

benefited from a grant of the EC, under project FREESUB.

The second author was partially supported by a post doctoral

grant from the FCT.

VII. REFERENCES

[I] M. Aicardi, G. Casalino, A. Bicchi, and A. Balestlino,

Closed Loop Steering of Unicyle-Like Vehicles via

Lyapunov Techniques, IEEE Robotics and Automation

Magazine, pp. 21-35, March 1995.

[21 M. Aicardi, G. Casalino, G. Indiveri, P. Aguiar,

P. EncarnaGlo, and A. Pascoal, A Planar Path Fol-

lowing Controller for Underactuated Marine Vehicles,

Pmc. MED200l , Dubrovnik, Croatia, June 2001.

[31 del Rio, F. et al., A New Method for Tracking Mem-

orized Paths: Applications to Unicycle Robots, PNX.

TABLE I MED2002, Lisbon, Portugal, July 2002.

THE INFANTE AUV. MOOEI. PARAMETERS [4] P. EncarnaGlo, A. Pascoal and M. Arcak, Path Follow-

ing for Marine Vehicles in the Presence of Unknown

Currents, Pmc. SYROCO2000, 6h IFAC Syniposium

on Robot Control, Vienna, Austria, 2000.

[5] P. Encama$lo and A. Pascoal, 3D Path Following for

Autonomous Underwater Vehicles, Pmc. 3gth IEEE

Conference on Decision and Control, Sydney, Australia,

2000.

[61 Fossen, T. (1994). Guidance and Control of Ocean

Vehicles. John Willey & Sons, Inc., New York, 1994.

V. CONCLUSIONS [71 M. KrstiC, I. Kanellakopoulos, and P. Kokotovic, Non-

A nonlinear control law was developed for accurate path linear and Adaptive Contml Design, John Willey &

following of autonomous undenvater vehicles (AWs). The Sons, Inc., New York, 1995.

key idea behind the new control law developed was to control [8] A. Micaelli and C. Samson, 3D Path Following and

explicitly the rate of progression of a virtual target to be Time-Varying Feedback Stabilization of A Wheeled

tracked along the path, thus overcoming the singularity Robot, Pmc. Inremarional Conference ICARCV92,

problems that arise when the position of the virtual target is RO-13.1, Singapore, September 1992.

simply defined by the projection of the actual vehicle on that 191 A. Micaelli and C. Samson, Trajectory - Tracking for

path. Controller design relied on backstepping techniques. Unicycle - Type and Two - Steering - Wheels Mobile

The paper offered a formal proof of convergence of the Robots, Technical Repor! No. 2097, INRIA, Sophia-

vehicles trajectory to the path. Simulation results illustrated Antipolis, Nov. 1993.

the performance of the control system proposed. [lo] C. Silvestre. Multi-Objective Optimization Theory with

The controller derived relies heavily on accurate knowl- Application tu the Integrated Design of Controllers

edge of the vehicle dynamics. Future work will address the / Plants for Autonomous Vehicles. PhD Thesis (in

problems of reducing the complexity of the controller as well English). IST, Lisbon, Portugal, 2000.

as evaluating its robustness against parameter uncertainty. [ l l ] D. Soetanto, L. Lapiem, and A. Pascoal, Adpa-

. The problem of precise path following in the presence of tive Nonsingular Path Following Control of Dynamic

unknown sea currents warrants also further consideration. Wheeled Robots, Proc. 42nd IEEE Conference on

Decision and Conrml, Hawai, 2003.

1261

Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDADE DE BRASILIA. Downloaded on November 26, 2008 at 14:52 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

- Cyber Motion Presentation on MechtronicsUploaded byseenumurar
- Basics Adaptive Control DDEBUploaded byDuy Tùng
- NASA Design and Analysis of Rotorcraft - Wayne JohnsonUploaded byRobert Andrzejewski
- 2011 Goupil, P. AIRBUS State of the Art and Practices on FDI and FTC in FCSUploaded bycmpmarinho
- Activity Based Modeling CourseUploaded bySuresh Damodariya
- borgognoni instructionallpUploaded byapi-394720598
- autocontrolUploaded byEmreEgemen
- motionmountain-volume1Uploaded byDan Levenstein
- Using Time TriggerUploaded bySerkan Ozturk
- AE2301-QBUploaded byVaroon Ram
- motionmountain-volume1Uploaded byCarmen Chivu
- 19830011870_1983011870Uploaded byJuan Manuel
- Control of Multiple UAVUploaded byDevi Archana Das
- WARWICK, KEVIN - Controlling a Mobile Robot With a Biological BrainUploaded byGastón G. Fernández
- mod and identificationUploaded byNaeem Ali Sajad
- 416678_731334298_773159429Uploaded byBinhMinh Nguyen
- s11771-007-0130-0Uploaded byNguyễnĐạt
- 1. Overview of MtsUploaded byShashank Mohan
- 62_Dynamics.pdfUploaded byisbro1788
- phet in the classroomUploaded byapi-318465351
- Introduction_ppt [Uyumluluk Modu]Uploaded byG P
- 60Problems.pdfUploaded byVenkata Allamsetty
- Asom New RubricsUploaded byventhii
- Kom 1st experiment.docxUploaded byAbhay Thakur
- 1978_Minster_JGR_Present-day.PDFUploaded byMuhajir Anshori
- IJCCMSUploaded byijccms
- 06- Kinematics.pdfUploaded byFiriz Fariz
- Contact Sensing and Mobility in Rough and Cluttered EnvironmentsUploaded byLuis Sentis
- [6] Camera ReadyUploaded bythuanhoang70
- WSEAS_Development and Testing of a Device for Human KinematicsUploaded byistancic

- Filter kalman vs complementaryUploaded byDante Fajardo Olmos
- ekf_excerptmasterthesis.pdfUploaded byyunierv
- 2015_07_BreguTesis Reengineering APM.pdfUploaded byyunierv
- APM2_5BlockDiagramUploaded byyunierv
- Submarine Dynamic ModelingUploaded bykooec
- SharpGP2D12Snrs.pdfUploaded bymhwasil
- APM2_5BlockDiagramUploaded byyunierv
- Articulo OK VerUploaded byyunierv
- Correction of Bathymetric Survey Artifacts Resulting Apparent Wave-Induced Vertical Position of an AUVUploaded byyunierv
- Nonlinear Path Following with Applications to the Control of Autonomous Underwater VehiclesUploaded byyunierv
- GNC ToolboxUploaded byyunierv
- Real-Time Simulation of Ship Motions in WavesUploaded byyunierv
- 1017_ifaccep96Uploaded byyunierv
- 39646bUploaded byJulian Amaya
- Fossen MCMC12 (Perturbaciones) Descarg 2013Uploaded byyunierv
- Design of a Sliding Mode Fuzzy Controller for AUVUploaded byRuchit Pathak
- 00606498.pdfUploaded byyunierv
- de_Winter_et_al_MB2012.pdfUploaded byyunierv
- 1464_IEEETAC05Fev.pdfUploaded byyunierv
- MohdRamzanMainal1996_EstimationOf_ShipManoeuvringCharacteristicsUploaded byBuvana Iyer
- Aage.pdf.pdfUploaded byyunierv
- Proportional_Valves.pdfUploaded byyunierv
- 00570951Uploaded byyunierv
- Assignment 1Uploaded byyunierv

- Rr310304 Kinematics of MachineryUploaded byandhracolleges
- Rack and Pinion Mechanism (1)Uploaded byImmad
- Crackiitjee.in.Phy.ch23Uploaded bySuresh mohta
- 2a5f482Uploaded byRuchil Shah
- Lecture 1Uploaded bymfastovets
- Power Screw & GearsUploaded bysam0415
- AE 2201 MOM.2marksUploaded bydennyfrancis19
- 2.2 Analysing Motion GraphUploaded byIrwan Zin
- M Tech Curricullam & Syllabus R2018Uploaded byGoutham Mareeswaran B
- Dynamic Analysis of LinkagesUploaded byHimmatSingh
- 01_Kinematics.pdfUploaded byVatsal
- Model and Control of a Hexapod RobotUploaded byNanda Gustianto
- Cam Mechanisms PackUploaded byRongguang Han
- rotational motion-1.pdfUploaded byAnup Kumar
- Static Balancing 2008.pdfUploaded bySamik Mukherjee
- 2 Rectilinear Motion (Updated)Uploaded bysefieilgua
- RobotUploaded byPhong Ngo
- MEC31 and MEC31-1 SyllabusUploaded byJohn Paul Tagabi
- Dynamics AssignmentUploaded bySid Menon
- at wokingUploaded byjeevanraj77
- 3- Kinematics of Mechanism machinery analysisUploaded bysajjad_naghdi241
- LECTURE-DYNAMICS.pdfUploaded byAnkan Pal
- MECUploaded bykaliyap20
- ME Mech Design Final 1Uploaded bykotkar1986
- Getting Started With SIMPACKUploaded byad80083
- chapter 5 solutions - physicsUploaded byaxel1993885
- Kinematic of MachineUploaded byJad Antonios Jelwan
- PHYSICS Newton's Second Law experimentUploaded byFatin Nabihah Jamil
- Kinematic Parameter Calibration of a CarUploaded byBui Huu Binh
- Chapter 7 Rotational Motion - LecturerUploaded bySahira Afuza