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

analysis control

of

the

helmsman's

behaviour.

wim veldhuyzen

//2>i9 / 53 ^

"O 00 o 00 M CD 0> UI W O' 00

**SHIP MANOEUVRING UNDER HUMAN CONTROL
**

ANALYSIS OF THE HELMAN'S CONTROL BEHAVIOUR

PROEFSCHRIFT TER VERKRIJGING VAN DE GRAAD VAN DOCTOR IN DE TECHNISCHE WETENSCHAPPEN AAN DE TECHNISCHE HOGESCHOOL DELFT, OP GEZAG VAN DE RECTOR MAGNIFICUS PROF. DR. IR. H. VAN BEKKUM, VOOR EEN COMMISSIE, AANGEWEZEN DOOR HET COLLEGE VAN DEKANEN, TE VERDEDIGEN OP WOENSDAG 16 JUNI 1976 TE 14.00 UUR DOOR WILHELMUS VELDHUYZEN

scheepsbouwkundig ingenieur geboren te Oegstgeest

, , , r / / J> è

BIBLIOTHEEK TU Delft P 1138 1336

C

263888

Dit proefschrift is goedgekeurd door de promotoren: LECTOR DR. IR. H. G. ST ASSEN PROF. IR. J. GERRITSMA

1 Aan Hendrina .

van Holten. and finally the students Mr. Mr.O.M.E.ulator experiments were nade possible financially by the Netherlands Ship Research Centre (TNO).J. Glansdorp of the Shipbuilding Laboratory for his contribution in the set-up of the experim^ents. In particular I will acknov/ledge the help of the sta^f members of the Institute TNO for Mechanical Constructions. Many collaborators of the Delft University of Technology contributed in one or another way to this thesis. H.The research reported in this thesis has been executed v/ithin the Man-r%chine Systems Group of the Laboratory for Measurement and Control. P. H. Mr. Department of Mechanical Enp*ineerini? of the Delft University of Technology. Zegwaard of the Hybrid Computer Centre for his enthousiastic and valuable assistance in computer programming and data processing. The sim.V/.P.B. The Royal Netherlands Naval College contributed in putting the training ship "Zeefakkel" at the disposal of the Man-Machine Systems Group. .F. Mr. Mr. who cooperated in running the experiments. van Gendt.H. C. Schermerhorn. R. and Mr. The research was sponsored by the Delft University Foundation and by the Netherlands Organization for the Advancement of Pure Research (ZWO).M. van Rooyen. Snel. In particular I like to acknowledge Ir. D. J.C. who each contributed with their Master of Science work partially to the total research program.

4 Introduction Experimental set up The manoeuvring simulator Ship dynamics Displays and controls The ordered headings: The test signal Subjects Experimental programme Data collection Modelling the helmsman's control behaviour Preliminary analysis of the experiments Linear modelling •lonlinear modelling Parameter estimation 31 31 31 32 33 34 35 35 36 36 36 41 42 47 -5- .2.1 3.2 3.7 3.3.2.2 3.6 3.1 3.4 1.2.2.CONTENTS page CHAPTER I 1.3 2.3 1.4 2.3.1 2.2 3.2 1.5 3.3 5.2 2.2.4 3.3.2.5 Introduction Models of ship manoeuvring The model selected Parameter values Ship motions due to waves 20 20 22 23 26 CHAPTER III: SHIP MANOEUVRING IN CALM WATER 3.1 3.3 3.3 3.5 GENERAL INTRODUCTION Problem statement Modelling the helmsman: A review of literature System identification Outline of the thesis Definition of symbols 9 10 12 15 16 CHAPTER II: SHIP DYNAMICS 2.1 1.2.

2 4.2 5 .2 5 .3 4.3.5 1 2 3 4 5 6 Experimental set up Ship dynamics Displays and controls The ordered headings: The test signal Subjects Experimental programme Data collection The analysis of the experimental data Results Discussion and conclusions -6- .3.1 4.1 4.6 4. 5 .3 4.3. 2 . 5 .4.3. 5 2. 2 5.1 4.3 5 .6 Results Discussion and conclusions 49 56 CHAPTER IV: 4.4 4.2 4.4 4.2.5 4.4 5 .5 3.3.page 3. 5 2.2 4.6 SHIP MANOEUVRING IN WAVES Introduction Extension of the nonlinear helmsman's model Experimental set up Ship dynamics Displays and controls The ordered headings: The test signal Subjects Experimental programme Data collection Prediction of scores Model structure Parameter values Results Discussion and conclusions 65 66 68 68 70 72 72 72 73 73 73 76 78 8I CHAPTER V: FULL SCALE EXPERIMENTS WITH A SMALL SHIP Introduction 85 85 86 86 87 87 87 87 88 '89 93 5 1 5.4.5 4.3.

1 CONCLUDING REMARKS AND FURTHER RESEARCH Results achieved . 97 6.2 Further research 100 SUMMARY 101 SAMENVATTING 103 .page CHAPTER VI: 6.

17]. i. The investigations reported may be considered as a first attempt and should be followed by more extensive studies. information of the helmsman's control behaviour must be available. For instance. a rate of turn indicator. e. but also by those of the controller. the helmsman or autopilot. An example is a large tanker sailing in restricted water with an intensive traffic density. . as in rather dangerous circumstances this controller is preferred to automatic steering. since that time many other studies were published [3. however. Therefore. has not been studied. on the performance of helmsmen controlling ships with different dynamical properties [l9]. this study does not yield information of the dynamical behaviour of helmsmen. where often more people are involved.Controller-Ship is a closed loop system. In particular data about the abilities of man to control slowly responding systems are unknown. 21^. 6j. As a consequence. but time varying. In trying to describe the handling quality of a ship it is important to state that the dynamic behaviour of a ship is not only determined by the dynamics of the ship itself. At this m. much attention was paid to the manoeuvring properties of large tankers [7. Not much is known about this manual control of slowly responding systems (which are often unstable too).CHAPTER I: GENERAL INTRODUCTION 1. l6. which means that they tend to start turning to either starboard or port when the rudder is kept amidships. One of the first papers with a more theoretical approach on this subject was written by Davidson and Schiff [2]. 12.0 But as stated before. l4] . 9]. an officer. the modern crude carriers often possess a length of more than three or even four hundred metres. In particular. in order to obtain an optimal performance the dynamics of the ship and the controller must be known. However. e. a lot of research has been devoted to the principle factors which influence mainly the handling quality of ships. The study reported in this thesis is therefore aimed to obtain at least a part of this information. the very slowly responding supertankers can be directionally unstable. to design a ship. 13. he only studied rather small and thus relatively fastly responding ships [ 2 . Apart from the design of autopilots it is desirable to focus the attention on the human controller. -9- . the manoeuvring properties of these ships may differ from the conventional freighters. the scope of this study is mainly limited to the helmsmen's behaviour during the control of a ship along a prescribed heading. In many cases automatic controllers are applied to keep èhips on the desired course or the desired track. 5. In particular this phenomenon was felt undesirable.g. The manual control of the ship's position. Stuurman published the results of a study to model the helmsman's control behaviour.1 Problem statement Progressively larger ships have been built during the last twenty five years [l]. also the design of controllers to steer ships along a prespecified track got rather much attention [l5. which is optimal with respect to handling quality. so that an adaptive autopilot has to be preferred [l8].g. 8. 4.oment emphasis is laid on automatic steering of ships in those circumstances where the dynamical behaviour is not constant.e. 11. To restrict this wide area of research. Many authors treated the design of autopilots for course keeping [lO. The system. Wagenaar performed a series of experiments to investigate the influence of auxiliary equipment.

athematical model of the control behaviour of the helm.eter estim. The function of the human operator therein v/as considered to be that of a controller. an element that has to close the loop in a certain optim.) eauals 1. the dynamic behaviour of ships.eters. The model is called the describing function model. suitable to analyze the helmsman's behaviour is chosen. and the equivalent linear element. It could be adapted to well defined goals.. and the models describing this behaviour constitute an essential part of the study. 1. the parameters of this model have to be estim. and where the crossover frequency is the frequency for which the open loop gain (HpH^. the remnant. such as aircraft. Using the results of the simulator tests an attempt has been made to develop a m.ed in this paragraph. 1.odel. or tests with ship models [22. represents the controlled element dynam. as well as to the m. j( Tg = effective time delay including neurom. This is generally not the case with full scale trials. theory the output of the human operator can be divided into two parts.ulator has been used. Applications of the crossover theory in the field of slowly responding systems could not be found in literature. Here it should be mentioned again that the describing function model is only based on stability considerations. H(. near the crossover frequency can be approxim.sman. As the helmsman adapts his behaviour to the ship dynamics.3 an introduction is given to the identification of systems.1) with H = human operator describing function. Based on linear system.sman. where Kp means the human operator describing function.ethods. which can be used to estim.ics.ate the model param. 25]: HpHc = 3^ e-J'^^e. (1.ation methods. In Ch.uscular dynamics. To model the helmsman's behaviour a m.ped closed loop performance is achieved. During the simulation the manoeuvring dynam.ith the response of an equivalent linear system.2.For practical reasons a manoeuvring sim. and another part. which will be shortly reviev.ated by means of param. -10- .ade as desired in a relatively simple and cheap way. 1. which represents the difference between the response of the actual system. The literature reviewed is given in Ch. In this way McRuer's well-knov/n crossover model has been obtained [24.an operator adapts his control behaviour to the system under control in such a way that a stable and well dam. because the ship dynamics and disturbances acting on the ship could be m.ated by an integrator and a time delay.al v. the describing function. one part which corresponds v. = crossover frequency. McRuer has summarized many studies and recognized that the open loop describing function H^H. In literature many human operator models are given. The hum.odel has to be selected on the base of certain selection criteria. H^ = controlled element transfer function. V/hen a model.ics of the ships were represented by a mathematical m. The manual control theory thus developed has resulted into a number of useful models.space vehicles. It was developed to describe the human operator's behaviour in controlling relatively fastly responding systems. 23].ay.2 Modelling the helm. (ü. cars and bicycles. A review of literature Starting in the forties much attention has been paid to manual control problems.

31. 30. that is an internal representation of the knov/ledge the human operator has [33]. a predictor to compensate for the human time delay. To summarize the literature the following remarks can be made. Some nonlinear models are based on the internal model concept too.ics of the controlled element and to the band width of the system input. but in an interm. which are mostly extended linear models [29. The nonlinear models were often developed to obtain model outputs. which correspond better with the actual human operator output than the output of a linear model. it is very clearly true for the optim.any other models have been developed such as the decision model [27. his behaviour can be described again with the crossover m. other papers deal with the behaviour of the human operator in a more general way [35. Besides the many studies executed by control and system engineers as mentioned above. Some of these papers are related to specific situations [33. kn important aspect of the behaviour of the human operator controlling a slowly responding system. and finally he also needs a certain tim. This model. where the human operator adapts his control to the dynam.mon aspect: In order to provide a successful control behaviour the human operator needs some information of the dynam. -11- .e for data processing. Besides these two im.portant models m. 32]. describes the behaviour of the human operator in a system with abruptly changing dynamics during the adaptation phase. 25]. The decision model. also originating from linear system theory is the optimal control model [26]. Though this model is mostly used to describe the human operator in controlling fastly responding systems. the applicability of these nonlinear models is restricted to the situation for which the model was developed. again these studies are based on the internal model concept. consisting of a Kalman filter. This knov.Another model. is based on the assumed knowledpe the human operator has about the system dynamics. 28]. This model is based on the assumption that the human operator behaves in a certain optimal way within his inherent limitations: He cannot observe without introducinpnoise. 36]. it may be expected to be useful in relation to slowly responding systems.al control m. The quantity to be observed is often changing so slowly that the human operator does not watch the indicators continuously. he cannot position the controls infinitely precisely. The existence of such an internal model is implicitely true for the crossover model [24.ittent way. a number of studies have been reported by psychologists. 38.ics of the system. When the human operator has adapted his behaviour to the changed system dynamics. 34J.odel [26j and the decision model [27. The nonlinear elem. 28].odel. 39] . this information should also include knowledge of the disturbances actinr on the system.ents were mostly chosen rather intuitively. No examples hereof are reported in literature as far as known. All these models show one com. based on statistical decision theory. The models are all more or less based on the internal model concept.e studies on the human's monitoring behaviour can be mentioned [37. to be controlled. Som. an optimal controller and observation and motor noises. and many nonlinear models.ledge is called an Internal Model. is his monitoring behaviour [33].

ent of the models som.odel concept. and an additional noise.• • • With a few exceptions.1). 32]. VJhen the internal model is an explicit part of a system engineering m.1: Time domain representation and a remnant. As an example the optimal control m. System identification 1.3 An important part of this thesis is concerned with models describing the helmsman's control behaviour. m. the describing function. However.odel can be mentioned [4l]. The following criteria to use a particular type of model to describe the human operator's behaviour in a particular situation were found: • The usefulness of the model to predict the human operator's control behaviour in terms of stability and damping of the system for conditions different from the test conditions. -12- of a system consisting of a linear model .ostly the internal model contains all the information with respect to the controlled system. the remnant (Fig. one part which corresponds with the response of an equivalent liner system. • The character of the model output compared with the character of the human operator output. whereas the human operator may have less knowledge of the system dynamics. As mentioned before the output of a non-linear system can be divided into two parts. All models describing the human operator are more or less based on the internal m.e introductory remarks about the identification of systems should be made. • Measures indicating how well the model output fits the human operator output. • The applicability of the model in practical situations such as display design. 31. To explain the problem. where linear models as well as non-linear models are applied.odel to obtain a more realistic model output [29. 1. e The simplicity of the model: A simple model with only a few parameters describing the human operator's behaviour in a reasonable way often yields more consistent results than a multi parameter model [42].odel.s encountered in the developm. 30. Sometimes nonlinear elements are used in connection with a linear m. an increasing interest in the field of human control of slow response systems exists [4o]. less attention has been paid to the human operator as a controller of slovrly responding systems. FlGURE 1. moreover it is more convenient to apply in analyzing the human operator's behaviour.

ill lead to a biased describing function.J FIGURE 1. however. 45]. For instance.• ^''' uy' In closed loop systems.2: Trans formation of a closed loop system into an open loop system. 1.(»/. in an open loop. To identify the describing function. mv) U(V) E{V) H^(VJ ^ Y(V) HjfV) Z(V) N(l/) UHj(l/)H2(V)| • . • Methods with certain a-priori knowledge. the human operator describing function denoted by H(v) can be determined by the following well-known relation: (1. Therefore the determination of the describing function by minimization of the variance of the error between system output and describing function output v. several methods are available. it can be proven that the remnant and the input of the system or the describing function are uncorrelated in the case of an open loop system. -13- . the noise n(t) is correlated with the systems input e(t) due to the feed back loon (Fig. N.(»/) U(VI H.a) [^3.2) S (v) H(v) Suu (v). In the case that no a-priori knov/ledge is available about the system to be identified. the identification should be achieved on the basis of general methods such as the determination of Bode or Nyquist plots from the analysis of deterministic test signals or spectral density functions of stochastic processes. 1 f Y(V) UHj(V)H^(»/)j ^v.2. the remaining error is then the remnant.The describing function is obtained by minimizing the variance of the error between system output and describing function output. which can be divided into two main groups [43]: • Methods without any a-priori knowledge.

The general criterion to be minimized is: E(e.ent dynam. factor indicating the influence of the magnitude of q e(t).b). 1. In Fig. 1. by transforming the closed loop system.3) r» u(t) stem linear model SL _1 y(t) linear model | y ( > ' ^ f ^ ' ^ minimizaiicn of E(-5.4) e-T . hence it follows: S ue In determining the describing function. (1. applied in a closed loop situation.3 shows the method for an open loop system. is given. here the controlled elem.T) v ' t .However. estimated of the cross spectral densities S (v) and S (v) as well as of the auto spectral density Suu(v) ^Kould be^a\^lilable. -14- . parameter estimation methods can be used.ics have to be known. It can be proven that this method results into consistent estimates in closed loop systems.4 a block diagram of a parameter estimation method.eighting function to take into account the time history of the error e(t).T) porameters T FIGURE 1.T) = /^|e(t)1^ w(e-t) dt. Sye(v) and Suu(v) abe given in the literature [44].ih respect to the unknown parameters (Fig.3).ethods are based on the concept of minimization of an error criterion E(e. Methods to determine these estimates S^y(v). 1.3: Block diagram estimation. Sue(^^) and S„^(v) of the spectra Suy(v). In the case that the structure of the linear system is known.vhere e(t) difference between system output and model output.2. into an equivalent open loop system (Fig. 1. the method explained just-before can be applied again. (v) (1. These m. w = v. of system identification by means of parameter The block diagram of Fig.

a linear model and a nonlinear model. is not possible in general. 1. the outline of the thesis and the definition of the symbols used are given in Ch. In Ch. 1.4 Outline of the thesis This thesis deals mainly with the manual control of large ships. This nonlinear model results from a prelim. 1. To analyze the helmsm. as well as the structures of a model built up with these elements. Moreover the application of simulator tests requires the choice of a mathematical model. knowledge of the manoeuvring characteristics of ships should be obtained.odel output and actual system output.atical model will be selected. As the number of possible nonlinear elements. an analytical derivation of the estimators of the parameters to be determined. and an additional noise.the output of an open loop nonlinear system can be divided into a part resulting from a nonlinear model. having the same input as the nonlinear system. a simple mathem. a review of human operator models and some introductory remarks on system identification. viz. it is from the practical point of view not possible to conclude to a certain configuration by minimization of the variance of the error signal between m. However. and for several ships.inary analysis and from the literature reviewed in Ch. To be able to analyze the test results. this model should be as simple as possible. 2 some models will be discussed. Analoguous to the methods of linear modelling.an's control behaviour two types of models were used.controlled system •itJ FIGURE 1.4: Block diagram of a closed loop parameter estimation method. the parameters of the model chosen will be given. The parameter estimation m. Ch. a general theory is not available. for which data could be found in literature.ethods developed with respect to linear models can also be used in the case of nonlinear models. 3 summarises the results of a large number of tests with a manoeuvring simulator. To estimate the parameters of the nonlinear model. describing the dynamics of the ships to be simulated. After giving an introduction into and a definition of the problem.this structure has to be chosen on the basis of a-priori knowledge of the system dynamics. is unlimited. To study the helmsman's control behaviour in relation to the dynamics of ships. Therefore. -15- .

5 Definition of symbols In Fig. Using the steering v/heel. orthogonal system.ade it possible to conduct a series of full scale trials with a rather sm. the Royal Netherlands Naval College m.odelling results. 1. 3 and Ch.odel. Fortunately. 6. of which the position is denoted by <Sd(t). the helmsman controls the rudder position fi(t).6: Definition of -16- the quantities involved in the manoeuvring of a ship. could be evaluated with respect to a small ship.an control.'hich the heading angle of the ship i(j(t) can be controlled. 1. In Ch. disturbances i » helmsman I — » steering gear | 6(t) V^(t) ship FIGURE 1.arks are made in Ch. 4 deals with a study of the influence of additional displays on the behaviour of the helmsm. The heading angle is the angle between the longitudinal axis of the ship and the xo-axis of a right handed. In this way the results of simulator tests. Some concluding rem. described in Ch. . by v. 4) attention vras focussed mainly on rather large ships.Ch.all ship. 5 these tests and the results obtained are described. had to be extended to be able to interprete the results of this study. this chapter also gives some guidelines with respect to further research work in this field 1. viz. linear and nonlinear m.6). of coordinates fixed relatively to the earth: Ox y^z^ (Pif.5: Block diagram of the ship steered by a helmsman. FIGURE 1. During the simulator studies (Ch.an steering a ship in waves.5 a block diagram is given of a ship under hum. 3. The nonlinear m.

1971. Nomoto. Proc Fourth Ship Contr. SSPA. Vergelijking van stuurautomaten. 31 p. 12. S. M. The ordered heading is denoted by i|)(j(t). Symp. 117 p... Konda. I.A. the course angle is the anp-le between the direction of the ship velocity vector V and the x^-axis.. Buitenhek. 1964. Vfapeninpen.N. The x-direction coincides with the ship's longitudinal axis. V. No. J. and that this plane coincides with the Gxy plane at all tim. 11. 14 p. Modelvorming voor scheepsbesturing.E. Vol. ter. Hozos. Naval College.s Symp. Den Helder.12. Theory and observations on the use of a m. 135-177. Delft.. pp.. Ship Model Basin. 30 p. 35.ed that the ship's centre of gravity is constrained to the horizontal Oxoyo pla^^e. pp.I. 1970. 6. 8. Hirano.M. Glansdorp. Abkowitz. Analyse en synthese van stuurautomaten. .. Proc. Mo. 3 pp. M. Engineering Science. 10.R... K. Report:. H. of the S.L. Report: Lyngby (Denmark). 14 (1972) No. 152-200.. 3. Norrbin.A.The XQ direction can be the south-north direction for example .. N. 30-41. 10. Some aspects of the stability of automatic course control of ships. Turning and course keeping qualities. 68.es. Proc. 35')-370. No.1 .N.K. 375. Manoeuvring trials with the 193. 2. 1970. Symp. Int.A. 73 (1965).. Bech. No. 301. 5t (igl^ö). Vol.H.E. The rudder angle is the angle betv/een the longitudinal axes of the ship and the rudder. having its origin at the ship's centre of gravity.S. of the S. . Shipbuilding Laboratory. 9. The positive direction of the heading is clockwise. REFERENCES • ' ' " 1. Eda.Delft.J. Davidson. pp. Clarke. 7. 13.000 tons tanker with a simple mathematical model. Manoeuvring trials with a 200.W. Modelvorming voor scheepsbesturing. 1972. Behaviour of larf^e tankers in shallow water in relation to the dimensions of an approach channel.P. Delft. J.E. Public: Gothenburp:. R.S. on Offshore Hydrodynamics. Vol.M. 17 p. L. Lectures on hydrodynamics. Patterson. Report: Delft. pp.A. In thTs study it is assum. Steering characteristics of ships in calm water and waves. 1969. Horst.000 tonne deadweight tanker "Esso Bernicia".000 tons tanker. System.. A.anoeuvring in deep and confined waters. just as for the rudder angle and the course ijj(t). Public: Netherl.. D. 1971.M. Automatic control of directionally unstable ships. fixed relatively to the ship. Vol. K. Koele. Royal Netherl. 248. L. No. Hy-5.. Thaler.. 7. G. On the steering qualities of ships. . Trans.. Paper: Spring Meeting of the Royal Inst. C. D. Symp. Mech. The components of the ship's velocity vector V in X.. C .20.and y-direction are denoted by u and v respectively. Symp. 113 p. 1971. 12. on Directional Stability and Control of Bodies Moving in Water. Journ. 5. T. Hydro og Aerodynamisk Laboratorium. Crane. 1975.. J H. Trans.A. Schiff. Simulation of full scale results of manoeuvring trials with a 200. 24 p.. Vfooderson. Shipbuilding Laboratory.athematical model for ship m. No. of Naval Architects..M. i (1957) No.I. Taguchi. Winkelman. Glansdorp. C . K. pp. 123-131. A second right handed and orthogonal system of coordinates Gyvz is defined.. C O . Vol.

G. pp. Report of the post graduate course: Design and economical considerations on shipbuilding and shipping. June 1966. Zuidweg.odel of the well-trained human operator in simple manual control. Human transfer function in ship steering. 327. r'MS-9 (I968). 1 (March). Shipbuilding Laboratory. The accuracy requirements of automatic path guidance. T. IEEE-trans.C. 31.. Aeronautical Sci. 23. 30. Automatic guidance of ships as a control problem. Com. Mathematical models of human pilot behaviour. NTIS. 18. 3 (Sept. A. on Man-Machine Systems. Autom. van. Elkind.. No. paper 30A.. Brummer. 441-449.S. Springfield. Contr. Diss. Wagenaar. 361-370. D..: Delft. IEEE-trans. Model Reference Adaptive Autopilots for Ships. V ' R van. Baron. 1972. R. IZF-1968-C3. Kleinman... Vol. J.. Paymans. W. C. Modelling the helmsman: A study to define a mathematical model describing the behaviour of a helmsman steering a ship along a straight course. Proc Third IFAC congress on automatic and remote control. Den Helder.A. An application of Kalnan Filter to the discrete time route trackinr of ships.). 1. D. No. 19. Auxiliary equipment as a compensation for the effect of course instability on the perform. Koyama.K..A. 59 p... Canner. 188. Journ. The effect of contracted time scales in scale model manoeuvring.M.. 20. J. Veenman.T. 6. Krendel.I.. 141-151.. -18- . Stuurman. 6 (Dec). AD-665-455..J.B. 1975. Adaptive characteristics of the human controller of time-varying systems.. pp. 25 (1958). Systems Symp. 24.P. Royal Netherl. Proc. D. McRuer. Amerongen. Delft. 29.. Royal Netherl. Pitkin. N.. A. 21. V. Naval College.p. A non-linear feedback m. 23 p. 11-22. 1970. book 2.. Brug..G. Report: Delft. Miller. 1 pp. Eighth Conf. AFFDL-TR-72-92. Report: The Institute for Perception. 1968. 1972. Jex. Diamantides.. on Autom. 824-832. Ship Research Centre TNG. Vol.. AC-16 (1971). W. McRuer. Proc Fourth Ship Contr. 21 p. J. A pilot analog for airplane pitch control. J. Contr. 2-9. E. Naval College. No. HFE-8 (1967). Den Helder. 191 p. System. 1 pp. A..L. Delft. IEEE-trans. 1975. No.R. Proc Fourth Ship Contr. Udink ten Cate.H.en. Y.M. V/agenaar.A. Some notes on the auto-pilot of an unstable ship. 28. 1969. D. London. 17. T.T. 25..ance of helmsm. Wapeningen. No. J.. 13 p. Vol.I. H. No.T.. the effect of feel in the wheel. Costello. Report: NATO-AGARD. Vol. Vol. 27. No. Koyama. pp.C . 112-130. A control theoretic approach to manned-vehicle systems analysis. 4701. 1975. W. Report: TNO-IWECO. pp. Vol. 26. Elkind. Kimura. P. 315-333. Vol. 72 p.D..atica. Ann Arbor. Michon.. S..A. 28 S.s Symp. 16. Royal Netherl. pp. J.. 1969. v. 170-184. Miller...'. on Human Factors in Electronics. 15. Stuurman. D. on Man. 231-249.J. Simulation of ship manoeuvring qualities.14. Glansdorp. 1968. E. A review of quasi-linear pilot models.. pp.. Proc Fourth Ship Control Systems Sym. 1971.. Den Helder.H. 136 p.odel for tracking studies. No. Vol. Naval College..d.C. The surge m. pp.munication Netherl. Soesterberg. pp. 11 (1975). Vol. 22. Levison. Wijk. On the process of adaption by the human controller.M.

1968. 10 p. 33. 34. Kleinman.S. IEEE-trans. Proc. NASA-SP-126. of Mech.. Stassen. 43. NASA CR-1952. L. 41. 1972. Man and Cybernetics. pp. NASA-SP-192. voor Werkt. Vol. Study Institute.. Senders. 35.G. 40. In: Displays and Controls. Contr.)'. Meet. 44.. Report: Delft.. Bainbridge. 181-I87.E. On the dynamic response of the human operator to transient inputs. Report: Cambridge (U.. 1968. Rouse. IEEE-trans.L... WTHD 21. Kelley.. D. on Human Factors in Electronics.M.). A. To be published. R. Annual Report 1969 of the Man-Machine Systems Group. 165-180.32. van. on Manual Control. Lunteren. pp. Bolt Beranek and Newman. I969. 42. C..).. A model of the human in a cognitive prediction task.s. Dept.). Lab. 473-477. The human operator as a monitor and controller of multidegree of freedom system. Lunteren. Kelley.. pp. Third Annual Conf. 3 (Sept. S. Los Angelos. J. Human decisions in the control of a slow response system.H. No. Proc. Manual and autom.atic c o n t r o l . Spectral Analysis and its Applications.R. No.K. W. 383-392. G. The design of a non-linear multi-parameter model for the human operator. C. 249-367. HFE-5 (1964). 1969.). on Man-Machine Systems. 39. 1965.D. A. Amsterdam. Cambridge (U. Berchtesgaden. 38. on Man.. Vol. 45.R. Berchtesgaden. 1 (Sept.. Rapport: Delft. J. pp..A. pp. HFE-8 (1967). Vfiley. A. Proc Fourth Conf. 5 (Sept. 36. H. 109 p. van. on Human Factors in Electronics. 403 p.W. . Phatak.. The nature of the mental model in process control. G. Int. 37. Ann Arbor. N-114. Baron. D. Swets and Zeilinger. 1976. Adv.en Regelt.. pp. Engineering. Diss. Watts. Smallwood. Internal models and the human instrument r. Symp. Cooke. Jenkins. New York. 1967. Systeem identifikatie en parameter schatting in open en gesloten ketens. Vol. Analytic Evaluation of Display Requirements for Approach to handing. SMC-3 (1973). 102 p.. Holden Day. A psychological approach to operator modelling in manual control.V. 1970. Johannsen.onitor. 2-5..G. 1976. on Monitoring behaviour and supervisory control.B.: Oxford. D. on Systems. Paper presented at Symp. Weir. No. IEEE-trans.

all amount of parameters. Keeping in mind the objectives of this study. (2.2-b) (2. In 1946 Davidson and Shiff published a method to analyze the behaviour of ships.u^)r = -Yg5 (2. Y = m (v + ur) . Referring Un.anoeuvring behaviour of ships will be given. As the study is only concerned with the behaviour of helmsm. N = hydrodynamic moment.en steering a ship alonr prescribed headings. but the more scientific approach started just in the forties. . simulator experiments a mathematical model describinfr the behaviour of a ship had to be selected. the following linearized equations of motions can be derived: (X^^-m)u + X^Au = 0 (2.(t)/dt = angular velocity.ulated: • The responses of the model to any rudder angle inout must be as realistic as possible.2-c) V = -^6^ -20- .2 Models of ship manoeuvring The steering of ships has been studied already for many years. a brief review of mathem. 2. • The tests should provide information about the im. By a sim. • To be able to analyze the test results the model should be as simple as possible. only the relation between rudder angle and heading is iriportant.1-b) N = 1^2^ .portance of different manoeuvring properties such as sluggishness and course instability.ent of inertia about the z-axis. (2.entary mechanics the equations of Euler for a sym.1 Introduction To perform. a model simple with respect to its structure and with a sm. r = dij. Y = hydrodynamic force in y-direction. r-n"^» Vn = 0 and 6^=0 as the nominal conditions.CHAPTER II: SHIP DYNAMICS 2.om. From elem. m = ship's mass. • It should be possible to introduce also the influence of v:aves in the simulation.metric ship moving in the horizontal plane are known: X = m (Ü . Izz = ship's m.ple model is meant.vr) .1-c) where X = hydrodynamic force in x-direction. which can be regarded as the base of all later research on this subject [l] .-m)v+Yv+ V v N'V V Y*f + r + N VV + (N'-I zz )f + r ^-m. the following requirements viith respect to such a model should be form.2-a) (Y. Before the model used can be selected.1-a) (2.atical models describing the m.

ay many different models have been suggested [2. In this v.1). for which o ften a cubic |() polynomial is. (2.eters. and z-axes are the ship's principle axes of inertia. consisting of three equations of which two equations are coupled.oto's second order model [5]: T^T2^(t) + (T^+T2)if(t)+iI^(t)=K[T^(5(t) + 6(t)]. this equation can be replaced by a simple first-order differential equation in the rate of turn [5. • The propeller is kept at a constant num.inating the drift speed v from.metric body.used. • Only the motions in the horizontal plane are considered. v.ber of revolutions. They r eplaced the term i i t by a nonlinear function H[i|i(t)]. If the rudder m. • • • The centre of gravity is considered to be situated in the Ox y plane. The influence of external disturbances such as wind. y.Norrbin [6.6) = K6(t).. is added to the output of the model descri bing the behaviour of the ship in calm.an a much siripler miodel is to be preferred. noise. To include also larger variations of the variables the model has to be extended v.() )] (2. To study the behaviour of a helmsm. 8. of the motions of a ship in waves (Fig. Wellknown models in this resp ect are the model of Bech [7] : T T ' i ' t + (T^+T2)i(}(t)+H[iI»(t)]=K[T^é(t) + 6(t ^2i. This model.s.1: Model describing behaviour of a in waves. which is the water plane. 3. (2. (2. knov/n as Nom. the Eos. 7. (2.aves or current is neglected. • The perturbations of the variables around the equilibrium.2-b) and (2. are small. These parameters are functions of the partial derivatives in the Eqs. 6 ] : Ti|}(t) + ii)(t) = K6(t).3) where the parameters T.ith nonlinear term. ship motions due to waves ö(t) model of shipdynamics in calm water V^l») • u* mt) FIGURE 2. 2. are called time constants and K is a gain factor. By elim. Tpj and T. the ship -21- . ° ° The X. (2.otions are low frequent. is based on the following assumptions: • The ship is a rigid and sym.2-c) a single differential equation is obtained. Mostly a sum of sine v a ves or a coloured . and the quantity u^ denotes the constant forward speed. 8 ] : T if(t) + il»(t) + a [Ht)]^ (2.5) and of Nomoto . in such a way that the spectrum of the output of the model obtained m.odels have a rather large number of param. • The ship is sailing in unrestricted viater.2) the subscript means the partial derivative with respect to the specific variable. 4 ] . 9 ] .atical model describing the manoe uvring of ships in waves has been found.In Eqs.4) Some authors extended these two miodels to obtain a better agreemient with full scale test results [6. water. However.eets the actual spe ctrum.2). these m. No simple mathem.

twin screw ships with one rudder situated at the ship's centerline can show a stationary characteristic different from Fig. -22- . the models of Bech or Norrbin [7.anoeuvring properties. this model had to be ch osen.4) ha 5 only two param. 8 ] .1 a model has been selected. 2. e.the relation between the rudder angle and the rate of turn in the steady state is linear.2: Stationary characteristics directionally unstable of ship. 2.2 rather well.3: Stationary characteristic of a twin screw ship with one rudder situated at the shiv's centerline.2.3. 2.2. but one like Fig. As Norrbin's model is simpler and describes the behaviour of ships viith characteri stics as shown in Pig. The stationary charac teristic . Nomoto's first-order m. a directionally stable and an However.eters and is one of the sim.plest models developed t o describe ship m. 3 The m. also ships with different characteristic s had to be simulated. Ö [deg] FIGURE 2. As the shape of this curve might influence strongly the helmsman's behaviour.odel (2. FIGURE 2. However. 2.odel selected On the basis of the requirements Fiven in Ch.g. This mioans that a nonlinear m. from full scale experimen ts it is known that this stationary characteristic often is nonli near [10] .odel had to be u sed.

It has been chosen mainly because of its simplicity. applied during the e x p e r i m e n t s .ated by their d e s c r i b i n g functions. The following model is thus obtained: Tj 6(t) + 6(t) = <S^(t) . Though the actual dynamics are much more complicated. These d a t a .4 the block diagram of the steering g e a r . • (2.eter T 3 . |5(t)| < 6^ . had to be transformed in terms of the n o n l i n e a r m o d e l . To control the rudder position often a hydraulic servo-system is used. öd(t) I — » J 5(t)dt ö(t) FIGURE 2. Som. 2 . A technique used by many authors to m o d e l ship d y n a m i c s is based on special tests or zig-zag t e s t s .ited capacity of the oil pumps. ll] .ulation. In F i g .ulations could be obtained.ited. some a p p r o x i m a t i o n s were introduced in e s t i m a t i n g Tg (Fig. the dynam.9-a) (2. 2. In order to obtain data to imiprove such a sim.To be able to simulate also this type of ships the Norrbin model was extended with a second nonlinear term: Tgi(.8) was finally used during the simulator experiments.ay that realistic sim.4 a review is given of ship data in terms of this model as found in literature. al. • The n o n l i n e a r elements were approxim. and Kg by m e a n s of a least sauared error m e t h o d . o The h e a d i n g ^(t) was considered to be a sinusoidal s i g n a l . Because of the lim.here T5 is a time constant and 6^ is the m a x i m u m rudder a n g u l a r v e l o c i t y . Parameter values As m e n t i o n e d b e f o r e . The results of the zig-zag tests were used to e s t i mate the param. the literature on ship steering vms therefore reviewed. The results of the spiral tests w e r e used to estim. 32.8) Model (2. h o w e v e r .4 of the steering gear. the dynamics of the ships to be simulated should be as realistic as p o s s i b l e .(t)+a^iJ^(t)+a2['l'(t)]^+a^[iKt)]^^^ = K^6 (2.4: Block diagram 2. S-j. In paragraph 2. the angular velocity of the rudder is lim. As only a rough e s t i m a t i o n was n e e d e d .ated in a reasonable way by m.e models describing such a system are given by Bech and Brummer et. -23- . It was hoped that those data were sufficient to choose the model parameters in such a v. 5 ) : e The r u d d e r engine d y n a m i c s w e r e n e g l e c t e d . is g i v e n .9-b) v. [lO.eans of a first-order differential equation.ate the model p a r a m e t e r s a ^ . although also the three remaining requirements were fulfilled.ic behaviour can be approxim.

1 1 «0 ^^ " 1 1 •%n ^0 öitJ Ks 4 V'\ 1 1 V^f'l i * s 1 1 tnoaei shipdynamics f during J . i)^ .ulated. the parameters of . In this way the following formula could be obtained: iJ^ l s 6 / ^1. 2. As this model approximates the stationary characteristic by a straight line. o In accordance to Norrbin [8] and Bech [?] the coefficient a^ was kept equal to 1 or -1 depending on the fact that the ship was stable or unstable. © Not any ship with stationary characteristic like Fig.6o ^ T. T. VJith respect to this.table the following remarks can be made: 9 A relatively small amount of full scale tests has been performed The larper part is related to larp-e ships. In these cases the parameter values were__norm.arginally stable ships v/ere found where B. = period of one oscillation. . The literature reviewed does not provide enough information to choose the model param. Nomoto's data do not provide inform.odel v/ere calculated.J L FIGURE 2.ation about the actual shape of the stationary characteristics of the ships.eters of a range of ships to be sim.5: Block diagram of the model a zig-zag test.oto [25] .2 has been found. except the railroad ferrv when sailing backwards [11].05 A large number of ships were examined by Nom. Some m.^ o 1 T TT^ ii^ 7 (2. sec -1 -24- .am.^ is equal to zero. The results of the parameter estimations are given in Table 2.1. Based on zig-zag tests v ' t about seventy ships.alized v/ith respect to Kg which was kept eoual to -.ih Nomoto's first-order m.plitude of the heading.10) where 6 = actual rudder amplitude.

09 -.0 .9 3 800 15.3 106 000 djj-11.4 19.0 15 9 15 9 16 Ballasted dj.9 32.04 -.6 48.5 19.8 14 242.47 4.TABLE 2.9 47.0 20.10 -.9 5. 1 .042 -0.0 313 307 106 59 10.5 2.0 .5 20 15 264 -.72 .0 .4 7.2 15.2 46.0 .125 26 -1.07 -. "3 Kind of ship Deadweight Length tons m 139.14 -.0 .0 18.3 7.05 -.0 .04 ^s sec 51 28 25 33 of different PARAMETERS MODEL •s ' sec-1 -.0 . 3.06 -.10 -207 76 208 185 28 Trainingship 41 7.5 234 -.3 3.2 382 12 8.046 -0.0 .5 24. SHIP DATA Breadth Draught m 17.6 4.26 -.04 »1 "2 « ! • ) ' REF.9 238 000 Displ.2 18.63 -.0 .0 .8 8.92 -.8 32.2 48.49 . -1 .3 12.05 Tanker Loaded Undeep water Ballasted Undeep water Bulkcarrier Bulkcarrier Tanker Tanker Unknown Unknown Cruise ship Pilot boat 135 89 dj.0 .6 3.05 -.0 .0 11 12 13 14 15 Railroadferry Passenger and Cargo Liner Cargo Liner Container ship Tanker Loaded .0 .0 .25 -.12 -0.22 1.8 62.05 -.4 20.8 -.0 24 17 18 19 20 21 21 22 23 .1 18. 6.0 .04 -.156 16.2 12.59 2.05 -.05 -. 63.07 1.0 c-i»)*"' .7.04 — 69 250 3 200 80 000 50 000 221.22 -.0 .0 .1 215 000 46 -.0 .9 .8 -0.05 -1.12 -.8 23 16.7 12 10 8 20 18 25 29.6 134. m' 9 100 7 300 13 170 Speed Knots 19.0 .13 .8 4.6 42 900 200 000 273. 39.0 .0 .1: Summary of the manoeuvring properties ships.0 310.9 m 5.8 d^-10.4 10.23 5.0 193 000 304.0 135. 20. . found in literature.05 -.4 65 089 250 251 250 750 13.7.0 .5 10.10 .

only the yawing motions had to be considered. denoted by ^ ( X Q . is assumed to be composed of an infinite number of sinusoidal components with different am.ed to a v.an steering a ship in a sea-way. c_ = wave velocity. frequencies and phases.otions S . The results hereof show a fair agreem. a signal simulating these yawing motions had to be available.6). and the ship's responses are given by the transfer function H. the behaviour of ships in waves had to be known. t ) . The relation betvjeen o j and ü g follovjs from.ulator experiments (Ch.ulations.ship speed. As this study was mainly based on fixed base sim. 3 and 4 ) .12) g where V = ship speed.5 Ship m.11) ( ). V ' e the spectral density .otions due to waves To study the control behaviour of a helmsm. classical wave theory and is given by: 3 s^^(%) = iH^^(^e) . -26- . 2. y = angle between the ship's velocity vector V and the wave velocity c (Fig. V . The random. sea surface.ent between predictions and measurem.jj^(^Wg)j the spectrum of the ship's yawing m. To introduce the disturbances in the sim.ic of a ship can be described just as the sea surface. " ^C^ e^ It should be noted that the spectrum and the transfer function depend on the frequency of encounter ^ . U) | o -ülJi cos y| ( cj^V (2.ents [28].direction of wave propagation. Formulas describing the spectral density of the sea waves as function of the circular frequency '^ are given by Neumann [29]. \ \ V^ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ FIGURE 2.plitudes.2 .ave spectrum based on the frequency of encounter Wg. V Q . 27]. C^p) can be calculated bv: ^^ (2.hn of the sea surface is denoted by S?c('^p). often a linear model based on the potential theory is applied [26. g = acceleration of gravity. The dynam. The wave spectrum based on the wave frequency ^ has to be transform.6: A ship sailing in a regular sea. by statistical methods. In calculating the ship motions in irregular sea. and by Pierson and Moskowitz [30] . y .

(joj ) = .be calculated as described above. can be approximated by the assumption that the presence of the ship does not influence the pressure in a wave. In this way the moment exerted by one wave component can be calculated. the wave exerted mom. can be integrated over the ship's hull.15) The hydrodynamical coefficients N.12). 31.The spectral density of the waves as function of wg can be computed from the spectral density based on u by means of the following formula: ==U<"e) . NÏ = added mass. 32]. TO transform the wave D spectrum S (OJ) into S^^((Dg) the spectrum S^^(a)) should be divided into parts^for which the relation between u and Wg is unique. By integrating the cross-sectional values the result for the three dimensional ship is found [28] .. rrf w \ • rr—r • (2.l4.y coincide with the other parts. the frequency I is not a uniquely function of I>)Q. The spectral density S^^(ue) is obtained by adding for each Wg the densities resulting from. i. -27- .16) To perform the computations described above the Delft Shipbuilding Laboratory has completed a number of com.ent. As a liner theory is used a linear transfer function Hj^r(jü)g) can be defined. describing the moments acting on the ship in regular as well as irregular waves. (2.s. can be computed.al mapping. The right hand side of Eq. The spectral density of the ship's yawing motions then can be estimated by the formula: ^^^'^e^ -. Each of these parts result in a part of the spectrum S55((jL)g). N^ = hydrodynamic mom. which m a . Using these programs the motions of a ship in regular waves. 2. where a correction is needed to take into account the relative motion of the ship. Starting points are the known two-dimensional solutions for the cross-sections. and using the wave spectra as given by Pierson and Moskowitz [30] Sr^(we) can. Nr = damping coefficient. the transformation of each part. the transfer functions Hjor(ü3g).puter program. However.oments are given by the following differential equation: where I = ship's moment of inertia. This pressure. known from wave theory. which can be computed by means of conform. and N^ can be estimated using the so called strip theory [27. The transfer function can be written as: H. The ship's responses to the wave exerted m.e.ent.Sec'"' % • (2-"> where du/dcog can be computed using Eq.l % ^ > e ) • "nS^J'^e^l^ h^^'^e?' ^^.

L. K. but finite number of sine v. 35. Bech.athematical model for ship m. M.7: Approximation of the continuous spectrum by a discrete spectrum. Hy-14. Vol. On the steering Qualities of ships. Schiff. N...as required. H.A.. 3. of the S. Journ.M. K.p. on Directional Stability and Control of Bodies Moving in Water. Finally the phases are chosen randomly. 2. Vol.E. 68. Therefore. 117 p. Gothenburg.N. pp.. 7.E. v. C.. No.anoeuvrinp in deep and confined waters.7).(tüg) is divided in small bands with . Theory and observations on the use of a m. 4. Nomoto. 5.. 1971. Abkowitz. 4 (1957) No. S. 1969. Problems and requirements of directional stability and control of surface ships.. Nomoto.. K. Hydro og Aerodynamisk Laboratorium. 6. Trans. Int. Vol.M. 1-5. >^^(We' FIGURE 2. Trans.. 354-370. Eda. M. Steering characteristics of ships in calm water and waves.. L. Analogue simulation of ship manoeuvres based on full scale trials or free-sailing model tests. Engineering Science.S.. Hydro og Aerodynamisk Laboratorium. 135-177. as stated before a signal to be added to the output of the model describing the ship's responses to rudder actions.The calculation of the ship m. Report: Lyngby (Denmark). of the S. Public. The amplitude of each component is selected in such a way that the power of a particular component equals the power within the corresponding band. a bandwidth Aw (Fig.otions in waves is based on frequency domain methods. Sym. Crane. Hirano.I. 152-200.. 73 (1965).ation of such a signal can be obtained by a sum of a large. pp. Taguchi. Honda. I.'aves.P. N'ech. Hy-5. St (. REFERENCES 1. 113 p.N. 24 p. -28- . Report: Lyngby (Denmark).H.S. pp. 7.. phase and freauency. l4 (1972) No. the calculated spectrum S. No. Norrbin.A. Lectures on hydrodynamics. K. Wagner Smitt. Proc.L. SSPA. However. Davidson. 1964.M. Turning and course keeping qualities.19'iè).A. The sine waves are chosen in such a way that the frequencies eauals the central frequencies of each of the bands. T. pp.I. ' 2.. Vol.. An approxim... with properly chosen amplitude.

18. Schiff und Hafen. Verstoep. 9...H. St. Clarke.. No.erongen. Manoeuvring trials with a 200. Vol.E. 24.000 tons deadweirht tanker "British Bom.bardier". K. Simulation of full scale results of manoeuvrinr trials with a 200. 533-541. 84s. Eisenbahnf"ahrschiff "Deutschland". 27. 14.. 10. BSRA. Nomoto. R.ol Vol. Containerschiff "Bremen Express". K. Manoeuvring trials with the 50. H. J. Verslag van de metingen verricht aan boord van de loodsboot "Capella" van 040472 tot 180472. U. Gerritsma.. Model tests and ship correlation for a cargo-liner. 1966. V.. M. NS-142. Proc. 1033-1061. J. Netherlands Ship Research Centre TNO.. Report: Delft. On the modified zig-zag manoeuvre and its anplication. 6I (1953) pp. C . Shipping World and Shipbuilder.. Report: Delft. Report:. of Naval Architects. Norrbin. Report: Delft. pp. M.E.I.. 10. V. 14 p. 109 (1972) STG-Sondernumm. 3773 (Dec. Jahrg. 162 (1969) No. 24 v. Hebecker. J. Motora. pp.V. 21.) pp. on Ship Manoeuverabilitv. Tenth Int. Report: Delft.. 372. Wooderson. 1966 . On the motions of ships in confused seas.8.. C . J. C. 17. Glansdorp. Mitteilung der Ham. 1-10. Am. M. 301. N.. 11. No. 19. On the design and analysis of the zig-zag test on base of quasi-linear freauency response.A. No. Trans. "arx.. "Mini Luck" Japanese-built mini bulk carrier. 280-357. Das Manover "Mann über Bord". First Symp...L. 25. Brix. l46l. 2043-2076. Chirilia. Buitenhek.. of Naval Architects. 15.D. K. Shipping World and Shipbuilder.. 355-374.. Report: David Taylor Model Basin.N. 1-8. Norrbin. Vol.. 20 p..R. Schiff und Hafen.000 tons tanker with a simple mathematical model. Gerbitz. Part I.) pp. Verslag van de metingen verricht aan boord van de "Zeefakkel" van 221073 tot 241073.J. 12. 133-148. Towing Tank Conf. Pronulsion and Manoeuvring tests. Fujino. 791-795. S. 9 (1972) pp. I4l-l8l. 32 p. 23. 160 (1967) No.'inkelman. 156 (1965) No. 31 p. J. Report: Delft.'. 13. 963-966. 3834 (June) pp.. 248. 26. D. Turbinentankschiff "Altanin".. No. 0. 275-304. Lehmkuhl. of the S. Chirila.. Saarikangar. .burgischen Schiffbau Versuchanstalt.V. pp. Shipbuilding Laboratory. Proc. Lindgren. D. Jrg.M. E. Analysis of Kempf's standard manoeuvre test and nronosed steering quality indices. N. Behaviour of a-ship in a sea-way. Delft 1970.er II (Nov. van. 1963. No. M. Laboratorium voor Regeltechniek..H. I960.. Shipbuilding Laboratory. Trans. 1500-1513.. 817-Ö21. Bech. 16 (1964) Heft 11 (Nov. Proc.000 tons tanker. fodelvorm. 3811 (Sept. Laboratorium. Vol. Manoeuvring trials with the 193.) pp. Pierson.) pp. 16. Vol..H. nn. Schiff und Hafen. Symp. No. K. Denis. Jrg. J. 1969. Patterson. Shipping V ' r d and Shipbuilder . voor Pegeltechniek.ing voor scheepsbesturing.' 1971.. of the Royal Inst. pp. In: Selected papers SNA Japan. N. Enkvist. 24 (1972) Heft 11. pp. 104 (1962).000 tonne deadweight tanker "Esso Bernicia".. 20. Modellversuche und Bordmessungen. Paper presented at Spring meeting 1972 of the Royal Inst. Clarke. pp. 15 (1963) Heft 10. D.C.V.. HANSA Jrg.K. Glansdorp. 22. Some guidelines to the optimum adjustment of autopilots in ships. Vol. Fritsch. "Finlandia" Finish-built Passenger and Car Liner Some Design Considerations. J. Sea trials of the "Sighansa".

Diss. Geophysical Sciences Lab.... No. Shipbuilding Laboratory.'. 30. No. 194.odel in regular longitudinal waves. 1968.H.parison of calculated and measured heaving and pitching motions of a series 60. Vugts. G. Pierson.H. 115 p. 32... heaving and rolling cylinders in a free surface. V. Com. No. Shipbuilding Laboratory. J.: Delft. J.a. Report: Delft. 1966. 1970. 43. J. 139.. L. CK= 70 ship m.28. W. Neumann. Report: New York University. 31. Beukelman. Moskowitz. Gerritsm. The hydrodynamic forces and ship motions in waves. 29. 63-12. No. Proposed spectral form for fully developed wind seas. Report: Delft. 30- . Vugts.. The hydrodynamic coefficients for swaying. On "Ocean wave spectra and a new method of forecasting windgenerator sea". 1963. Technical Memoranium: Beach Erosion Board.J. l6 p.

2 3. To achieve these goals the simulation on a manoeuvring simulator was preferred to the execution of full scale tests. it should be noted that a validation of the simulator test results by means of full scale tests will be necessary (see Ch.CHAPTER III: SHIP MANOEUVRING IN CALM V ' T R . the influences of waves. • The helmsman steered the ship by means of the steering wheel only. wind. the position of the ship had not been taken into account. partly engaginr the helmsm. only a brief description will be given.portant part of this study. 3. etc. Moreover.an's attention could be neglected. However. o The ship dynamics were constant.2. was analyzed.1 Experimental set up The manoeuvring simulator The simulator of the Institute TNO for Mechanical Constructions at Delft was used to perform the tests. The engine telegraph was not used. current.AE 3. 5). well defined experiment could be executed.an's control behaviour in relation to the ship dynam. that is. 3. o The disturbances v/ere as sm. being an im. and also the presence of other people on the bridge. The test conditions were chosen in such a way that a simple. a series of experiments were performed. This simulator has been described extensively by Brummer and Van V/ijk [l] . so that the results obtained could be analyzed and interpreted in an understandable v/ay. the usefulness of the different models. full scale tests are very expensive. It was assumed that: • Only the heading of the ship had to be controlled by the helmsman. of projecrion II environmemoili I »' 2 " " " ^ display instiuciions rp desiied state I instruments! indicating nF5^^ ship's ^ helmsman I—^ controls dynamics [ wheel house analogue I j computer FIGURE 3.1: Block diagram of the TNO simulator. On the basis of some preliminary experiments linear as well as nonlinear models were formulated. -31- . Fig.1 Introduction To gather information about the helmsm.ics.1 shows a block diagram. Therefore.. To structure the information obtained in this way a model of human behaviour has been developed. because then the test conditions can be controlled as desired.all as possible.

3. "^he sim.ulator during a simulated harbour approach. 2. the environmental display and the indicati'nrinstrum.med. the p r o j e c t i o n system and the analojrue computer.-ed a rap v/ith respect to certain types cf ships.1.odel (En. hence the helmsman obtains only inform.2 shows a photorraph of the sim. Using the extended version of Norrbin's m.ain p a r t s a r e the v. such as sluggishness and course instability. in relation to manual steerin.ents . As the results of the literature study shov. Therefore an other and systemiatic approach had to be follov.'heelhouse.2: The ship research and manoeuvring for Mechanical Constructions at simulator Delft. of the Institute TNO On the computer the dynamics of the ship to be simulated have been program.the sim.ics The tests should provide information about the importance o^ different mianoeuvring properties.8): T^lO(t)+a^ii-(t)+a2['Ht)]^ + a^[Mt)]^''^ = K^6(t). 3. The m.2 Ship dynam. The com. could not be selected on the base of Table 2.ulator. ( 2. FIGURE 3.2.ation from.ulator is a fixed base simulator.--. F i g . R) -32- .'ed.puter generates the sirnals to control the environmiental display system and the indicating instruments. the param.eters of the model chosen to simulate the ships.

05 -.3 Displays and controls The displays used were a com. 3] . displaying the ship sailing in unrestricted water.e constant Tg could be found in literature [2.portant aspects can be distinguished.05 -.ih linear characteristic. Characteristic (see Fig.ee 50 and 250 seconds. corresponding with small.3) I Sec 10 50 250 10 50 10 50 250 10 50 10 50 250 10 50 Sec-^ -.ics the parameters of the steering gear had to be chosen as well. For each of these values the shane of the stationary characteristic was varied: Stable v ' t a more or less .05 -.2.3 is given.05 -. Based on these data the follov/ing values were chosen: 6 = 3 deg/sec.1 -. and the sluggishness.as displayed. the sky and the front part of the ship. normal and large ships respectively.1: The selected the ships Ship parameters of the model used to simulate Parameters model Ts K s H Nr. 3. viz. 3. No coast line v. that means the helmsman only perceived the sea. Some indications about actual values of the maximum angular velocity 6^ and the tim.025 -.atically: Three values of T^ v ' r chosen.05 1 1 1 0 0 -1 ^2 ^3 /sec>2 (deg)2/3 Meg' sec' 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 II III I 9" 10 11 12 13 14 15 IV V _^ -1 VI -1 To show the stationary characteristics of the ships Fig.tv/o im. -33- . in particular the slope of this curve at zero rudder angle.05 -.05 -. 10.odel parameters used are given in Table 3. the shape of the stationary characteristic. The m. These nuantities vrere varied system. the subject could obtain information from a projection screen.1 -. and stable with the characteristic simulating a dead zone. Moreover.025 -. 3.05 -. Tj. unstable. = 1 sec. viz.1 TABLE 3.05 -. . Besides the parameters of the ship dynam.1 -.pass and a rudder angle indicator.05 -.

In these first series of experiments . wheel.4 The ordered headings: The test signal The helmismen were instructed to steer the sh ip along prescribed headings. . de noted by input signal or test signal.e con stant Tg of t he ship: 10 min for a time constant T_ 10 sec.ore time to exe cute a manoeu vre than in steering a small and fastly responding ship.ere used. as it vras the intention to study the influence of additional displays lateron. Each test consisted of just one period. The sequence of these headings. A tim. The o rdered heading was displayed by means of a digital counter.3: stationary characteristics used in the ship simulations. since in steering a slowly responding ship the helm.eans o f a steering . I 8 16 24 -. 3.ith a random.H ^ -. v.portant with respec t to the task to be executed by the helmsman.a which were not im. 20 m in for Tg = 5 0 sec and 40 miin for Tg = 250 sec. when a new heading was ordered.. were out of use.4^-^-^Ö[deg] -2 8 16 24 Öfleg] .ly cho sen starting point.31 FIGURE The six 3. -34- .nZ 6 [deg/sec] char. which could easy be turned wi th only a small am. 3.4. no additional displays like a rate of turn indicator v. The helmsman controlled the ship's h eading by m. The duration of a test depended on the tim.an needs m. an auditory signal was given.6 [deg/sec] 6 peg/sec] -24 -16 -8 / .2 8 char.6 16 24 Ö[deg] -24 -16 -Sr" char. was a periodic signal.sm.ount of physical effort.5 [deg/sec] -24 -16 char.2. The remaining indicators of the simulator.e h istory of the test signal for a test with a large ship is shown in Fir. such as v ' t er depth indicator and speedlog.

4. the subjects Bl and B2 the ships with the characteristics I.2 a survey of the tests to be executed with the TNO sim.4: Time history of the test signal of a forty minutes test. To become familiar with the dynam. 3. II.[deg] 2 o -2 -4 -6 400 800 1200 1600 2000 2400 I 2800 [*«] FIGURE 3.plitudes twice as larrre. None of them was experienced in steering ships larger than 10. in the last case by TS L.ber of all the ships simulated. steered only a certain num. 3.ic behaviour of large ships.5 Subjects Four subjects. and with am. To keep the num. In the first case the test signal is indicated by TS S. The com.ulator is given.6 Experimental programme In Table 3.000 tons. each of them. To keep them motivated small rewards were paid. The subjects Al and A2 steered the ship with the stationary characteristics I.ber of tests the subjects had to perform.plitudes as indicated in Fig.otivation during the experim. trainees of the School of Navigation at Amsterdam.ents could be observed. each subject controlled about one hour the large unstable ship (Ts=250 sec. Tests were performed using the test signal with am.ents. as small as possible.2. 3. It was intended to execute two tests v. but in spite of this fact a decrease of their m.2. The subjects were instructed to steer the ships just as they normally did. Char. Ill) before starting the experim.ments m. were used to analyze the helmsmian's behaviour. hence the total number of experiments was 144.ade by the subjects supported this fact. V and VI. III and IV. -35- .ith each subject and each condition.

50 .(t) .. Ship data Subjects Charact. the signals T^ .250 50 50 .!.2: Summary o'" the tests with the TNO simulator.e histories of the desired ship heading lijd(t).ents By the Figs.ples are given of the tim. -36- .7 Data collection .(t). I II III IV V VI Tg(sec) 50 . TS S. T = 250 sec.). the actual heading i|)(t).he following signals were recorded on miagnetic tape: o The desired headin. \lj(t). and the position of the steering wheel ^^{t) as recorded durinrthe tests. Char.5: Time histories of Subject A2. Ill (unstable char. P«g] \ Öj{t)40.5 and 3.2.TABLE 3. [deg]20 FIGURE 3.1 Modelling the helmsrian's control behaviour Preliminary analysis of the experim.3 3.250 50 10 .3. o The steering wheel position 6^(t) o The rudder angle 6(t). and^n(t).(t).6 some exam.50 10 10 10 10 S/L S/L S/L S/L S/L S/L Al A2 El El Al A2 Al A2 Bl Bl B2 B2 B2 B2 3.(t). 3. ^ 0 o The rate of turn i|. The heading .250 10 .ijj. 3.-.

6: Time histories of Subject Al. In p-eneral the number of rudder calls a helmsman uses to change the heading of the ship decreases with the training.7: Phase-plane recorded during a large unstable trajectories a test with ship.^(^{t) . 3. the helmsman stops the rotating motion of the ship and when the desired heading is achieved with only a small rate of turn (the desired state) the fourth phase starts (rudder angle zero). then during the second phase. This behaviour can be showed clarly by means of the phase-plane: the rate of turn of the ship lii(t) plotted against the heading error ^e{t) . • A change of heading often consists of four phases.an generates an output in order to start the ship rotating. char. the signals ii^(t). there will be an overshoot and to achieve the desired state the cycle is repeated starting with the first phase again.7. ip (t). Char. Ill (unstable s 6j(t). the rudder is kept am. FIGURE 3. Durinp* the first phase the helmsm. TS S.ore or less of discrete steps.idships.'heel position 6(j(t) show that the helmsman generates a steering wheel position which consists m. If the rate of turn is not small enough. An example of such a phase-plane plot is shown in Fig.^{t) . and T = 250 sec.). -37- .ade with respect to the records: • In all cases the records of the steering v.ÓdCUO feg]20 O FIGURE 3. The following remarks can be m. During the third phase.

v/hereas during the third phase the num. coherency I.001 .etim. -5.50 aoo . Estimated squared spectral density functions and squared spectra of a test with a stable ship. -4. During the first phase the output of a helmsman is often shaped like a rect angular pulse v.50 sec.01 V[HZ] V[HZ] FIGURE 3.e a peak in the steering v/heel position is generated b y the helm. T .sman. . TS L.As the ship was unstable in this case.ith only a few rudder calls. som. Char. Tg = 50 sec) are shown. -38- .01 V[HZ]' ^2 '. during the second phase the rate of turn increased with the rudder angle 6(t) equal to zero. -4. From the estimated coherency ri|j^4jg(v) it can be concluded that the feedback loop does not contain components with frequencies higher than .ber of rudder calls is much larger. Subject A^. 3. In some cas es when there will be an overshoot.8 a set of estimated squared spectral density functions SV'dV^d'^' [LOG]-»-^ [LOG] -' -I -2.01 V[HZ] . . and estimated squared coherency spectra of a test with a stable ship (Char.es during a short per iod of tim.OOj RtlV^e'»" 0.01 Hz.1 -3. In Fig.8. It looks as if the man prefers it to stop the m o tion by large rudder am. I.plitudes to avoid overshoots.

the observation time [4].9) show a very sm.dijjd(v) and Sij^e'Pe^^) show only very slight differences from these frequencies. since the number of data points is determ. Subject Al.ined by the duration of a test. 1 ) . ^2 e The estimated squared coherency spectra V IJJ(36(J(V) (Fig. he chooses a rudder angle which corresponds vrith his expectation of the ship response. frequencies (see Ch. fv^död IV). these models m.d(t) and 6cl(t). 3.odels available within the Man-Machine Systems Croup [5. with a It should be noted that the region of interest is only the low frequency range.ay be useful in analyzing the helmsm. Using his experience with regard to the ship behaviour. . However. the internal model. T s = 250 sec.all coherency between the signals i|.ated coherency spectra ri(jd6d(v) show that the coherency between the signals '{'^(t) and ó^jTt) is small (Figs. for each of the models a area could be defined for which a certain model is superior with respect to certain criteria. The estim. I. 1 ) .9: Estimated squared coherency spectrum f\^^j^(v) of a test large ship. 05 .an's control behaviour. However the following reasons can be mentioned to elucidate that the helmsman's behaviour in the control of large ships should be described by nonlinear models: • in an earlier study Stuurman [7] concluded that in the case of large ships a more or less bang-bang like control strategy was applied by the subjects. It was decided to analyze the records by means of linear models. as well as by means of a nonlinear model. depending on the test conditions. TS S. 3. only a few data points are estimated in this range.sman's describing functions at l v ' o. Char. It was hoped that. indicating that a nonlinear model might yield better results. This means that the test durations were too short to obtain reliable estim. In view of the experience in the field of linear m. 6 ] . -39- .This corresponds with the fact that the estimated cross ^spectrum.9). as well as the large amount of literature.ates of the spectra and also of the helm.001 . |Si(. To construct a nonlinear model the internal model concept was used (Ch. and that therefore a nonlinear model would probably fit the data better. The well-trained helmsman uses only a small number of rudder calls to execute an order to change the ship's heading.^i|^g(v) I and the estimated auto spectra S<|.1 0 l/[HZj FIGURE 3.indicating the practical use of linear models.8 and 3.such as the ship's time constant.

-40- . 3.sman v ' l be less interested in whether there is a . The helmsman's control stratery looks very m. Table 3. Also the existence of the second phase. this indifference m. Likewise the ships with a deadzone could hardly be recognized [9].e to a new decision.10). after a while he v. Tn this way the discrete character of the helmsman's output may be explained.When the actual ship dynamics differ from.sman's control behaviour differs from bang-bang control. maximum rudder • anale m maximum rudder angle.10: Schematic representation a: helmsman. During all the tests no subject ever used the time >m 5j(. the helmsm.ay lead to larger sampling intervals and a decrease of willingness to change the position of the rudder [8].an's internal model. b: bana-bana J of the execution of an order. 5 .'atch the indicators continuously. control. and com.uch like banm-banpcontrol.ber of rudder calls is generally less than during the third phase.l I 1 time -6ml FIGURE 3. As the helmsman does not v. indicates that the helm.3 summarizes some of the results obtained with this questionnaries. some insight could be obtained about the ideas the subjects had about the dynamics of the ship just steered. but one important dif.il difference between his predictions and the actual state of the ship. This phenomenon may be explained by the fact that during the first phase the heading error is large.dll detect a difference betv/een predicted and actual ship state. During the first phase the num. and the helm. which the subjects had to fill in after each test. From the questionnary. during which the rudder angle is kept zero. as indicated by Stuurman [7].ference exists (Fig. From these data it was concluded that in particular in the case of large ships the subjects could hardly recognize whether the ship was stable or unstable.

3. (3.2 71.2 Linear modelling As spectral analyses of the recordings did not provide accurate information with respect to the structure of the helm.3 62.5 Subjects Group A 6.1) taking into account that slowly responding system.ined. Starting with the simplest human operator m.2 6.0 VI Ships with characteristic II (marginal stable) are assumed to be stable.6 43.2 18.2) -41- .TABLE 3. Eq.3.3 13.2) (j. From these results and from conversations with the subjects the impression v.2 8.7 7.3 - II IV V 6. the structure has been based on data given in literature [7.7 71.5 6.sm^an's describing function. (3. whether Ship data Characti I T^ (sec) 10 50 250 10 50 III 10 50 250 10 50 10 50 250 10 50 21.) Hj^U = K. sothat given a certain structure. lo].8 14.3 0.as established that the subjects had only some vague thoughts about the dynamic response of the ship.^y-' ^] (3.1) can be simplified to Eq.3 Groun E 31.4 62.odel.2 8.3: Percentages incorrect the ship just steered answers on the question was stable or unstable.s are considered. the parameters could be determ. given by McRuer [10] (T^JO) + 1) -JWT^ (3.

^i^^ ^ i . These nuantities have to be estim.2) it may be expected that the model based on the crossover model (Eq. To investigate the influence of the lag term both models have been used to analyze the helmsman's control behaviour. the input of the internal model is denoted by ' c ' ( ) ( ^ g 3. it follov. By assuming that the crossover model may be applied.11).1).3 Nonlinear modelling The nonlinear model has been based on the following startingpoints: • An internal model of the ship dynamics was used to make predictions about future headings and rates of turn of the ship. (3.3) 5 where the dynamic behaviour of the ship has been approxim.v.t+T).odel(Eq.here the time delay has been neglected because of this slowly responding character of the ship. which may be disturbed with noise. 3.3.J^ t c.4) Comparing this m.odel.**) has a rather large part of its output at higher frequencies due to the lead time constant.odel used by Stuurman L7J (T jw + 1) (3. The choice of the internal model structure has been based on the following considerations: -42- . These predictions can be based on the actual steering wheel position to monitor and to judge the results of an action already started.ated by Nomoto's first order m.heel positions to choose the action necessary to achieve a desired state of the ship.ated from the inform. e The model had to be as simple as possible in order to be able to analyze and to interpret the results.ation presented by the compass.4). To predict future states of the ship the actual heading and rate of turn must be known. Hence H^(jw) = K^(T^jw + 1) (3.^ + 1) • jw(T j ^ + 1) .odel v/ith the linear m.H^(jü))=K^^^ . 3. but they can also be based on arbitrary steering v. 3. 3. It is used to make predictions of the heading and the rate of turn during the time span (t. A decision making element was used to base the actions to be taken on these predictions. The part of the model which estimates the heading and the rate of turn is called the estimator (Fig. Therefore.s that: (T^jt^ + 1) K H^(ja)). o The model was constructed in such a way that its output shows the same characteristics as the helmsman's output (Ch.3.11).portant part of the helmsman's m. The internal model is an im. 2.

V^(t)

r ^ t i m n inr

1

'^(t),^{t)

\f

internal model

V^(t:t.t+n

^(t:i,i+r) V/j(ti deciision maki ng elerrlent

ö>)

6j(tl

FIGURE 3.11: Block diagram

of

the

nonlinear

model.

•

Nomoto pointed out that the responses of a ship on a rudder angle input show mainly the characteristics of second order system responses [ll] . This fact corresponds v;ith the bang-bang like control strategy of the helmsm.en. • The comments of the subjects suggested that nonlinearities in the ship dynamics could hardly be observed. • The steering gear is a rather fastly responding system, in relation to the dynamics of the ship. Therefore, and also as a m.atter of simplicity, the steering gear dynamics have been neglected. The internal model, as part of the helmsman's model, has been written in the following mathem.atical form:

Tjit)

Ht)

Vd^^)

(3.5)

where T^ and K^ are the parameters of the internal model, and thus parameters of the complete nonlinear m.odel. The choice of the internal m.odel structure was based only on an analysis of the records and the comments of the subjects during the experiments. Therefore, it should be stated that a relation between the internal model

of a helmsman exist. and that of the nonlinear model does not necessarily

To make predictions with the internal model t wo initial conditions are needed: the ship's heading and the rate o f turn. This information is provided by the estimator. In general the heading presented by means of the compass is corrupted with noi se and thus the quantities needed have to be estimated (Ch. 4 ). However, durinp" the simulator tests described in this chapter no disturbances were introduced and the disturbances resulting from the simulator, e.g. computer noise, were small. In this case the structure of the estimator can be very simple (Fig. 3.12). To obtain the rate of turn only a differentiator had to be applied.

-43-

v^(t)

r

1 V^ci

T 1

1

1 estimator _d_ dt

1

1 V'C)

1 _J

FIGURE 3. 12: Structure of the estimator have been introduced.

in

the

situation

where

no

disturbances

It may be noted that the term, estimator is probably rather confusing in this context. However, to obtain a direct link v;ith the more general situation described in Ch. 4, also in this chanter the term. estimator is used since in this way possibilities to extend the model and to include refinements, such as m.odels describing the helmsman's sam.pling behaviour, can be explained similarly. In steering a ship the helm.sm.an has to adopt a strategy to achieve the desired state [l2]. This stratery has been based on his experience, the internal m.odel. The strategy used by the helm.sm.an's m.odel is represented by the structure of the decision making ele-

ment.

As shown in Ch. 3.3.1 a m.anoeuvre can often be divided into four phases. First a rudder deflection is given to start the ship rotating. VJhen this objective has been achieved the rudder is kept amidships in order to keep the rate of turn more or less at a constant value. When the heading error is small in relation to the ship's rate of turn, a second rudder deflection is needed to stop the rotating motion. The objective during the third phase is to make both heading error and rate of turn equal to zero, the desired state of the ship. In the phase-plane the four phases can be indicated (Fig. 3.7), v;here the boundaries between the regions corresponding with the first and second phase represents the pursued objective during the first phase and the origin of the plane the objective durinr the third phase. To keep the model sim.ple, the boundaries between the areas in the phase-plane have been approximated by straight lines (see Fig. 3.13), given by the Eos.:

4'e(t) + C. il'(t) + C, li'(t)

i|^g(t) + Cj iKt)

= 0 = 0 = 0

J

Ue(t)| + C^|il.(t)|

ment. ^ '^ :>

p ,

(3.6) (3.7) (3.8) (3.9)

where C,, C„, C, and p are parameters of the decision making ele-

-44-

phoseE phase I

phase I Vj(t)*C,V^(tl = 0

V^^lD+C^V^ItJrO V^dl^CjV^dlsO

FIGURE 3.13: The four phases

of

control

in

the

vhase-plane.

During the second and fourth phase the rudder angle is kept zero; during the other two phases a rudder angle m.ust be selected in order to achieve the objectives given by Eos. 3.6 (phase I) and 3.9, where p = 0 (phase III). At the beginning of a particular phase, and thus when one of the boundaries is passed, a steering wheel position 6(j(t) is chosen based on the internal m.odel predictions, in such a way that after a tim.e t|3(t) the goal will be achieved. This means that the steering v/heel position ^(^(t) has to be estimated, for which the solution of the internal model equation (3.5) yields the heading (ij(t+tp) and rate of turn il;(t+tp) which satisfy the objective and where the actual heading and heading rate are the initial conditions. After the rudder angle is chosen the internal model is used to check, whether the objectives will be satisfied at the time determined, or whether a new rudder angle has to be chosen. Fig. 3.l4 illustrates the working principle of the decision making element. In general the predicted state of the ship will differ from the objective during a particular phase, due to e.g. differences between the internal model and the actual ship dynamics. As the helmsman changes the steering wheel position in a discrete v;ay small differences are allowed obviously. The criteria to choose a new rudder angle are given by the following Ens.:

Phase I : |it)g(t+t )+C^ii)(t+t )|< d(t);

(3.10) (3.11)

Phase I I I :

\A)At^t p ) |+C 1 |tp(t+t pT |— d ( t ) , £ e

-45-

in addition to the objective Eq.12) where p and q are model parameters.eter p and the accuracy of the displayed information exists. It should be mentioned that during the first phase many different rudder angles may result in the selected goal depending on the time tp(t). related to the applied rudder angle. 4 a relation between the param. As will be shov/n in Ch. 3. cannot be too sm.axim.3.14: Flow chart of the decision making element.atical form: That combination of steering wheel position ^^(t) and duration tp(t) is chosen which minimizes the following criterion: -46- . On the other hand to execute the manoeuvre v/ithin a reasonable time the rudder angle to be used. From the recordings it can be concluded that the subjects never applied the m.um rudder angle during the first phase.ple model structure can be obtained by putting the above in the following mathem.all.( start 3 read heading and rate < ( p h a s e l ? > no yes 1 1 / o h n s e lir'>\ no lyes /correctionN < \needed?/ yes calculote /'correctionN ^ \ needed?/ yes calculate 5d ''p "n öd=o ( -Id ) FIGURE 3.anoeuvre. Therefore.(t+tp) are predicted using the internal model. (3. As the number of rudder calls during the third phase is generally larger than during the first phase the threshold value depends possibly on the heading error 4'e(t) (Ch. A relatively sim. and the time needed to execute the m. and where d(t) is a threshold value. Probably the selection of the rudder angle is based on an optimum between the ship's speed loss. This dependence has been put in the following simple mathematical form: d(t) = p(l + q \^At) I ) (3.6) a second equation is needed. where ii'e(t+tp) and i|.1).

15: Estimation of the parameters of the helmsman's model.15.14) J' This criterion was preferred to a quadratic criterion t. When the rudder angle. the lower loop is a sim.13) implies that the rudder angle is weighted inversely to the time tp(t).^ ip— (3.4 Parameter estimation The parameters of the two linear models (Eqs. |<S^(t)| dt (3.15) J [«H(t)]'dt computer simulation model of the helmsmen öj' model of the ship y/'u).tp(t) + w I 6.6 *(t)|dt 100^. The output of the model 6^ (t) was subtracted from the helmsman's output ^^(t) in order to calculate the following criterion: J E |6. 3.(t) .4) as well as those of the nonlinear model were estimated as shov/n in Fig. / (3.13) with the weighting factor V as an additional model parameter. En. -47 .2 and 3. 3.sman on a hybrid computer. determined by minimizing J. The upper loop represents the experimental loop with the manoeuvring simulator.ulation of ghip and helm. LtFIGURE 3. is larger than the maximum rudder angle this maximum.(t) (3. 3. angle is chosen.

arks should be m. This method has some advantages compared v/ith other methods such as gradient methods [l3. Besides the quantity Eiri and Er2.(t)]'dt o and l'^\i>(t) E| 1= 2 _ ^ .f.. As discussed in Ch. As all the optimization programs which were available for the optimization of the nonlinear model. o To optimize a function of many variables.ethods are easy to program.3 this method can be used also to optimize the nonlinear model.13) with respect to the nonlinear m. The calculation of the absolute value of the difference betv/een the actual steering wheel position and the model output was expected to be m. were based on random. However.ethod has been applied.puter noise. -48- . 3. yielding more consistent results.15). 6 ] .izing Ei^j (Eq. 100^. (3.*(t)]Mt E.ation of the linear model parameters this method has been applied. 1.ade with respect to the parameter estimation method used (Fig. © They are effective to optimize irregular criterion functions which have sharp ridges and discontinuous first derivatives.ii^*(t)|dt . 100^ .16) j ' \ ti.ore accurate than the squared value.odel parameters a random search m. (3.17) The last two quantities indicate the correspondence between the time histories of the actual heading of the ship i(^(t} steered by the helmsman and those generated by the ship model ^ (t) steered by the model of the helm. 3.l4) with data given in literature. also the followinr quantities have been computed: '' I'^l ^(t) . in literature mostly a quadratic criterion is used. This method has been suggested by Johannsen [l6] and leads to unbiased estimates for linear models [6]. l4. 0 They are less sensitive for com. (3. random search m. 15]: • Random search m. To be able to compare the results to be obtained by minim. also £-2 has been calculated.. which enables often a direct computation of the unknown parameters [5.ethods are very effective. also during the estim.sman.as the integrations were executed by means of analogue components. To minimize the criterion Eq..' = 2—^ . Some rem. but then an analytical derivation of the estimators of the parameters is not possible. search methods.

ents and the full scale trials is difficult to make as the simulator results mainly relate to large ships.inimally reouired rudder angular velocity is undependent of the seize of the ship.05 -.10 -.eters Tj„ and Kjrj.5 Results As mentioned in paragraph 3. where Kj^ has been varied and the value of T estimated with all other model parameters constant are .e constant Tg = 10 sec.4 the results obtained with the two proposed linear m.05 TS L S S L S L Subj . In Ch.17 some typical time histories are shown of the heading iiit) and the steering v/heel position as well as the output of the linear miOdel with three param.eters. with a tim.3) 6^ (t) and that of the ship model ^ (t). The interpretation of the result of these small shins is therefore rather complicated. 3. in particular this was true for the unstable ones.e of the parameters. the Table 3.eters (Ea.ents v/ith different ships were executed. the steering gear dynamics were kept constant.18: The relation between the model parameters T and K . the steering gear dynamics were lim. 3.odels (Eos. a I b I c V d V III f I Q 250 250 250 250 50 50 Al A2 Bl B2 Al B2 [sec-] FIGURE 3.4) are shown.2 a number of experim.all ship v/ill be discussed.1 . m m the results of six tests. ^s ^s -. since in general the m. but a comparison betv/een simulator experim.3. The dynamics of the ship were changed according to Table 3. in particular the internal model param. Only for the very small ships.l6 and 3.18 Char.2 and 3. the emphasis in this chapter v ' l be laid .il mainly on the handling qualities of large ships. 3.ined and the criterion values related to these param.05 -.iting the control properties of the ships. During the analyses of the tests with the nonlinear model it has been found that som. 5 full scale trials with a sm. In Fig. In Table 3. were strongly coupled.10 -. In the Figs.05 -. 3.4 provides information about the very large ships in terms of the parameter values determ.

250 sec.4 3.3 33.9 2.0 5. large TWO PARAMETERS.4: Results of the parameter two linear models.5 43.8 11.9 A2 1.9 21.4 Al .7 2.8 1.5 31.7 104.3 48.2 89.5 2.8 98.2 5.8 2.1 33.8 6.8 3.5 29.5 5.7 38.6 53.5 14.2 64.8 11.8 29.5 26. 3.0 34.5 4.8 18.0 S.5 31.4 2.6 46.1 10.2 19.2 3.2 1 Char TS '^1*1 ^«* ^l^l ^ V j I 74 75 76 78 49 55 56 67 64 60 71 62 81 59 74 75 69 71 74 86 63 69 t 46 61 61 59 22 30 30 46 43 38 43 42 67 35 57 50 49 44 42 48 40 38 t 19 32 — 20 — 16 13 14 14 18 30 21 37 — 15 — 16 12 14 12 20 10 t 4 1 111 — 6 — 4 2 3 3 4 13 6 15 — 3 — 3 2 3 2 10 2 1 1I s Al Al Bl B2 Al Al A2 HI Bl Al Al A2 A2 4.6 4.TABLE 3.2 ^|«| ^«2 % 83 88 86 85 65 77 73 77 75 69 81 84 95 73 85 93 76 81 87 92 76 79 \ 60 81 73 68 42 58 51 60 57 52 56 72 87 56 77 82 61 63 66 65 60 55 ^ U j ^t* % 19 49 — 18 — 19 25 33 23 22 32 23 42 — 36 — 18 13 17 14 21 12 % 4 26 — 5 — 5 8 13 6 6 14 8 21 — 15 — 4 2 4 3 10 2 ovtimization ships with T with the .9 69.9 29.1 28.7 5.1 45.8 3.8 23.9 37. THREE PARAMETERS MODEL: Eq.5 1 ^ S L .4 73.2 67.6 41.1 21.2 30.2 1.5 31.2 6.0 3.5 3.4 ^2 sec 8.6 5.2 5.1 6. 4.8 3.1 43. | 1 TEST CONDITIONS Subj .7 2.4 11.6 136.9 4. 3.6 16.3 5.2 30.2 44.3 46.0 Bl Bl B2 B2 Bl B2 2.2 9.7 24.4 •h ^ ^1 sec 32.5 4.9 1.2 7.0 3.6 132.0 7.1 3.7 30.0 A2 1.5 28.6 3.7 49.2 37. MODEL: Eq.0 142.1 9.1 106.1 4.5 3.2 'h ^ ^^ sec 46.1 11.3 1.8 33.9 94.4 3.2 3.1 37.3 8.3 13.3 4.1 L j 1 1 ^ ^ ^ L S 5.

ii(t) and ^^(t) ^ompared with the linear model output 6^ (t) and the output of the ship model ii (t): Subject Al. T = 250 sec. Char. s . Char.17: Typical time histories of the actual signals ^(^(t). I. [sec] i UI FIGURE 3.16: Typical time histories of the actual signals ^d^'^^i i ) t and ^^[(t) compared with t(j the linear model output 6^ (t) and the output of the ship model i) (t): | Subject Al. T s = 250 sec. Test signal L.V^ft» 10 Vd"» 5 V^(tl20T V^d'"lO: [deg] 0 V^jltjlO [deg] 600 -10 -201 Öj(t)50 ^ /{2'oqV 1/ Ï80Ö 2A00 . I. ' Test sianal S ^ FIGURE 3.

consists of three terms. 3. Tg = 50 and 10 sec. The tables give the parameter valueg as well as the criteria values indicating how v/ell the signals 6. These judgem.odel 6^ (t) and the output of the ship model i) (t) are shown. . 3. T = 10 sec.JUDGEMENT j | ^ sec sec sec deg deg 5 . I are found to be more or less constant.20 some typical tim.5 the parameter optimization results with the nonlinear model are given for tests v/ith large ships.5* 1. In Table 3.21 E|«|E«2 E|^| E^2 SUBJ. as well as the criterion value Ei^i.30 .85 52- . In the Figs. Fig. As can be seen in the region of interest where the model parameters T r and K^ are near j.eters Tg and Kg. (t) and ^ (t) correspond v/ith the recorded signals <5^(t) and ij. the rate of turn and the rudder angle multiplied by the gain factor K^n. the value of the criterion function El. the figure indicates in what way the criterion values Eiri and E^2 depend on the parameters. 3.38 5 . As these two parameters are linearly dependent jj j^ Kj^ was not varied the parameter optimization. viz.e constant T^. TABLE 3. 3. the ship param. An explanation of this phenomenon may be the fact that only small rates of turn were generated by the helmsm.7 were found j^ to be on the boundary of'the parameter space.ultiplied by the tim. Furthermore. In addition to the parameters and the criterion values also the subject's judgement with respect to the manoeuvring properties of the ship is given.plotted.66 3.(t).18) This equation shows very clearly the coupling between the parameters T y and K r .ore or less linear relation betv/een T^ and K^ exists. the angular acceleration m. hence v/hen the rate of turn is always small in relation to the other two terms.an's m.ents roughly indicate whether a ship should be regarded as difficult or as easy to steer.7 summarize the results of tests with smaller ships. Finally in Fig.5) now.5* 4.6 and 3.6 ana 3. but kept equal to the coefficient K of the ship.e histories of the heading ^(t) and the steering v/heel position 6(j(t) as v/ell as the output generated by the nonlinear helmsm. this damping term can be neglected.21 a representative set of sensitivity functions is given. the conseauence hereof will be elucidated in the next paragraph.e: '^J'(t) = K^<5^(t).l8 shows that a m.5 v/ill becom.an.al values of T p given in Tables 3. Tg = 250 sec.19 and 3. Then the E G . 3. MODEL PARAMETERS optimization for a small TEST CONDITIONS Char. TS Subj . CRITERIA ^ m sec "1^ ^ S 1 11 5 5 9 S P Q. The internal m.7: Results of the parameter ship. Some optim. (3.odel (Eq.70 63 60 43 47 20 16 5 3 easy very easy I I S S Al A2 3. while the Tables 3.

24 .74 .15 1.44 .JUDGEMENT % % % % 70 69 74 71 38 54 59 69 62 62 70 67 76 61 64 73 67 61 57 69 60 61 45 48 55 48 20 33 31 45 42 39 42 44 55 40 44 50 46 38 36 45 36 36 15 14 — 12 -15 8 12 11 18 32 21 20 — 12 — 13 11 13 12 21 10 3 3 — 3 — 3 1 0 0 5 14 6 5 — 0 — 2 2 2 3 10 2 very easy very easy difficult difficult very easy very easy easy difficult not too difficult very easy very easy very easy easy very easy easy not too difficult not not not not too too too too difficult difficult difficult difficult ^m sec 167 168 195 211 254 324 295 256 215 258 290 216 215 304 237 208 233 257 302 259 173 277 3^^ S S S P Q J — see sec sec deg deg 0.57 4 .56 5 .25 .48 .00 1.30 .17 .30 1.55 3.48 3 .16 .36 10 1 0 1 .33 .24 .28 . optimisation TEST CONDITIONS Char.34 .31 .^.32 1.33 1.05 0.S: Results of the nonlinear for ships with T .17 . MODEL PARAMETERS CRITERIA E|«| E«2 E.20 1.07 2.36 I I I I I I I I I III III III III III III III V V V V V V S S S S L L L L L S S S S L L L S S S S L L Al A2 Bl B2 Al Al A2 HI Bl Al Al A2 A2 Al A2 A2 Bl Bl B2 B2 Bl B2 3 .45 .41 .46 1.60 2.19 .72 .51 .16 3.83 1.24 .00 39 19 19 50 47 29 59 40 51 42 43 57 41 55 56 53 25 22 27 23 26 30 13 16 37 22 28 28 26 37 38 48 25 30 24 36 30 36 15 21 16 15 31 29 5 2 10 2 1 2 1 2 0 10 6 4 2 .16 .96 1.250 model parameter sec.25 .Table S.27 .39 .25 . E^2 SUBJ.13 1.25 .23 1.11 1.34 .34 1.11 .40 .42 0.08 .59 .39 1.36 3.07 .91 not too difficult easy .62 .74 10 .27 . TS Subj .38 .27 .51 .

10 .3 93.6 36.46 .23 0.6 53.86 .7 70.05 difficult very easy easy easy easy not too difficult easy not too difficult very difficult easy not too difficult easy not too difficult easy difficult not too difficult difficult not too difficult easy difficult easy difficult not too difficult easy easy difficult easy easy easy difficult difficult very easy very easy very easy easy easy easy easy very easy very easy easy easy easy easy not too difficult not too difficult easy 25.8 37.00 3.50 .30 .00 61.74 .10 .33 .8 44.13 .00 0.05 .40 . TS Subj .18 1 .30 .3 1 .62 .31 .01 V V V V V V V • "s" S S L L L L S S 9 15 13 16 10 9 10 5 5 5 5 5 11 9 5 8 10 10 10 10 16 10 19 16 6 11 18 20 5 16 8 5 5 0 10 6 10 0 0 0 5 3 7 2 5 .48 .68 1 .0 76.33 .75 3.49 4 3 5 9 9 3 2 5 4 -2 5 3 2 " VI VI VI VI VI VI VI VI s s L L L L _5H.92 0.7 85.35 .06 .06 .0* 74.39 .69 .99 .05 .4 74.97 28.3 25.7 40.6 61.24 .9 28.81 1 .20 .50 0.14 .23 .0* 25.64 .55 2.85 0.50 .48 1.22 .6 37.95 t89 .31 1.00 3.50 .23 0.51 .97 1.31 .38 .19 .43 .66 .51 1.57 .56 .21 .8 .07 1.67 .66 1.99 100.0* 38.95 .00 60.JUDGEMENT S S S s L L L L Al Al A2 A2 Al Al A2 A2 Bl Bl B2 B2 Bl Bl B2 B2 Bl Bl B2 B2 Bl Bl B2 B2 Al Al A2 A2 A2 Al Al A2 A2 Al Al A2 Al Al A2 A2 Bl Bl B2 Bl Bl 32 B2 Bl Bl B2 B2 Bl Bl B2 B2 55.1 3.1 80.56 28 15 22 17 16 17 28 29 19 10 16 10 24 12 14 19 10 13 18 18 18 19 18 33 27 46 10 10 24 28 20 19 60 40 45 43 29 25 60 54 31 10 15 25 14 15 10 18 18 10 13 10 25 26 13 21 19 10 28 16 26 32 25 18 16 49 19 21 21 23 29 24 38 24 57 45 55 58 40 54 8 0 10 15 0 0 7 0 12 8 5 6 3 8 8 12 .00 1 5 7 0 6 10 12 5 6 11 0 5 2 7 10 0 9 14 9 5 12 13 4 14 .8 70.45 .1 84.36 .80 2.3 1.0* 2.99 0.20 1.75 0.00 .00 ^* 11 SUBJ.12 0.05 .50 0.75 1.98 .22 .31 .93 .17 .1 39.41 .9 55.22 .72 1.28 .14 3.7 77.00 III T T T In IV IV IV IV IV IV IV S S S L L L L 2.74 .77 .41 1.57 63.57 1.4 73.49 71 67 68 69 55 71 55 54 77 71 68 62 62 60 55 66 82 73 68 80 65 65 60 74 79 70 63 86 75 66 85 68 84 72 75 72 48 62 74 76 60 67 69 49 66 73 56 59 53 57 S3 54 52 47 49 53 48 52 53 34 46 42 38 69 56 46 43 43 41 33 48 72 57 49 49 48 49 41 52 58 45 45 71 54 49 73 56 64 60 59 50 25 41 56 58 41 44 43 25 43 47 32 37 31 37 28 42 34 26 29 "77" 20 21 19 -13 -24 18 14 10 13 16 9 21 11 14 19 12 12 _11 -10 29 49 19 33 23 21 41 14 18 34 63 19 -— 25 18 15 13 19 19 19 14 10 17 16 -10 17 12 13 5 7 5 -2 -6 4 3 1 3 3 1 7 2 3 4 3 2 -2 -2 11 28 5 16 9 5 21 3 5 14 41 5 --9 4 easy very easy very easy very easy very very very very easy easy easy easy ii y 11 ^ 1 II S S S S L L L L S S S S L L L L S S S S S L L L L .50 .0 73.88 1.00 1.7 89.10 .9 62. CRITERIA Q deg'^ E|«|^«2 optimization TEST CONDITIONS Char.5 25.40 .75 1 .81 2.57 82.17 .05 .6: Results of the nonlinear for ships with T s = 5 0 •' ' MODEL PARAMETERS P deg model parameter sec.15 .00 .3 52.0 78.7 .6 25.29 .05 .7 53.0* 3.0* 1.12 .20 .53 .95 25.31 0.6 1.05 .6 41.0 28.0* 1.25 2.7 28.24 . m sec 50.36 .60 .05 .78 .96 .30 .23 .77 .77 .10 .00 2.10 .77 0.0* W sec sec sec sec deg 1 .17 .18 .68 .50 0.27 .15 .21 .49 .3 66.78 .0* 0.4 84.75 .15 .94 .95 39.70 0.16 .5 82.7 79.7 58.TABLE 3.00 2.31 2.98 1.9 100.8 63. .38 .56 .90 2.43 .1 100.32 .17 .16 .04 49.87 1.66 .41 .

T = 250 sec.20: Typical time histories of the actual signals yii^^(t). Test sianal S FIGURE 3. Char. Char.19: Typical time histories of the actual signals ii(i(t). r„ = 250 sec. I. I. ^(t) and 6^(t) compared with the nonlinear model output 6j (t) and the output of the ship model \\i (t): Subject Al. i'(t) and ^^^(t) gompared with the nonlinear model output (5j (t) and the output of the ship model ^ (t): Subject Al. Test signal L .^-^ \ P«g] 0 -10 -20 \/(i)20 V/j(il ) 0 : [deg] -10 -201 öjj(f) 50 I V \J 600 ^ ^ ^ 181 7\ ^ / V s o o ^ / l V 1200 v_ / / / \ / 180 o\ \J ^ ^ 2400 Tsw 2400 ï o y y ^ 50 -•2400 t [sec] [deg] 25| MAVTTHTVLATJU t [secj -25 -50 UI I FIGURE 3.

odel Ea. Although the output of the m. model with three param.eters provides a rather poor averaged description of the helm. 30 until SQ% .sm.eter linear m. Therefore. I . 3. with an average of about 45^ with only a f v ' exceptions. Char.an's behaviour sometimies differs from the actual output. the heading of the ship generated by the m.sm.odel of the helm. = 250 sec . only the results of the three parameter model will be discussed.odel is invariably a good fit due to the very low pass filtering properties of the ship.2 indicate that the first one yields a much poorer description of the helmsman's control behaviour than the latter.an's control behaviour.2 show. -56- .sman. functions. TS L.9 13 W (scc/deg] 1. that the heading of the ship as steered by the model closely approxim. The criterion values Ex\.ates the heading of the ship steered by the helm.21: A set of sensitivity Subject Al .280 300 . however.4 and to the three param. [sec] |6| 0E52 FIGURE 3. the values with respect to these signals are generally less than 10^.odel Ea. 3.7 60 -f ( 1 ^ »—^ *•—^ f^—4 • 20 O -O—OOO—o—o—e—ö—o—o C2 [«<0 2 C. 3.eans that the linear e. This m.6 Discussion and conclusions The criterion values related to the two parameter linear m. The criterion values £{2 range from.

It seems that an explanation of the phenom. v ' t a .22 five tim.sman's nons tationary behaviour.enon may be the helm.e the manoeuvre is executed. Therefore. one after each other. however. in Fig.22: of the steering nonstationary behaviour wheel position.sman on the These records could be generated by the nonlinear m. 3.eter space. j -57- .eters W. it was mentioned that some of the optim. Superficially seen. it can be shown that this will not lead to the desired resuit. whereas the decision making element param. all being responses to a certain heading order. of the helm.al values of T^ were found to be on the boundary of the param. the solution for th is problem is to enlarge the param.e histories of the steering wheel position are given.ih constant internal model parameter T i equal to the ship parameter ^ Tg.Reviewing the r esults obtained with the nonlinear model.odel executing a particular manoeuvre five times. Cp and C 5 have different values each tim. C^ .eter space. «d'" 16 [deg] U 12 10 average 8 6 steering wheel position 2 0 -2+ -k -6 -8 -10 -12 -U -16 -18 I FIGURE Influence average 3.

ly. and the estim.uch different from. In the same way.00 1.05 .10 . The estimated values of the parameter Tm v/ith respect to the tests with the large shins are of the same order as the param.98 1. - Number of tests Char.08 s L S L S L 185 . 269 245 250 263 225 .8). -58- .ate the parameters yields incorrect values v/hen the helmsm.uch j. this fact m. when the helm. is unimportant.30 The resulting sensitivity functions show that the criterion function is rather sensitive to the parameters W and C^. V ^ t .74 1. T s = 250 sec.ih regard to the parameter C3 this easily can be understood.17 .20 . the mean values Tm approximate in most of the cases the actual ship tim. that is. it can be arrued that when the helmsm.izing the m.In optim.ation m. In this case this average output corresponds with an internal m. 8: The mean values T]Tm ^ n ? variances ic oTm of the internal model time constant Tj^.odel time constant very m.09 . So the conclusion may be dravm that the m. Hence. those values will be found v/here the model output approxim.ill yield incorrect results.e-varying decison making element parameters. it is laying on the boundary of the parameter space. in those cases where no overshoot occurs the param.ay be caused by tim.eter C.eter T v differs very m. TS riip m m ^T m ^T /^s m. the internal model parameter v/ill drift av/ay from the actual value.'ly.an turns the steering wheel very slov.ethod v. that is.sm. from Tj5.ethod used to estim.e constant Tr vrere yi found mainly during the analyses of the tests with the smaller ships. and that the parameters C3.an turns the steering wheel very slov.an's behaviour is nonstationary or. the actual value.ber of rudder calls.odel param. 3. 1 sec 4 5 4 3 4 2 I I III III V V sec .ated internal m. averaged over the subjects. Tg = 50 sec and Tg = 10 sec. TABLE 3. It should be noted that extreme values of the tim.90 22 42 33 49 24 74 . larae ships. p and q do not influence the criterion value very much.ates as closely as possible the average recorded output (Fig. because of the larp-e num.e constant within about 10%.22). that it is less sensitive with respect to C2 and T^. when the estim.13 1 1 1 1 . since this parameter determines the transition from phase III to phase 1 when an overshoot will occur.eter of the ship (Table 3.odel parameters on the basis of these five manoeuvres.

3. The criterion values obtained with the three parameter linear model differ not m. the linear model may be preferred superficially seen.0 50 nonlinear model 60 6 FIGURE 3.entioned for v/hich the nonlinear model is far superior. however. 3. 4 it will be shown that on the basis of the nonlinear model and extention to more real world conditions can be made.sman's output than the output of the linear model (Figs.atch in time domain. It m.an's control behaviour by the nonlinear model m. also a number of criteria such as the number of rudder calls. As the linear model is much simpler. and as consistent parameters can be estimated without difficulties.The parameters p and q have a rather great influence on the character of the output signal.5 through 3. as given by the subjects. This is particularly important when the influence of the ship dynamics or the disturbances on the number of rudder calls is studied.l6 and 3.ostly found to be within 25% and 55% with an average of about 40%. As can be seen in the Figs. In Ch. The criteria values Ei.19 and 3.ents of the different ships.ates the headinp.es differs from the actual output.24 histograms are presented of the judgem.7 show that the description of the helmsm. 3.odel. The criterion Eü)2 values are mostly smaller than 10%. the heading of the ship as steered by the nonlinear model closely approxim. 50 60 70 80 90 nonlinear model löl 20 30 i. -59- .17). they have almost no effect on the duration of a specific phase or on the magnitude of the rudder angle used during a phase.uch from those found with the nonlinear model (Fig.20. The criterion values Eg2 are m. However.of the ship steered by the helmsman although also in this case the output of the nonlinear model sometim.ostly leads also here in certain way to rather poor m.23). can be m. Each + represents a particular test with one of the ships. the character of the output of the nonlinear model looks more like the helm.23: Comparison between the criterion values E\s\ and Efi2 obtained with the nonlinear model and the linear three varameter model.ay be noted that the ships with stationary characteristic I are judged differently by the groups of subjects A and B.i and Eg2 given in Tables 3. Just as in the case of the linear m. 3. In Fig.

B2 12 3 4 5 12 3 4 5 H 12 3 4 5 N a u 12 3 4 5 12 I 3 4 5 » o u Wi 12 3 4 5 Ts=250 Ts = 50 FIGURE 3.§ a wmm5 12 3 4 i ^ 1 2 3 4 5 1 very easy 2 easy 3 not loo difficult 4 difficult 5 very difficult i 12 3 4 5 n subj.24: Histogram. A1.c u subj.A2 M N a . Bl.s of the different the subject's ships. judgements of the manoeuvrability of -60- .

An explanation may be that in judging the manoeuvrability of ships.25 the values of C^ are plotted as a function of the values of W.ents of the handling qualities of the ship by the helmsman.2 1.24 is a linear scale it is possible to com.9: The different ment.hn C\ and W are sm. When the ship is unstable and qualified as being rather difficult to handle.8 From Table 3. When it is assumed that the scale used in Fig. On the other hand. In Fig.7 2. but also of the constant Tg. v/hen the parameters are large. that the ships with characteristic I v/ere judged differently.ator of the judgem.ents. As discussed before.l4 2. These parameters influence the duration as well as the magnitude of the rudder deflection during the first phase.6 2. small rudder angles are generated so that only small rates of turn of the ship occur. on the other hand when the ship is easy to J steer.9 the ships have been arranged according to these average judgem. The parameters Ci and V m. -61- . Ship Char. With respect to the other decision making element parameter C2 the sam. the parameters C^ and W are large. the stable ships were easier to manoeuvre than the unstable ships. 3.e effect may be exist. Characteristics III and IV.6 2-1 1. In Table 3. ships ranked according the average judge- Average judgement •'s 50 50 50 250 50 250 250 50 50 Subjects A Subjects B V VI I V II I III IV III 1. the results are dependent on the helmsman's personal experience and the test sequence. are judged as being easier to manoeuvre than the ships steered by the group of subjects A. correspond with very small values of C^ and W. it may be concluded from Table 3. 3. This may be a reason.pute the average judgements for each ship.8 3.atter of the stationary characteristic. The unstable characteristic III is qualified m. the parameters C^ and V are large.ay be regarded as a rather good estim. Vfhen the ship is unstable. From Fig.9 that the detrimental effect of course instability with respect to the helmsman's judgement is not only a m.1 2. Furthermore.all. whereas the ships v/ith a dead zone in the stationary characteristic were superior in relation to the ships with a more or less linear characteristic.0 1. large rudder angles will be used during a rather long period. Ci and W are smiall.uch better in relation with the constant Tg = 250 sec than in relation with the smaller constant Tg = 50 sec. 3. TABLE 3.9 3.9 it can be concluded that the ships which the group of subjects B had to steer.25 it can be concluded that very stable ships with the characteristics V and VI. V ' e .

T-s50 50 40 30 char.'1 50 40 3020 10 char. Sum.in.eter is m.I]I.marizing the follov/ing conclusions can be drawn: The three param.ription of the helmsman's control gives often an acceptable desc behaviour. Ts=250 60 60+ 60 • • • • 50 50 50 40 40 40 3a 30 30 20 10 O 1 2 3 vv 20 10O 1 2 3 w 20 10 O 1 2 3w [sec/d eg] FIGURE The value 3.lEiTjsSO 20| ^ 10 -1 50 40 30 20 O l 2 3 w O l 2 3 w char.eters. However.26 shov/s the criterion values E|6| and E52 averared over the subjects for the nine large ships.ple i nternal m.II.hn is more difficult to m.anoeuvre the criterion values show a tendency to increase. as the criterion function E|^| is less sensitive to this parameter a relation between the ship's handling aualities and this param.ï. Fig. Although a relatively sim.IZ.ics of the steering: gear J a relatively good -62- .I . From this diarram it may be concluded that a weak correlation exists between the criterion values and the helmsman's opinion about the ship's handling aualities.T.=250 char.Ts=250 char.eter linear modI . consisting of only the linear part of the ship enuation and not takinp. arranged again accordinp* to Table 3.T5=50 char.25: of the parameter C plotted as a function of W.T5s50 5040 30 • 20 10+ char.31: Ts=50 50 40 30 20 10 10 • — 1 — 1 — 1 3 W 0 1 2 3 W '1 char.sman.odel is used.9. 3.odels closely m.ï:V50 50 40 30 201 10 0 1 2 3 W 0 1 2 () 1 2 3 w char. V ' e the shin .I. The heading of the ship steere d by the tv/o m. The method used to estimate th e parameters does not alv/ays result in the desired values o f the nonlinear model param.atches the heading of the shi p steered by the helm.ore difficult to show. to account the dynam.

an's behaviour is obtained. A weak correlation exists between the criterion values E i j i . IK 50 250 50 250 250 50 50 FIGURE 3.sm. '' -63 . The internal m. and description of the helm.an. The decision m.'|5|80 604020 O '|5|80 60 401 20 O Ö 80 60 40 20 O TSS TSL TSS 1 TSL V 80 60 40 20 O e a I 50 sr 50 I z n 1 M IS.odel time constant T^ is of the same order as the ship's time constant Tg in the case of large ships. the subjects.aking elem. and Er2 and the ship handling aualities.26: Values of the criterion arranged according the function subject's averaged over judgements.ent parameters C^ and V may be rep-arded J as rather good estimators of the judgements of the handling qualities of the ship by the helmsm.

Journ. D.. Holden Day. 1973..M. 8133/1 32 p. 170 S. 5. 6. Brummer.ization problem. Stuurman. Some aspects of the stability of automatic course control of ships.s.M. C . 14. Engineering. Amsterdam.p. No. 231-249. Vol. Wijk.. 2. 1972.. Report: Delft. Lab. Delft. W. S. 12.. 1969. pp.A. voor Werkt. 33 p. Cooke. 11. Vol. -64- . K. Report: Delft. D. Report: Delft. TNO for Mech. White. Johannsen.A. R. van der. Constr.. C. Glansdorp. 3. Automatica. Congress on Ergonomics...: Oxford.A.. Rapport: Delft. Spectral Analysis and its Applications. VJTHD 21.P. Simulation. WTHD 55... H. No.R. Progress Report January 1970 until January 1973 of the Man-Machine Systems Group. pp. K. Dept. Study Institute. Stassen. Veldhuyzen. Diss. Meet. 1970. 354-370. V/ijk. A. 9 . van.G. Inst. P. H (1957). 17 (1971). I.C. Vol. 102 p. Report: Delft. on Directional Stability and Control of Bodies Moving in V/ater..und. A method for the development and optimization of controllermodels for man-machine systems. The ship manoeuvring and research simulator of the Institute TNO for Mechanical Constructions. Berchtesgaden. 320 p. • lEEE-trans. Vol. Stassen. G.. Nomoto.G. 10. London. 403 p.. Hirano. Annual Report 1969 of the Man-Machine Systems Group.. 349-366.T.E.R. on Human Factors in Electronics. HFE-8 (1967). L. L. Engineering. In: Displays and Controls. Adv. Modelling the helmsman: A Study to Define a Mathematical Model Describing the Behaviour of a Helmsman Steering a Ship along a straight course. Mech. van. 1965.. G. Taguchi. pp. Nov. No. Netherl. A.. Automation and Remote Control. Constr. 37 p. 59 p. Cooke. G. Ship Research Centre TNG. Human decisions in the control of a slow response system. San Francisco. van.ulation of the steerinr and manoeuvring characteristics of a second generation container ship.. 123-131.pling of Displayed Inform. E. 4701. 1 (1963). H. Beishon. N-98. C .REFERENCES 1. lit (1972).B. Proc. 197-205.. Supplement to Ergonomics. 13. W. 15. 1969.F. Taylor and Francis. Swets and Zeilinger. Visual Attention and the Sam. 77.R.E. K.S. 230 p. 1972. pp.. No. Grossman. .J.. T. TNO for Mech. On the steering qualities of ships. A Survey of random methods for parameter optim.en Pegeltechniek. Convergence of the random search method in the presence of noise..al. Dortm. Jex.V/.. J. No. No. 1961. 26 (1965 II). Lunteren. pp. et.M. Sym. Proc. J. 8. Sim. Inst.I. Rastzigin. Proc. 1505-1511. Vol. Vol. Gurin. Brummer. D. Bech. 1970. pp. Report: Delft. Dept.). Enpineerinr Science. W.R. De beoordeling van de manoeuvreereigenschappen van verschillende gesimuleerde schepen door de roerganger. 7. A review of quasi-linear oilot models.S. Jenkins. 197*1.. G..G. Voorde. 111-121. k. Karnopp. Watts. 3 (Sept. of Mech. No.ation in Process Control. 35 pp. 16. McRuer. Honda.M.ization. Int... H.C. Second Int. No. No. Random search techniaues for optim. of Mech.

ation. v/here again hybrid simulation techniques have been applied. he only has to deal with the low-frequent components in the heading signal \\){t) . based on the -65- . Just as before. it follows that additional inform. may be expected to be a help for the helmsman steering a ship sailing in waves. etc. t of a ship in waves consists of tv/o components: One com|() ponent i|jg(t) resulting from the steering actions with the rudder. which can not be estimated in this case as m.1). that it is hard to make on the bases of the internal m.sman's performance by means of computer sim.ulations with the extended nonlinear model.odel an estim. i. the subjects were instructed to steer a ship along a seouence of prescribed headings sim.ponent originating from the disturbances due to v/ave exitations of the ship (Fig. it has been tried to estimate the parameters of this extended m. the above. due to the noise of the analogue com. heading rate.. from the com.ation of the reouired rudder angle as the initial conditions needed to solve the differential equation are not known exactly.sman's m. 3. v/hereas the latter is relatively high frequent. the parameters of the basic nonlinear model have been estimated with respect to a fev/ tests.Due to the restricted time available for this preliminary study a switch to a totally digital computer simulation.ulator techniaues have been applied. However. integrators. v/as impossible.ulator experiments. the displays used. the following procedure has been developed.1 Introduction During a series of preliminary sim. a very simple laboratory simulation was set U P . and another com. The heading signal i . the nonlinear helmsman's m. Therefore a preliminary study has been started to investigate the control behaviour of a helmsm. Therefore. Also here.odel.g. In general the helmsman of a ship is instructed not to respond on these high-frequent disturbances. the estimation method used resulted into unreproducable results.ee performed with a large tanker sailing in open sea with very high waves £l. Therefore. 3 ) . From. It has been tried to predict the influence of additional displays on the helm. such as amplifiers. v/here the structure was adapted to the displays used during a particular test.odel had to be extended. It is important to realize that this first com. by means of a rate of turn indicator. to make the predictions. but as it has been the intention to perform only a prelim. sim.e.ented v/ith additional displays. e.Hov/ever.entioned above.an steering a ship in waves instrum. The method to estimate the parameters v/as similar to the method used before (Ch. tests v f r .CHAPTER IV: SHIP f^ANOEUVRING IN WAVES 4.ponents. The m.inary study. 2 ] . in terms of the nonlinear helm. 2.ain reason for this instruction is the fact that rudder calls increase the ship's resistance. To include the influence of waves.odel. This means. and thus decrease its speed.ments made by the subjects it can be derived that it is often difficult to estimate the rate of turn in particular when this rate of turn is small.en are not well trained. a set of model parameter values is needed. However. where the wave disturbances in the computer simulation have been omitted. So the helmsman has to estimate the undisturbed heading and.ponent is a low frequent one.ilar to the tests mentioned in Ch. These tests showed that rather dangerous situations can occur when the helmsm. Therefore the structure of the model was adapted to each of the test conditions. Then.

Calculations of the yawing spectra of a 200.pared v/ith the values measured during the experim. existing of an estim.easures could be obtained.odel. estim.odel given in Ch. 3.ents. 4.part of the m.1 rad/sec as can be concluded from the results given in Ch.i i t ( ^ r 2. tons tanker -66- .6 .ator.ates are denoted by i]Jg(t) and ^5(t). the extension concerns in particular the estim.72 m/sec windspeed =22 m.000 tons tanker with a speed of 15 knots showed that the freauencies of the ship motions are mostly centered between . 3 has to be extended in such a v/ay that the behaviour of a helmsm.an steering a shin in waves could be described.an's m. that the extension of the nonlinear model may be replaced by an ideal filter v/ithout influencing the remaininp.1).000 for different directions of wave propagation. where the influence of the displays on the m.2 and 1.odel structure and on the parameter values has been taken into account. Vv/*^e' xlO V»7.2 Extension of the nonlinear helmsm. These l() ' i .odel.ulated v/ith the extended nonlinear m.1 FIGURE 4. an internal miodel and a decision miaking element (Ch. the freauencies of the m.ator. 4.3.1: Calculated spectra of the yawing motions of a 200.1). Using these parameters all the tests have been sim. A very simple extension of the model v/ould be a linear filter. In this way predictions of the performance m. 3.odel The nonlinear m.0 rad/sec (Pig.8 0/^ [rad/sec] . v/hich could be com. /sec o .assumption. However. In view of the structure of the m.3).Odel. This extension should include a kind of filter v/hich generates estimations of the undisturbed heading 'l^g(t) and heading rate 'J^g(t) based on the disturbed headinp.otions of a large tanker due to rudder calls range up to about .

the application of a linear filter may not lead to acceptable results.ore or less like a sine wave v/ith a slowly and in time varying amplitude.es t^. Therefore.2). H's^^^ SLnh ^sit).3(t^) (4. estimates of the undisturbed heading and heading rate. tj.3) (4. and tc^. A very useful filter could be based on a publication of Magdeleno.2) v/here t 2 = (t^ + t ) / (t^ + t^) / 2. at time ts using successive peaks Based on the three successive peaks at tim.1) ü. can be obtained in the following manner (Fig. 4. the undisturbed headings at times t2 and ti^ can be estim. Based on the fact that ship motions due to waves can be regarded as narrow band noise [4j.t^) = 2At25 .2: Estimation of \pg(t) and Tpgft) of the \l)(t) signal. and thus a time history of such a signal looks m.Both frequency ranges are so close to each other that by means of linear filtering large phase shifts in the estimated heading and heading rate will occur. V/-(») 01 c '5 • a FIGURE 4. Setting: (t^ . [3]. et.t^) = 2At^.ated according to: il'(t^) + ip(t^) ^^it^) and ii)(t^) + ^i){t^) (4. (4.al. Other filtering techniques had to be applied.4)-67- and (t^ .

a rudder angle indicator. .ade: '^s^^5^ = ^^s^n^ " ^s^^4^ • ^*2 ' • t Ijt. the internal model and the decision making element.ates.3. But between tv/o successive peaks information about these quantities must be available too. the parameters were chosen eaual to the parameters of the large unstable ship used before (Table 4. (4. driven by the steering wheel position signal.ator. ï In this way at discrete tim. the internal model is reset at the new estim.5) and (4. are obtained.000 tdw.inding that the intention v/as to perform only a preliminary study. so that the influence of additional inform.ulator has been used consisting of a steering wheel. and a rate of turn indicator. the simple Mom.sm. 3. a very simple manoeuvring sim. a directionally unstable 200. of the extended model is given.e tjcan be m. -68- . the estim.ates ^ (t-^) and l g t { ) as initial i '(-^ conditions. viz. 2. ^^-5) (^-6) (4.1 Ship dynamics In describing the dynamics of the ship. In Fig. tanker. 3 three m. a predictive display.ain blocks can be recop^nized.3 a block diagram. viz.2). 4.6 was used.odel Eq. a rotating compass.ation on the helm. 4. It m. 5 1 » ^^-8) where '' (t^) can be calculated using Eq.U (t ) ^s(^5) = ^s(H) = ' At. 4. where at the times a peak of the heading signal occurs.6) can be rewritten as: ^^(t^) = ?^3(t4) + ^g(t5) . Using the internal model Eq. (4. At^ • The Eqs.5 this information can be obtained by solving the differential equation with the steering wheel position as forcing input and the last estim.1). Thus the estimated values of the undisturbed heading and rate of turn are supplied continuously by the internal model.) . Only one ship has been sim.7) %(S^ - I .ed.ulated.t.estimations of the undisturbed heading and heading rate at tim. Rem.3 Experimental set up To evaluate the applicability of the extended nonlinear model a number of tests has been perform.es estimates of the undisturbed heading and rate of turn.ay be noted that just as described in Ch.oto-Norrbin m. At2 .an's performance could be investigated.

Fr «op detection |_rL 1 l 5 top averager estimator ^^•V'? "^S (t) P ï 'int. extended model of the helmsman steering a TABLE 4. mod.f'> i ship — • FIGURE 4. equation intenal rnodel I l I j V^-(t:i.t*T) I ö^(t) ^ ^ decision making clement .1 5 3 Dim.1: The model parameters of the ship.J 6j(t) disturbances V{.ension sec sec (sec/deg) deg/sec 2 K -69 .05 . Parameter ^s ^s ^2 Value 250 -.3: Block diagram of the ship in waves.

Using the computer programs of the Shipbuilding Laboratory of.5 deg.1) 4.5 . v/as di vided into t wenty three bands.ulate the behaviour of the ship in waves (Fip-. a com. and am. this spectrum was chosen to sim. 2. As the largest amplitudes are found v/hen the angle between wave direction and ship speed is eaual to about 60°. the spectrum. the contribution of the disturbances acting on the ship in the -70- . tanker It should be noted that even in this situat ion the yavring motions are relatively small.2 . 3 . 2 (Fif'.the Delft University of Technology. The disturbance signal was added to th e output of the model describing the ship's manoeuvring behaviou r as discussed in Ch. 4 . a rate of turn indicator and a predictive display have been used. windspeed: 22 /sec /=0* i6' . 4 6 Wj [rad/sec] FIGURE 4. .000 tons with a wave direction of propoagation equal to 60 degrees. T-^oreover an indicator to display the ordered heading ^^{t) has been applied.pass and a rudder angle indicator.2 Displays and controls In addition to the displays normally in use in ship steerino-^ viz. To create a disturbance si gnal. The phase of each compone nt v/as chose n randomly. The signal consisted of the sum of twenty three sinusoids with frequencies corresponding with the central fre auency of each of the bands. In practice.000 tons tanker in a sea-way have been calculated using strip theory methods (Fig. spectra of the yav/ing motions of a 200.plitudes chosen in such a v/ay that the pov/er of a specific component was equal to the power o f the corresponding band. 1 ) . 4 ) . the ampli tudes are of the order of only . 4 . which can be used in the simiUlation.4: Spectrum of the calculated yawing motions of a 200.3.

b: the desired heading relative to the momentary heading. FIGURE 4.an as given in Ch. Moreover. 3. however.2: To filter the disturbances out. The following structure of the predictor m. is not a realistic situation.odel was chosen: Tpi^(t) + ilj(t) = Kp6^(t).ooth picture was obtained. tests have been performed using the principle on v/hich the extended helm. -71- . these predictions are very inaccurate and unreliable. the ideally filtered signals ^^it). a: momentary heading. linear filtering techniaues cannot be used. Likewise. The repetition time was chosen after som. where the prediction tim. This model was also used to predict the heading to be shown by the predictive displays. this solution v/as chosen. the heading and rate of turn should he filtered in such a way that useful additional information is presented to the helmsman. and ^g(t) were known.anoeuvring sim. when the predicted headings are based on the actual heading and rate of turn.inary tests. the rate of turn indicator shows a very noisy signal.rate of turn is much higher than the contribution due to rudder deflection. The prediction of the heading as given by the predictive display was repeated every four seconds. (4. o: predicted heading relative to the momentary heading. but due to the limited time available for that study. a m. The use of these signals.9) which is comparable with the structure of the internal model of the helmsm.5: Screen of the predictive display.odel describing the ship dynam.ulator has been used. This tim.e span is based on simulations with the nonlinear model of the helmsm. To obtain the estimates continuously. Because a m. in such a v/ay that a rather sm. the prediction time was 100 sec. 4. which was about two tim. The rate of turn indicator and the predictive display based on these ideally filtered inputs are indicated in this thesis by RTIl and PDl respectively.g(t) and lijg(t).e tp never exceeded 100 sec. This problem is already discussed in Ch. Also V-'arenaar used this prediction time in his study [5] to investigate the influence of predictive displays on the helmsman's performance. Therefore.an's model. A RT-screen v/as applied to shov/ the predicted heading. The displays based on this principle are indicated by RTI2 and PD2 respectively.es the ship length taking into account the velocity of 15 knots.sman's model is based to estimate 4. hence when the actual rate of turn is displayed.ics should be available.e prelim.

5 Experimental program.4 Subjects For this prelim. C.05 sec*"!. 4.entary heading.es.The Fig. were students of the Delft University of Technology.e Each of the tv/o subjects. The seouence of headings was the same as during the previous tests.omentary heading. C. Disturbances No Ye« Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes - RTIl PDl RTI2 FD2 PD2 PD2 250 250 250 200 300 C .mie. using the displays and controls just discussed. v/ith the smaller amplitudes (TS S. The timie constant of the predictor m. or 300 sec.arized in Table 4. The duration of a test was 40 min. T (sec) p of a dis- Indicators C C C. indicated by A and B respectively. PD = predictive display. -72- . The curved line "c" is the prediction of the heading. the gain factor Kp equal to -. = RTI = rate of turn indicator. 4. ^•3.sman could use a rather light steering wheel. C. The circles are indicating constant prediction tim.3. They were trained until the moment they showed a more or less stationary steering behaviour.odel T^ was chosen equal to 250 sec. and "b" the desired heading relatively to the m. where Tp was varied at values of 200. performed the tests summ. 250.entary heading. 4. C. 3 ) . The angle betv/een these two lines is the heading error.om. C. TABLE 4. the straight line "a" indicates the mom. a number of tests was performed with the predictive display PD2. To steer the ship the helm.sman's behaviour.3 The ordered headings: The test signal The task designed v/as to steer a ship along prescribed headings. To investigate the influence of different time constants on the helm. also given relatively to the m. Ch.m.2. The two subjects participating in this program.2: Summary of the tests to investigate the behaviour helmsman steering a ship in waves with different plays.5 shows the display configuration.inary study the number of subjects was kept as small as possible.3. compass. which required not much physical effort. No other controls were available.

with different time constants of the predictor model. based on the undisturbed heading and heading rate (PDl).^(t )-ii.um speed. 4.10) (4. /^Iso the information supplied by the predictive display can be obtained from the helm. • The undisturbed heading ij^g(t). For that reason the number of times that the angular speed of the rudder exceeded 10^ of its maxim.ulations with the nonlinear model. based on the filtered heading and rate of turn (PD2). displaying the filtered rate of turn. • The undisturbed rate of turn i|j5(t).sman's own estimator and from internal model. • A rate of turn indicator. the estimation of NRC is not simple.12) Heading error score I. • The steering wheel position fi^^Tt). = ^ i o^ = V i^ J 62(t)dt il. the structure of this model m.ation obtained from the predictive displays also contains the momentary values of the heading and the heading rate or estimates of these auantities.ust be adapted to the displays used during a particular test. • A predictive display. also estimates of the rate of turn can be achieved from the estimator. additional displays were investigated: • A rate of turn indicator. was counted. displaying the undisturbed heading rate (RTIl). = V '^ r^ [i|.1 Prediction of scores Model structure To predict the scores by means of computer sim. " Moreover the average number of rudder calls per minute NRC was calculated. Hov/ever.3.g^(t)dt (4.g(t)] ^dt . Block diagrams of each of the displays together with the helmsman's model are shown in the Figs.9. It should be mentioned that the inform.4 4. 4.4. As the steering wheel position 6^(t) is an analogue signal.6 through 4. A few remarks with respect to these figures should be made.6 Data collection The following signals were recorded on magnetic tape: • The desired heading ip^(t).4. From these signals the follov/ing performance measures were computed: Rudderscore Rate of turn score I^ I. due to noise in the simulation. using successive peaks (RTI2). • Three predictive displays. This means that this information can be used to reset the internal model as well. -73- .11) (4. • The rudder angle <5(t). As mentioned before four types of. • The disturbance signal. The information supplied by the rate of turn indicator can be used as an initial condition to make predictions with the internal model.

r %1\)%U.6: Block diagram^ of of turn indicator the helmsman's (RTIj).ed that the helm. model steering a ship with a rate V^s(t).) estimator ¥4 111 iternal internal lodel mod M I-*—I n disturbances I V^s(t:t. to base his decision on his own estimates.g n phiv v>ith a vre- .i*r) V^.l'»! ój(t) decision making element model i ship V/-(t) [MImsman's FIGURE 4.V^s(t) V^s"t''V^s"tl II predictor model L I disturbances ship V^lt) FIGURE A.ake no use of the displayed information and instead. as otherwise the display is more or less superfluous. However.Finally. it should be noted that the helmsman has the possibility to m.sman uses the displays indeed. model steerir. the helr^cmar's (PDj). in the predictions of the scores it is assum.7: Block diagram of dictive display --ji^.

Note that the vredictor model is only to estimate \b (t) continuously.r ^ estimator I v^. of dictive disvlay the helmsman's (PD2).8: Block diagram of the helmsm.(. rate used r ^•t'.t.an's model steering a shiv with of turn indicator (RTI2).t*T) decision making element %lx) i ship öj(tl V^(t) helmsman's model FIGURE 4.v. a.\*r) model |.^sf't' estimator top detector and averager predictor model V='''*V w i ?p":'.(v ^pf'i "1 V^s"tl V^f't) predi model el top d etec.*— L^—I h V^(1) disturbances V^(t:t.] making element helmsman's model V^H"! ^d'" I ship Sjftl FIGURE 4.9: Block diagram.1 tor and nd L«— averager I ger I internal model M L4—I 1 disturbances ^slt:t. internal %\\:x.t+T)( decision -*.»r) V^s(t:t. model steering a phiv with a vre- -75- ..).

may also be related to the accuracy of the displayed inform. as well as the v/ay of steerinpare not influenced by presenting additional inform. The threshold value p is directly related to the accuracy of the predictions necessary to make the decisions. 1 Extended helmsman's model (Ch.ed. 3.3: Summary of possibilities the nonlinear helmsm. the threshold value p is the only param. The only param. Ci.12).4.ulation have been selected in the following way.s. the parameter o is assumed to be undependent upon the displayed information.sman's indif f ierence threshold for large heading errors.odel (Ch.ation.aking elem. Before the selection of the values of p in relation to the different displays will be discussed. the parameter values had to become available. and the decision making element param. are the parameters P and o. -76- .ainly the way of steering.4. p and q.eter v/hich certainly is influenced by giving the helmsman additional inform.odel. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Nonextended helm. Ship sailing in v/aves. The parameters cannot be estimated due to computer noise. The parameter values used in the sim.an is .an's Model to be used to estir^ate m. v/ater.eters p and q can be considered as being indicators of the accuracy of information transmission.3)• m.ics.hn extremely well-trained. and another sub set which v/ill not be influenced.3) The parameters can be esti. v/ith and [without addiItional displays.portant. However. without additional displays.3.eters is divided into a sub set which will be influenced by presenting additional information.ent parameters VI. the parameters in Tests performed Ship sailing in calm. V ^ e a helmsm. they can be divided into two groups.1 mated as described in Ch.eters \'I. the v/ay used to obtain a set of the remaining model parameters will be elucidated.2 Parameter values In simulating the tests with the nonlinear model. TABLE 4. v/hereas the parameter a is related to the influence of the magnitude of the heading error on this precision (Eq.ay be im. that is the magnitude and duration of the rudder deflections. 4 ) . as a relation between a and the information accuracy is difficult to obtain. The param. hence the param. that are the internal m.ation.3 a summary is given of the tests perform. The set of param. In Table 4.eters which m. The parameter a indicatinr an increase in the helm.odel parameters Tjn and K . Parameter estimation 1 Nonextended helmsman's m. one with and another without wave disturbances. and so to the accuracy of the displayed information.eters can be estim. viz. j^ 02. Ci. 3. Conseauently.ated v/hen the wave disturbances are omitted in the computer simulation. it may be assumed that the knowledge he has about the dynamics of the ship. The internal model parameters relate to the ship dynam. C2 and C3 influence m.ation.eter p indicate the precision of ship control.an' s model (Ch. The decision m.The param. C3.

4. A very noisy output of the helm. (4. • On the other hand. v/ater.. the scone o** this chapter is the manoeuvring of ships in v/aves. As mentioned before the estim. 3.'l^s(tti). since then rather large heading errors and large overshoots occur. the estimated param.eter values have been averared over both the subjects.. which are denoted by Ati/(tti) and Ail)(tti). Hov/ever. It should be noted that the helm. The selection of one of" these m.ate the m. C2. Thus the param. In this v/ay a set of parameter values is obtained related to the m. The parameters of this nonextended m.4).hn describe the helmsm. does not influence the parameter values of the m. The parameter estim.13) -77- .odel parameters (Table 4.an's control behaviour is the nonextended model (Ch.odel is then obtained. The model of the helmsman to be used in this configuration is again identical to the model described in Ch.odel can be estimated v.ation method selected in this v/ay yields a set of parameter values which is assumed to be undependent of the displayed information. To diminish the influence of this variance on the scores to be predicted.ena: • VJhen the parameter p is chosen too small.eter p should have that value where errors in the reset values of the internal m. the errors in the reset values of the internal model. the model to be used to . V' Ci. They are defined by: Al'(tti) = $g(tti) .sman's m. This ideal estimator can easily be applied in a com.itted.inr that the replacement of the estimator of the extended helmsman's model (Ch. are caused by errors of the estimator. Put. Based on the results of the second method a prediction of the performance measures has been achieved.3) are based on certain assum.3).odel.puter sim. the remaining parameter values can be estimated.quality is very poor. 3. Sensitivity analyses with the nonlinear m.odel by an ideal estimator does not influence the parameter values. Both the methods to estim. every new value of the estimator output will result into a new rudder angle (Fig.v ' e no wave disturbances act on the shin.ithout having difficulties due to computer noise (Ch.odel do not result into rudder calls. The first one is based on the assum^ntion that the presence of wave disturbances does not influence the parameter values obtained from a test v/ithout wave disturbances.3). the latter is based on the assumption that a replacem. v/hen p is chosen too large. viz.anoeuvring of ships in calm. C3 and a. by assum. and so they can be om. %.ethods is arbitrary at this stae-e.eters showed the follov/ing phenom. 4. 3. therefore both the methods have been used in parameter estimation in order to judp-e the best solution.ptions.sman behaves in a nonstationary way causinr a variance in the estim.ulation. and A'i'(tti) = il'g(tti) .odel adapted to the different test conditions with varying param.14) (4.'J^gCtti). The disturbances then become unimportant in the computer sim.ent of the estimator part of the m.2) by an ideal estimator generating the exact values of the undisturbed heading and heading rate.3.eters of the extended model v/as impossible due to computer noise. except the parameter p. parameter p has to be chosen depending on the test conditions.ated parameter values. T^. since the undisturbed values of the heading and the heading rate are already available.ulation.ation of the param. the performance is rather poor too. The performance with respect to the steerinp. When no additional information is supplied. Only the .

The results of the param. (4. Thus.4.(tti).ated depending on the display considered.ation displayed by the rate of turn indicator and the predictive displays based on the top detection principle (RTI2 and PD2) is less accurate than the other tv/o displays (RTIl and P D l ) . the probability density functions of the estimator errors (Eqs. the helmsman is aware of the exact value of the rate of turn. the internal model reset errors can be sm. Also when additional information is supplied p should be as small as possible to avoid unaccurate steerinr and large overshoots . the display of this additional information will not influence the parameter p. in the case the remaining model param. -78- .ation of this parameter difficult.easures Eas.'(t. the parameter p can be estim. The parameter is mainly determined by the reading-accuracy of the display.odel. However. As the m. Finally.15) for each tim.. 4.and the heading rate. and the estimated probability density functions of AiJ. 4. in the case that the actual rate of turn is displayed by m. v/hich means for each time the estimator resets the internal m. VJhen additional information is supplied. ) I < p . In addition to the inequalities Eos. As the estimates of the undisturbed heading and the undisturbed heading rate are obtained from.e tt^ a peak value in the headinp. and so only Eq.eans of computer sim.12 and the average number of rudder calls NRC for each of the subjects as well as the average values of these scores. 4. which makes the estim.occurs. the first phenomenon can be translated into the following ineoualities with respect to the param.l4)have to be determ.) I < and jCi. The averap-e scores v/ill be compared at the end of this paragraph with the m.ance m. the m. this means that the param.odel.13 and 4. 4.Ail.l6.aller. For instance.l6.ay be dependent upon p itself. To obtain the predictions of the scores by m.eter p.odel parameters have been estim.ates. it can be concluded from the sensitivity analyses that P should be as small as possible.15 is im. 4.ation v/ith respect to the headinp.odel is part of a closed loop system.. Thus. these probability density functions m.eters are known.eans of the rate of turn indicator RTIl.15 and 4.5.ethod applied to estimate the param. the performance measures are only influenced by the structure of the model.eter estimations are sum. using the Eqs. 4.5 Results Table 4. sim.ated for the tests without additional displays.eter p: |Ai|.16) p.ulations v/ith the nonlinear model with various values of p learned that this dependence could be nerlected.11 and 4.an's own estim.4 gives the perform.ulations. 4.(tt. keeping in mind that p should be chosen as small as possible.eter p can be very small.15 and 4. The m.10. (4. The inform.(tti) and AiJ. The reset errors are caused only by errors in the estim.marized in Table 4.odel predictions. 4.Taking into account the structure of the nonlinear m. The predictive display PDl supplies very accurate inform.ated heading.ined in order to choose the proper values of the param.2.eters has been discussed already in Ch.portant. the same estimating principle as the helmsm.

33 3. Model parameters Subj .58 10.05 12.6 2.08 . the value of the parameter q has been changed from the values given in Table 4.52 3.2 % 38 24 64 56 C C .0630 2.10 3. RTI = rate of turn PD = predictive display.09 .14 4.95 .72 3.PD2 C.50 11.0665 2.RTI2 C.83 9.05 -.05 3. Parameters of the ship: T = 250 sec. = 250 sec.78 10.0621 3. This parameter change in a was allowed due to the fact that the optimization criterion Ei.0622 .1 2.FDl C.62 3.0620 .70 3.53 .0568 2.76 9.82 3.05 -.09 .06 3.60 2.98 10. Subject A l6 deg ^*e dep I^ dep sec NRC nin" Subject B ^6 dep ^*e deg Averape value ^P sec H dep sec NRC min" !« dep ^*e dep H dep sec NRC min" C C C.13 3.0599 3.45 .23 3.05 -.94 3. C = compass.0728 .52 3. m sec •m ^ W ^1 sec C2 sec Criteria P dep a dep"^ Test conditions Indicators Disturbances H sec ^161 % 58 43 66 68 ^5^ sec sec-^ deg -.0724 .49 .66 3.03 11.50 2. indicator.5).0654 .64 .80 9.58 3.68 3.i was -79- .4 38 35 31 30 2 14 . a2 = 5 C = compass.51 .53 9.15 4.0593 3.77 11.0635 3.5: The averaged parameter values and the criterion values for each of the tests without additional displays.0630 4.51 .0601 2. | Test conditions Indicator Dist.10 51 67 31 60 To obtain an idea about the possibility to predict the scores by means of computer simulations the tests with the ship sailing in calm water are simulated using the nonextended helmsman's m.05 sec~^.53 .5.58 10.09 3.0611 3.PD2 no _ yes yes 250 yes 250 250 200 300 yes yes yes yes 9.RTIl C.03 12.09 .05 sec~ .59 .05 -.73 .05 1. During this com.18 TABLE 4.64 10.4.PD2 C.6P 10.19 10.0689 .odel and the average m.58 .50 .23 9.3 2.05 2.0705 2.29 3.68 3. C no no yes yes A B A B 252 287 215 291 41 35 26 44 32 29 30 30 0 3 15 13 .59 11. (sec/deg)2.0685 2. aj = -1.0610 2.67 9.06 c Average values c c no yes A/B A/B 270 253 -.64 3.04 12.75 .0675 .87 .52 .95 3.87 3.98 .13 10.0709 .0633 .TABLE and average values 4.87 3.98 3.0642 3.91 11.odel parameter values related to the calm water condition (Table 4.52 10.69 3.90 .67 3.52 3. K = -. Scores of these scores.puter simulation as well as those which will be discussed below.9 2.48 .46 .23 4.59 .0582 2. to avoid a very large number of rudder calls.97 3.14 . Measured scores Parameters model ship dynamics: T K = .

From Table 4. -80- density functions of the estimator errors .44 1 3.10: Estimated vrobability hii(t^) and h^(t^).was rather insensitive_ with respect to a for values sm. [d«g] " n .t.73 1^ C no no By using the average param.12 m -. Perf. TABLE 4.0& -.062 . the probability density functions of the estimator errors b.6: Comparison between the performance measures resulting from the tests and those predicted by computer sim.L .aller than . the number of rudder calls is still rather larp-e compared with the value measured. 4. measures obtained from Performance measures ^6 deg Tests (average values) Model predictions 10. C = compass.065 1 1 Test conditions 1 Indicators Disturbances H NPC 1 min" 1 1.ulations.3 deg~l.5).Qi.eter values with respect to the ship sailing in waves (Table 4.5 (average values) with an exception for q which was set equal to .3 deg~l.12 ^ [deg/sec] FIGURE 4.Qi x. .eter value of a. Therefore q is set equal to .81 I*e dep 3. ^ Jl -.64 dep sec .6 it can be concluded that in spite of this increase in the param.10).08 n .52 3. The parameters of the model are chosen as given in Table 4.-^{tt^) and h^it^i) have been determined (Fig.3 deg~^.33 10.

15. 4. As p m.15. the performance of the subjects improved (Table 4.sman's model is modified as described in Ch.ation displayed (Table 4. The predictive display (PDl) also shov/ed the same effect. the number of rudder calls becomes rather large in using predictive display. 4.ber of rudder calls was found. 4 . where the nonlinear helm. as exact values of the undisturbed heading and heading rate were displayed. 4.15 and 4.2 4.ostly sm. (about lO rudder calls per m. depending upon the kind of additional inform. 4.16 The value of p with respect to the predictive display (PDl) should be sm.5 and 4.ated by means of the Eos.aller than .ator errors are m. In the case of the predictive display PDl.15 4. RTIl PDl RTI2 PD2 yes yes yes yes yes 2. This fact may be caused by the reason that the display based on the top detection method provides not fully accurate information.16. C.inute) p is set eaual .15. the use of additional inform. whereas the rudder scores Ig were a little bit smaller than those related to the rate of turn indicator.6 deg with respect to the heading. 4. led to a small improvement in the perfonrance. which may result -81- .2 deg. 4.4.06 deg/sec with respect to the heading rate.16 4.7). 4.6 Discussion and conclusions VJhen additional information.ation. C.2 2. 1 -7 .4).ust be larger than zero and there for p = . based on the ton detection principle.ulations are given in Tables 4. p cannot be estimated from the Eos.2 Eas.16 4.2 2.aller than . In general. and sm. In Fig.all.7.15 and 4. based on the undisturbed rate of turn was supplied (RTIl).11 the scores obtained by the computer simulations and the measured scores are given.l6.1. Rased on these data the parameter p has been estim.7: The values performance of the parameter p used to predict the measures by means of computer simulations 1 Test conditions Indicators P Disturbances sec C C. be it that the number of rudder calls increased. The model parameters used during the computer sim.1 a rather large num. Hov/ever. C. but larger than zero as for p • 0 the NRC > becomes very large. TABLE 4.From these probability density functions it may be concluded that the absolute value of the estim.

given in Table 4. This fact can be elucidated as follows: V ' e no disturbances .RTI^ C.ents. VJhen the ship sails in waves.PD Tp=250 measured • predicted QRTI^ QPD QPD Tp=250 200 CiPD^ .5.Oi .ay be supposed that the main effect of these displays is a reduction of m. resulting into -82- . it may be concluded that the average param. it is more difficult to control.08 .06 . 3.2. From the estimated parameter values.02 NRC 300 FIGURE Measured 4. it m. into the generation of superfluous rudder calls. the ship is rather easy to control.hn act on the ship.eter values obtained from the test v/here the ship sailed in calm water show only small differences from the average parameter values related to the test where disturbances were introduced. Hence. Based on remarks made by the subjects during the experim. this statem. onlv small overshoots will occur.ent could not be proven.eter.ental workload. Because of the fact that no workload measurements were carried out. The most important difference is found between the values of the parameter C3 related to both test conditions. / s discussed in Ch.5 ¥e IMJIM im nu c n C.11: and predicted scores. the optimiza^ tion criterion is then insensitive to this param.

ation is certainly inaccurate.ay exist between the helm.easured scores and the predicted ones related to the predictive displays PD2. Also the parameter q.an's selection of the rudder angle during the first phase may be based more on the helmsman's experience. an interaction m.eter p was assum.ber of rudder calls which are larger than predicted.eaningless.eans that the value of the param. the helm.66 deg per degree heading error. o Only the param. 4. e.2 and a = . by means of a predictive display. that is.12). the influence of the heading error on the threshold value d(t) v/ill be much larger than for sm. when p is large due to the errors in the displayed information.easured num. The following conclusions can be summarized: -83- J .3.ed to be influenced by presenting additional information.12 and the riven values of p and q. The differences between the m. and with the heading error scores which are smaller than predicted (Fig.ulations was chosen too large.g. a relation may exist between this parameter and the parameter p. the resulting threshold d(t) is at least 2. Hence. This explanation corresponds with the m. This corresponded with threshold values d(t) m. Plowever. may be influenced by the display.sm. For instance. that is his internal model and the presented information v/hich is also based on knowledge of the ship dynamics. consisted of generating a predicted heading on the display touching to the desired heading. that means on the way he normally chooses the rudder angle in a particular situation. This m. the information was considered to be more accurate than it actually was. may be caused by the following reasons: o It m. that means that the criterion may become sensitive to the parameter C3.sm. In the case of the predictive display PD2 where p = 2.2 deg v/ith an increase of .eter p in the computer sim. This fact may explain the difference betv/een the measured and predicted rudder angles scores related to the predictive display v/ith a predictor model time constant Tp = 3OO sec.11).ay be that the helm. This means that rather large threshold values can occur.an's experience. indicating the influence of the heading error on the precision of ship control. For instance.eter q is influenced by the display. On the base of this fact it may be concluded that also the param. since the applied rudder angles are related to the helmsm.an's knowledge of the ship dynamics in such a way that an internal m.e constant. 3. It should be mentioned that the influence of the accuracy of information presentation.•^ larger overshoots. Except the case v/ith the predictive displays based on the top detection principle (PD2) the predictions of the scores v/ith the nonlinear model were reasonable. should be studied more in detail as in practice the displayed inform. than on the displayed information. 3.sman did not notice the magnitudes of the errors in the displayed information.all values of p (Eq. In particular during the third phase. the m.uch smaller than given by Eq.odel or predictor model with a larger time constant corresponds with larger rudder angles than an internal model or a predictor model with a smaller tim. the values of the parameter C3 related to the ship sailine* in calm water are m.ethod applied of steering the ship using a predictive display. The changes of the measured scores related to the different test conditions v/ere predicted rather v/ell.

sman of a supertanker.A rate of turn indicator im. Cambridge (USA).."WTHD-55.ance with respect to the heading error scores and the rudder anp-le scores. G. Dept. No. Proc. NASA SP-215. pp. van. J . 28s. 1973... Delft. Gerritsm. 3. W. Magdeleno.A. -84- .ance m. pilot models for periodic and narrowband inputs. W. Wagenaar.M. 5. Netherlands Shin Research Centre TNO. Delft.a.R.easures. No.E. subjective predictability gradations. Cambridge (USA). Auxiliary equipment as a compensation for the effect of course instability on the performance of helm.. 1969. C. In: H.. pp. of the fifth Annual Conf. 20 p. Engineering. Behaviour of a ship in a sea-way. Glansdorp. pp.C. The scores derived from the simulation v/ith the nonlinear model are a good prediction of the scores measured. Stassen et. Report: Delft.. Stassen.er.A.en.A. Ship Research Centre TNG.sm. REFERENCES 1. vr. on Manual Control. l40-l60. Modelling the behaviour of the helmsman steerinp a ship. R. H. of Mech. The predictive display also leads to a better perform. W. Johnson.P. The influence of inaccurate information presented by m. 1966. Veldhuyzen. No. Tracking quasi-predictable displays. Progress Report January 1970 until January 197 3 of the Man-Machine Systems Group.ent of the perform. 391-428. Veldhuyzen. 2. however. 1973. Wijk.al.ation may be rather a decrease in v/orkload than the imnrovem. 21 p. 1972. Brumm. P.G..J.G.. Jex. The important profit of additional inform. the number of rudder calls increases. VJ. on Manual Control. of the ninth Annual Conf.. REFERENCES 1. 84S.eans of a predictive display needs certainly further research. Proc.proves the performance of the helmsman. H.. 639-658. Modelling the helm. Paymans. Communication Netherl. 4 .

50 m Mean draught 2.1 [l].CHAPTER V: FULL SCALE EXPERIMENTS VJITH A SMALL SHIP 5.1 Introduction In Ch.1: Principal data of the training ship "Zeefakkel" Length 42.ent 383 in3 Tonnage 324 tons Steering equi pment 2 rudders Rudder area 2 X 1. Nevertheless. with m. However.an had to execute a number of manoeuvres which were equal to those with the simulator experiments.e differences occured.00 m Breadth 7. 5. Speed max. The results of the tests ^ / t the small ships were not ^ih very satisfying. TABLE 5. sometim. Besides.otions due to waves.an's behaviour.04 m2 Propulsion 2 diesel engines 2 controlable pitch propellers Nominal RPM 300 turns/min.es causing a diversion of the helmsman's attention. 3 the experiments with the manoeuvring simulator were described.ulator study. birds and waves has probably influenced the helmsm. Fortunately.ulator results only with great cautions. During the experiments large as well as sm. have been performed at the North Sea during the summer 1975. This trainingship was originally designed to be used for hydrographical purposes. The weather conditions were good: A light swell and a windforce of about 2 or 3 Beaufort. Also the dynamics of the shin. The test conditions were chosen as similar as possible to the sim. these points will be discussed below. which could be felt. hence it possesses very good handling aualities. whereas during the full scale experiments a rather large group of people v/ere present. som. which could not be avoided. the "Zeefakkel". 12 kn. The principal data of this ship are shown in Table 5. due to the chosen steering gear dynamics.22 m Displacem. and the dynamics of the controls differed. the Royal Netherlands Navy College gave an opportunity to perform a series of full scale experiments with a small ship.all ships were simulated. for instance the fact that the other crew members were present on the bridge. due to the different social environment. During the previous tests only a small number of men were present in the wheelhouse. the results of these tests can be compared with the sim. the presence of other ships. During the test to be executed the helmsm. 2 Experimental set up The tests described in this chapter. -85- .

otions could not be measured easily. The investigations were performed with two ship speeds. e. During the tests a light swell could be observed. which reacts slower.5. Norrbin. are given in Table 5. the instrum. and Bech have been estimated for different ship speeds and rudder angle inputs [2].2.2: Ship speed knots 9 12 Parameters of the m •'s model Ks sec" -.28 defT 1 sec 1 1 1 7. TABLE 5. A rudder angle indicator was available. estimated from data given by Van Maanen [l].uch l§:rger than the maximum velocity during the simulator tests.14 . 34. the results with the Norrbin model have been used.2. and can introduce a bias in the results of the same order as the v/ave disturbances.secv2 T sec 1 1 m 1 deg 15 27 sec 20.2 and Table 5.2.ally used was out of order. -86- . 3. The parameters of the models of L'omoto. Moreover» the accuracy of the ship model is unknown. This table also gives the parameters of the m.orning the gyro norm. 5. 1 7. where ój^. To steer the shin only the steering wheel had to be used. Especiallv. one of the subjects had a lot of difficulties in beinr used to this unusual situation. the rate of turn. These values on which the final analysis of the test results has been based.r. In the experiments reported here.odel of the steering gear. As can be seen. in the analyses of the tests these disturbances were neglected. However. resulting into small ship motions. the maximum: rudder angular velocity 6^ is here m. These inputs^v/ere binary sirnals: A binary maximum lenrth seouence and a periodic block shaped sirnal.2).pitch ^1 - ^2 . just as during the previous tests.anoeuvrinr behaviour of the Zeefakkel.2.64 of the trainings shiv "Zeefakkel" 1 Prop. The parameter values of the Norrbin model related to these two conditions. about 9 and 12 knots corresponding with 15 and 27 degrees pitch of the propellers respectively. as these m.1 :hip dynamics The Laboratory for Control of the Department of Electrical Engineering of the Delft University of Technolory performed many experim:ents to model the m. r 3 deg/sec (Ch.25 -. No additional information.ents used caused some troubles. viz. the normal gyro could be used again. it was not allowed to use the pitch control of the propellers. and on the basis of a small gyro. have been chosen according to the data given by Van Amerongen. In later experiments. ^de?-* . Steering had to be done on the basis of the magnetic compass.2 Displays and controls During the field trials. was provided. The first m.

An important difference between the full scale tests and the sim.2. B and C. • The sv/itching times of the com. were members of the crew of the Zeefakkel.3 summarizes the experiments executed with the Zeefakkel. in correspondance with the way they normally get the orders. other ships in the neighbourhood. most of the time on the Zeefakkel. The steering v/heel of the Zeefakkel was much bigger than that of the simulator. C | Duration 5 min.5 Experimental programme Table 5. TS S and TS L. B .2.2. C A*.4 Subjects The three subjects. 5. Each had up to thirty years experience as a helm. 9 A A A A . C'' .6 Data collection The following signals were recorded on magnetic tape: • The heading iii(t) .e seouence of headings as the previous tests.C 12 knots A*. 10 min.eans that the manoeuvring was influenced rem. Both seauences of ordered headings.3 The ordered headings: The Test si. they actively engaged in steering. 10 min. TABLE 5.p-nal During the tests the ship had to be steered alonr the sam. R .eans that for the helmsman the task included more than just plainly following the orders. 5. hence it demanded much miore physical effort of the subjects. B .2. C . • The rudder angle 6(t). The duration of the tests has been varied: 20. 10 and 5 min. This m.m. 5. ^ • The rate of turn il'(t). 5.3: Testsignal TS S TS S TS S TS L Summary of the tests executed Ship speed knots . C A*.C These tests have not been elaborated due to troubles such as the interaction v/ith other ships.an was informed in a verbal way about the headinr to be steered. B . which m.sman.and signal \b(^(t) . were used.ulator experiments resulted from the controls. B .arkable by e. 20 min. A.g. • The steering wheel position ^(^(t). B*. The helmsm. B . -87- .

some records shov/ed not only an off-set in fid(t).entor by pushing a knob when a nev/ order v/as «^iven. Tn addition.3.3) -88- . 3. To investigate the influence of inserting such a lag between the output of the nonlinear m. it turned out that due to som.es v/ere recorded by m. the steering v/heel of the Zeefakkel was much bigger than that of the simulator. VJith respect to the steering wheel position. a fev/ tests were not suitable to elaborate.2) where the ouantity x(t) can be either 6(5(t). Therefore. 5. some tests have been analyzed using the nonlinear m. (5. but also a drift. where ^^(t) = output of the nonlinear model.odel.ated according to T 1 Iv2 = l n/ [ ^(t)] ^ dt.3 The analysis of the experimental data In analyzing the tests.These switching tim. for instance the interaction v/ith other shins in the direct environm. '5df(t) = output of the first-order filter.ent of the Zeefakkel. The estim. varying for each experim. the recordings of the steering v/heel position showed a rather big off-set. about fifty derrees. such as the mean absolute values. (5. and the time on tarret.entioned already before. described in Ch.aller than a certain boundary value bv. o The estimation of performance m. ^i^it) or il(t). 5. where the output of the model is fed through a first-order filter (Fig.ean absolute values have been estim. such an effect may be approxim.odel. particularly in relation to the characteristics of the previous tests with the simulator. this fact may lead to inertial effects. and the rate of turn.r^enerated by the experim.e troubles.3 indicates which experiments have been analyzed.odel and the input of the ship m. VJhen the freauencies of the signals involved are lov/ or when the dampinr of the system including the steering v/heel is large. the variances and the m. Moreover. Table 5. that is the time in terms of percents of the test duration during v/hich the absolute value of the heading error |if^e(t)| is sm. Tf = filter time constant. the heading. this analysis included the following items: o A study of the characteristics of the time histories.easures. the records were corrected in such a way that the m.eans of a pulse .1) X' and ^l = -^ J - T I x(t)| dt.ation of the parameters of the three parameter linear m. As m. the heading error.ent.odel (Eq. 3.2). i (5. \b(t). and those of the nonlinear model.1) T^ 5d^(t) + 6d^(t) = 6^(t).3.ated by a first-order lag.ean value of the 6(j(t) signals were eaual to zero. variances.

diagram of the ship model steered model. 5.2 shov/s an exam.odel parameters.ized by m.2: Time histories TS S. was minim.V^j(t) ' nonlinear helmsman's model öjiM first order filter ödf«" ship model 1 V'OI J helmsorder FIGURE 5. -89- . where the output 6^(t) is by the nonlinear fed through a first To estim. Analoguous to Eg2.in. Subject of ^f^(t). The criterion function: . 9 knots. also EJK2 and E^2e.1: Block man's fi Iter. Ship speed: and S^(t).2: [deg] FIGURE 5. 100?S (3. a digital computer was used. 6(j (t) = model output.e histories of the heading i!)(t). 5.6^*(t)]^ dt E^2 = .eters of the linear and nonlinear helm. and the steering v/heel position 6ci(t).odels.ate the param. indicating how well the time histories of the actual heading ij. the desired heading ^^{t).sm.(t) and the sim.15) |^[6^(t)]^ dt where ödjft) = helmsman's output.ple of the tim.an's m.'^[6^(t) . a m.ethod which is easy to program digitally. The following remarks can be derived from Fir. ^(t) C. Test duration 20 m.eans of cyclic variation of the m.4 Results Fig. v/ere computed. 5.ulated heading ^ (t) corresponds.

es a rather large difference between the desired heading and the actual one occurs. TS L. of m the boundary slow.8 1.• 40- ^^ / 40 .8 l!6 bv—^ . -90- . 5.^the heading error ii^it).6 bv—.4.All time histories shov/ a more or less smiooth activity pattern of the helm.- ^ 0/ 3 .6 bv—i^ % 2010- ^ "F in 20 10 0/ f .ize the heading error.6 bv—i- 0 f • .8 1. • Some records of the heading show an oscillatory motion pattern of the ship. In Table 5.3: The times on target + slow. . the internal model parameter Kf^ was kept eaual to the parameter of the ship Ks.8 .' value bv.5 the results of the param. The estimated variances and mean absolute values of the steerinr wheel position 6(j(t). . "o as a function fast. • Sometim.eter optimization with the nonlinear model are given. without any action of the helmsman in order to m. / / ^2 40 '3 40 " ^ / / 1 \ (0 7« c X • /T () 7o• 20 10 0 20 10 0 [) 20 10 E o n .8 K6 bv—.8 1.X / .Jc^ % / 20 10- c . Nine tests were analyzed using the linear model.3. the times on target as a function of the boundary value bv are shown in Fir.• «0- 40- 40- % .S K6 bv—.an. / U / ^ 3 . • S.8 1.sm. % ^ 7 o C 20- • 20 10- • / / i y^ 0 20 10- ë o 10 0 / 0 . TS S .8 1. TS S . 3 1.6 bv—*- 0^ 0 0 b v — 1 FIGURE 5. the headinr ^(t) and the rate of turn i)(t) during the experiments are given in Table 5.6 0 . . Just as before.inim.6 bv—^ 40 \ / > I.

Time histories of the heading ^p(t).an's output ^ig. Nonlinear model Linear model Nonlinear model extended with a first order filter. and the steering wheel position 6^(t) recorded during test. The remaining parameters v/ere kept equal to the values given in Table 5.4 is given. W and Ci. -91- .5. FIGURE 5. To investigate the influence of the first-order lag. the desired heading \jjf^(t).sm.The results are given in Table 5. the linear model and th& nonlinear model extended with a first order filter: \p (t). were estimated again.7. 5. The results of the analysis of the five tests are given in Table 5. To compare the output of the models with the actual helm.6. five tests were analyzed.4. (t) j^ respectively.puter timie only the most sensitive parameters. To limit the amount of com. and the signals from the computer simulations with the nonlinear model. viz. ij (t) and 6 .

4 .5 .2 10.6 73. -.0 sec .1 11. 8 12.3 14.4 7.9 deg 4.9 4.2 48.5 .5 4.5 13.6 . 7.09 . 3.2 3.1 2. 3.63 20.8 17.(t) .6 6.5 .9 12. 20.4 2.0 36.5 23.5: Results mode I. 35. 14.4 3.5 12.6 15.8 q.4 14.4 3. 2.5 .6 4.8 4.4 5.9 15.63 42.1 9.9 30.70 .1 . 3.0 3.9 12.5 9.22 . 6. 3.6 15.3 17.i 20. -.4 134.9 69.1 21.1 23.1 4.2 deg 18.2 46.5 15.12 .6 .6 2. 1. 4. -.5 . 4.5 .3 22.9 83.9 76.3 25. 1.6 .5 .ean absolute values signals t (t) .8 73. \!)(t).8 .30 .8 17.6 .07 TABLE 5. -.7 .1 68.5 .8 5.43 .6 2.3 19. 1. 20. 9 6.4 4.4 1. -92- .6 6. s s s s L 9 20.1 46.25 3''.36 .4 ?7. TS Speed Ts min.4: Estimated variances and m.6 3.48 .50 . 9.5 1.8 29.63 20. 18.25 9 12 42. -.15 .8 4.0 34.4 12 9 12 9 20 10 10 10 S S S L 3.4 13.9 77.7 55.2 75.4 9.0 1.3 3. 34.6 2.36 .7 10.0 13.4 . 9 5 K s s 9 12 20. .5 .8 66. .6 56.71 " ' a ab.5 1. \IJ (t) and ^j(t).8 3.0 5.7 .53 . 3. 20 A B C B C A C B C A E C A B E C 's ^ 1 Model parameters m V / ^1 ^2 ^3 P q Criteria ^62 < E. 34. 2. 3. .0 11.4 . 20 5 A E C B C A C E C A 3 C A B B C Variances 6.7 17.7 41. of the varameter ovtimization with the nonlinear Ship data Duration Subj .54 .5 .47 .34 14.24 . 9.5 8.25 1: 4.8 10.4 3. 6.4 20 10 10 10 12 34.2 48.4 7. 36. .4 17. -.2 8. -.4 25.5 . 17.2 85. speed knots min.7 26.4 64.8 11. .92 9 12 5 5 s s 15.32 .24 .50 . 7.5 . 31.7 .7 3.6 3.6 51.2 62.11 .25 34. 3.6 .6 2.7 4.0 10.5 . 5.1 4.^(t) li'(t) iit) cieg 23.54 .3 20. 5.53 .4 3.7 9.26 .7 .7 3.5 . 4.4 5.7 9. 5.8 5.5 .1 40. 3.6 . 16.1 7.52 .5 .8 7.42 .4 .2 7.1 1. 2.1 38. of the Ship Duration TS Suhj.-ïclute values •en ^. 16.5 . 3. 4.2 7°.4 9.9 40.8 39.1 5. 1.4 8.5 22. . 19.(t) i'^(t) deg deg fit) deg i(t) dee SPC 9 3.4 2.67 .5 3.9 11.9 64.0 11. 9. 1. 19.0 7.2 of J ^ ^ of /J knots sec sec" sec sec deg sec sec sec deg deg'20.7 42.7 3.TABLE 5.22 ..1 20. 7. 4.56 .8 45.8 .5 2.1 1. 6.4 5.4 6.6 .0 10.8 . .0 47.9 3.9 9.9 3.69 .6 1.5 53.3 1.8 11.7 7.6 65.5 .8 .5 6.

7: Results of the parameter ovtimization with the nonlinear model.25 -. TS Speed min. 5.5 3. 20.2 1. 20.9 1. % 12.4 5.3 1. 1.7 10.3 42.4 . .6 5. 9. Parameters Cr iteria ^f sec 1.25 -.2 E.8 7.7 8.smen turned the steering wheel more or less in a sm.4 .4 19.25 -.6 % 36.9 51. The remaining parameters are kept eaual to the values given in Table 5. 2.2 24.9 1.4 . 20.7 '%^ % 42. 20.4 11. This difference m.7 8.1 6.7 3.4 .2 1.3 1.7 52. 9. 1.5 37.3 35.3 W % 10.9 11.3 2.25 -.5. 20.9 8.25 -.25 -.2 32.4 S sec 9. Ship data Duration Subj .0 8.7 42. • 2.ooth way to a new position in contrast with all simulator experim.7 7.5 1. 20 20 10 10 10 10 10 5 5 A B A C A B C A B S S S S L L L S S knots 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 % 56.3 11.25-.6 45. Criteria ^6^ 1 \ ^1 sec ^2 sec 1.5 5.9 12.25 -•25 -.25 W sec def .9 54.6: Results of the parameter parameter linear model. 20. 20.25 -. \ sec" -.8 2.3 2.5 2. 20.4 2.9 2.25 -.9 2.6 8.25 -. 7. 20. TS Speed ^s sec 20. Shi r data optimization with the three Duration Subj . 5.1 7. 20.3 5.all ships.2 6.0 min.7 E.TABLE 5.3 16. where a discrete control was achieved (Ch.6 46.2 12.1 39. 's ^ sec" -.0 7. 20. including those with the sm.1 44.4 12.25 Kode 1 param. 3 ) . ^^^ % 68.1 14.6 7. extended with a first-order filter.2 2.ay be caused by the following reasons: .9 3.7 6l. 10 10 10 10 5 C A B C A S L L L S knots 9 9 9 9 9 sec 20.4.2 8.7 TABLE 5.5 Discussion and conclusions As indicated in Ch. the time histories show that the helm. 20.9 7.ents.7 69.

A difference in ship dynamics: The Zeefakkel is a very fastly responding ship, whereas the sm^all simulated ships reacted much slov/er. • The influence of the inertia of the steering wheel of the Zeefakkel on the steering dynamics of this ship. The linear m.odel as v/ell as the nonlinear model extended with a first order lag generate a sm.ooth output comparable v/ith the helmsm.an's output (Fig. 5.4). The best modelling results have been obtained with the extended nonlinear model. Kov/ever, this does not explain whether this lag was introduced by the helm.sm.an as a controller of a fastly respondinr ship, or by the dynamics of the steering wheel itselves. To investigate this fact further experiments should be perform.ed. The records also show that the steerinr wheel position is almost never kept constant but small oscillations v/ere made. The records of the simulator tests showed a helmisman's output consisting of steering v/heel positions which were kept constant durinr a certain duration. This phenomenon may be introduced by one of the following items: • The influence of the v/aves on the ship: During the tests a very light swell v/as observed, resulting probably into sm.all ship m.otions. As the ship responds rather fast, it might be that the helm.sman reacts on these disturbances which is certainly not the case with larger ships. • The nonlinear behaviour of the steering gear: The dynam.ics of this servo system have been sim.ulated by a first order differential equation with lim.ited rudder angular velocity. However, the actual dynam.ics are much m.ore com.plicated v/ith e.g. dead zones and hysteresis loops. This means, that the steering wheel position does not indicate the actual rudder angle exactly. Probably by introducing small changes of the steering wheel position the helmsm.an can obtain more accurate information about the position of the rudder angle. This phenom.enon v/here subjects introduce test signals is also described in literature several times [3]. Except the results of a few tests, the variety in most of the perform.ance measures related to a certain test condition is small. For small test periods the performance measures related to steerinpwheel position and headinr error are larger than v/ould be expected; the perform.ance m.easure related to the heading is more or less constant. All perform.ance measures increase v/hen test sirnal L was applied. The variances and mean absolute values in the steering wheel position were extremely large for the tests v/ith a duration of five m.inutes, compared v/ith the longer period tests, under the same ship speed and test signal condition. Probably the subjects had not enough tim.e during the shortest tests to steer the ship as they were used to do; a statement which is primarely based on com.ments of the subjects during the execution of the tests. The rather heavy steering wheel again m.ay play an im.portant role in this respect. In particular with respect to the longer tests, the estim.ated times on target (Fig. 5.2) indicate a better perform.ance for the slow ship speeds than for faster ship speeds. During the longest tests, it is more im.portant to keep the ship at the ordered heading. This seems to be easier to do at slov/ speed than at full speed. Also the estimated performance measures given in Table 5.6 indicate a better performance v/ith respect to the heading error under slow speed condition. This fact can be understood by taking into account the

•

-94-

nonlinear behaviour of the steering gear, becoming more important when the ship reacts faster. The results obtained with the nonlinear m.odel and the linear model are rather poor, in general. The criterion values obtained by usinr the nonlinear model extended with a first-order filter are slightly better. This can be caused by the following reasons: • The influence of measurem.ent noise: In particular the recordings of the ordered headinr ^6(.t) caused some troubles, the orders v/ere given verbally and thus an exact time was difficult to define. • Environmental influences, such as other ships in the neightbourhood of the Zeefakkel. • The difference existing between the model describing the ship dynam.ics and the actual dynamics. • The influence of waves. e The difference between displays and controls of the Zeefakkel and those of the simulator used to develop the nonlinear model. e A difference in behaviour of the subjects durinr this study and the simulator study due to task definition, etc. In spite of the large values of the optimization criterion, the variances of the parameter values found with respect to the nonlinear m.odel are in general rather sm.all. Table 5.10 shows the averaged values and standard deviation of the parameters for each of the ship speeds. TABLE 5.10: Averaged nonlinear values model (x\) and standard deviations parameters for each of the (a) ship of the speeds.

Ship data Speed knots ^s sec 20. 20. 34. 34. •s ^ sec" -.25 -.25 -.63 -.63 m sec 17.9 2.1 .90 .11 m s

Fodel parameters W sec deg .61 .34 .91 .70 ^1 sec 8.3 1.6 10.8 1.5 ^2 sec 5.0 .9 6.6 1.4 '3 sec 2.8 .9 3.0 .6 P deg .63 .14 .51 .10 q deg"^ .51 .10 .51 .01

n

0

9 9 . 12 12

n

a

35.3 1.04 3.7 .11

When the standard deviation is not small, for instance the values of the parameter VJ, this is often caused by one extreme data point. From this table, it can also be concluded that the influence of the ship speed on the parameter values is mostly sm.all. The param.eters W and Q\ increase a little with increasing speed, but in particular W shows a rather large variance so that this increase may not be regarded as being significant. Only the internal model parameter T is strongly influenced by the ship param.eters Tg and Kg (Km is kept equal to Kg) and therefore also the normalized values of n and a with respect to Ts are given. This normalized value is rather constant too. The values of the decision making element param.eters Ci, C2 and V J are all rather smiall compared with the sim.ulator test results, but

as the Zeefakkel possesses very good handling oualities, this can be understood (Ch. 3 ) . The param.eters C3, p and o are arain less sensitive, but the values found correspond v/ith the previous results . The criteria values obtained with the linear m.odel do not differ m.uch from the nonlinear modelling results: The output of the linear model is continuous just as the output of the helmsman. Only tests with the ship sailing at low speed are analyzed, as the results with the nonlinear model are the best for this test condition. From; the parameter values found, it may be concluded, that in particular the gain factor Y.^. is strongly influenced by the test signal used (Table 5.8). The criteria values found with the nonlinear model extended v/ith a first-order lag, are sometimes much sm.aller than with the basic nonlinear model or the linear model. The output of this extended model looks most like the output of the helmsmen. As only three parameters vrere optimized, viz. W, Ci and Tf, and the rem.aining parameters were kept enual to -the values given in Table 5.5, the results are possibly not the most optimal ones. As it was only the intention to investigate the question whether a lag, added in the loop, would yield better results, not all the parameters were varied. However, it can be concluded that for the tests analyzed a first-order filter added to the ship dynam.ics yield better results with respect to the optim.ization criterion than the basic nonlinear m.odel or the linear model. Finally the following conclusions can be summ.arized: • The tim.e histories obtained with full scale tests show some significant differences with the sim.ulator test results, due to different ship dynamics including the dynamics of the steering wheel. • The performance m.easures are better when the ship sails slowly than at full speed, possibly due to nonlinearities of the steering gear or due to the fact that the ship itself is easier to handle at low speed. o The obtained values of the criterion used to optim.ize the models are large, both with the nonlinear m.odel as v/ell as with the linear model. Adding a first-order lag simulating the inertia effects of the steering v/heel, to the ship dynam.ics, yield better results. e The parameter values of the nonlinear model agree with the results of the simulator study. • The variances of the nonlinear m.odel parameters found are rather sm.all, just as those of the linear m.odel, except the gain Kji, which is strongly influenced by the am.plitudes of the test sirnal used. This fact indicates the nonlinear behaviour of the helmsm.an.

REFERENCES 1. REFERENCES 1. Maanen, M.A. van, Simulatie van een m.et verstelbare spoed-schroeven uitp-erust vaartuig. Report: Den Helder, Roval Netherlands Naval College, 1974, 38 p. 2. Amerongen, J. van; Haarnan, J.C.; Verhage, V ' , .. Mathem.atical modelling of ships. In: Proc. Fourth Ship Control Svstems Svmo., Roval Netherlands Naval College, Den Helder, 1975, Vol. 4, pp. 163-178. 3. Lunteren, A. van; Stassen, H.G., Annual Report 1969 of the ran-"achine Svstems Groun. -Qf)Report: Delft, Dept. of Mech. Engineering, 1970, No. '•n'HD-21,

new actions have to be taken. that m.the compass m. C3. • A nonlinear model describing the helm.an's behaviour in the control of a ship sailing in calm.pare sim. C2.an's behaviour in the control of a ship sailing in disturbed as v/ell as undisturbed water.eters involved in the process of deciding whether an action should be perform.ay be disturbed by noise. 1. 5 ) . VI) and a group of parameters related to the comparison between the internal model predictions and the actual ship states (p. a lag and a lead term.ed or not. This m. The two m. To update this internal model an estimator is needed to generate estimates of the undisturbed heading and heading rate.g. • A series of simulator experiments to study the influence of waves and the influence of presenting additional information such as the ship's rate of turn and predictions of the heading on the helmsm. The proper actions necessary to achieve the desired state are selected by the decision making elem. it consists of an internal model.ents to study the helmsman's control behaviour in relation to the dynamical behaviour of ships sailing in calm. an estimator and a decision m.2). The parameters of this nonlinear helmsman's model can be divided into two groups: one group being the internal model parameters (Tm.CHAPTER VI: CONCLUDING REMARKS AND FURTHER RESEARCH 6 .eters can be divided again into a group related to the way of steering.sm. 3 ) . 1 was to obtain knowledge about the human control of ships.odel is based on the internal model concept (Ch.odels just-mentioned have been based on the follov/ing experiments: • A series of sim.es too large. This model describes the helmsm.ple differential enuation describing the dynamic behaviour of ships is used: The internal m. To predict future headings a sim. This last group of param.ulator test results with those obtained from tests with an actual ship (Ch.an's behaviour (Ch. To limit this v/ide area of research only the helm.ent on the basis of predictions with the internal model.ents the following conclusions with respect to the optimization of the models could be drav/n: -97* . e.aking element.eans the magnitudes and durations of the rudder angles to be applied (Ci. 4 ) . Km) and another one being the decision making element parameters. VJhen the difference between the predicted state and the actual state becom. • A series of full scale experiments with a small ship to com. water. indicate the helmsman's precision of steering.1 Results achieved The problem stated in Ch. The param.ulator experim. due to waves. as the heading displayed by . From these experim. so that the handling Quality of ships can be quantified. water (Ch. q ) .sman steering a ship along prescribed headings has been considered.odel. The inform.ation obtained has been summarized into two models: • A linear model consisting of a gain.

sm. 3) as v/ell as in the case of the small actual ship (Ch.odel structure used. 3.eters related to the way of steering may be regarded as a rather good estimator of the helm. o This optimization criterion is rather insensitive to some of the nonlinear m. 3. but also upon the ship's time constant (Ch.sm.ization of the nonlinear m.odel parameters.an's performance and the influence of rather accurate additional information presented to the helmsm. • The internal model parameters Tm and Km have been found to be strongly coupled. 3. • The decision making elem. instead of the simple internal m. • In the case of larre ships (Ch.ance (Ch.an on this perform.odel and those of the nonlinear one the followinr conclusions can be summarized: • The rain factor of the linear m.odel output.an during the full scale tests v/as much poorer (Ch.sman . the main profit of additional displays m. that is the relation between rate of turn and rudder angle in steady state. an acceptable description of the helm. Concerning the parameters of the linear m. 5) due to differences betv/een the test conditions.ation presented to the helm. 3 ) .sm.plitudes of the headings ordered.sm:an's control behaviour in the simulator experiments (Ch.odel is stronrly influenced by the am.odel yield on the basis of the error criterion used.inim. With respect to the perform.sman the follov/ing conclusions were drawn: • The control of very large ships in calm water by the helm.ance. 5) the internal m.eters by m. 5 ) .orovement of the helm.izing the m. 9 The decision making element param. 3 ) . • -98- . in particular the number of rudder calls (Ch. Therefore. 5 ) .an does not cause problems fundamentally different from the control of sm.odel rather v/ell.an (Ch. This fact indicates the nonlinear behaviour of the helmsm. Hov. 4 ) .odel time constant Tm v/as found to be of the same order as the ship's time constant Ts .ent param.an's perform.sm.ean absolute value of the difference betv/een model output and helm.sman of a large ship leads to a better perform. 5 ) . to the helm. These parameters are very important with respect to the accuracy of the information presented.sm.eters related to the precision of steering influence mainly the character of the nonlinear m. does not always yield the desired results (Ch. in particular those parameters which indicate the precision of steering.all ships. The description of the helm. 3 ) . o The helm.The linear model ps v/ell as the nonlinear m. 9 The optim.sm.an output. • The simulated heading of the ship always closely matches the heading of the ship steered by the helmsman (Ch. can be predicted with the nonlinear m.an (Ch. 9 Additional inform. 3. 3) • • The nonlinear steering gear dynamics may have a detrimental effect on the helnsmian's performance in the control of fastly responding ships (Ch.ay be rather a decrease in v/orkload than the im. 4 ) .'ever.eans of m. The detrimental effect of course instability is dependent not only upon the ship's stationary characteristic. even a sim. 3 ) .pler structure can be adopted (Ch.an's subjective judgement of the handlinr qualities of the ship (Ch. 5 ) .odel param.ance of the helm.ance of the helm.sm.

3 ) . the number of rudder calls. respect to stability and damping. less attention has been paid to the manual control of slowly -99- . On the basis of a sensitivity analysis.ics.g.However. 1 ) . literature on linear human operator models (Ch. the influence of additional inform. som. As mentioned in the literature review. it is known that the human operator adapts his control behaviour to the dynamics of the controlled element. Hence. these decision making element parameters can be considered as an indicator of the ship's handling quality.e for this study the sensitivity of the error criteria with respect to the structure of the internal model has not been studied. water may contribute to a better understanding of the parameters related to the precision of steering.odel. Due to the available tim. As m.odel this m. in such a way that a stable and well-damped closed loop performance is obtained. 4 ) . the quality can be determined by means of computer simulations.portant in the prediction of the influence of additional displays on the helmsman's performance (Ch. this conclusion can probably contribute to other man-machine problems.portant conclusion.ay be the case as can be concluded from the results of the simulator study.eaning of the results listed above. Finally. This means that in predicting the handling quality of ships. a relation exists between the helmsm. the fact that the simple internal miodel used yields already acceptable results. As discussed in Ch. Hov/ever. For instance. As an example an optimization criterion may be defined based on the differences between model output and helmsm. much research has been executed in the field of manual control of fastly responding systems. 3. is a very im. and thus to the overall performance of the helmsman.agnitudes and durations of the applied rudder deflections. the optimization criterion to be used should be also sensitive to the model parameters related to the precision of steering.e remarks should be made.an output v/ith respect to the average number of rudder calls and v/ith respect to the m. These parameters are mainly dependent on the helmsman's indifference with respect to sm. it is believed that a more detailed study of the helmsman's sam. those parameters can be estimated which yield the best closed loop performance with. where the stability and damping are determined depending on the decision making element param.all errors and the accuracy of the observed information. needs further research (Ch. is related to the complexity of the internal model. the meaning of the decision m. From.any important problem. 4 ) .ation v/hich is inaccurate due to differences between predictor model and the actual ship dynam. these parameters are very im.ization criterion was rather insensitive to the parameters indicating the precision of steering (Ch.pling behaviour in steering a ship in calm.s in human operator activities can be directly related to the internal model concept. They are also important with respect to the character of the helsman's output. 4 ) . Also with respect to the nonlinear m. The prediction of the influence of additional information presentation on the helmsman's performance was based on such a relation (Ch.odel. the information needed to update the internal m. The nonlinear model has been based on a relatively simple internal m.aking element parameters related to the precision of steering will be discussed. As mentioned before. To elucidate the m. e. However. Therefore. Hence.eters related to the way of steering. that is the information which has to be presented.an's sampling behaviour and the values of the parameters related to the precision of steering. the optim.

an behaviour in the control of slowly responding system. / s a conse^ quence. the use of the model is restricted to a lim. scale enlarging and automation leads to the fact that hum. It is therefore recommanded to base further research on the general internal model concept.portant is the general use of the internal m.odel. -100- .ited area. The study reported contributes in two ways. for instance the approach of a harbour.s should be gathered. it also may contribute to the integration of cybernetics and experimental psychology.odel concept. has not been obtained.ore and more slowly respondinr systems.responding systems and only some incidental studies in the field of supervisory control are reported.e varying ship dynamics and the control of the ship's position. In this sense the results are rather poor.an control of slowly responding system. much more knowledre about the hum.portant with respect to shin handling properties. In the particular case of the manoeuvring of large ships it provides a nonlinear model. but due to the nonlinear properties of the m. on the base of which predictions about the handling ouality of shins can be estimated. This result is im. viz.plete solution of the problem. 6. However.al control models to describe hum.ple of a supervisory control with only one input and one output. 1. much more im.ent of the nonlinear m.anoeuvring of ships in those conditions. further investigations should be executed. it may be expected that the use of the internal m. With respect to supervisory control problem. However. • An extension of the application area of the nonlinear model to more general test conditions. VJith respect to the first area the follov/ing items should be considered: • A detailed study of the problems which have been arisen in the developm. This integration then can be achieved by relating the many cybernetical concepts on the one side and the psychological functions on the other. such as the sensitivity of the internal model structure on the output of the nonlinear model. This concept is a very . the navigation in restricted water or in areas with a high traffic density.s. stated in Ch. the control of ships and the supervisory control. it now is proven to be of great value in studies of hum.odel.s.s.an behaviour in the control of fastly responding system. an exam. an extension to other test conditions is difficult to foresee.an operators have to control and supervise m.odel concept can be a basis for new research in the almost unknown area of supervisory control behaviour. e The m. In the past it has been used in optim.2 Further research The results mentioned above indicate that a com. The suggestions to be given with respect to further research can be classified into two areas. where the complete crew on the bridge is involved. the optimization criteria to be used. and the sampling behaviour of the helmsman. such as tim. general one.

The internal m.sman's behaviour in the control of a ship sailing in disturbed as well as undisturbed water. As the heading displayed by the compass may be disturbed by noise. water. The two m. a lag and a lead term.odel parameters has been executed by means of a hybrid comiputer. • A series of full scale experim.odel is a sim.an output v/as minimal. however. due to waves.ates of the undisturbed heading and heading rate..ined for which the mean absolute value of the difference between model output and helmsm. This model describes the helmsman's behaviour in the control of a ship sailing in calm. an estimator is needed to generate estim. as well as those of the helm.odel as part of the nonlinear helmsman's m.eters have been determ.ulator experiments to study the helmsm. This model has been based on the internal model concept. With regard to the first area. e.SUMMARY In order to obtain an optimal performance of a ship controlled by a helmsman. on which the models of the helm. about the disturbances acting on the ship and about the task to be executed. The optimization of the m.ple differential equation which is used to predict future ship states. A very good description of the ship's heading is obtained. The proper actions necessary to achieve the desired states are selected by the decision m. The study reported here contributes to the field of ship manoeuvring.ents v/ith a small ship to compare simulator test results with those obtained from. • A series of simulator experiments to study the influence of waves and the influence of presentinr additional information. A lot of research has been devoted to the dynamics of ships.g. • The internal model parameters are often of the same order as the corresponding parameters of the ship.portant in the prediction of the ship's handling ouality and in the prediction of the influence of presentinr additional information to the helmsman. the dynamical behaviour of the helmsm. • A nonlinear model describing the helm.odels have been based on the follov/ing experiments: • A series of sim.an's control behaviour in relation to the dynamical behaviour of ships sailing in calm v/ater.aking element on the basis of predictions with the internal model.sman should be known. tests v/ith an actual ship. e. the dynamics of the ship. that is the assumed knowledge the helm. The information obtained has been summ. The research described in this thesis is aimed to obtain inform. which is a part of the much larger field of the control of slov/ly responding systems. the ship's rate of turn and predictions of the heading on the helmsman's behaviour. The decision making element parameters are very im.arized into two models: • A linear model consisting of a gain. -101- . the following conclusions can be drawn: e The two helmsman's models provide an acceptable description of the helmsman's control behaviour.sman and a model of the ship dynam.g. Those param. to update the internal model.sman has about the dynamics of the ship under control.ation with respect to the helmsman's control behaviour.ics have been programmed.an got less attention.

The presentation of additional information improves the helms man's performance. VJith reference to the control of slowly respondinr systems. it i shown that the application of the internal model concept is very valuable. • .

d.v. is een schatter nodig om de ongestoorde deviatie en hoeksnelheid van het schip te schatten.oet de dynamika van het schip en het dynamisch gedrag van de roerganger bekend zijn. De verkregen inform. • Een reeks experim.odel. Deze twee m. de kennis die de roerganger verondersteld wordt te hebben over het dynamisch gedrag van het te besturen schip. Het doel van deze proeven was om. echter aan het gedrag van de roerganger is veel m. die wordt aangegeven door het kompas.SAMENVATTING Teneinde een optimaal gedrag van een door een roerganger bestuurd schip te verkrijgen.m.v. m. de hoeksnelheid van het schip of voorspellingen van de koers van het schip.alisatie van de model parameters is gebruik gem.iddelde absolute waarde van het verschil tussen de door de roerganger en het model gegenereerde signalen..ulator proeven te kunnen vergelijken met de resultaten van proeven met een echt schip. worden gekozen door een beslissingselem. varend in vlak water. op het regelgedrag van de roerganger te bestuderen.z. • Een niet lineair m.atie is samengevat in tv/ee modellen: • Een lineair m. Voor het doen van deze voorspellingen moet de deviatie en hoeksnelheid van het schip bekend zijn. over de verstoringen die op "4^et schip werken en over de uit te voeren taak. is een eenvoudige differentiaal vergelijking die gebruikt wordt om de toestand van het schip in de toekomst te voorspellen.inder aandacht besteed.odel. dat het gedrag van de roerganrer beschrijft bij het besturen van schepen varend zowel in vlak v/ater als in golven.odellen van de roerganger en het m. eveneens uitgevoerd met een manoeuvreer simulator. om de invloed van golven en de invloed van het aanbieden van extra informatie b. Het onderzoek beschreven in dit proefschrift had tot doel informatie ten aanzien van het regelgedrag van de roerranger te verkrijgen. De parameters zijn geschat door m. Veel onderzoek is verricht op het gebied van het dynamisch gedrag van schepen. . de resultaten verkregen m.odel. v/at deel uitmaakt van het veel grotere gebied van de besturing en regeling van traag reagerende systemen. konklusies getrokken worden: . De akties. Het interne model v/aar het niet lineaire model op rebaseerd is. De studie beschreven in het proefschrift is een bijdrage op het gebied van het besturen van schepen. b. bestaande uit een versterkinrsfaktor.et de sim. Met betrekking tot het eerste gebied kunnen de volgende . verstoord kan zijn door ruis. Hierbij zijn schepen varend in vlak water beschouv/d. Dit model beschrijft het gedrag van de roerganger bij het besturen van schepen. ten gevolge van golven.enten met een manoeuvreer simulator om het regelgedrag van de roerganger in relatie tot het dynamisch gedrag van het schip te bestuderen.aakt van een hybriede rekenmachine.ent op grond van de voorspellingen met het interne m.enten met een klein schip. een differentiërende en een integrerende term. waarop de m. Dit model is gebaseerd op het interne miodel concept.odel van de dynamika van de schepen zijn geprogram. Aangezien de deviatie.enten. -103- .inimalisering van de gem.eerd. Voor de optim.w. die nodig zijn om het gestelde doel te bereiken. • Een reeks experim.odellen zijn gebaseerd op de volgende experimenten: • Een reeks experim.

De tv/ee opgestelde m:odellen voor het gedrag van de roerganger geven een acceptabele beschrijvinr van het regelgedrag van de roerganger. Een zeer goede beschrijving van de door de roerganger gevaren koers is verkregen. Zij zijn eveneens belangrijk bij de voorspelling van de invloed van het aanbieden van extra informatie op de prestaties van de roerganrer. Met betrekking tot de rereling van langzaam. dat de toepassing van het interne model concept zeer v/aardevol is. • -104- .atie verbetert de prestaties van de roerganrer. reagerende systemen is aangetoond. • Het aanbieden van extra inform.stire param.eters van het interne model zijn vaak van dezelfde orde van grootte als de overeenkom. 9 De param.eters van het schip. De parameters van het beslissingselement zijn erg belanrrijk bij het voorspellen van de manoeuvreereigenschappen van een schip.

. 4 (Sept. lEEE-trans.j Jex. HFE-8 (196T). G. W. dat het overgrote deel van het mens-machineonderzoek gericht is op het verkrijgen van een antwoord op de laatste vraag.v. Lit. V. IV.: Dit proefschrift. 494-504. Hierbij dienen twee vragen beantwoord te worden..al. Om een mens-machinesysteem te optimaliseren is een gedegen kennis omtrent de informatieuitwisseling tussen mens en machine van groot belang. De door Johannsen gesuggereerde algemeenheid van deze methode is aanvechtbaar..: McRuer. III. Vol.R. SMC-2 (1972). is experimenteel de invloed van koersstabiliteit op de prestaties van roergangers bepaald. Ship Research Centre TNO.: Johannsen. H. Vol. 3(Sept.. No. nl. 28 S. 21 p. Door Johannsen is een methode aangegeven om systemen opgenomen in een gesloten keten m. . terwijl juist de eerste vraag van veel groter belang geacht moet worden. D. II.) pp.al. A review of quasi-lineair pilot models.: "Over welke informatie dient te mens te beschikken.: Wagenaar. Het door hen uitgevoerde onderzoek zou sterk in waaorde hebben gewonnen indien de onderzoekers hun resxiltaten op basis van een model ter beschrijving van het gedrag van de roergsinger zouden hebben verklaard. Lit. teneinde een machine zo goed mogelijk te kunnen besturen?".STELLINGEN I. and Cybernetics. waarbij verschillende informatiepresentatie systemen zijn onderzocht. Door Wagenaar et. Man. No. Delft.). on Systems. Studies van het menselijk regelgedrag zouden bij voorkeur gebaseerd moeten zijn op het Intern-Model-concept. pp.A. et. 1972. 231-249. Development and Optimization of a Nonlinear Multiparameter Hiunan Operator Model. Voor de beschrijving van het gedrag van de mens als regelaar van relatief trage systemen kan met vrucht gebruik gemaakt worden van de reeds ontwikkelde lineaire modeltheorie met betrekking tot de regeling van relatief snelle systemen. No. Lit.b. lEEE-trans. niet-lineaire modellen te identificeren. Communication Netherl. Auxiliary equipment as a compensation for the effect of course instability on the performance of helmsmen. en "Hoe dient deze informatie te worden gepresenteerd?" Het is te betreuren.T. Lit. on Human Factors in Electronics.

en schriftelijk rapporteren tijdens de voor-kandidaatsstudie voor werktuigkundig ingenie\ir is volstrekt onvoldoende. VII. tegenwoordig is het juist de onzekerheid die het onderwijs nadelig beïnvloed. X. VIII. XI. IX. Met het ontbreken van de mogelijkheid tot doubleren op de door de Minister van Onderwijs en Wetenschappen voorgestelde middenschool ontbreekt ook een belangrijke mogelijkheid tot het opdoen van levenservaring voor de scholier. Werd vroeger het onderwijs nadelig beïnvloed door de zekerheid van de juistheid van het bestaande onderwijssysteem. Een doelmatiger muziekonderricht bij het basis onderwijs en het voortgezette onderwijs kan een belangrijke bijdrage leveren tot een grotere belangstelling voor de serieuze muziek van deze eeuw. De aandacht die thans besteed wordt aan het mondeling. Dit verschil in experimentele condities vormt een sterke belemmering voor de noodzakelijke samenwerking van beide disciplines. Bij fundamenteel onderzoek naar het gedrag van de mens als bewaker/ regelaar van een systeem is het gebruik van een door een digitale rekenmachine gestuurde simulator te verkiezen boven het gebruik van een door een analoge rekenmachine gestuurde simulator.VI. Het verschil tussen de doelstelling van de systeemtheoretisch geschoolde ergonoom en de doelstelling van de experimenteel psychologisch geschoolde ergonoom ten aanzien van onderzoek op het gebied van de mens-machinesystemen resulteert in een totaal verschillende opzet van uit te voeren experimenten. .

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