(Advances in Industrial Control) Keum-Shik Hong, Umer Hameed Shah - Dynamics and Control of Industrial Cranes-Springer Singapore (2019)

Advances in Industrial Control
Keum-Shik Hong
Umer Hameed Shah
Dynamics
and Control
of Industrial
Cranes
Series Editors
Michael J. Grimble, Department of Electronic and Electrical Engineering,
University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK
Antonella Ferrara, Department of Electrical, Computer and Biomedical
Engineering, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy
Advisory Editor
Sebastian Engell, Technische Universität Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany
Editorial Board
Graham C. Goodwin, School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science,
University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia
Thomas J. Harris, Department of Chemical Engineering, Queen’s University,
Kingston, ON, Canada
Tong Heng Lee, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, National
University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
Om P. Malik, Schulich School of Engineering, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB,
Canada
Gustaf Olsson, Industrial Electrical Engineering and Automation, Lund Institute of
Technology, Lund, Sweden
Ikuo Yamamoto, Graduate School of Engineering, University of Nagasaki,
Nagasaki, Japan
Editorial Advisors
Kim-Fung Man, City University Hong Kong, Kowloon, Hong Kong
Asok Ray, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA
Advances in Industrial Control is a series of monographs and contributed titles
focusing on the applications of advanced and novel control methods within applied
settings. This series has worldwide distribution to engineers, researchers and
libraries.
The series promotes the exchange of information between academia and industry,
to which end the books all demonstrate some theoretical aspect of an advanced or
new control method and show how it can be applied either in a pilot plant or in
some real industrial situation. The books are distinguished by the combination
of the type of theory used and the type of application exemplified. Note that
“industrial” here has a very broad interpretation; it applies not merely to the
processes employed in industrial plants but to systems such as avionics and
automotive brakes and drivetrain. This series complements the theoretical and more
mathematical approach of Communications and Control Engineering.
Indexed by SCOPUS and Engineering Index.
Series Editors
Professor Michael J. Grimble
Department of Electronic and Electrical Engineering, Royal College Building, 204
George Street, Glasgow G1 1XW, United Kingdom
e-mail: m.j.grimble@strath.ac.uk
Professor Antonella Ferrara

Department of Electrical, Computer and Biomedical Engineering, University of
Pavia, Via Ferrata 1, 27100 Pavia, Italy
e-mail: antonella.ferrara@unipv.it
or the
In-house Editor
Mr. Oliver Jackson
Springer London, 4 Crinan Street, London, N1 9XW, United Kingdom
e-mail: oliver.jackson@springer.com
Publishing Ethics
Researchers should conduct their research from research proposal to publication in
line with best practices and codes of conduct of relevant professional bodies and/or
national and international regulatory bodies. For more details on individual ethics
matters please see:
https://www.springer.com/gp/authors-editors/journal-author/journal-author-help-
desk/publishing-ethics/14214
More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/1412

Keum-Shik Hong Umer Hameed Shah
•
Dynamics and Control

of Industrial Cranes
123
Keum-Shik Hong Umer Hameed Shah
School of Mechanical Engineering School of Mechanical Engineering
Pusan National University Pusan National University
Busan, Korea (Republic of) Busan, Korea (Republic of)
ISSN 1430-9491 ISSN 2193-1577 (electronic)

ISBN 978-981-13-5769-5 ISBN 978-981-13-5770-1 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-5770-1
Library of Congress Control Number: 2018965912
© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part
of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations,
recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission
or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar
methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from
the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this
book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the
authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or
for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to
jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
The registered company address is: 152 Beach Road, #21-01/04 Gateway East, Singapore 189721,
Singapore
Series Editor’s Foreword
The aim of the series Advances in Industrial Control is to fill the gap between
theoretical research and practical applications in the area of control engineering,
contributing to the transition into practice of the most advanced control results, and
bearing in mind significant recent developments of control technology. It also
promotes the dissemination of knowledge related to modern control solutions in all
sectors of industrial control, making it usable even by readers who are not experts in
the specific application field. This is particularly important for the less well-known
areas of industrial control, since any area presents interesting control problems and
challenges and may provide insights and suggestions for control solutions possibly
useful in other areas as well.
This is, for instance, the case for the present monograph. It focuses on industrial
cranes. An industrial crane is a material-handling machine widely used in different
contexts for construction and freight handling. For decades, cranes have played a
crucial role in ports, offshore, in underwater activities, and in manufacturing. Yet, in
recent years, they have become more and more important because of the rapid
growth of logistics and of the associated industrial activities. For instance, loading
and discharging operations on container vessels are performed with cranes. The
working pace of cranes, known as the cranes’ “productivity”, as well as their safety
can be significantly improved by developing efficient automatic control strategies.
Controlling an industrial crane is an extremely complicated task, so that the role
of advanced control is actually of paramount importance in improving the perfor-
mance while guaranteeing safety even in hostile environments, subject to bad
weather, strong winds, or high waves.
This book addresses the subject starting from a classification of cranes mainly
based on their dynamic properties and on the coordinate systems used to describe
the location of the rope-suspension point. Then, it presents the mathematical models
of the different crane systems used in industry and arrives at a discussion of con-
ventional and more advanced control strategies. The models considered are of
different nature: from lumped mass models, which do not consider the deflections
within the individual parts of the crane, to distributed parameter models expressed
by partial differential equations, and the combination of the two kinds of models.
v
vi Series Editor’s Foreword
The control approaches illustrated include open-loop control schemes, largely

applied for simple crane operations in controlled environments, and feedback
control schemes of linear, nonlinear, and hybrid type, more appropriate for oper-
ations in environments where external disturbances such as wind, sea currents, and
waves can have a severe impact on the controlled crane dynamics. In the feedback
control schemes discussed, the controlled variables are the sway angle of the
payload and the position/velocity of the crane support mechanism (i.e., the trolley,
bridge, boom, etc.), while the control inputs are typically the forces or torques
applied to the support mechanisms themselves so as to achieve both payload sway
suppression and position control of the entire crane.
The book also identifies several open problems in industrial crane control,
specifically in the case of cranes with multi-rope hoisting mechanisms, underwater
applications of gantry cranes, telescopic boom cranes, and offshore crane systems.
This new monograph contributes to enrich the series Advances in Industrial
Control with a new volume full of photographs, schematics, and references, a
volume that has the merit of treating a complex subject of great industrial interest in
an easily understandable way. I am therefore sure that readers will find this book
truly useful to face and solve the main problems related to the use of cranes in the
industrial field.
Pavia, Italy Antonella Ferrara

University of Pavia
Preface
This book discusses the development of mathematical models and control strategies
for industrial cranes. First, a detailed discussion on the different crane systems being
used in the industry is presented. Then, the mathematical models for every crane
system are explained. Both the lumped mass and distributed parameter formulations
of crane systems are discussed. The lumped mass models (LMMs) are derived by
assuming that the crane system consists of rigid subsystems (i.e., hoisting and
support mechanisms), where the equations of motion are represented by ordinary
differential equations (ODEs). Such models do not consider the deflections within
the components of the crane. In contrast, the distributed parameter models are more
realistic and consider the deflections within the components, for example, in the
hoisting cable and the structure of the crane. Such distributed parameter models are
represented by partial differential equations (PDEs) or a combination of both ODEs
and PDEs. Further, control strategies applicable to crane systems, which include
open-loop control, feedback control, and hybrid control strategies, are discussed.
Then, conclusions on the best modeling practices and the most suitable control
strategies for different crane systems are drawn. Finally, future research directions
are proposed for the advancement of crane control technology.
This book comprises eight chapters. Chapter 1 provides an introduction to crane
systems, which discusses the construction and operation of different types of crane
systems. Applications of such crane systems to the industry are also discussed.
Subsequently, Chaps. 2–5 present the mathematical modeling of all crane systems
introduced in Chap. 1.
Chapter 2 discusses the mathematical modeling of gantry crane systems as
lumped mass systems. Different configurations of gantry crane systems are mod-
eled, for example, gantry cranes with a single-rope hoisting mechanism, gantry
cranes with multiple hoisting ropes, gantry cranes with the hoisting mechanism
modeled as a double pendulum, and gantry cranes used for underwater applications.
Chapter 3 presents the LMMs of rotary crane systems, which include the mathe-
matical models of tower cranes and different configurations of boom cranes.
Chapter 4 covers in detail the LMMs of mobile cranes, which include
truck-mounted cranes, ship-mounted boom cranes, and mobile harbor systems.
vii
viii Preface
Chapter 5 discusses the mathematical modeling of crane systems in the distributed

parameter setting, where the hoisting mechanism is considered flexible. The dis-
cussed formulations consist of overhead crane systems with a flexible hoisting rope,
flexible hoisting mechanisms modeled as a double pendulum and as an axially
moving system (i.e., for modeling the hoisting motion of the rope), an offshore
crane system for subsea installation, and lastly the nuclear refueling machine (RM).
Chapters 6 and 7 cover the control development of crane systems: In Chap. 6,
open-loop control schemes, which include the optimal control and input shaping
methods, are discussed. In Chap. 7, feedback control schemes, which include linear
feedback control methods, nonlinear control methods including time delay control,
state feedback control, sliding mode control, and fuzzy control, are discussed.
Moreover, hybrid control schemes, which include the combination of different
control schemes for achieving enhanced control performances, are discussed.
Finally, feedback control schemes for crane systems modeled as distributed
parameter systems are discussed.
In Chap. 8, conclusions are drawn based on the discussions in Chaps. 1–7.
Moreover, future research directions are also proposed to help researchers con-
tribute to the advancement of the field of dynamics and control of crane systems.
Busan, Korea (Republic of) Keum-Shik Hong

Umer Hameed Shah
Contents
1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1 Gantry Cranes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.1.1 Overhead Cranes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.1.2 Container Cranes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.2 Rotary Cranes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.2.1 Boom Cranes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.2.2 Tower Cranes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1.3 Mobile Cranes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2 Lumped Mass Models of Gantry Cranes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.1 Single-Rope Hoisting Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.2 Multi-rope Hoisting Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2.3 Double-Pendulum Crane Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
2.4 Underwater Load Transportation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
2.5 Simulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
3 Lumped Mass Models of Rotary Cranes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
3.1 Tower Cranes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
3.2 Boom Cranes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
3.3 Simulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
4 Lumped Mass Models of Mobile Cranes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
4.1 Truck-Mounted Cranes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
4.2 Ship-Mounted Cranes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
4.2.1 Ship-Mounted Boom Cranes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
4.2.2 Mobile Harbor System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
ix
x Contents
4.3 Simulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
4.3.1 Simulation Code for MH System Dynamics . . . . . . . . . . . 62
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
5 Distributed Parameter Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 67
5.1 Crane Systems Operating in Air . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 67
5.1.1 Two-Dimensional Overhead Crane with Flexible
Hoisting Rope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
5.1.2 Overhead Crane as Flexible Double-Pendulum System . . . 70
5.1.3 Overhead Crane as Axially Moving System . . . . . . . . . . . 73
5.2 Underwater Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
5.2.1 Offshore Crane for Subsea Installation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
5.2.2 Nuclear RM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
5.3 Simulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
5.3.1 MATLAB Code for the Underwater Responses
of the RM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 81
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 86
6 Open-Loop Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
6.1 Optimal Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
6.1.1 Bang–Bang and Bang–Offbang Trajectories . . . . . . . . . . . 96
6.1.2 Time-Optimal Control Considering Load Hoisting . . . . . . . 98
6.2 Input Shaping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
6.2.1 Input Shaping for Underwater Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
6.3 Simulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
7 Feedback Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
7.1 Linear Feedback Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
7.2 Nonlinear Feedback Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
7.2.1 Delayed Feedback Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
7.2.2 Sliding Mode Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
7.2.3 Intelligent Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
7.3 Hybrid Control Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
7.4 Feedback Control Application to Distributed Parameter
Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128
7.4.1 Boundary Control of Refueling Machine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
7.5 Simulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
7.5.1 MATLAB Code for Boundary Control
of the RM System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138
8 Conclusions and Future Research Directions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143
8.1 Future Research Directions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145
Contents xi
Appendix A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147
Appendix B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149
Appendix C . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151
Appendix D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155
Appendix E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157
Appendix F . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159
Appendix G . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163
Appendix H . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165
Appendix I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169
Appendix J . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171
Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175
Abbreviations
2D Two-dimensional
3D Three-dimensional
CG Center of gravity
DOF Degrees of freedom
LMM Lumped mass model
MFA Master fuel assembly
NB Negative big
NM Negative medium
NS Negative small
ODE Ordinary differential equation
PB Positive big
PD Proportional derivative
PDE Partial differential equation
PM Positive medium
PS Positive small
RM Refueling machine
SMC Sliding mode control
UW Underwater
VIV Vortex-induced vibrations
ZR Zero (in fuzzy logic tables)
ZV Zero vibration
ZVD Zero vibration and derivative
ZVDir Directional ZV
xiii
Symbols
A Amplitude of the oscillation of the payload

Ac Area of the cross section of a hydraulic cylinder
A1, A2, A3 Magnitude of impulses in input shapers
Ap Projected frontal area of the rod
~a ~a = (st – ss)/ss
a Constant acceleration
aC Absolute acceleration of the center of gravity of a vehicle
aC,Cor Coriolis acceleration component of aC
aC,rel Relative acceleration component of aC
aC,tran Translational acceleration component of aC
am Absolute acceleration of the payload
am,Cor Coriolis acceleration component of am
am,rel Relative acceleration component of am
am,tran Translational acceleration component of am
amax Maximum acceleration
a 1, a 2, a 3, a 4 Magnitudes of acceleration inputs in the underwater shaper
B Input matrix
B1, B2 Magnitude of impulses in radial input shaper
b 1, b 2, b 3, b 4 Constants in the equation of x ~n
C Coriolis (or centrifugal) matrix
C Component of percentage vibration
Ca Added mass coefficient
Cd Drag coefficient
Cl Lift coefficient
Cm Inertial coefficient
c, cc, cl, cr, cs, cv Viscous damping coefficients
c x , c y , c z , c a, c / Viscous damping coefficients
chs, c/,x, c/,y Viscous damping coefficients
c 1, c 2, c 3 Constants in co-state equation
xv
xvi Symbols
D Damping matrix
D Rayleigh’s dissipation function
d Diameter of the rod
E Young’s modulus
EA Axial stiffness
EK Kinetic energy
EP Potential energy
e0 Offset of the base of the boom from the origin
eh Horizontal offset of the base of the boom from iv jv kv
ev Vertical offset of the base of the boom from iv jv kv
ey , ez Position errors of the bridge and the trolley
F Control input vector
F Control input
Fb Control input to the bridge
Fh Control input to the hoist motor
Ft Control input to the trolley
Fv Control input to the vessel
fa Added mass force
fb Buoyancy force
fD Drag force
fD,y, fD,z Component of fD along the j and k axes
fI Inline hydrodynamic force
fI,y, fI,z Components of fI along the j and k axes
fm,x, fm,y, fm,z Forces acting on the CG of the payload
fN Normal hydrodynamic force
fN,y, fN,z Components of fN along the j and k axes
fw Wind-induced force
G Gravitational force
Gb Transfer function of the bridge
Gps(s) Closed-loop transfer function of the position servo system
Gvc Transfer function of the velocity controller
Gvs Transfer function of the velocity servo system
G/(s) Transfer function representing the sway dynamics
G/s(s) Transfer function of the controller for suppressing sway
g Gravitational acceleration
H Hamiltonian
h Height of the crane/boom
I Area moment of inertia
i Unit vector along the i-axis
ib A local unit vector affixed to the boom
iP A local unit vector affixed to the tip of the boom
it A local unit vector affixed to the trolley
iv A local unit vector affixed to the CG of a vehicle/vessel
Symbols xvii
J Cost function/performance index

Jb Mass moment of inertia of the bridge-drive motor
JC Mass moment of inertia of the ship-crane system
Jh Mass moment of inertia of the hoist motor
Jl,b Mass moment of inertia of the boom
Jl,j Mass moment of inertia of the jib
Js Mass moment of inertia of a rotary crane about the vertical
axis
j Unit vector along the j-axis
jb A local unit vector affixed to the boom
jP A local unit vector affixed to the tip of the boom
jt A local unit vector affixed to the trolley
jv A local unit vector affixed to the CG of the vehicle/vessel
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffi2ffi
K K ¼ efp= 1f
Kl A variable related to the hoisting rope
KI, KP, Kv Control gains
K/, Ky, Kz Control gains
K1, K2 Design constants
k Unit vector along the k-axis
kb A local unit vector affixed to the boom
kP A local unit vector affixed to the tip of the boom
kP Spring constant at joint P
kt A local unit vector affixed to the trolley
kv A local unit vector affixed to the CG of the vehicle/vessel
ky A crane-dependent design constant
L Lagrangian
l Length of the hoist cable
lave Averaged length
lb Length of the boom
lc Length of the cylinder
lcb Distance between the CG of the boom and P0
lcj Distance between the CG of the jib and P
lj Length of the jib
l1 Hoisting rope length connecting the hook and the bridge
l2 Distance between CGs of the hook and the payload
M Mass matrix
MC Moment of the vessel about the CG
MC,x, MC,y, MC,z Components of MC
m Mass of the payload
ma Added mass
mb Mass of the bridge
mbm Mass of the boom
mbc Mass of a crane’s lower body/machine
xviii Symbols
mb1 Mass of the first boom in a telescopic boom crane

mb2 Mass of the second boom in a telescopic boom crane
mj Mass of the jib
mmc Mass of the mobile crane (vehicle + crane)
mmb Mass of the bridge-drive motor
mmh Mass of the hoist motor
mr Mass of the rod
mt Mass of the trolley
mv Mass of the vessel/vehicle
mx, my, mz Masses along the i, j, and k axes of a 3D crane
m1 Mass of the hook (in a double-pendulum system)
m2 Mass of the payload (in a double-pendulum system)
~
m ~ = mr + ma
m
P Tip point of the boom
P0 Pivot point of the boom
p Pressure in the hydraulic cylinder
Q 1, Q 2, Q 3 Generalized forces
qi Generalized coordinates
~
R Starting radial position of the trolley
Ri Reaction force on the vehicle
r Projected length of the hoisting rope(s) on the jk-plane
rb Radius of the bridge-drive motor
rg Radius of gyration of the container-spreader system
rh Radius of the hoist motor
rv Position vector of the vessel in the inertial frame ijk
S Component of percentage vibration
St Strouhal number
s Sliding surface
sb1, sb2 Position vectors of two boom members
sC Position vector of the crane body
sm Position vector of the payload in the inertial frame ijk
sm,x, sm,y, sm,z Components of the position vector in the i, j, and k axes
sRi Position vector to the point where reaction force Ri occurs
ss Distance between the cable-attachment points
st Distance between the cable-suspension points
st Position vector representing the CG of a truck
T Tension in the hoisting rope
T Tension vector
t Time
ta ta ¼ vmax =amax
tc Traveling time (coast period)
td Period of a damped oscillation
tf Final time
Symbols xix
tr Rise time
tup Time for one complete cycle of an oscillation
t0 Initial time
t1, t2,…,t4 Time instances at which impulses are applied
u Inline deflection along the j-axis
u u ¼ yðtÞ þ uðx; tÞ
us Unit step input
uss Steady-state inline deflection
V Percentage vibration
V(s) Laplace transform of velocity v
Vr Volume of the rod submerged in water
Vr(s) Laplace transform of the reference velocity to the bridge
vh Hoisting speed of the payload
vmax Maximum velocity
vm,rel Velocity of the payload relative to iv jv kv
vr Velocity of the rod
v 1, v 2 Velocity vectors
vXx , vXy , vXz Components of the radial velocity
vbl , vbs Components of the slewing velocity
W Weight
Wm Weight of the payload
w Transverse deflection along the k-axis
x Spatial coordinate along the i-axis (+ dir.: hoisting down)
xm Coordinate of the payload along the i-axis
xvm Coordinate of the payload along the iv-axis
xP Coordinate of the tip of the boom along the i-axis
xv Surge motion of the vessel
xvP Coordinate of the tip of the boom along the iv-axis
Y(s) Laplace transform of the displacement of the bridge
Yr(s) Laplace transform of the moving reference position
y Displacement of the bridge along the j-axis
yf Target position of the bridge
y_ max Maximum velocity of the bridge
ym Coordinate of the payload along the j-axis
yvm Coordinate of the payload along the jv-axis
yP Coordinate of the tip of the boom along the jv-axis
yref Reference trajectory of the suspension point
ytravel Distance of the bridge during acceleration command
yv Sway motion of the vessel
yvP Coordinate of the tip of the boom along the jv-axis
z Coordinate of the trolley along the k-axis
zm Coordinate of the payload along the k-axis
zvm Coordinate of the payload along the kv-axis
xx Symbols
zP Coordinate of the tip of the boom along the k-axis

zref Reference trajectory of the suspension point
zt-b Trolley position relative to the CG of the bridge
zv Heave motion of the vessel
zvP Coordinate of the tip of the boom along the kv-axis
a Angle between r and the bridge axis
a1, a 2 Constants in the equation of the lift coefficient
bl Luff angle
bl,b Luff angle of the boom in a boom-jib crane
bl,j Luff angle of the jib in a boom-jib crane
bs Slew angle
c1 , c2 Magnitudes of inputs in the radial input shaper
d Maximum allowable deflection
e Angular acceleration
n Bridge acceleration divided by a2
~n Interval of the input in the bang–bang control
g Axial deflection of the hoist rope
~g Interval of the input in the bang–bang control
hb Angular displacement of the bridge-drive motor
hd hd ¼ tan1 ðf=xd Þ
hh Angular displacement of the hoist motor
hs Rotational angle of the spreader about the i-axis
hv,x, hv,y, hv,z Rotational angles of the vehicle about the i, j, and k axes
k Inverse of the wave speed
l A constant related to the hoisting of two-rope mechanism
f Damping coefficient
q Mass per unit length of the hoisting rope
qw Water density
sb Torque of the bridge-drive motor
sh Torque of the hoist motor
ss Torque of the slew motor
sl Torque of the luff motor
sy , sz Time delays
/ Sway angle between the hoisting rope and the i-axis
/x, /y, /z Components of /
/1 Sway angle of the hook (double pendulum)
/2 Sway angle of the payload (double pendulum)
v Co-state variable
w Phase angle
W A constituent function of the performance index J
x Natural frequency
xd Damped natural frequency
Symbols xxi
xn Natural frequency of a double-pendulum system

~n
x Approximation of xn
^t
x Angular velocity of the tower
xv Vortex-shedding frequency
x0 Nominal value of the natural frequency
# A function in the state equation, q_ ¼ #ðq; FÞ
u Angle between the projections of the pendulum and the boom
on the ij-plane
C Transformation matrix
PC Angular momentum about C
X Angular velocity of the payload
Xx , Xy , Xz Components of X along the i, j, and k axes
Chapter 1
Introduction
Cranes are material handling machines, which are used in different industries (i.e.,
construction, manufacturing, shipbuilding, and freight handling) for transporting
heavy materials that humans cannot handle. Cranes have the capability of moving
the load vertically (i.e., lifting up and lowering) and also in a horizontal plane, either
along a straight or a curved path. In order to meet the requirements of handling a
specific load in various industries, cranes with different operating mechanisms are
utilized. For lifting a load, a hoisting mechanism is used, which consists of either
a single or a set of multiple ropes suspended from the support mechanism of the
crane. A gripper or a hook at the bottom free end of the rope(s) grasps the load, while
an actuator/motor located at the top rope support mechanism hoists up and down
the load by using a system of sheaves. The support mechanism moves the point of
suspension within the workspace of the crane (Abdel-Rahman et al. 2003).
Cranes come in various sizes and designs to perform different material handling
tasks in land, sea (offshore), and underwater. Depending on the dynamic properties
of cranes and the coordinate systems that can describe the location of the rope sus-
pension point most naturally, cranes are classified as gantry crane and rotary crane.
Gantry cranes can be further classified into overhead cranes (see Figs. 1.1 and 1.2)
and container cranes (see Fig. 1.3) (Mizumoto et al. 2007; Ebrahimi et al. 2011;
Chang and Lie 2012; Liu et al. 2012; Sun and Fang 2012; Boschetti et al. 2014;
Tomczyk et al. 2014). On the other hand, rotary cranes can be classified into boom
cranes (see Figs. 1.4, 1.5 and 1.6) and tower cranes (see Fig. 1.7). In most cases, the
base of a crane is fixed to the ground. Such a crane system, known as a fixed crane,
has a restricted workspace. However, in other cases, to enhance the mobility of cranes
for conducting operations in the field, for example, on a seaport, at a construction
site, or in the sea, cranes are mounted on mobile platforms such as trucks, crawlers,
and ships. Such crane systems are termed mobile cranes (see Figs. 1.8, 1.9 and 1.10).
In the following sections, a detailed description of such systems is presented.
© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019 1

K.-S. Hong and U. H. Shah, Dynamics and Control of Industrial Cranes,
Advances in Industrial Control, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-5770-1_1
2 1 Introduction
Fig. 1.1 Overhead crane: a an overhead crane operating inside a factory (https://www.
convergencetraining.com/overhead-crane-operational-safety.html) and b schematic of an overhead
crane
Fig. 1.2 Nuclear refueling machine (RM) (a type of overhead crane): a a nuclear RM transporting a
fuel rod in a nuclear reactor (http://www.nucleartourist.com/operation/refuel1.htm) and b schematic
of the refueling process (Shah and Hong 2014)
Fig. 1.3 Container crane: a container cranes loading/unloading a container ship at a sea-
port (http://www.cranestodaymagazine.com/features/china-service//image/china-service-180078.
html) and b schematic of a container crane
1 Introduction 3
Fig. 1.4 Single-boom crane: a a boom crane operating at a construction site (http://dt-machinery.
com/product/0-5ton-20t-single-boom-electric-hydraulic-marine-ship-deck-cranes-supplier) and
b schematic of a boom crane
Fig. 1.5 Knuckle boom crane: a a knuckle boom crane operating at a construction site (http://www.
protea.pl/what-we-offer/pedestal-cranes/knuckle-boom and b schematic of a knuckle boom crane
Fig. 1.6 Telescopic boom crane: a a telescopic boom crane operating at a seaport (https://
www.maxtechcorp.com/products/marine-solutions/ship-deck-crane/telescopic-boom-crane/) and
b schematic of a telescopic boom crane
4 1 Introduction
Fig. 1.7 Tower crane: a tower cranes during construction of high-rise buildings (http://jaso.com/
tower/en-us/cranes/) and b schematic of a tower crane
Fig. 1.8 Truck-mounted boom crane: a a telescopic crane mounted on a truck (https://
cranenetwork.com/crane/boom-truck-cranes/unic/ur1504/212753) and b schematic of a truck-
mounted telescopic boom crane
Fig. 1.9 Ship-mounted boom crane: a boom cranes mounted on an offshore vessel for subsea oil
field installation (https://technopow.com/2017/09/21/offshore-crane-market/) and b schematic of a
ship-mounted crane
1.1 Gantry Cranes 5
Fig. 1.10 Mobile harbor system: a a mobile harbor system unloading containers from a mega
container ship (mother ship) in an open sea (Ngo and Hong 2009) and b schematic of a mobile
harbor system
1.1 Gantry Cranes
1.1.1 Overhead Cranes
Figure 1.1b illustrates a simple schematic of an overhead crane. The support mech-
anism of the overhead crane consists of a bridge and a trolley, where the bridge runs
on the fixed rails and the trolley traverses along the bridge. The trolley also acts as
the suspension point of the payload, which is suspended using the hoisting rope. The
length of the hoisting rope can be changed, for lifting or lowering the load, using a
motor mounted between the interface of the hoisting rope and the suspension point.
In actual systems (see Fig. 1.1a), the hoisting mechanism may consist of multiple
ropes and a hook connecting the payload to the free end of the hoisting rope(s). An
overhead crane can move a load to the desired locations by utilizing the planar move-
ments of the bridge and trolley (i.e., in the two-dimensional (2D) space) and hoisting
of the payload. The transportation of the load using an overhead crane can induce
large oscillations of the payload in the three-dimensional (3D) space because of the
coupling between the movements of the bridge, trolley, and payload (Fang et al. 2003;
Lee 2005; Lee et al. 2014). The overhead crane is a simple system that is mostly
used for material handling inside manufacturing plants, ship-building factories, and
nuclear power plants (see Fig. 1.2). In nuclear power plants, the overhead crane is
used for transporting fuel rods within the nuclear reactor (i.e., from the fuel upender
to the reactor core and vice versa) during the refueling process (see Fig. 1.2b). Such
a crane system, called the refueling machine (RM), transports fuel rods underwater
to avoid the escape of radiation from the fuel rods to the environment.
6 1 Introduction
1.1.2 Container Cranes
Container cranes are also called quay cranes. They are used at a container terminal
for loading and unloading the containers to/from the container ship anchored at the
seaport (Augustin and Maurer 2001; Bartolini et al. 2003; Ngo and Hong 2009;
Zrnic et al. 2010; Azeloglu et al. 2013; Kreuzer et al. 2014; Arena et al. 2015;
Azeloglu and Sagirli 2015). Figure 1.3b depicts a schematic of a container crane,
which shows that the supporting structure (or frame) can traverse the length of a quay
along the rail tracks on the ground. At the top, the frame supports another rail along
the cantilever beam structure on which the trolley can move. Usually, four hoisting
ropes are suspended from the trolley, which have a gripper at the free end, which
is used for gripping the container(s). Container cranes utilize the movements of the
frame and the trolley and the hoisting of the payload to transport containers to and
from between the container ship and trucks.
1.2 Rotary Cranes
1.2.1 Boom Cranes
Figure 1.4b depicts the schematic of a single-boom crane (Abdel-Rahman and Nayfeh
2002; Sun and Liu 2006; Schaper et al. 2014). It is shown that the base of the tower
is fixed to the ground and there is a boom (i.e., a cantilever beam) of fixed length at
the top of the tower.
At the point of connection between the boom and the tower, the boom can rotate
about the vertical axis of the tower (i.e., the slew movement) and also can rotate in the
vertical plane consisting of the vertical axis of the tower and the axis parallel to the
boom (i.e., the luff movement). From the free end of the boom, a payload is suspended
using a hoisting rope. The length of the hoisting rope can be changed using an actuator
mounted at the suspension point. A boom crane can manipulate the load in the 3D
space using the luff and slew movements of the boom and hoisting of the payload.
Such cranes are commonly used in construction sites (see Fig. 1.4a). Boom cranes
can also have more than one boom. One variation of the boom crane has an auxiliary
jib connected to the boom with a flexible joint to enhance the maneuverability (i.e., by
addition of a degree of freedom (DOF)) and the workspace of the crane system. Such
boom cranes are also called knuckle boom cranes (see Fig. 1.5). Another variation of
the boom crane is the telescopic boom crane that is shown in Fig. 1.6, which consists
of two or more boom members, where the members can slide in or out of each other
in order to change the overall length of the boom (Sagirli et al. 2003a, b; Cekus and
Posiadala 2011).
1.2 Rotary Cranes 7
1.2.2 Tower Cranes
Tower cranes are typically used for constructing high-rise buildings (see Fig. 1.7a).
Figure 1.7b depicts a schematic of a tower crane, which consists of a jib that can
rotate (i.e., slew movement) in the horizontal plane about the vertical axis passing
through the stationary vertical tower (Hara et al. 1989; Ju et al. 2006; Jerman and
Kramar 2008; Duong et al. 2012; Carmona and Collado 2016; Sun et al. 2016). A
trolley traverses along the length of the jib with the payload suspended from the
trolley through the hoisting ropes. In contrast to the boom crane, which can transport
loads using the slew and luff movements of the boom and hoisting of the payload,
the tower crane transports loads in the 3D space using the slew movement of the jib,
translation of the trolley along the jib, and hoisting of the payload.
1.3 Mobile Cranes
As discussed earlier, the crane is mounted on a mobile platform to enhance its maneu-
verability; such cranes are called mobile cranes. Owing to the inherent ability of
boom cranes to withstand large compressive loads, they are mostly used as mobile
cranes (Bak and Hansen 2013a, b; Fang et al. 2014; Huang et al. 2013, 2015). For
inland operations, boom cranes can be mounted on trucks or crawlers (see Fig. 1.8),
for example, at a seaport for material handling (i.e., from a container crane to the
dockyard), for towing of broken cars on roads or as a forest crane for picking up
heavy logs of cut trees (Araya et al. 2004). For offshore operation, boom cranes are
mounted on a ship for installing oil and gas extraction equipment on the seabed (see
Fig. 1.9) (Henry et al. 2001; Ellermann et al. 2002, 2003; Ellermann and Kreuzer
2003; Abdel-Rahman and Nayfeh 2003).
In the past few decades, a rapid growth in the logistics industry and an associated
increase in competition and costs have been observed. According to a rough estimate,
more than 90% of the world’s trade is done by sea. The success of maritime transport
lies in the fact that, compared to the transport of freight through air and land, larger
and heavier goods can easily be transported to far away places cheaply through a
large container ship. However, to keep pace with the ever-increasing volume of world
trade, the size of a container ship has become extremely large (i.e., over 20,000 TEU
(twenty-foot equivalent unit). Therefore, they cannot anchor at shallow water seaports
(Tuan et al. 2015). To load/unload such large container ships in a deep sea, a container
crane is mounted on a small ship; the system is called a mobile harbor system (see
Fig. 1.10) (Ngo and Hong 2009).
8 1 Introduction
References
Abdel-Rahman EM, Nayfeh AH (2002) Pendulation reduction in boom cranes using cable length
manipulation. Nonlinear Dyn 27(3):255–269
Abdel-Rahman EM, Nayfeh AH (2003) Two-dimensional control for ship-mounted cranes: a fea-
sibility study. J Vib Control 9(12):1327–1342
Abdel-Rahman EM, Nayfeh AH, Masoud ZN (2003) Dynamics and control of cranes: a review. J
Vib Control 9(7):863–908
Araya H, Kakuzen M, Kinugawa H et al (2004) Level luffing control system for crawler cranes.
Autom Constr 13(5):689–697
Arena A, Casalotti A, Lacarbonara W et al (2015) Dynamics of container cranes: three-dimensional
modeling, full-scale experiments, and identification. Int J Mech Sci 93:8–21
Augustin D, Maurer H (2001) Second order sufficient conditions and sensitivity analysis for the
optimal control of a container crane under state constraints. Optimization 49(4):351–368
Azeloglu CO, Sagirli A (2015) Active vibration control of container cranes against earthquake by
the use of LMI based mixed H 2 /H ∞ state-feedback controller. Shock Vib. http://dx.doi.org/10.
1155/2015/589289
Azeloglu CO, Sagirli A, Edincliler A (2013) Mathematical modelling of the container cranes under
seismic loading and proving by shake table. Nonlinear Dyn 73(1–2):143–154
Bak MK, Hansen MR (2013a) Analysis of offshore knuckle boom crane—part one: modeling and
parameter identification. Model Identif Control 34(4):157–174
Bak MK, Hansen MR (2013b) Analysis of offshore knuckle boom crane—part two: motion control.
Model Identif Control 34(4):175–181
Bartolini G, Pisano A, Usai E (2003) Output-feedback control of container cranes: a comparative
analysis. Asian J Control 5(4):578–593
Boschetti G, Caracciolo R, Richiedei D et al (2014) Moving the suspended load of an over-
head crane along a pre-specified path: a non-time based approach. Robot Comput-Integr Manuf
30(3):256–264
Carmona IG, Collado J (2016) Control of a two wired hammer head tower crane. Nonlinear Dyn
84(4):2137–2148
Cekus D, Posiadala B (2011) Vibration model and analysis of three-member telescopic boom with
hydraulic cylinder for its radius change. Int J Bifurcation Chaos 21(10):2883–2892
Chang CY, Lie HW (2012) Real-time visual tracking and measurement to control fast dynamics of
overhead cranes. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 59(3):1640–1649
Duong SC, Uezato E, Kinjo H et al (2012) A hybrid evolutionary algorithm for recurrent neural
network control of a three-dimensional tower crane. Autom Constr 23:55–63
Ebrahimi M, Ghayour M, Madani SM et al (2011) Swing angle estimation for anti-sway overhead
crane control using load cell. Int J Control Autom Syst 9(2):301–309
Ellermann K, Kreuzer E (2003) Nonlinear dynamics in the motion of floating cranes. Multibody
Syst Dyn 9(4):377–387
Ellermann K, Kreuzer E, Markiewicz M (2002) Nonlinear dynamics of floating cranes. Nonlinear
Dyn 27(2):107–183
Ellermann K, Kreuzer E, Markiewicz M (2003) Nonlinear primary resonances of a floating crane.
Meccanica 38(1):5–18
Fang YC, Dixon WE, Dawson DM et al (2003) Nonlinear coupling control laws for an under
actuated overhead crane system. IEEE-ASME Trans Mechatron 8(3):418–423
Fang YC, Wang PC, Sun N et al (2014) Dynamics analysis and nonlinear control of an offshore
boom crane. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 61(1):414–427
Hara K, Yamamoto T, Kobayashi A et al (1989) Jib crane control to suppress load swing. Int J Syst
Sci 20(5):715–731
Henry RJ, Masoud ZN, Nayfeh AH et al (2001) Cargo pendulation reduction on ship-mounted
cranes via boom-luff angle actuation. J Vib Control 7(8):1253–1264
References 9
Huang J, Liang Z, Zang Q (2015) Dynamics and swing control of double-pendulum bridge cranes
with distributed-mass beams. Mech Syst Signal Proc 54–55:357–366
Huang J, Maleki E, Singhose W (2013) Dynamics and swing control of mobile boom cranes subject
to wind disturbances. IET Contr Theory Appl 7(9):1187–1195
Jerman B, Kramar J (2008) A study of the horizontal inertial forces acting on the suspended load
of slewing cranes. Int J Mech Sci 50(3):490–500
Ju F, Choo YS, Cui FS (2006) Dynamic response of tower crane induced by the pendulum motion
of the payload. Int J Solids Struct 43(2):376–389
Kreuzer E, Pick MA, Rapp C et al (2014) Unscented Kalman filter for real-time load swing estima-
tion of container cranes using rope forces. J Dyn Syst Meas Control-Trans ASME 136(4):041009
Lee HH (2005) Motion planning for three-dimensional overhead cranes with high-speed load hoist-
ing. Int J Control 78(12):875–886
Lee HH, Huang CH, Ku SC et al (2014) Efficient visual feedback method to control a three-
dimensional overhead crane. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 61(8):4073–4083
Liu RJ, Li SH, Ding SH (2012) Nested saturation control for overhead crane systems. Trans Inst
Meas Control 34(7):862–875
Mizumoto I, Chen T, Ohdaira S et al (2007) Adaptive output feedback control of general
MIMO systems using multirate sampling and its application to a cart-crane system. Automatica
43(12):2077–2085
Ngo QH, Hong K-S (2009) Skew control of a quay container crane. J Mech Sci Technol
23(12):3332–3339
Sagirli A, Bogoclu ME, Omurlu VE (2003a) Modeling the dynamics and kinematics of a telescopic
rotary crane by the Bond Graph method (Part I). Nonlinear Dyn 33(4):337–351
Sagirli A, Bogoclu ME, Omurlu VE (2003b) Modeling the dynamics and kinematics of a telescopic
rotary crane by the bond graph method: part II. Nonlinear Dyn 33(4):353–367
Schaper U, Dittrich C, Arnold E et al (2014) 2-DOF skew control of boom cranes including state
estimation and reference trajectory generation. Control Eng Practice 33:63–75
Shah UH, Hong K-S (2014) Input shaping control of a nuclear power plant’s fuel transport system.
Nonlinear Dyn 77(4):1737–1748
Sun N, Fang YC (2012) New energy analytical results for the regulation of under actuated overhead
cranes: An end-effector motion-based approach. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 59(12):4723–4734
Sun N, Fang YC, Chen H et al (2016) Slew/translation positioning and swing suppression for 4-DOF
tower cranes with parametric uncertainties: Design and hardware experimentation. IEEE Trans
Ind Electron 63(10):6407–6418
Sun GF, Liu J (2006) Dynamic responses of hydraulic crane during luffing motion. Mech Mach
Theory 41(11):1273–1288
Tomczyk J, Cink J, Kosucki A (2014) Dynamics of an overhead crane under a wind disturbance
condition. Autom Constr 42:100–111
Tuan LA, Lee SG, Nho LC et al (2015) Robust controls for ship-mounted container cranes with
viscoelastic foundation and flexible hoisting cable. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part I-J Syst Control Eng
229(7):662–674
Zrnic ND, Bosnjak SM, Hoffmann K (2010) Parameter sensitivity analysis of non-dimensional
models of quayside container cranes. Math Comput Model Dyn Syst 16(2):145–160
Chapter 2
Lumped Mass Models of Gantry Cranes
This chapter discusses the mathematical modeling of gantry crane systems, consid-
ering the subsystems of a crane to be rigid bodies. Such a formulation does not reflect
the deflections within the individual parts of the crane but only considers their rigid
body movements and results in a lumped mass model (LMM). Both the overhead and
container cranes, shown in Figs. 1.1 and 1.3, respectively, lie within the category of
gantry cranes. In developing the LMMs of gantry cranes, three different approaches
for modeling the hoisting mechanism are usually followed: (i) single-rope hoisting
mechanism, (ii) multi-rope hoisting mechanism, and (iii) double-pendulum system.
The first approach, which considers a single-rope hoisting mechanism, represents
the dynamics of a simple overhead crane considering the hook and the payload as
a single-lumped mass. The second approach, which considers a multi-rope hoisting
mechanism, is mostly used for modeling container cranes, where the gripper–payload
assembly is suspended through multiple ropes (usually four) from the support struc-
ture (i.e., the trolley) of the container crane (see Fig. 1.3). Some researchers, for long
hoisting lengths, have approximated multi-rope hoisting systems with single-rope
models. Another simplification of multi-rope hoisting systems is to model them as
approximate two-rope systems, where the rotation of the payload about the vertical
axis is not included in the dynamics analysis. The third approach models the hoisting
mechanism as a double-pendulum system, which is an accurate representation of
the dynamics of an overhead crane system: Here, the first pendulum represents the
hoisting rope and the hook and the second pendulum depicts the motion between the
hook and the payload.
In this chapter, various mathematical formulations describing the dynamics of
crane systems are presented. For consistency and ease of comparison, the symbols
appearing in the literature have been unified. Moreover, the derivatives with respect
to time t and the spatial coordinate x (i.e., along the i-axis) are denoted by ˙ and ’,
respectively.

12 2 Lumped Mass Models of Gantry Cranes
2.1 Single-Rope Hoisting Models
Figure 2.1 depicts a 3D schematic of an overhead crane with a single-rope hoisting

mechanism. It is shown that a bridge of mass mb moves on fixed rails, along the
j-axis, upon the control input F b (t); a trolley of mass mt slides on the bridge along
the k-axis upon the control input F t (t); and a payload of mass m, which is suspended
from the trolley using a rope of length l(t), is transported to a target position in the
3D Cartesian space by controlling the positions of the bridge y(t) and the trolley z(t),
and hoisting the rope along the i-axis using the control input F h (t).
It should be noted that in lumped mass formulations, the rope is considered inex-
tensible and the tension T (t) in the rope is considered only as a function of time,
whereas in the distributed parameter setting, the rope is considered flexible and the
tension is considered at all points of the rope to investigate the deflection along the
rope. Owing to the planar movements of the bridge and the trolley and the hoisting of
the payload, the payload undergoes oscillations both during (i.e., transient) and after
(i.e., residual) its transportation. Figure 2.2 illustrates the sway angles of the rope
considering two different configurations (for modeling purpose) of the sway angle.
Figure 2.2a illustrates the angular configuration pursued by Lee (1998), where φ is
the angle between the hoisting rope and the vertical i-axis, φ z is the projection of φ
on the ik-plane, and φ y is the sway angle measured from the ik-plane. Figure 2.2b
shows the angular configuration adopted by Moustafa and Ebeid (1988), where φ x
is the sway angle between the projection of the rope length on the ij-plane and the
k-axis.
Fig. 2.1 Three-dimensional schematic of an overhead crane with a single-rope hoisting mecha-
nism: The rationale to denote the hoisting-down direction (approaching) as a positive i-axis is to
denote the lateral deflection of the rope as u(x, t) in Chap. 5
2.1 Single-Rope Hoisting Models 13
Fig. 2.2 Different sway angle configurations: a sway angle configuration by Lee (1998), b sway
angle configuration by Moustafa and Ebeid (1988)
We begin our discussion on the dynamics of overhead cranes by a simple formu-

lation representing the dynamics of an overhead crane with a single hoisting rope
mechanism. In such a setting, only the movement of the bridge along the j-axis,
which causes the payload to oscillate (or undergo sway φ(t)) in the ij-plane, where
the payload suspended by an inextensible hoisting rope of length l is considered
(i.e., hoisting-up and hoisting-down motions of the payload are not considered; see
Fig. 2.3). One way of obtaining the equations of motion is by using Lagrange’s
method, which is based on the calculus of variations and utilizes the concept of con-
servation of energy. The following equations of motion are obtained considering the
crane system to have only two DOFs, y and φ (Karihaloo and Parbery 1982). For the
derivation, see Appendix A.
(m b + m) ÿ(t) + ml φ̈(t) cos(φ(t)) − ml φ̇(t)2 sin(φ(t)) Fb (t), (2.1)
l φ̈(t) + cos(φ(t)) ÿ(t) + g sin(φ(t)) 0, (2.2)
where g is the gravitational acceleration. Equation (2.1) represents the dynamics of

the bridge along the j-axis (i.e., inline with the motion of the bridge), whereas (2.2)
depicts that of the payload. Assuming small oscillations (i.e., sin φ(t) ≈ φ(t) and
cos φ(t) ≈ 1)) of the payload, the following linear form of (2.1) and (2.2) is obtained.
(m b + m) ÿ(t) + ml φ̈(t) Fb (t), (2.3)
l φ̈(t) + ÿ(t) + gφ(t) 0. (2.4)

Fig. 2.3 Two-dimensional

schematic representing the
dynamics of a single-rope
gantry crane under bridge
movements in the j-axis
Another way of obtaining the equations of motion of the system considered in

Fig. 2.3 is by utilizing Newton’s second law of motion (Manson 1982). The equation
of motion of the bridge along the j-axis is obtained as follows.
m b ÿ(t) + T sin(φ(t)) Fb (t), (2.5)
whereas the equations of motion of the payload along the j and i axes, respectively,
are obtained as
−ml φ̇(t)2 cos(φ(t)) mg − T cos(φ(t)), (2.6)
m( ÿ(t) + l φ̈(t) cos(φ(t)) − l φ̇(t)2 sin(φ(t))) T sin(φ(t)), (2.7)
where T denotes the tension in the hoisting rope. In the succeeding discussions on
lumped mass formulations of crane systems, we will use the Lagrange’s method.
In the formulations discussed above, the hoisting-up and hoisting-down move-
ments of the payload were not considered. Now, the equations of motion for the
simultaneous bridge and hoisting motions in the 2D plane shown in Fig. 2.4 will be
Fig. 2.4 Two-dimensional schematic representing simultaneous motions of the bridge and the
payload
developed. For the considered system, the kinetic and potential energies are given as
follows:
˙ 2 + l(t)2 φ̇(t)2
E K (1/2)m b ẏ(t)2 + (1/2)m( ẏ(t)2 + l(t)
˙ sin(φ(t)) + 2 ẏ(t)l(t)
+ 2 ẏ(t)l(t) ˙ φ̇(t) cos(φ(t)), (2.8)
E P −mgl cos(φ(t)). (2.9)
Considering φ(t), y(t), and l(t) as generalized coordinates, and F b (t) and F h (t) as
the control inputs applied to the bridge and for hoisting the payload, respectively,
and by following the derivation procedure in Appendix A, the following equations
of motion are obtained (Kim et al. 2004).
(m b + m) ÿ(t) + ml(t)(φ̈(t) cos(φ(t)) − φ̇(t)2 sin(φ(t)))

¨ sin(φ(t)) + 2m l(t)
+ m l(t) ˙ φ̇(t) cos(φ(t)) Fb (t), (2.10)
¨ − ml(t)φ̇(t)2 − mg cos(φ(t)) + m ÿ(t) sin(φ(t)) −Fh (t),

m l(t) (2.11)
˙ φ̇(t) + g sin(φ(t)) + ÿ(t) cos(φ(t)) 0.

l(t)φ̈(t) + 2l(t) (2.12)
Equation (2.10) represents the dynamics of the bridge along the j-axis, (2.11) depicts
the hoisting motion of the payload, and (2.12) describes the sway motion of the
payload about the k-axis.
In all the discussions so far, the control input to the bridge is considered as a
force without considering the masses/inertias of the actuators themselves. However,
from a control application viewpoint, it is important to include the dynamics of the

actuators in the equations of motion for complete modeling. Now, considering the
mass moments of inertias J b and J h , radii r b and r h , rotational angles θ b and θ h , and
torques τ b and τ h of the bridge-drive and hoist motors, respectively (see Fig. 2.5),
the following equations of motion of a single-rope gantry crane in the 2D plane are
obtained, considering three DOFs, namely θ b , θ h , and φ (Hong et al. 1997).

(Jb + (m b + m)rb2 )θ̈b (t) + mrbrh θ̇h2 (t)φ(t) cos(φ(t)) + (mrbrh /2) θ̈h2 (t) sin(φ(t))

θh (t)φ̈(t) cos(φ(t)) − θh (t)φ̇ 2 (t) sin(φ(t)) τb (t), (2.13)
mrbrh θ̈b (t) sin(φ(t)) + (2Jh + (1/2)mrh2 )θ̈h (t) − (1/2)mrh2 θh (t)φ̇ 2 (t)
− mgrh cos(φ(t)) 2τh (t), (2.14)
2rb θ̈b (t) cos(φ(t)) + 2rh φ̈(t)(θh (t) + θ̇h (t)) + 2g sin(φ(t)) 0, (2.15)
where (2.13) represents the dynamics of the bridge along the j-axis, (2.14) depicts
the hoisting movement of the payload, and (2.15) describes the sway motion of the
payload about the k-axis.
So far in this chapter, the dynamics of a gantry crane along one axis (i.e., the
j-axis) was discussed. However, in actual operation, both the bridge and the trolley
move (i.e., along the j and k axes, respectively) to transport the load to a target
position. Considering y, z, l, φ y , and φ z as five generalized coordinates and F b , F t ,
and F h as the associated generalized forces, the following five equations of motion
Fig. 2.5 Two-dimensional schematic representing the dynamics of a gantry crane considering
actuator dynamics and rope hoisting
of an overhead crane can be derived by using Lagrange’s method (Lee 1998); see
Appendix B for details.
¨ sin φ y (t) + c y ẏ(t)

(m y + m) ÿ(t) + ml(t)φ̈ y (t) cos φ y (t) + m l(t)
˙ φ̇ y (t) cos φ y (t) − ml(t)φ̇ y (t)2 sin φ y (t) Fb (t),
+ 2m l(t) (2.16)
(m z + m)z̈(t) + ml(t)φ̈z (t) cos φ y (t) cos φz (t) + cz ż(t)

¨ sin φz (t) cos φ y (t) + 2m l(t)
+ m l(t) ˙ φ̇z (t) cos φz (t) cos φ y (t)
˙ φ̇ y (t) sin φ y (t) sin φz (t) − ml(t)φ̇z (t)2 cos φ y (t) sin φz (t)
− 2m l(t)
− 2ml(t)φ̇ y (t)φ̇z (t) sin φ y (t) cos φz (t) − ml(t)φ̈ y (t) sin φ y (t) sin φz (t)
− ml(t)φ̇ y (t)2 cos φ y (t) sin φz (t) Ft (t), (2.17)
¨ + m z̈(t) cos φ y (t) sin φz (t) + m ÿ(t) sin φ y (t) + cx l(t)

(m x + m)l(t) ˙
− ml(t)φ̇z (t)2 cos2 φ y (t) − ml(t)φ̇ y (t)2
− mg cos φ y (t) cos φz (t) Fh (t), (2.18)
˙ φ̇ y (t)
l(t)φ̈ y (t) + ÿ(t) cos φ y (t) − z̈(t) sin φ y (t) sin φz (t) + 2l(t)
+ l(t)φ̇z (t)2 sin φ y (t) cos φ y (t) + g sin φ y (t) cos φz (t) 0, (2.19)
˙ φ̇ z (t) cos2 φ y (t)

l(t)φ̈z (t) cos2 φ y (t) + z̈(t) cos φ y (t) cos φz (t) + 2l(t)
− 2l(t)φ̇ y (t)φ̇z (t) sin φ y (t) cos φ y (t) + g cos φ y (t) sin φz (t) 0, (2.20)
where φ z is the projection of φ on the ik-plane, φ y is the sway angle measured from
the ik-plane (see Fig. 2.2a); mx , my , and mz are the masses of the crane and the
equivalent masses of the rotating parts such as motors and their drive trains along
the i, j, and k axes; similarly, cx , cy , and cz are the viscous damping coefficients
opposing the motion of the crane components; and F t and F h denote the control
inputs to the trolley and hoist motors, respectively. Equation (2.16) represents the
dynamics of the bridge, (2.17) depicts the dynamics of the trolley, (2.18) indicates
the hoisting motion of the payload, and (2.19) and (2.20) signify the sway dynamics
(φ y and φ z , respectively) of the payload. The most important feature of the 3D crane
model given by (2.16) and (2.20) is that by considering ż z̈ φz φ̇z φ̈z 0,
a 2D model of the crane, depicting only the movement of the bridge (i.e., along the
j-axis), is obtained. On the other hand, a 2D model representing only the trolley
movement can be obtained by assuming ẏ ÿ φ y φ̇ y φ̈ y 0. Such a
convenient reduction to a 2D model was not possible in the 3D models developed
earlier (Moustafa and Ebeid 1988; Ebeid et al. 1992; Al-Garni et al. 1995; Moustafa
and Abou-el-Yazid 1996; Sakawa and Sano 1997) owing to the consideration of a
different angular configuration of the payload (see Fig. 2.2b).
2.2 Multi-rope Hoisting Models
All the formulations discussed so far depict crane systems having single-rope hoisting
mechanisms. However, container cranes have widely spaced rope reeving configu-
rations, which utilize multiple ropes for connecting the spreader to the trolley/cart
(see Fig. 2.6). The responses of the load between multiple and single-rope hoisting
mechanisms are significantly different. Such a multi-rope configuration results in
highly nonlinear and coupled translational and rotational motions of the spreader,
whereas for the case of a single rope, the rotational motions of the load were ignored
(Morrish et al. 1996, 1997; Kim et al. 2003). Such complex motions of the spreader
(in the case of multi-rope hoist systems) are caused by the uneven distribution of
tensions among the ropes, which consequently result in the geometric distortion of
the system (i.e., changes in the length of hoisting ropes). However, the net effect of
multiple ropes is a stiff response of the load, resulting in a better sway suppression
capability of the system. Considering the four-rope hoisting mechanism in Fig. 2.6,
the equations representing the motion of the spreader, in polar coordinates r and α
(see Fig. 2.7b), can be obtained, resulting from the movements of the gantry and
hoisting of the load. Here, r depicts the projected length of the hoisting rope(s) on
the jk-plane and α is the angle between r and the axis of the bridge/gantry. The
following three equations of motion are derived considering r, α, and θ s as three
generalized coordinates, where θ s is the rotational angle of the spreader about the
i-axis (Cartmell et al. 1998). For the derivation, see Appendix C.
Fig. 2.6 Four-rope hoisting mechanism of a container crane

2.2 Multi-Rope Hoisting Models 19
Fig. 2.7 Schematics representing the motions of a gantry crane in two different coordinate systems:
a representation in the Cartesian coordinates and b representation in the polar coordinates (Cartmell
et al. 1998)
ṙ l¨ (r l˙ − ṙl)2
r̈ + cr − r + r 4 − r (θ̇b + α̇)2 + z t−b θ̇b2 cos α
m l l − l 2r 2

− (1 − (4/π 2 )(1 − (1 − 2(R 2 /l 2 ))1/2 )θs2 ) × ( ÿb cos(θb + α) + z̈ b sin(θb + α)
⎛
16R 2 lθ˙s
+z̈ t−b cos α + 2ż t−b θ̇b sin α + z t−b θ̈b sin α + ⎝
π l (1 − 2R 2 l 2 )1/ 2
2 3
⎛ ⎞⎞
4 1 − (1 − 2R 2 l 2 )1/ 2 (ṙl 2 − rl l) ˙ ˙
2 − rl l)
θ (ṙl
×⎝ + r θ̇s ⎠⎠
3 s
θs −
π 2 (l 2 − r 2 ) l2 − r 2
2
16 1 − (1 − 2R 2 l 2 )1/ 2 θs3 rl l˙ − ṙl 2
+ 4θ̇s 2 + r (θ̇b + α̇)2 θs
π4 l − r2

4 1 − (1 − 2R 2 l 2 )1/ 2
× 2ṙ θs θ̇s − 2r θs θ̈s − 2r θ̇s2 − z t−b θ̇b2 θs2 cos α
π2
⎛ ⎞⎫
1 − (4 π 2 ) 1 − (1 − 2R 2 l 2 )1/ 2 ⎬
l l˙ − r ṙ
2 2
−2r (θ̇b + α̇) θs − 4r 2 θs θ̇s − ⎝ rgθs ⎠
2
l −r 2 (l − r )
2 2 1 / 2 ⎭
l2 − r 2
× 2 0, (2.21)
l 2 1 − (4 π 2 ) 1 − (1 − 2R 2 l 2 )1/ 2 θs2
α̇ 1
α̈ + cα + θ̈b − 2
Ir
1 − (4 π 2 ) 1 − (1 − 2R 2 l 2 )1/ 2 θs2 r

× −2ṙ (θ̇b + α̇) + (32/π 4 )(1 − (1 − 2(R 2 /l 2 ))1/2 )(θ̇b + α̇)θs3
⎛ ⎞
2R ˙ θs
2 lr
×⎝ − (1 − (1 − 2(R /l )) )(ṙ θs + 2r θ̇s )⎠
2 2 1/2
l 3 (1 − 2R 2 l 2 )1/ 2

+ (4/π 2 )(1 − (1 − 2(R 2 /l 2 ))1/2 )θs2 − 1 × (z̈ b cos(θb + α) − ÿb sin(θb + α)

−z̈ t−b sin α + 2ż t−b θb cos α + z t−b θ̈b cos α + z t−b θ̇b2 sin α − (8/π 2 )(θ̇b + α̇)θs
⎛ ⎛ ⎞ ⎞⎫
˙ θs
2R 2 lr R2
1/ 2 ⎬
× ⎝ ⎝
−2 1− 1−2 2 ⎠ (ṙ θs + r θ̇s )⎠ 0, (2.22)
l 3 (1 − 2R 2 l 2 )1/ 2 l ⎭
θ̇s 1
θ̈s + cθs − 2
m I + (64/π 2 )m 1 − (1 − 2R 2 /l 2 )1/ 2 l 2 θs2
⎧
⎨ 128R 2 l˙ 1 − (1 − 2R 2 l 2 )1/ 2
× −I θ̈b − m − ˙ s)
θs2 (2l θ̇s + lθ
⎩ π 4 l 2 (1 − 2R 2 l 2 )1/ 2
− (8/π 2 )(1 − (1 − 2R 2 l 2 )1/ 2 )r θs × ( ÿb cos(θb + α) + z̈ b sin(θb + α)

+z̈ t−b cos α + z t−b θ̈b sin α + 2ż t−b θ̇b sin α − z t−b θ̇b2 cos α − r (θ̇b + α̇)2

+ (32/π 4 ) (1 − (1 − 2R 2 l 2 )1/ 2 )2 θs3 − (8/π 2 )(1 − (1 − 2R 2 l 2 )1/ 2 )θs
× (2r ṙl l˙ + l 3 l¨ − ṙ 2 l 2 − l˙2 r 2 − r 2 l l)(1/(l

¨ 2 − r 2 )) + (32/π 4 )(1 − (1 − 2R 2 l 2 )1/ 2 )2 θ
s

64R ll 2 ¨ − 2R ll
3 2 ¨ − 3l l˙ + 4R l˙
2 2 2 2
× 4l lθ˙ s θ̇s + 2l 2 θ̇s2 − r 2 (θ̇b + α̇)2 θs2 −
π 4 l 4 (1 − 2R 2 l 2 )3/ 2
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎫
R2
1/ 2
8 ⎝ R2
1/ 2 ⎬
⎝
× 1− 1−2 2 ⎠ 3
θs + 2 1 − 1 − 2 2 ⎠ 2 2 1/
(l − r ) θs g2 0, (2.23)
l π l ⎭
where zt-b denotes the position of the trolley relative to the center of gravity (CG)
of the bridge, θ b is the angle of rotation of the bridge with respect to the i-axis, l is
the hoist length, and cr , cα , and cθ s are the viscous damping coefficients associated
with the generalized coordinates. In (2.21) and (2.23), the equations of motion of the
bridge and the hoisting of the payload are not included; they are only regarded as
inputs to the dynamic system.
2.3 Double-Pendulum Crane Models
In developing most 2D models, the hook and the payload are considered lumped as
a single mass exhibiting a pendulous motion (i.e., a single-pendulum approximation
of the crane system). However, in actual operation, the hook and the payload may
exhibit different sway responses, and this phenomenon can be modeled as a double-
pendulum system (Karkoub and Zribi 2002a, b; Kim and Singhose 2010; Vaughan
et al. 2010; Maleki and Singhose 2012; O’Connor and Habibi 2013; Tuan and Lee
2.3 Double-Pendulum Crane Models 21
Fig. 2.8 Double-pendulum representation of an overhead crane
2013; Masoud et al. 2014; Masoud and Alhazza 2014; Zhang et al. 2016; Sun et al.
2017). Figure 2.8 depicts a double-pendulum representation of a gantry crane, where
l1 denotes the length of the hoisting rope connecting the hook to the bridge, m1 is the
mass of the hook, and φ 1 signifies the sway angle of the hook (i.e., the angle between
l1 and the i-axis). Similarly, l2 , m2 , and φ 2 represent the distance/length between
the CGs of the hook and the payload, the mass of the payload, and the sway angle
of the payload, respectively. Considering y(t), φ 1 (t), and φ 2 (t) as three generalized
coordinates, the following equations of motion of the double-pendulum system are
obtained (Ramli et al. 2017). For the derivation, see Appendix D.
(m b + m 1 + m 2 ) ÿ(t) + (m 1 + m 2 )l1 φ̈1 (t) cos(φ1 (t)) + m 2 l2 φ̈2 (t) cos(φ2 (t))
− (m 1 + m 2 )l1 φ̇1 (t)2 sin(φ1 (t)) − m 2 l2 φ̇2 (t)2 sin(φ2 (t)) Fb (t), (2.24)
Fig. 2.9 Assumption of a two-rope model as a double-pendulum system
(m 1 + m 2 )l1 ÿ(t) cos(φ1 (t)) + (m 1 + m 2 )l12 φ̈1 (t) + m 2 l1l2 φ̈2 (t) cos(φ1 (t) − φ2 (t))
+ m 2 l1l2 φ̇2 (t)2 sin(φ1 (t) − φ2 (t)) + (m 1 + m 2 )gl1 sin(φ1 (t)) 0, (2.25)
m 2 l2 ÿ(t) cos(φ2 (t)) + m 2 l1l2 φ̈1 (t) cos(φ1 (t) − φ2 (t)) + m 2 l22 φ̈2 (t)
− m 2 l1l2 φ̇1 (t)2 sin(φ1 (t) − φ2 (t)) + m 2 gl2 sin(φ2 (t)) 0, (2.26)
where (2.24), (2.25), and (2.26) describe the dynamics of the bridge, the sway dynam-
ics of the hook and the payload, respectively.
The double-pendulum approximation can also be applied to multi-rope systems
in order to reflect the enhanced stiffness attributed to multi-rope systems. Figure 2.9
illustrates the assumption on the two-rope hoisting system as a double-pendulum
system, where st is the distance between two rope-suspension points on the trolley,
and ss is the distance between two rope-attachment points on the spreader. Consid-
ering φ 2 φ 1 (st −ss )/ss ãφ1 , the double-pendulum formulation can be expressed
as the following single nonlinear equation of motion (Masoud and Nayfeh 2003).
(l12 + ã 2 l22 − 2ãl1l2 cos(φ1 (t) + ãφ1 (t)))(φ̈1 (t) + (c/m 1 )φ̇1 (t))
+ ã(ã + 1)l1l2 sin(φ1 (t) + ãφ1 (t))φ̇1 (t)2 + (l1 sin(φ1 (t)) + ãl2 sin(ãφ1 (t)))g
+ (l cos(φ1 (t)) − ãl2 cos(ãφ1 (t)))( ÿ(t) + (c/m) ẏ(t)) 0, (2.27)
where c denotes the viscous damping coefficient associated with the movements of
the trolley and the payload. Assuming a small sway angle φ 1 , the following linear
form of (2.27) can be obtained (Masoud et al. 2005).
2.3 Double-Pendulum Crane Models 23
l1 + ã 2 l2 ÿ(t) + (c/m) ẏ(t)

φ̈1 (t) + (c/m)φ̇1 (t) + gφ1 (t) + 0. (2.28)
(l1 − ãl2 )2 (l1 − ãl2 )
In (2.27) and (2.28), the dynamics of the two-rope hoisting mechanism are pre-
sented in a simplified form, that is, in terms of only φ 1 , and this simplification refers
to a simple pendulum system. Although such simplification does not describe the
exact dynamics of the actual system, it can certainly result in formulating simple yet
implementable control schemes such as delayed feedback control. Another reason
for simplification and linearization of the dynamics of multi-rope systems is for a
formulation of input shaping control, which is a widely used control method for
crane systems owing to its simple application structure. Input shaping control is an
open-loop method, which is based on the principle of superposition, and requires the
plant to be linear. Additionally, for generating input-shaped commands, the natural
frequency of the plant should be known. Therefore, from the viewpoint of applica-
tion of input shaping control, an alternative linear form of (2.27) can be obtained as
follows (Masoud and Daqaq 2006).
φ̈1 (t) + (c/m)φ̇1 (t) + ωn2 φ1 (t) + μl˙1 (t) ÿ(t) 0, (2.29)
where

g(l1 + ã 2 l2 ) − ã(dt /ds )l¨1l2
ωn (2.30)
l12 − 2ãl1l2 + ã 2 (rg2 + l22 )
is the natural frequency of the double-pendulum system and

l˙1 (l1 − ãl2 )
μ . (2.31)
l12 − 2ãl1l2 + ã 2 (rg2 + l22 )
In (2.30) and (2.31), r g denotes the radius of gyration of the container–spreader

system about its center point.
As discussed earlier in this section, the response of a multi-rope system is different
from those of a single-rope one. The elasticity of the hoisting ropes affects the oscil-
lating frequency of a multi-rope system during oscillations of the payload (Masoud
2009). Therefore, it is a daunting task to properly estimate the natural frequency
of multi-rope systems. Daqaq and Masoud (2006) utilized the method of multiple
scales to obtain the following nonlinear approximation ω̃n for the natural frequency
of the simplified double-pendulum model of the container crane.

3b3 b1 ξ 2 −3b3 b42
ω̃n ωn 1 − A2 + + + 2b2 b4 − b1 b4
2
, (2.32)
8ωn2 4 2ωn4 2ωn2
where

m 1 g(ã22 + 2ã32 + ã 2 ã2 l2 )
ωn (2.33)
ã2 (J1 ã 2 + m 1 (ã2 − ãl2 )2
is the linear frequency of the double-pendulum system, A is the amplitude of the

oscillation in the coast mode, ξ ÿ(t)/ã2 , and bi , i 1, 2, …, 4, are constants given
as follows:
b1 (m 1 (4ã32 + (ã(1 + ã)2 − 6ã1 )ã22 l2 ) + 6J1 ã ã1 ã22

+ 2m 1 ã((3 + 2ã)ã2 ã4 l2 − 2ã22 (ã3 − 3ã ã1 l22 )))
/(ã22 (J1 ã 2 + m 1 (ã2 − ãl2 )2 ), (2.34)
b2 m 1 (6ã3 + ã2 (ã2 − ã 3l2 + 6ã1l2 ))/2(J1 ã 2 + m 1 (ã2 − ãl2 )2 ), (2.35)
b3 −gm 1 (12ã3 + ã3 (ã2 − 24ã2 ã4 + ã(ã 3 − 24ã1 l2 ))

/6ã2 (J1 ã 2 + m 1 (ã2 − ãl2 )2 ), (2.36)
b4 m 1 ã2 (ã2 − ãl2 )/(J1 ã 2 + m 1 (ã2 − ãl2 )2 ), (2.37)
and
ã1 st (st2 − ss2 )/6ss3 , (2.38)

ã2 l1 (t)2 − (1/4)(st − ss )2 , (2.39)
ã3 st ss /8, (2.40)
ã4 st ss (st2 − 4l1 (t)2 + st ss + ss2 )/24((st − ss )2 − 4l1 (t)2 )2 . (2.41)
2.4 Underwater Load Transportation
All the formulations discussed so far in this chapter deal with the transportation of
the load in the air. However, cranes are also employed for transporting loads in water.
For example, the refueling machine (RM) in a nuclear power plant, which is a type
of overhead cranes, is used for transporting nuclear fuel rods to desired locations
within the nuclear reactor in water to prevent the escape of radiation from the rods
to the environment. Figure 2.10 depicts a 2D schematic of the RM system, which is
transporting a fuel rod along the j-axis in water to a given target location in that one
end of the rod is pin-jointed to the bridge, whereas the other one hangs (vertically)
freely. In Fig. 2.10, y(t) is the displacement of the bridge of mass mb , F b (t) is the
control input to the bridge along the j-axis, l is the half-length of the rod of mass mr ,
φ(t) is the sway angle of the rod about the k-axis, f b is the buoyancy force, f D is the
drag force, and g is the gravitational acceleration.
2.4 Underwater Load Transportation 25

schematic depicting
dynamics of a nuclear RM
along the j-axis
Whenever the rod is transported in water, the fluid–structure interaction results in

the generation of hydrodynamic forces such as the buoyancy force f b , the drag force
f D , and force due to the added mass f a . The buoyancy force is the weight of the fluid
displaced by the rod and is expressed mathematically as follows.
f b (t) ρw Vr g, (2.42)
where ρ w is the density of water and V r is the volume of the submerged rod. The drag
force f D is often termed as the fluid reaction force that acts on the direction opposite
to the movement of the rod and is mathematically expressed as follows (Shah and
Hong 2014).
f D (t) (1/2)Cd ρw AP |vr |vr , (2.43)
where C d is the drag coefficient, AP is the projected frontal area, and vr is the velocity
of the rod. The hydrodynamic force caused by the acceleration of the fluid is called
the added mass force f a and is expressed as follows.
f a (t) m a (dvr /dt), (2.44)
where ma is the added mass, which is mathematically given as follows.
m a Cm ρw Vr , (2.45)
where C m is the inertial coefficient.

Considering the above-mentioned hydrodynamic forces, the following equations

of motion of the RM system, for analyzing the underwater response of the rod upon
the movements of the bridge, are obtained (Shah and Hong 2014). For the derivation,
see Appendix E.
(m b + m̃) ÿ(t) − m̃l φ̈(t) cos φ(t) + m̃l φ̇(t)2 sin(φ(t))

+ cy ẏ(t) + (1/2)Cd ρw Ap |vr |vr Fb (t), (2.46)
m̃l ÿ(t) cos(φ(t)) − (7/3)m̃l 2 φ̈(t) + cφ φ̇(t) − (m r g − ρw Vr g)l sin(φ(t)) 0,

(2.47)
where m̃ is the mass of the rod (mr ) combined with the additional mass of the fluid
itself displaced by the rod (ma ), and cy and cφ correspond to the viscous damping
coefficients associated with the movements of the bridge and the rod, respectively.
Equation (2.46) depicts the dynamics of the bridge, whereas (2.47) represents the
oscillations of the rod in water.
2.5 Simulations
This section presents the simulations of the lumped mass models of the discussed
gantry cranes. Let us start with the simulation of the simple 2D model, (2.3) and (2.4),
of the overhead crane, which depicts the dynamics of the bridge and the payload along
the j-axis. First, the equations of motion (2.3) and (2.4) are converted into a schematic
using Simulink; see Fig. 2.11.
Considering m 0.5 kg, mb 25 kg, and l 5 m, the responses of both the bridge
and the payload were obtained, as illustrated in Fig. 2.12: Fig. 2.12a shows the input
F b (t) to the bridge, which transports the bridge 0.047 m along the j-axis in 7.0 s; see
Fig. 2.12b, whereas Fig. 2.12c depicts the sway of the payload. Figure 2.12 depicts
the responses of a linear model of the 2D overhead crane. To simulate the nonlinear
model, (2.1) and (2.2), of the 2D overhead crane, the schematic shown in Fig. 2.11 can
be updated to include the nonlinear terms of (2.1) and (2.2). The sway responses of
both the linear models, (2.3) and (2.4), given by the black solid line, and the nonlinear
model, (2.1) and (2.2), given by the blue-dashed line, are compared in Fig. 2.13. The
said two crane models do not include the hoisting dynamics of the payload. Now,
we will simulate the dynamics of the 2D overhead crane in consideration of the
hoisting-up and hoisting-down movements of the payload; see (2.10) and (2.12).
The schematic of the said crane system is shown in Fig. 2.14. Figure 2.15 illustrates
the responses of the 2D overhead crane considering m 0.1 kg, mb 25 kg and
hoisting-down movement of the payload: Fig. 2.15a shows the input F b (t) to the
bridge, which displaces the bridge 1 m along the j-axis in 7.0 s; see Fig. 2.15b,
c represents the hoisting-down movement of the payload from 10 to 15 m in 5 s,
whereas Fig. 2.15d indicates the resultant sway of the payload. Now, a comparison
2.5 Simulations
Fig. 2.11 A schematic for simulating the response of the 2D overhead crane model, (2.3) and (2.4), in Simulink
27
Fig. 2.12 Responses of the linear 2D overhead crane model, (2.3) and (2.4): a input F b (t) to the
bridge, b displacement of the bridge, and c sway of the payload
2.5 Simulations 29
Fig. 2.13 Comparison of the sway motions of a 2D overhead crane model considering nonlinear
(i.e., (2.1) and (2.2)) and linear (i.e., (2.3) and (2.4)) equations of motion
of the sway responses of the payload, considering both hoisting-up and hoisting-
down motions of the payload, is depicted in Fig. 2.16: Fig. 2.16a shows the input to
the bridge; Fig. 2.16b portrays the consequent displacement of the bridge; Fig. 2.16c
depicts the hoisting of the payload from 10 to 5 m; and, finally, Fig. 2.16d compares
the sway of the payload upon hoisting-up and hoisting-down motions of the payload,
represented by blue-dashed and black solid lines, respectively.
So far, we have simulated the overhead cranes operating in air. Now, we will
simulate the dynamics of the RM system, (2.46) and (2.47), which is an overhead
crane that transports nuclear fuel rods, underwater, in a nuclear power plant. The
schematic of the considered RM system is shown in Fig. 2.17. The simulations are
performed considering C m 2, C d 1.28, ρw 1000 kg/m3 , l 0.49 m, mr
0.165 kg, d 0.01 m, mb 5.1 kg, cy 10.2 Ns/m, and cφ 0.4 Nms/rad. Figure 2.18
illustrates the underwater response of the fuel rod: Fig. 2.18a shows the control input
to the bridge, which moves the bridge 2 m along the j-axis in 7.0 s; see Fig. 2.18b,
c depicts the velocity of the bridge, which has a maximum value of 0.3 m/s; and,
finally, Fig. 2.18d represents the consequent sway of the fuel rod in water.
30
Fig. 2.14 A schematic for simulating the response of the overhead crane model, (2.10) and (2.12), considering the hoist motions of the payload
2 Lumped Mass Models of Gantry Cranes
2.5 Simulations 31
Fig. 2.15 Responses of the 2D overhead crane considering lowering the payload from 10 to 15 m:
a input F b (t) to the bridge, b displacement of the bridge, c hoisting-down motion of the payload,
and d sway angle of the payload
Fig. 2.16 Responses of the 2D overhead crane during the hoist up motion of the payload from
10 to 5 m: a input F b (t) to the bridge, b displacement of the bridge, c hoisting-up motion of the
payload, and d sway angle of the payload
32
Fig. 2.17 A schematic for simulating the underwater responses of the RM using (2.46) and (2.47)
2 Lumped Mass Models of Gantry Cranes
References 33
Fig. 2.18 Simulation of the dynamics of the RM using (2.46) and (2.47): a input F b (t) to the
bridge, b displacement of the bridge, c velocity of the bridge, and d sway angle of the rod
References
Al-Garni AZ, Moustafa KAF, Nizami S (1995) Optimal control of overhead cranes. Control Eng
Practice 3(9):1277–1284
Cartmell MP, Morrish L, Taylor AJ (1998) Dynamics of spreader motion in a gantry crane. Proc
Inst Mech Eng Part C-J Mech Eng Sci 212(2):85–105
Daqaq MF, Masoud ZN (2006) Nonlinear input-shaping controller for quay-side container cranes.
Nonlinear Dyn 45(1–2):149–170
Ebeid AM, Moustafa KAF, Emarashabaik HE (1992) Electromechanical modeling of overhead
cranes. Int J Syst Sci 23(12):2155–2169
Hong K-S, Sohn S-C, Lee M-H (1997) Sway control of a container crane (Part I): modeling, control
strategy, error feedback control via reference velocity profiles. J Control Autom Syst 3(1):23–31
Karihaloo BL, Parbery RD (1982) Optimal control of a dynamical system representing a gantry
crane. J Optim Theory Appl 36(3):409–417
Karkoub MA, Zribi M (2002a) Modelling and energy based nonlinear control of crane lifters. IEE
Proc-Control Theory Appl 149(3):209–216
Karkoub MA, Zribi M (2002b) Modelling and non-linear discontinuous feedback control of crane
lifter systems. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part I-J Syst Control Eng 216(I2):157–167
Kim DH, Singhose W (2010) Performance studies of human operators driving double-pendulum
bridge cranes. Control Eng Practice 18(6):567–576
Kim DH, Lee JW, Park KT et al (2003) Closed-form kinematic solution of a non-parallel cable
reeving crane system. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part C-J Mech Eng Sci 217(2):257–269
Kim YS, Hong K-S, Sul SK (2004) Anti-sway control of container cranes: Inclinometer, observer,
and state feedback. Int J Control Autom Syst 2(4):435–449
Lee HH (1998) Modeling and control of a three-dimensional overhead crane. J Dyn Syst Meas
Control-Trans ASME 120(4):471–476
Maleki E, Singhose W (2012) Swing dynamics and input-shaping control of human-operated
double-pendulum boom cranes. J Comput Nonlinear Dyn 7(3):031006
Manson GA (1982) Time–optimal control of an overhead crane model. Optim Control Appl Methods
3(2):115–120
Masoud ZN (2009) Effect of hoisting cable elasticity on anti-sway controllers of quay-side container
cranes. Nonlinear Dyn 58(1–2):129–140
Masoud ZN, Alhazza K (2014) Frequency-modulation input shaping control of double-pendulum
overhead cranes. J Dyn Syst Meas Control-Trans ASME 136(2):021005
Masoud ZN, Alhazza K, Abu-Nada E et al (2014) A hybrid command-shaper for double-pendulum
overhead cranes. J Vib Control 20(1):24–37
Masoud ZN, Daqaq MF (2006) A graphical approach to input-shaping control design for container
cranes with hoist. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol 14(6):1070–1077
Masoud ZN, Nayfeh AH (2003) Sway reduction on container cranes using delayed feedback con-
troller. Nonlinear Dyn 34(3–4):347–358
Masoud ZN, Nayfeeh AH, Nayfeh NA (2005) Sway reduction on quay-side container cranes using
delayed feedback controller: simulations and experiments. J Vib Control 11(8):1103–1122
Morrish L, Cartmell MP, Taylor AJ (1996) Cable stretch asymmetries in multi-cable spreader
suspension systems undergoing combined translations and rotations. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part
C-J Mech Eng Sci 210(3):225–237
Morrish L, Cartmell MP, Taylor AJ (1997) Geometry and kinematics of multicable spreader lifting
gear. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part C-J Mech Eng Sci 211(3):185–194
Moustafa KAF, Abou-El-Yazid TG (1996) Load sway control of overhead cranes with load hoisting
via stability analysis. JSME Int J Ser C-Dynam Control Robot Des Manuf 39(1):34–40
Moustafa KAF, Ebeid AM (1988) Nonlinear modeling and control of overhead crane load sway. J
Dyn Syst Meas Control-Trans ASME 110(3):266–271
O’Connor W, Habibi H (2013) Gantry crane control of a double-pendulum, distributed-mass load,
using mechanical wave concepts. Mech Sci 4(2):251–261
Ramli L, Mohamed Z, Abdullahi AM et al (2017) Control strategies for crane systems: a compre-
hensive review. Mech Syst Signal Proc 95:1–23
Sakawa Y, Sano H (1997) Nonlinear model and linear robust control of overhead traveling cranes.
Nonlinear Anal-Theory Methods Appl 30(4):2197–2207
Sun N, Fang YC, Chen H et al (2017) Amplitude-saturated nonlinear output feedback antis wing
control for under actuated cranes with double-pendulum cargo dynamics. IEEE Trans Ind Electron
64(3):2135–2146
Tuan LA, Lee SG (2013) Sliding mode controls of double-pendulum crane systems. J Mech Sci
Technol 27(6):1863–1873
Vaughan J, Kim D, Singhose W (2010) Control of tower cranes with double-pendulum payload
dynamics. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol 18(6):1345–1358
Zhang MH, Ma X, Rong XW et al (2016) Adaptive tracking control for double-pendulum overhead
cranes subject to tracking error limitation, parametric uncertainties and external disturbances.
Mech Syst Signal Proc 76–77:15–32
Chapter 3
Lumped Mass Models of Rotary Cranes
As discussed in Chap. 1, rotary cranes comprise tower cranes and boom cranes. In
this chapter, we will discuss the dynamics of both the tower and boom crane systems.
The operation of a tower crane consists of a slew motion of the jib, a translational
motion of the trolley along the length of the jib, and a hoisting motion of the payload.
The operations of a boom crane include slewing and luffing movements of the boom
together with a hoisting motion of the payload (Ito et al. 1978).
3.1 Tower Cranes
As discussed earlier in Chap. 1, a tower crane can undergo three motions: Jib rotation,
trolley translation, and load hoisting. Figure 3.1 depicts a schematic of a tower crane,
where mj is the mass of the jib, which can undergo a rotational motion (i.e., slew
motion) about the vertical i-axis, β s denotes the slew angle of the crane. A trolley
of mass mt traverses along the length of the jib, where y(t) denotes the position of
the trolley on the jib. A payload of mass m hangs from the trolley through a rope of
length l. Upon the slewing motion of the boom, a translational motion of the trolley,
and a hoisting motion of the payload, the payload sways in the 3D space. Figure 3.2
illustrates the angular configuration of the sway motion of the payload, where φ x
signifies the angle between the hoisting rope and its projection on the ij-plane and φ z
represents the sway angle between the vertical axis and the projection of the hoisting
rope on the ij-plane.
Several researchers have investigated the dynamics of tower cranes (Omar and
Nayfeh 2004; Blajer and Kolodziejczyk 2011; Matusko et al. 2015). Considering
the slew motion of the crane, a translational motion of the trolley on the jib, and a
hoisting motion of the payload, the following equations of motion of the tower crane
system are obtained (Omar and Nayfeh 2003). For their derivation, see Appendix F.

36 3 Lumped Mass Models of Rotary Cranes
Fig. 3.1 Three-dimensional schematic of a tower crane

Js + ml(t)2 sin(φx (t))2 + m cos(φx (t))2 l(t)2 sin(φz (t))2 + (m t + m)y(t)2
+ 2ml(t) cos(φx (t)) sin(φz (t))y(t))β̈s (t) + ml(t)y(t) sin(φx (t))φ̇x (t)2
˙
− 2m l(t)y(t) cos(φx (t))φ̇x (t) − 2ml(t)2 cos(φz (t)) sin(φx (t))2 φ̇x (t)φ̇z (t)
¨
− ml(t)2 cos(φx (t)) sin(φx (t)) sin(φz (t))φ̇z (t)2 − m l(t)y(t) sin(φx (t))
˙
− ml(t)l(t)(2 sin(φz (t))φ̇x (t) + cos(φz (t)) sin(2φx (t))φ̇z (t)) + β̇s (t)(cs
˙ cos(φx (t)) sin(φz (t)) + 2(m t + m) ẏ(t))
+ y(t)(2m l(t)
+ ml(t)2 (cos(φz (t))2 sin(2φx (t))φ̇x (t) − cos(φx (t))2 sin(2φx (t))φ̇z (t))
˙
+ 2ml(t)(l(t)(sin(φ 2 2 2
x (t)) + cos(φx (t)) sin(φz (t)) )
+ ẏ(t) cos(φx (t)) sin(φz (t)) − y(t) sin(φx (t)) sin(φz (t))φ̇x (t)
+ y(t) cos(φx (t)) cos(φz (t))ϕ̇z (t))) + ml(t) ÿ(t) sin(φx (t))
+ ml(t)2 cos(φx (t)) sin(φx (t)) cos(φz (t))φ̈z (t)
+ (−(ml(t)2 cos(φx (t))2 sin(φz (t))) − ml(t)2 sin(φx (t)2 sin(φz (t)
+ ml(t)y(t) cos(φx (t)))φ̈x (t), (3.1)
3.1 Tower Cranes 37
Fig. 3.2 Angular configuration of the sway motion of the payload transported by a tower crane
(m t + m)( ÿ(t) − y(t)β̇s (t)2 ) + c y ẏ(t) + ml(t)β̇s (t)2 cos(φx (t)) sin(φz (t))
+ 2ml(t)β̇s (t)φ̇x (t) cos(φx (t)) − ml(t) cos(φx (t)) sin(φz (t))φ̇x (t)2
− 2ml(t) cos(φz (t)) sin(φx (t))φ̇x (t)φ̇z (t) + ml(t) sin(φx (t))β̈s (t)
¨
− ml(t) cos(φx (t)) sin(φz (t))φ̇z (t)2 + m cos(φx (t)) sin(φz (t))l(t)
− ml(t) sin(φx (t)) sin(φz (t))φ̈x (t) + ml(t) cos(φx (t)) cos(φz (t))φ̈z (t)
˙
− 2m l(t)(− sin(φx (t)) β̇s (t) − sin(φx (t)) sin(φz (t))φ̇x (t)

+ cos(φx (t)) cos(φz (t))φ̇z (t) Ft (t), (3.2)
l(t) cos(φx (t))2 φ̈z (t) + cos(φx (t))(g sin(φz (t)) − cos(φz (t))y(t)β̇s (t)2
− 2l(t) sin(φx (t))φ̇x (t)φ̇z (t) + 2l(t) cos(φx (t)) cos(φz (t))β̇s (t)φ̇z (t)
˙
+ l(t) cos(φx (t)) cos(φz (t)) sin(φz (t))β̇s (t)2 + 2l(t)(cos(φ x (t))φ̇z (t)

+ cos(φz (t)) sin(φx (t))β̇s (t)) + cos(φx (t)) cos(φz (t)) ÿ(t)
+ l(t) cos(φx (t)) cos(φz (t)) sin(φx (t))β̈s (t) 0, (3.3)
l(t)φ̈x (t) + g cos(φz (t)) sin(φx (t)) − 2 cos(φx (t)) ẏ(t)β̇s (t)
− (β̇s (t)2 /4)l(t) sin(2φx (t))(1 + cos(φz (t))2 − sin(φz (t))2 )
+ y(t) sin(φx (t)) sin(φz (t))β̇s (t)2 + l(t) cos(φx (t)) sin(φx (t))φ̇z (t)2
˙
− l(t)(2 sin(φz (t))β̇s (t) − 2φ̇x (t)) − 2l(t) cos(φx (t))2 cos(φz (t))φ̇z (t)β̇s (t)
− ÿ(t) sin(φx (t)) sin(φz (t)) − (l(t) sin(φz (t)) + y(t) cos(φx (t)))β̈s (t) 0, (3.4)
where J s denotes the moment of inertia of the tower crane about the i-axis and cs
denotes the coefficient associated with the viscous damping force to oppose the slew
motion of the crane. Equation (3.1) depicts the slew motion of the tower crane, (3.2)
describes the dynamics of the trolley traversing on the jib, and (3.3) to (3.4) represent
the sway dynamics of the payload. Assuming small sway angles and a constant length
of the hoisting rope, the nonlinear model, (3.1)–(3.4), can be reduced to the following
simple equations of motion.
(Js + m t y(t)2 )β̈s (t) + cs β̇s (t) − m t gy(t)φx (t) τs (t), (3.5)
m t ÿ(t) + c y ẏ(t) + mgφz (t) Ft (t), (3.6)
l φ̈z (t) + gφz (t) − ÿ(t) 0, (3.7)
l φ̈x (t) + gφx (t) + y(t)β̈s (t) 0. (3.8)
Equation (3.5) depicts the slew motion of the tower crane, (3.6) describes the dynam-
ics of the trolley traversing on the jib, and (3.7) to (3.8) represent the sway dynamics
of the payload. Further simplifications to the dynamics, given by (3.5)–(3.8), can
be made by neglecting the hoisting of the payload, which results in the following
formulation of the tower crane representing only the slew motion of the jib and the
translation of the trolley along the jib (Blackburn et al. 2010a, b).
φ̈z (t) −(g/l)φz (t) − (1/l) ÿ(t), (3.9)

3.1 Tower Cranes 39
φ̈x (t) −(g/l)φx (t) + (y(t)/l)β̈s (t). (3.10)
Now, considering only the slew motion of the tower crane (i.e., when both the trol-
ley movement and the payload hoisting are not considered), the simplified dynamics
of the tower crane are obtained as follows (Zameroski et al. 2008).
φ̈z (t) β̈s (t)φx (t) + 2φ̇x (t)β̇s (t) + β̇s (t)2 φz (t) + (lj /l)β̇s (t)2 − (g/l)φz (t), (3.11)
φ̈x (t) −β̈s (t)φz (t) − 2φ̇z (t)β̇s (t) + β̇s (t)2 φx (t) − (lj /l)β̈s (t) − (g/l)φx (t),
(3.12)
where lj is the length of the jib.

All the formulations on rotary cranes discussed thus far have focused on the influ-
ence of crane motions on the dynamics of the payload. However, some researchers
(Jerman et al. 2004; Marinovic 2012), on the contrary, have investigated the effects
of the swing of the payload on the structure of the crane. Such studies are useful in
the cases where large payloads are handled, and furthermore, it is desirable to assess
the fatigue of the crane structure.
3.2 Boom Cranes
Figure 3.3 depicts a boom crane, which consists of a boom (i.e., a cantilever beam
of length lb and mass mbm ) with one end connected, via two pin joints, to the top
end of the tower (stationary) to allow rotations of the boom about the k-axis (i.e.,
the slewing motion denoted by the angle β s ) and the ib -axis (i.e., the luffing motion
signified by the angle β l ), respectively. The slewing and luffing motions are generated
by the torque inputs τ s and τ l to the slewing and luffing actuators, respectively. The
global coordinates ijk are fixed to the base of the tower, whereas ib j b kb are the local
coordinates fixed to the boom at its connection point to the tower. From the free end
of the boom, at point P, a payload of mass m is suspended using a hoisting rope
of length l. The payload undergoes sway motions in the 3D space (i.e., a spherical
pendulum) due to the slewing and luffing motions of the boom and the hoisting
motion of the payload (generated by the hoist force F h ). The sway dynamics of the
payload can be represented by two DOFs: φ (i.e., the angle between the hoisting rope
and the vertical axis) and ϕ (i.e., the angle between the projections of the pendulum
(P1 P2 ) and the boom (P0 P1 ) on the ij-plane).
Fig. 3.3 Three-dimensional schematic of a boom crane
Considering the coordinates, x m , ym , and zm , of the payload along the i-, j-, and k-
axes, respectively, and the slewing angle β s of the boom, as generalized coordinates,
the following model of the boom crane is obtained using Lagrange’s method (Sakawa
et al. 1981). For the derivation, see Appendix G.
ẍm (t) (g Jh /(Jh + mrh2 ))(1 + rh τh /g Jh )((lb sin(βl ) cos(βs (t)) − xm )/l(t)), (3.13)
ÿm (t) (g Jh /(Jh + mrh2 ))(1 + rh τh /g Jh )((lb sin(βl ) cos(βs (t)) − ym )/l(t)), (3.14)
¨ (g Jh /(Jh + mrh2 ))((rh τh /g Jh ) − (mrh2 /Jh )),

z̈ m (t) −l(t) (3.15)
β̈s (t) (τs /Js ) + ((mlb sin(βl )/Js )(g Jh /(Jh + mrh2 ))(1 + rh τh /g Jh )
× ((ym (t) cos(βs (t)) − xm (t) sin(βs (t)))/l(t))), (3.16)
where τ s denotes the torque of the slewing motor and J s represents the moment of
inertia of the crane about the k-axis. Equations (3.13) and (3.14) depict the position
of the payload along the i- and j-axes, respectively, (3.15) represents the hoisting
motion of the payload, and (3.16) describes the slewing motion of the boom. Equa-
tions (3.13)–(3.16) are obtained using Lagrange’s method, where the luff angle β l
of the boom is considered fixed.
3.2 Boom Cranes 41
An alternate mathematical model to the slewing dynamics, (3.13)–(3.16), of the

boom crane can be obtained by using Newton’s second law of motion, which is given
as follows.
m ẍm (t) −T sin(φ(t)) sin(ϕ(t) − βs (t)), (3.17)
m ÿm (t) −T sin(φ(t)) cos(ϕ(t) − βs (t)), (3.18)
m z̈ m (t) −mg + T cos(φ(t)). (3.19)
Equations (3.17) to (3.18) represent the dynamics of the payload along the i- and
j-axes, respectively, and (3.19) depicts the hoisting dynamics. Now, from the above
equations, the following equations of motion of the boom crane undergoing simul-
taneous luff and slew motions are obtained (Sakawa and Nakazumi 1985). For the
derivation, see Appendix H.
Js β̈s (t) τs − Js (βl (t))β̇l (t)β̇s (t) + (mlb2 ((eo /lb ) + sin(βl (t))
× (−(xm (t)/lb ) sin(βs (t)) + (ym (t)/lb ) cos(βs (t)))(T /mlbl(t)), (3.20)
β̈l (t) sin(βl (t)) + (1 + (mrh2 / Jh ))(cos(βl (t)) − (z m (t)/lb ))(T /mlbl(t))
(g/lb ) − β̇l (t)2 cos(βl (t)) + (rh /Jhlb )τh . (3.21)
Equations (3.20) and (3.21) describe the slewing and luffing motions of the boom,
respectively. In (3.20), the term Js (βl (t)) represents the derivative of J s with respect to
β l and eo signifies the offset of the base of the boom from the origin. In (3.17)–(3.21),
T is the tension in the hoisting rope, which is given as follows.
T ml(t)(g + z̈ m (t))/(cos(βl (t)) − (z m (t)/lb )). (3.22)
Equations (3.13)–(3.16) and (3.17)–(3.22) of the boom crane were obtained con-
sidering small angle approximations (i.e., cos φ ≈ 1 and sin φ ≈ φ). The com-
plete nonlinear equations of motion of the boom crane undergoing all three possible
movements (i.e., luff, slew, and hoisting) can be obtained using Lagrange’s method
(Agostini et al. 2003). For the derivation, see Appendix I.
˙ ϕ̇(t) − l(t)φ̇(t)2 cos(ϕ(t)) sin(ϕ(t)) − g cos(φ(t)) sin(ϕ(t))

l(t)ϕ̈(t) −2l(t)
+ ẍp (t) sin(φ(t)) sin(ϕ(t)) + ÿp (t) cos(ϕ(t)) − z̈ p (t) cos(φ(t)) sin(ϕ(t)),
(3.23)
˙ φ̇(t) cos(ϕ(t))2
l(t) cos(ϕ(t))2 φ̈(t) 2l(t)φ̇(t)ϕ̇(t) sin(ϕ(t)) cos(ϕ(t)) − 2l(t)
− ẍp (t) cos(φ(t)) − g sin(φ(t)) cos(ϕ(t)) − z̈ p (t) sin(φ(t)) cos(ϕ(t)),
(3.24)
ẍp (t) eo (β̇s (t)2 cos(βs (t)) − β̈s (t) sin(βs (t)))

+ lb 2β̇s (t)β̇l (t) sin(βs (t)) sin(βl (t)) − β̈l (t) cos(βs (t)) sin(βl (t))

− (β̇s (t)2 + β̇l (t)2 ) cos(βs (t)) cos(βl (t)) − β̈s (t) sin(βs (t)) cos(βl (t)) ,
(3.25)
ÿp (t) eo (β̇s (t)2 sin(βs (t)) − β̈s (t) cos(βs (t)))

+ lb −2β̇s (t)β̇l (t) cos(βs (t)) sin(βl (t)) − β̈l (t) sin(βs (t)) sin(βl (t))

− (β̇s (t)2 + β̇l (t)2 ) sin(βs (t)) cos(βl (t)) + β̈s (t) cos(βs (t)) cos(βl (t)) (3.26)
z̈ p (t) lb (−β̇l (t)2 sin(βl (t)) + β̇l (t)2 cos(βl (t)), (3.27)
where x p , yp , and zp denote the positions of the tip of the boom (i.e., point P of
suspension of the payload). Equations (3.23) to (3.24) describe the sway dynamics
of the payload, whereas (3.25), (3.26), and (3.27) depict the dynamics of the tip point
P of the boom along the i-, j-, and k-axes, respectively.
So far, we have discussed the formulations of rotary cranes having a single boom.
However, some boom cranes also have an auxiliary jib connected to the boom with a
flexible joint (see Fig. 3.4) to enhance the maneuverability (i.e., by addition of a DOF)
and the workspace of the crane system. Such boom cranes are also called knuckle
boom cranes. The following equations of motion of the considered knuckle boom
crane can be derived using Lagrange’s equation, using the same method described
in Appendix I, considering the given kinetic and potential energies as follows.
2
E K (1/2) Jl,b + m j l 2j β̇l,b + (1/2)Jl,j β̇l,j2 + (1/2)Js β̇s2

+ m j lblcj β̇l,b β̇l,j cos βl,b − βl,j , (3.28)
2
E P m blcb + m jlb g sin βl,b + m jlcj g cos βl,j + (1/2)k P βl,b − βl,j , (3.29)
and the generalized coordinates q1 βl,b , q2 βl,j , and q3 βs (Sato and Sakawa
1988; Yoshimoto and Sakawa 1989).
(Jl,b + m jlj2 )β̈l,b (t) + m jlblcj cos(βl,b (t) − βl,j (t))β̈l,j (t)
+ m jlblcj sin(βl,b (t) − βl,j (t))β̇l,j (t)2 − (1/2)(∂ Js /∂βl,b )β̇s (t)2
− (m blcb + m jlb )g sin(βl,b (t)) + k P (βl,b (t) − βl,j (t)) Q 1 , (3.30)
Jl,j β̈l,j (t) + m jlblcj cos(βl,b (t) − βl,j (t))β̈l,b (t)

− m jlblcj sin(βl,b (t) − βl,j (t))β̇l,b (t)2 − (1/2)(∂ Js /∂βl,j )β̇s (t)2
− m jlcj g sin(βl,j (t)) − k P (βl,b (t) − βl,j (t)) Q 2 , (3.31)
3.2 Boom Cranes 43
Fig. 3.4 Three-dimensional schematic of a knuckle boom crane
Js β̈s (t) + ((∂ Js /∂βl,b )β̇l,b (t) + (∂ Js /∂βl,j )β̇l,j (t))β̇s (t) Q 3 , (3.32)

ẍm (t) (g + z̈ m (t))((lb sin(βl,b (t)) + lj sin(βl,j (t)) − eo ) cos(βs (t)) − xm (t))
÷ lb cos(βl,b (t)) + lj cos(βl,j (t)) − z m (t), (3.33)

ÿm (t) (g + z̈ m (t))((lb sin(βl,b (t)) + lj sin(βl,j (t)) − eo ) sin(βs (t)) − ym (t))
÷ lb cos(βl,b (t)) + lj cos(βl,j (t)) − z m (t), (3.34)
¨ (rh2 /Jh )m(g + z̈ m (t)) − (rh /Jh )τh ,

l(t) (3.35)
where k P denotes the spring constant of the flexible joint P, lb and l j represent the
lengths, and mbm and mj signify the masses of the boom and the jib, respectively;
J l,b and J l,j are the moments of inertia of the boom and the jib about the pivot point
P0 and P; l cb and l cj indicate the distances of the CGs of the boom and the jib from
P0 and P, respectively; and Qi (i 1, 2, 3) symbolize the generalized forces, which
are given as follows.
Q 1 mlb (g + z̈ m )ab /(lb cos(βl,b ) + lj cos(βl,j ) − z m ) + Aclc p, (3.36)
Q 2 mlj (g + z̈ m )aj /(lb cos(βl,b ) + lj cos(βl,j ) − z m ), (3.37)
m(g + z̈ m )(lb sin(βl,b ) + lj sin(βl,j ) − eo )(xm sin(βs ) − ym cos(βs ))

Q 3 τs − ,
lb cos(βl,b ) + lj cos(βl,j ) − z m
(3.38)
where
an (xm cos(βs ) + ym sin(βs ) − lb sin(βl,b ) − lj sin(βl,j ) + eo ) cos(βl,i )

+ (lb cos(βl,b ) + lj cos(βl,j ) − z m ) sin(βl,i ), (n b, j). (3.39)
Here, p is the pressure generated by the cylinder, Ac is the cross-sectional area of the
hydraulic cylinder (i.e., the actuator for generating luffing movement of the boom),
and lc l c (β l,b ) is the length of the cylinder, where lc ∂lc /∂βl,b .
3.3 Simulations
In this section, we will present the simulation results of the rotary cranes. First, we
will simulate the model, (3.5)–(3.8), of the tower crane to depict the sway angles
φx (i.e., the angle between the hoisting rope and its projection on the ij-plane) and
φz (i.e., the sway angle between the vertical axis and the projection of hoisting rope
on the ij-plane) upon a slew motion βs of the jib and a translational motion y of
the trolley along the length of the jib. Figure 3.5 illustrates the schematic of the
dynamics, (3.5)–(3.8), of the tower crane. Considering l 10 m, m 0.5 kg, mt
5 kg, cy cs 0.2 Ns/m, and J s 10 kg m2 , the sway angles (φx and φz ) of the
payload upon the inputs F t and τ s are depicted in Fig. 3.6: Fig. 3.6a shows the input
F t to the trolley, which transports the trolley 2.25 m along the axis of the jib in 5 s,
see Fig. 3.6b; Fig. 3.6c depicts the sway angle φx ; Fig. 3.6d shows the torque input
τ s to the jib, which induces a slew movement of 0.3 rad of the job, see Fig. 3.6e; and
finally, Fig. 3.6f depicts the sway angle φz .
3.3 Simulations 45
Fig. 3.5 A schematic representing the equations of motion, (3.5)–(3.8), of the tower crane
Now, we will present the simulation results of the boom crane. Figure 3.7 illustrates
the schematic of the dynamics, (3.23)–(3.27), of the boom crane. Considering e
0.017 m and l b 2.37 m, the sway angles φ (i.e., the angle between the hoisting rope
and the vertical axis) and ϕ (i.e., the angle between the projections of the pendulum
(P1 P2 ) and the boom (P0 P1 ) on the ij-plane) of the payload are obtained upon the
luff and slew movements of the crane and the hoisting motion of the payload, see
Fig. 3.8: Fig. 3.8a and 3.8e shows the luff and slew angles of the boom, respectively;
Fig. 3.8b indicates that the payload is lowered from 1 to 1.313 m; whereas Fig. 3.8c,
d depicts the sway angles φ and ϕ for the given slew and luff angles and lowering of
the payload; Fig. 3.8f indicates that the payload is hoisted from 1 to 0.687 m; and,
finally, Fig. 3.8g, h compare the sway angles φ and ϕ for the hoisting-up motion
and hoisting-down motion (shown in Fig. 3.8b, f) of the payload represented by
blue-dashed and red dash-dot lines, respectively.
Fig. 3.6 Simulation of the equations of motion, (3.5)–(3.8), of the tower crane: a force input F t to
the trolley, b displacement of the trolley, c sway angle φx , d torque input τ s , e slew movement of
the jib, f sway angle φz
Fig. 3.7 A schematic representing the equations of motion, (3.23)–(3.27), of the boom crane
References 47
Fig. 3.8 Simulation of the dynamics, (3.23)–(3.27), of the boom crane: a Luff angle, b hoisting-
down motion of the payload, c sway angle φ during the hoisting-down motion of the payload,
d sway angle ϕ during the hoisting-down motion of the payload, e slew angle, f hoisting-up motion
of the payload, g comparison of the sway angle φ during hoisting up and down of the payload,
h comparison of sway angle ϕ during hoisting up and down of the payload
References
Agostini MJ, Parker GG, Schaub H et al (2003) Generating swing-suppressed maneuvers for crane
systems with rate saturation. IEEE Trans Contr Syst Technol 11(4):471–481
Blackburn D, Lawrence J, Danielson J et al (2010a) Radial-motion assisted command shapers for
nonlinear tower crane rotational slewing. Control Eng Practice 18(5):523–531
Blackburn D, Singhose W, Kitchen J et al (2010b) Command shaping for nonlinear crane dynamics.
J Vib Control 16(4):1–25
Blajer W, Kolodziejczyk K (2011) Improved DAE formulation for inverse dynamics simulation of
cranes. Multibody Syst Dyn 25(2):131–143
Ito H, Senda Y, Fujimoto H (1978) Dynamic behavior of a load lifted by a mobile construction-type
crane. 4 study on boom hoist motion, ETC. Bull JSME Jpn Soc Mech Eng 21(154):600–608
Jerman B, Podrzaj P, Kramar J (2004) An investigation of slewing-crane dynamics during slewing
motion—development and verification of a mathematical model. Int J Mech Sci 46(5):729–750
Marinovic I, Sprecic D, Jerman B (2012) A slewing crane payload dynamics. The Vjesn
19(4):907–916
Matusko J, Iles S, Kolonic F et al (2015) Control of 3D tower crane based on tensor product model
transformation with neural friction compensation. Asian J Control 17(2):443–458
Omar HM, Nayfeh AH (2003) Gain scheduling feedback control for tower cranes. J Vib Control
9(3–4):399–418
Omar HM, Nayfeh AH (2004) Gain scheduling feedback control of tower cranes with friction
compensation. J Vib Contr 10(2):269–289
Sato K, Sakawa Y (1988) Modelling and control of a flexible rotary crane. Int J Control
48(5):2085–2105
Sakawa Y, Nakazumi A (1985) Modeling and control of a rotary crane. J Dyn Syst Meas Control-
Trans ASME 107(3):200–206
Sakawa Y, Shindo Y, Hashimoto Y (1981) Optimal control of a rotary crane. J Optim Theor Appl
35(4):535–557
Yoshimoto T, Sakawa Y (1989) Modelling and control of a rotary crane with a flexible joint. Optimal
Contr Appl Methods 10(1):21–38
Zameroski D, Starr G, Wood J et al (2008) Rapid swing-free transport of nonlinear payloads using
dynamic programming. J Dyn Syst Meas Contr Trans ASME 130(4):041001
Chapter 4
Lumped Mass Models of Mobile Cranes
In the previous chapters, we have discussed the crane systems with a fixed base,
which are used at construction sites (e.g., tower cranes), manufacturing/power plants
(e.g., overhead cranes), ship-building factories (e.g., gantry cranes), and seaports
(e.g., container cranes), for handling heavy loads. However, such a crane can operate
only within a limited workspace, because its base is fixed. For operations requir-
ing commutation of the crane (i.e., on land or in the sea), a mobile crane system,
which consists of a crane mechanism mounted on a mobile platform, is used. For
inland operations, usually a boom crane is mounted on a crawler or a rubber-tired
carrier (Maczynski and Wojciech 2003; Klosinski 2005). On the other hand, an off-
shore crane system consists of either a boom crane or a container crane mounted
on a ship or a floating vessel, where the latter (i.e., a container crane mounted on
a vessel) is called a mobile harbor system, which is used for loading and unload-
ing shipments/containers from a big container ship in a deep sea (Ngo and Hong
2009). In this chapter, we will discuss the dynamics of a truck-mounted crane used
for inland operations, whereas for offshore operations, ship-mounted boom and con-
tainer cranes will be discussed.
In developing the equations of motion for mobile crane systems, the reduced
modeling approach is usually pursued. First, the dynamics of the payload are reduced
to the description of a spherical pendulum, which has a movable point of suspension
(Miles 1984; Chin et al. 2001a, b; Ghigliazza and Holmes 2002; Yurchenko and
Alevras 2014; Perig et al. 2014a, b). Then, the excitations due to the movements of
the crane and the mobile platform (i.e., any land vehicle or an offshore vessel) are
integrated into the expressions that represent the motions of the point of suspension
(Abdel-Rahman et al. 2003). For analysis, the movements of the crane and the mobile
platform can be either considered as external disturbances or they can be obtained
by solving the equations of motion of the crane–vehicle (or vessel) system. In this
chapter, both approaches will be discussed.

50 4 Lumped Mass Models of Mobile Cranes
4.1 Truck-Mounted Cranes
In this section, the modeling part consists of developing the coupled equations of
motion of the payload and the crane–vehicle system (i.e., the movements of the crane
and the mobile platform are not considered as disturbances). Figure 4.1 illustrates a
schematic of a truck-mounted telescopic boom crane, which consists of two boom
members, where one member can slide in or out of the other in order to change
the overall length of the boom lb . The mass of the first boom member, which is
in contact with the truck, is denoted by mb1 , whereas the mass of the other sliding
member is symbolized as mb2 . For analyzing the dynamics, ijk is considered as
the inertial coordinate frame, whereas iv j v kv , ib j b kb , and iP j P kP represent the local
coordinate frames, which are affixed to the CG of the chassis of the vehicle, to the
base of the boom (i.e., where the boom is connected to the upper rotating machine),
and to the tip point P of the boom, respectively. The boom can undergo slew and
luffing motions, which are represented by the angles β s and β l , about the vertical
axis passing through the tower and the ib -axis, respectively. Moreover, the body of
the truck/vehicle undergoes rotational motions θv,x , θv,y , and θv,z about the iv , j v , and
kv axes, respectively, due to the interaction represented by the reaction forces Ri (i
1, 2, 3, 4) of the truck with the road/surface on which it moves. The above-mentioned
motions of the crane and the truck result in oscillations of the payload of mass m,
which is suspended from the tip point P of the boom using a hoisting rope of length
l. The position of the payload relative to iv j v kv is obtained as follows.
sm,x ((lb (t) sin(βl (t)) − eh ) cos(βs (t)) + xP (t)), (4.1)
sm,y ((lb (t) sin(βl (t)) − eh ) sin(βs (t)) + yP (t)), (4.2)
sm,z lb (t) cos(βl (t)) + ev + zP (t), (4.3)
where eh and ev denote the offsets of the base of the boom from iv j v kv along the
horizontal and vertical axes, respectively. Now, the equations of motion of the payload
can be written in the following vector form.
mam −T + Wm , (4.4)
where Wm denotes the weight of the payload, T signifies the tension force in the
hoisting rope, and am represents the vector of absolute acceleration of the payload,
which is given as follows (Posiadala et al. 1990).
am am,rel + am,Cor + am,tran , (4.5)
where am,rel is the relative acceleration given as
am,rel (aΩx (t) + ẍP (t))i + (aΩy (t) + ÿP (t))j + (aΩz (t) + z̈P (t))k, (4.6)
4.1 Truck-Mounted Cranes 51
Fig. 4.1 Truck-mounted telescopic boom crane
where
aΩx (t) eo β̇s (t)2 cos(βs (t)) + eo β̈s (t) sin(βs (t)) − aβs sin(βs (t))
+ alb sin(βl (t)) cos(βs (t)) + aβl cos(βl (t)) cos(βs (t)),
aΩy (t) eo β̇s (t)2 sin(βs (t)) − eo β̈s (t) cos(βs (t)) + aβs cos(βs (t))
+ alb sin(βl (t)) sin(βs (t)) + aβl cos(βl (t)) sin(βs (t)),
aΩz (t) −eo β̇s (t)2 cos(βl (t)) − aβl sin(βs (t),
alb l̈b (t) − lb (t)β̇l (t)2 − lb (t)β̇s (t)2 sin2 (βl (t)),
aβl lb (t)β̈l (t) + 2l̇b (t)β̇l (t) − lb (t)β̇s (t)2 sin(βl (t)) cos(βl (t)),
aβs 2β̇s (t)(l̇b (t) sin(βl (t)) + lb (t)β̇l (t) cos(βl (t)))
+ lb (t)β̈s (t) sin(βl (t)).
Here, am,Cor is the Coriolis acceleration given as follows.
am,Cor 2 × vm,rel , (4.7)
where is the angular velocity vector consisting of the following components (Posi-
adala 1997).
Ωx θ̇v,x sin θv,y sin θv,z + θ̇v,y cos θv,z , (4.8)
Ωy θ̇v,x sin θv,y cos θv,z − θ̇v,y sin θv,z , (4.9)
Ωz θ̇v,x cos θv,y + θ̇v,z . (4.10)
In (4.7), vm,rel is the velocity vector of the payload relative to the iv j v kv frame given
as follows.
vm,rel (vΩx (t) + ẋP (t))i + (vΩy (t) + ẏP (t))j + (vΩz (t) + żP (t))k, (4.11)
where
vΩx (t) eo β̇s (t) sin(βs (t)) + l̇b (t) sin(βl (t)) cos(βs (t))
+ vβl cos(βl (t)) cos(βs (t)) − vβs sin(βs (t)),
vΩy (t) −eo β̇s (t) cos(βs (t)) + l̇b (t) sin(βl (t)) sin(βs (t))
+vβl cos(βl (t)) sin(βs (t)) + vβs cos(βs (t)),
vΩz (t) l̇b (t) cos(βl (t)) − vβl sin(βs (t)),
vβl lb (t)β̇l (t),
vβs lb (t)β̇s (t) sin(βl (t)).
Here, am,tran is the translational acceleration given as
d2 rv (t)
am,tran + ε × sm + × ( × sm ), (4.12)
dt 2
where rv (t) is the position vector of the vessel from the inertial frame ijk, ε is the
angular acceleration (i.e., the time derivative of ), and sm is the position vector of
the payload relative to ijk, with its components given in (4.1)–(4.3).
Considering the translational and rotational motions of the truck and the boom
crane, the position vector sC of the CG of the truck–crane system (i.e., the hoisting
rope and the payload are not considered), denoted as C, is given as follows.
4.1 Truck-Mounted Cranes 53
sc (mv st + mbc sbc + mb1 sb1 + mb2 sb2 )/mmc , (4.13)
where mmc is the sum of the masses of the truck/vehicle mv , the crane body mbc ,
and the boom elements mb1 and mb2 , whereas st , sbc , sb1 , and sb2 denote the position
vectors of the CGs of the truck, the crane body, and the boom members, respectively,
relative to the inertial coordinate frame ijk.
The translational motion of the truck–crane system is given as follows.
4

mmc aC Ri + T + W, (4.14)
i1
where the vectors aC , T, and W represent the absolute acceleration of C, the tension
of hoisting rope, and the weights of individual components (i.e., the truck, the crane
body, and two members of the boom). In (4.14), ac is given as follows (Posiadala
1997).
aC aC,rel + aC,tran + aC,Cor , (4.15)
where
d2 sc
aC,rel , (4.16)
dt 2
d2 lb
aC,tran + ε × sC + × ( × sC ), (4.17)
dt 2
dsC
aC,Cor 2 × . (4.18)
dt
Equation (4.16) describes the relative accelerations aC,rel of all the components of
the considered truck–crane system, (4.17) illustrates the translational accelerations
aC,tran of all the components, and (4.18) depicts the Coriolis acceleration aC,Cor .
The rotational motion of the considered truck–crane system can be obtained in
the following vector form:
dC
MC , (4.19)
dt
where the vectors C and Mc denote the angular momentum and the resultant exter-
nal moment of the system about the point C, which are given as follows (Posiadala
1997).

4
C (i + (si + sC ) × mi (si − sC )), (4.20)
i1
5

5
4
4
MC sRi × Ri + s i × Wi − s C × Ri × Wi . (4.21)
i1 i1 i1 i1
In (4.20)–(4.21), i , si , mi , and Wi correspond to the truck for i 1, body of the

crane for i 2, and two boom members for i 3, 4 respectively; sRi is the position
vector to the point of application of the forces Ri , where R5 T.
4.2 Ship-Mounted Cranes
For offshore applications, ship-mounted cranes (or offshore cranes) are used for
performing the tasks of subsea installations (i.e., setting up oil extraction equipment
or laying of power and optic fiber ropes on the seabed) and freight/container transport
between a big container ship in deep sea and a shallow water port, where the container
ship cannot anchor. For subsea installations, a type of boom crane is usually installed
on a ship, whereas for offshore freight transport, a container crane is installed on a
vessel. The latter is also called a mobile harbor system. The dynamic modeling of
both the ship-mounted boom crane and ship-mounted container crane is discussed
in this chapter.
4.2.1 Ship-Mounted Boom Cranes
This section discusses the dynamics of ship-mounted boom cranes (Witz 1995; Kuch-
ler et al. 2011). Figure 4.2 depicts the 3D schematic of a ship-mounted boom crane.
For analyzing the dynamics, the ijk frame is considered as the inertial coordinate
frame, whereas iv j v kv and iP j P kP represent the local coordinate frames affixed to the
CG of the vessel and to the tip point P of the boom, respectively. The ship–crane
system is considered as a rigid body undergoing 3D movements defined by the fol-
lowing six DOFs: three rotational motions: roll (θv,x ), pitch (θv,y ), and yaw (θv,z ) and
three translational motions: surge (x v ), sway (yv ), and heave (zv ) motions about the
iv , j v , and kv axes, respectively. A payload of mass m is suspended from the tip of
the boom, denoted by P, using a hoisting rope of length l. Upon the movements
of the ship–crane system and hoisting of the payload, the payload oscillates in the
3D space (see Fig. 4.3): φ y is the angle between the projection of the hoisting rope
on the iP kP -plane and the iP -axis, whereas φ x is the angle between the projection
of the hoisting rope on the jP kP -plane and the k-axis. Considering the ship-bound
coordinate system iv j v kv , which is affixed to the CG of the ship–crane system (i.e.,
C), the coordinates of P and the payload are defined as (x P , yP , zP ) and (x m , ym ,
zm ), respectively. In the ijk coordinate frame, the positions (x vP , yvP , zvP ) and (x vm ,
yvm , zvm ) of the boom’s tip point P and the payload, respectively, are obtained as
follows.
4.2 Ship-Mounted Cranes 55
Fig. 4.2 Three-dimensional schematic of a ship-mounted boom crane
Fig. 4.3 Angular

configuration of a
ship-mounted boom crane
⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤⎡ ⎤
xvP xv 1 −θv,z θv,y xP
⎣ yvP ⎦ ⎣ yv ⎦ + ⎣ θv,z 1 −θv,x ⎦⎣ yP ⎦, (4.22)
zvP zv −θv,y θv,x 1 zP
⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤
xvm xvP l sin φy
⎣ yvm ⎦ ⎣ yvP ⎦ + ⎣ l sin φy cos φx ⎦. (4.23)
zvm zvP l sin φy sin φx
Considering the six DOF motions of a crane–ship and the three DOF motions (i.e.,
l, φ x , and φ y ) of the payload, the following equations of motion of the ship-mounted
boom crane system are obtained (Schellin et al. 1991).
⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤
ẍv 0 zC −yC θ̈v,x fv,x
mmc ⎣ ÿv ⎦ + mmc ⎣ −zC 0 xC ⎦⎣ θ̈v,y ⎦ ⎣ fv,y ⎦, (4.24)
z̈v yC −xC 0 θ̈v,z fv,z
⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤⎡ ⎤
θ̈v,x 0 −mmc zC −mmc yC ẍv
JC ⎣ θ̈v,y ⎦ + mmc ⎣ mmc zC 0 −mmc xC ⎦⎣ ÿv ⎦
θ̈v,z −mmc yC mmc xC 0 z̈v
⎡ ⎤⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤
mmc (zC + yC ) −mmc xC yC −mmc xC zC
2 2
θ̈v,x MC,x
+ ⎣ −mmc xC yC mmc (xC2 + zC2 ) −mmc yC zC ⎦⎣ θ̈v,y ⎦ ⎣ MC,y ⎦, (4.25)
−mmc xC zC −mmc yC zC mmc (xC2 + yC2 ) θ̈v,z MC,z
⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤⎤ ⎡ ⎤
l̈ fm,x ẍv xP l̇ cl l̇
1
⎣ φ̈y ⎦ −1 ⎣ ⎣ fm,y ⎦ − ⎣ ÿv ⎦ − ¨ ⎣ yP ⎦ − ˙ ⎣ φ̇y ⎦⎦ − ⎣ cφ,y φ̇y ⎦,
m
φ̈x fm,z z̈v zP φ̇x cφ,x φ̇x
(4.26)
where
⎡ ⎤
cos φy −l sin φy 0
⎣ sin φy cos φx l cos φy cos φx −l sin φy sin φx ⎦. (4.27)
sin φy sin φx l cos φy sin φx l sin φy cos φx
is the transformation matrix given as

⎡ ⎤
1 −θv,z θv,y
⎣ θv,z 1 −θv,x ⎦, (4.28)
−θv,y θv,x 1
f m,x , f m,y , and f m,z are the forces acting on the CG of the payload; J C signifies the mass
moment of inertia of the ship–crane system, whereas M C,x , M C,y , and M C,z indicate
the moments at the CG of the vessel, and cl , cφ ,x , and cφ ,y are the viscous damping
coefficients associated with the hoisting and two sway motions of the payload, which
are represented by angles φ x and φ y , respectively.
4.2.2 Mobile Harbor System
Figure 4.4 depicts a schematic of a mobile harbor system consisting of a container

crane mounted on a ship, where the motions of the considered system are described
by using three different coordinate systems: ijk denotes the inertial coordinate frame,
which becomes the reference frame that is separated from the mother ship by a con-
stant distance; iv j v kv is the coordinate frame affixed to the CG (denoted by C) of the
mobile harbor, where the iv , j v , and kv axes are chosen to coincide with the principal
axes of the vessel representing its surge, sway, and heave motions, respectively; and
finally, it j t kt is the coordinate frame affixed to the trolley, where the positive it -axis
is aligned with the iv -axis of the vessel, the positive j t -axis expresses the movement
of the trolley toward the mother ship along the boom of the container crane, and the
positive kt -axis signifies the upward direction to the sky. As discussed in Sect. 4.2.1, a
ship possesses six DOFs consisting of translational motions in three directions (surge,
sway, and heave) and rotational motions about three axes (roll, pitch, and yaw). For
the case of the mobile harbor system, the loading/unloading operation requires that
the mobile harbor is connected by a special docking mechanism to the mother ship
that is stationary in the ocean due to its mega size. Owing to such an arrangement
between the two vessels, the movements of the mobile harbor are restricted and it
can undergo only three types of motions: one translational (heave) motion along the
k-axis, denoted by zv , and two (roll and pitch) rotational motions about the iv and j v
axes denoted by θv,x and θv,y , respectively.
As shown in Fig. 4.4, mt and m denote the masses of the trolley and the payload
(container), respectively, h is the height of the crane, x and y represent the positions
of the gantry and the trolley in the ship coordinate frame iv j v kv , l signifies the length
of the hoisting rope, φ x and φ y define the longitudinal and lateral sway angles of the
load in the inertial coordinate frame, respectively (see Fig. 4.5), and F t denotes the
control input to the trolley.
Now, considering y, φ x , and φ y as the generalized coordinates and F t as the
generalized force and using Lagrange’s equation, the following equations of motion
of the trolley and the payload, in terms of heave (zv ), roll (θv,x ), and pitch (θv,y )
movements of the mobile harbor, are obtained (Hong and Ngo 2012).
(mt + m)ÿ(t) + ml(t)φ̈y (t) sin(θv,x (t)) cos(φx (t)) sin(φy (t) − θv,y (t))
+ ml(t)φ̈x (t) sin(θv,x (t)) sin(φx (t)) cos(φy (t) − θv,y (t))
+ cos(θv,x (t)) cos(φx (t)) + b̃1 Ft (t), (4.29)
m sin(θv,x (t)) sin(φx (t)) cos(φy (t) − θv,y (t)) + cos(θv,x (t)) cos(φx (t)) ÿ(t)
+ ml(t)φ̈x (t) + b̃2 0, (4.30)
ml(t)ÿ(t) sin(θv,x (t)) cos(φx (t)) sin(φy (t) − θv,y (t))

+ ml(t)2 φ̈y (t) cos2 (φx (t)) + b̃3 0, (4.31)
Fig. 4.4 Three-dimensional schematic of a mobile harbor system
where the terms b̃1 , b̃2 , and b̃3 are given below.
b̃1 (mt + m) −x(t)(θ̈v,y (t)) sin(θv,x (t)) − hθ̈v,x (t) − hθ̇v,y (t)2 sin(θv,x (t)) cos(θv,x (t))
+ (mt + m)(g + z̈v (t)) cos(θv,y (t)) sin(θv,x (t)) + ml̈(t) cos(θv,x (t)) sin(φx (t))
− (mt + m) θ̇v,y (t)2 sin2 (θv,x (t)) + θ̇v,x (t)2 y(t)
− ml̈(t) sin(θv,x (t)) cos(φx (t)) cos φy (t) − θv,y (t)
+ 2ml̇(t)φ̇y (t) sin(θv,x (t)) cos(φx (t)) sin φy (t) − θv,y (t)
+ 2ml̇(t)φ̇x (t) sin(θv,x (t)) sin(φx (t)) cos φy (t) − θv,y (t)
+ 2ml̇(t)φ̇x (t) cos(θv,x (t)) cos(φx (t)) − ml(t)φ̇x (t)2 cos(θv,x (t)) sin(φx (t))
+ ml(t) φ̇x (t)2 + φ̇y (t)2 sin(θv,x (t)) cos(φx (t)) cos φy (t) − θv,y (t)
− 2ml(t)φ̇x (t)φ̇y (t) sin(θv,x (t)) sin(φx (t)) sin φy (t) − θv,y (t) , (4.32)
Fig. 4.5 Angular configuration of a mobile harbor system
b̃2 m 2l̇(t)φ̇x (t) + 2ẏ(t)θ̇v,y (t) sin(θv,x (t)) sin(φx (t)) sin φy (t) − θv,y (t)
− y(t)θ̇v,x (t)2 cos(θv,x (t)) cos(φx (t)) − 2ẏ(t)θ̇v,x (t) sin(θv,x (t)) cos(φx (t))
− y(t)θ̈v,x (t) sin(θv,x (t)) cos(φx (t)) + l(t)φ̇y (t)2 sin(φx (t)) cos(φx (t))
+ 2y(t)θ̇v,y (t)θ̇v,x (t) cos(θv,x (t)) sin(φx (t)) sin φy (t) − θv,y (t)
− 2hθ̇v,y (t)θ̇v,x (t) sin(θv,x (t)) sin(φx (t)) sin φy (t) − θv,y (t)
− y(t)θ̇v,x (t)2 sin(θv,x (t)) sin(φx (t)) cos φy (t) − θv,y (t)
− hθ̈v,x (t) cos(θv,x (t)) cos(φx (t)) + hθ̇v,x (t)2 sin(θv,x (t)) cos(φx (t))
− hθ̇v,x (t)2 cos(θv,x (t)) sin(φx (t)) cos φy (t) − θv,y (t)
− y(t)θ̇v,y (t)2 sin(θv,x (t)) sin(φx (t)) cos φy (t) − θv,y (t)
− hθ̇v,y (t)2 cos(θv,x (t)) sin(φx (t)) cos φy (t) − θv,y (t)
+ y(t)θ̈v,y (t) sin(θv,x (t)) sin(φx (t)) sin φy (t) − θv,y (t)
+ hθ̈v,y (t) cos(θv,x (t)) sin(φx (t)) sin φy (t) − θv,y (t)
− hθ̈v,x (t) sin(θv,x (t)) sin(φx (t)) cos φy (t) − θv,y (t)
+ y(t)θ̈v,x (t) cos(θv,x (t)) sin(φx (t)) cos φy (t) − θv,y (t)
+ 2ẏ(t)θ̇v,x (t) cos(θv,x (t)) sin(φx (t)) cos φy (t) − θv,y (t)
− x(t)θ̇v,y (t)2 sin(φx (t)) sin φy (t) − θv,y (t)
− x(t)θ̈v,y (t) sin(φx (t)) cos φy (t) − θv,y (t)
+(g + z̈v (t)) sin(φx (t)) cos(φy (t)) , (4.33)
b̃3 ml(t) −2l(t)φ̇y (t)φ̇x (t) sin(φx (t)) cos(φx (t)) + 2l̇(t)φ̇y (t) cos2 (φx (t))
+ 2ẏ(t)θ̇v,x (t) cos(φx (t)) cos(θv,x (t)) sin φy (t) − θv,y (t)
− 2ẏ(t)θ̇v,y (t) sin(θv,x (t)) cos(φx (t)) cos φy (t) − θv,y (t)
− y(t)θ̈v,y (t) sin(θv,x (t)) cos(φx (t)) cos φy (t) − θv,y (t)
+ y(t)θ̈v,x (t) cos(θv,x (t)) cos(φx (t)) sin φy (t) − θv,y (t)
− y(t) θ̇v,x (t)2 + θ̇v,y (t)2 sin(θv,x (t)) cos(φx (t)) sin φy (t) − θv,y (t)
− 2y(t)θ̇v,y (t)θ̇v,x (t) cos(θv,x (t)) cos(φx (t)) cos φy (t) − θv,y (t)
− hθ̈v,y (t) cos(θv,x (t)) cos(φx (t)) cos φy (t) − θv,y (t)
− hθ̈v,x (t) sin(θv,x (t)) cos φx (t)) sin φy (t) − θv,y (t)
− h θ̇v,x (t)2 + θ̇v,y (t)2 cos(θv,x (t)) cos(φx (t)) sin φy (t) − θv,y (t)
+ 2hθ̇v,x (t)θ̇v,y (t) sin(θv,x (t)) cos(φx (t)) cos φy (t) − θv,y (t)
− x(t)θ̈v,y (t) cos(φx (t)) sin φy (t) − θv,y (t)
+ x(t)θ̇v,y (t)2 cos(φx (t)) cos φy (t) − θv,y (t)
+(g + z̈(t)) cos(φx (t)) sin(φy (t)) . (4.34)
4.3 Simulations
In this section, we will present the simulation results of the MH system. First, a
schematic, representing the equations of motion of the MH [i.e., (4.29)–(4.31)] is
developed in SIMULINK; see Fig. 4.6, where the code used in the function describing
the crane dynamics is explained in Sect. 4.3.1. Then, considering the roll (Fig. 4.7)
and pitch (Fig. 4.8) movements of the ship as disturbances, the longitudinal (φ x ) and
lateral (φ y ) sway responses of the payload are obtained; see Fig. 4.9.
4.3 Simulations 61
Fig. 4.6 A schematic representing the dynamics, (4.29)–(4.31), of the MH system
Fig. 4.7 Roll motion of the ship
Fig. 4.8 Pitch movement of the ship

Fig. 4.9 Lateral (φ y ) and longitudinal (φ x ) sway angles of the payload
4.3.1 Simulation Code for MH System Dynamics
function [y_2dot, theta_2dot, delta_2dot,f] fcn(yd_dot, z_2dot, phi,phi_dot,

phi_2dot, psi, psi_dot, psi_2dot, y, y_dot, theta, theta_dot, delta, delta_dot)
h=10;
x=5;
mt=6000;
ml=20000;
l=8;
b=4;
a=0.5;
g=9.81;
l_dot=0;
l_2dot=0;
yd=10;
yd_2dot=0;
% Mass matrix
m11=mt+ml;
m21=ml*l*(sin(phi)*sin(theta)*cos(delta-psi)+cos(phi)*cos(theta));
m31=ml*l*sin(phi)*cos(theta)*sin(delta-psi);
m12=ml*l*(sin(phi)*sin(theta)*cos(delta-psi)+cos(phi)*cos(theta));
m22=ml*lˆ2;
m32=0;
m13=ml*l*sin(phi)*cos(theta)*sin(delta-psi);
m23=0;
m33=ml*lˆ2*(cos(theta))ˆ2;
n11=m11-ml*(sin(phi)*sin(theta)*cos(delta-psi)+cos(phi)*cos(theta))ˆ2;
n21=m13;
n12=m13;
n22=m33;
4.3 Simulations 63
c11=-(mt+ml)*((psi_dotˆ2*(sin(phi))ˆ2+phi_dotˆ2)*y+x*psi_2dot*sin(phi)
+h*phi_2dot+h*psi_dotˆ2*sin(phi)*cos(phi)-(g+z_2dot)*cos(psi)*sin(phi));
c12=ml*l_2dot*cos(phi)*sin(theta)-ml*l_2dot*sin(phi)*cos(theta)*cos(delta-
psi)+2*ml*l_dot*delta_dot*sin(phi)*cos(theta)*sin(delta-psi);
c13=2*ml*l_dot*theta_dot*sin(phi)*sin(theta)*cos(delta-psi)+2*ml*l_dot*theta_
dot*cos(phi)*cos(theta)+ml*l*(theta_dotˆ2+delta_dotˆ2)*sin(phi)*cos(theta)*cos(delta-
psi);
c14=-ml*l*theta_dotˆ2*cos(phi)*sin(theta)-2*ml*l*theta
_dot*delta_dot*sin(phi)*sin(theta)*sin(delta-psi);
c21=2*ml*l*l_dot*theta_dot+2*ml*l*y_dot*psi_dot*sin(phi)*sin(theta)*sin(delta-
psi)+2*ml*l*y_dot*phi_dot*cos(phi)*sin(theta)*cos(delta-psi)-
2*ml*l*y_dot*phi_dot*sin(phi)*cos(theta);
c22=2*ml*l*y*psi_dot*phi_dot*cos(phi)*sin(theta)*sin(delta-psi)-
ml*l*y*(psi_dotˆ2+phi_dotˆ2)*sin(phi)*sin(theta)*cos(delta-psi)-
ml*l*y*phi_dotˆ2*cos(phi)*cos(theta);
c23=ml*l*y*psi_2dot*sin(phi)*sin(theta)*sin(delta-psi)+ml*l*y*phi_
2dot*(cos(phi)*sin(theta)*cos(delta-psi)-sin(phi)*cos(theta));
c24=ml*l*h*(-2*psi_dot*phi_dot*sin(phi)*sin(theta)*sin(delta-psi)-
(psi_dotˆ2+phi_dotˆ2)*cos(phi)*sin(theta)*cos(delta-psi)+phi_dotˆ2*sin(phi)*cos(theta));
c25=ml*l*h*(psi_2dot*cos(phi)*sin(theta)*sin(delta-psi)-phi_
2dot*(sin(phi)*sin(theta)*cos(delta-psi)-cos(phi)*cos(theta)));
c26=-ml*l*x*psi_dotˆ2*sin(theta)*sin(delta-psi)-ml*l*x*psi_2dot*sin(theta)*cos(delta-
psi)+ml*l*l*delta_dotˆ2*sin(theta)*cos(theta)+ml*l*(g+z_2dot)*sin(theta)*cos(delta);
c31=-2*ml*l*l*delta_dot*theta_dot*sin(theta)*cos(theta)+2*ml*l*l_dot*delta_dot
*(cos(theta))ˆ2+2*ml*l*y_dot*phi_dot*cos(theta)*cos(phi)*sin(delta-psi)-
2*ml*l*y_dot*psi_dot*sin(phi)*cos(theta)*cos(delta-psi);
c32=-ml*l*y*(psi_2dot*sin(phi)*cos(theta)*cos(delta-psi)-phi_2dot*cos(phi)*cos
(theta)*sin(delta-psi)+(phi_dotˆ2+psi_dotˆ2)*sin(phi)*cos(theta)*sin(delta-
psi)+2*psi_dot*phi_dot*cos(phi)*cos(theta)*cos(delta-psi));
c33=-ml*l*h*cos(theta)*(psi_2dot*cos(phi)*cos(delta-psi)+phi_2dot*sin(phi)*sin(delta-
psi)+(phi_dotˆ2+psi_dotˆ2)*cos(phi)*sin(delta-psi)-2*psi_dot*phi_dot*sin(phi)*cos(delta-
psi));
c34=ml*l*x*cos(theta)*(-psi_2dot*sin(delta-psi)+psi_dotˆ2*cos(delta-
psi))+ml*l*cos(theta)*(g+z_2dot)*sin(delta);
c1=c11+c12+c13+c14;
c2=c21+c22+c23+c24+c25+c26;
c3=c31+c32+c33+c34;
alpha=(b-a-l*sin(delta))*l*cos(delta)/sqrt(lˆ2+(b-a)ˆ2-2*l*(b-a)*sin(delta));
beta=(b-a+l*sin(delta))*l*cos(delta)/sqrt(lˆ2+(b-a)ˆ2+2*l*(b-a)*sin(delta));
% matrix parameter
M=[m11 m12 m13;m21 m22 m23; m31 m32 m33];
N=[n11 n12/(alpha+beta); n21 n22/(alpha+beta)];
c=[c1;c2;c3];
% control gain
k1=0.2;
k2=19;
k4=0;
k3=1;
muy1=23;
muy2=0.5;
nuy=0;
F0=8000;% initial tension
F0_e=F0-100;
s1=y_dot+k1*(y-yd)-k2*(theta)+k4*cos(phi);
s2=delta_dot+k3*delta;
z1=-k1*y_dot+k2*(theta_dot)-k4*cos(phi)-muy1*sign(s1);
z2=-k3*delta_dot-muy2*sign(s2);
z=[z1;z2];
nc1=c1-c2*(sin(phi)*sin(theta)*cos(delta-psi)+cos(phi)*cos(theta));
nc2=(c3-(alpha-beta)*F0)/(alpha+beta);
nc=[nc1;nc2];
f=N*z+nc;
if f(2)>F0_e
f(2)=F0_e;
end
if f(2)<-F0_e
f(2)=-F0_e;
end
to=(alpha+beta)*f(2)+(alpha-beta)*F0;
fy=10ˆ6*(yd_dot-y_dot);% control input for trolley without sway control
f_to=-1*10ˆ6*delta-1*10ˆ6*delta_dot;
f_PD=5*10ˆ3*(yd-y)-2.1*10ˆ4*y_dot+5*10ˆ4*theta+10ˆ4*theta_dot;
if f_PD>10ˆ4
f_PD=10ˆ4;
end
if f_PD<-10ˆ4
f_PD=-10ˆ4;
end
if f_to>F0_e
f_to=F0_e;
end
if f_to<-F0_e
f_to=-F0_e;
end
to_PD=(alpha-beta)*F0+(alpha+beta)*f_to;
u=[f_PD; 0; to_PD];
q_2dot=inv(M)*[-c+u];
y_2dot=q_2dot(1);
theta_2dot=q_2dot(2);
delta_2dot=q_2dot(3);
References 65
References
Abdel-Rahman EM, Nayfeh AH, Masoud ZN (2003) Dynamics and control of cranes: a review. J
Vib Control 9(7):863–908
Chin C, Nayfeh AH, Abdel-Rahman E (2001a) Nonlinear dynamics of a boom crane. J Vib Control
7(2):199–220
Chin CM, Nayfeh AH, Mook DT (2001b) Dynamics and control of ship-mounted cranes. J Vib
Control 7(6):891–904
Ghigliazza RM, Holmes P (2002) On the dynamics of cranes, or spherical pendula with moving
supports. Int J Non-Linear Mech 37(7):1211–1221
Hong K-S, Ngo QH (2012) Dynamics of the container crane on a mobile harbor. Ocean Eng
53:16–24
Klosinski J (2005) Swing-free stop control of the slewing motion of a mobile crane. Control Eng
Practice 13(4):451–460
Kuchler S, Mahl T, Neupert J et al (2011) Active control for an offshore crane using prediction of
the vessel’s motion. IEEE-ASME Trans Mechatron 16(2):297–309
Maczynski A, Wojciech S (2003) Dynamics of a mobile crane and optimisation of the slewing
motion of its upper structure. Nonlinear Dyn 32(3):259–290
Miles J (1984) Resonant motion of a spherical pendulum. Phys D 11(3):309–323
23(12):3332–3339
Perig AV, Stadnik AN, Deriglazov AI (2014a) Spherical pendulum small oscillations for slewing
crane motion. Sci Worl J. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/451804
Perig AV, Stadnik AN, Deriglazov AI et al (2014b) 3 DOF spherical pendulum oscillations with
a uniform slewing pivot center and a small angle assumption. Shock Vib. https://dx.doi.org/10.
1155/2014/203709
Posiadala B (1997) Influence of crane support system on motion of the lifted load. Mech Mach
Theory 32(1):9–20
Posiadala B, Skalmierski B, Tomski L (1990) Motion of the lifted load brought by a kinematic
forcing of the crane telescopic boom. Mech Mach Theory 25(5):547–556
Schellin TE, Jiang T, Sharma SD (1991) Crane ship response to wave groups. J Offshore Mech Arct
Eng Trans ASME 113:211–218
Witz JA (1995) Parametric excitation of crane loads in moderate sea states. Ocean Eng
22(4):411–420
Yurchenko D, Alevras P (2014) Stability, control and reliability of a ship crane payload motion.
Probab Eng Mech 38:173–179
Chapter 5
Distributed Parameter Models
This chapter discusses modeling of crane systems as distributed parameter systems.

In the preceding chapters, crane systems were modeled as lumped mass systems,
represented by ODEs, where the components of the crane, for example, the support
mechanisms (i.e., rails, bridge, trolley, boom, etc.), payload, and hoisting rope(s),
were modeled as interconnected rigid bodies. However, both the support and hoisting
mechanisms undergo structural deflections/deformations during operation and ide-
ally should be considered as flexible bodies. The deformations of the hoisting rope are
relatively evident, but the supporting mechanisms exhibit significant vibrations only
when the payload being transported is considerably heavy. The distributed parameter
models of crane systems are important in the sense that they reflect the influence of
external forces/disturbances acting on the flexible hoisting rope. From this view-
point, the distributed parameter formulations of crane systems can be categorized
for systems operating in either air or underwater.
5.1 Crane Systems Operating in Air
Figure 5.1 depicts a payload of mass m suspended from the suspension point P of
a crane using a flexible hoisting rope of constant length l, which exhibits inline
deflections u(x, t) (i.e., along the j-axis) distributed in space x and time t under the
influence of a wind-induced force f w (x, t) acting along the length of the rope. The
flexible hoisting rope of a constant length can be modeled using the wave equation
as follows (O’Connor 2003; He et al. 2014).
ρ ü(x, t) − Tu (x, t) fw (x, t), (5.1)
where ρ and T denote the mass per unit length and the tension of the rope, respectively.
The associated boundary conditions are given as follows.

68 5 Distributed Parameter Models

schematic of a flexible
hoisting rope
u(0, t) 0, (5.2)
Tu (l, t) −mü(l, t). (5.3)
Equations (5.1)–(5.3) describe the motions of the payload caused by the action of
external disturbances in the hoisting rope alone. However, the main cause of the
motion of the payload is the movement of the support mechanisms of the crane,
for example, the movements of the bridge/trolley. Therefore, we will discuss the
formulations depicting the responses of the payload coupled with the movement of
the bridge.
5.1.1 Two-Dimensional Overhead Crane with Flexible

Hoisting Rope
Figure 5.2 depicts a 2D schematic of an overhead crane, where a payload of mass m

hangs below a bridge of mass mb using a flexible hoisting rope of constant length l.
5.1 Crane Systems Operating in Air 69

schematic of an overhead
crane considering a flexible
hoisting rope
The control input F b to the bridge transports the bridge by a distance y(t) along the
j-axis, which consequently results in deflections u(x, t) of the rope along the j-axis,
in both space x and time t, and the oscillations of the payload in the ij-plane. The
kinetic energy E K of the bridge–rope–payload system is given as follows.
l
EK (1/2)(mb ẏ(t) + ρ 2
(ẏ(t) + u̇(x, t))2 dx + m(ẏ(t) + u̇(l, t))2 . (5.4)
0
The potential energy is given as follows.
l
EP (1/2) Tu (x, t)2 dx, (5.5)
0
where T denotes the rope tension. The equations of motion of the coupled 2D crane
system can be obtained using Hamilton’s principle as follows (d’Andrea-Novel et al.
1994; Alli and Singh 1999). For the derivation, see Appendix J.
l
(mb + m + ρl)ÿ(t) + ρ ü(x, t)dx + mü(l, t) Fb (t), (5.6)
0

Tu (x, t) − ρ ü(x, t) ρ ÿ(t), (5.7)
where (5.6) is the equation of motion of the bridge along the j-axis and (5.7) represents
the equation of motion of the flexible rope. Putting λ2 ρ/T , (5.7) can be rewritten
as a wave equation shown below.
u (x, t) − λ2 ü(x, t) λ2 ÿ(t), (5.8)
where (1/λ) is the wave speed. The associated boundary conditions are obtained as
follows.
u(0, t) 0, (5.9)
Tu (l, t) −m(ÿ(t) + ü(l, t)). (5.10)
5.1.2 Overhead Crane as Flexible Double-Pendulum System
The ODE–PDE formulation discussed above represents an overhead crane trans-

porting a lumped payload (i.e., a single-lumped mass representing both the hook and
the payload) along the j-axis. However, as discussed in Sect. 2.3, the hook and the
payload actually exhibit different responses and therefore the hoisting mechanism
can be represented as a double-pendulum system. Figure 5.3 depicts a 2D schematic
of an overhead crane transporting two masses m1 and m2 , representing the hook
and the payload, respectively. The connections between the bridge and the hook and
the hook and the payload are modeled as flexible ropes of constant lengths l1 and
l2 , respectively. The control input to the bridge is denoted as F b , which moves the
bridge by a distance y(t) along the j-axis and consequently results in deflections u(x,
t) of the rope and oscillations of the two masses in the ij-plane. Considering the
rope configuration, the single-rope model of the overhead crane, (5.6)–(5.7), can be
extended as follows to describe an overhead crane transporting two rigid masses,
suspended below the bridge using flexible hoisting ropes, along a straight path (Sano
2008).
∂
ü(x, t) g(m1 + m2 + ρ(l − x))u (x, t) , t > 0, x ∈ (0, l1 ) (5.11)
∂x
∂
ü(x, t) g(m2 + ρ(l − x))u (x, t) , t > 0, x ∈ (l1 , l2 ), (5.12)
∂x
mb ü(0, t) g(m1 + m2 + ρl)u (0, t) + Fb (t), t > 0, (5.13)

schematic of an overhead
crane represented as a
distributed double-pendulum
system
u(l1− , t) u(l1+ , t), t ≥ 0, (5.14)
m1 ü(l1 , t) g(m2 + ρ(l2 − l1+ ))u (l1+ , t) − g(m1 + m2 + ρ(l2 − l1− ))u (l1− , t), t ≥ 0,
(5.15)
m2 ü(l2 , t) −gm2 u (l2 , t), t ≥ 0 (5.16)
All the formulations discussed thus far in this chapter considered hoisting ropes
of constant lengths (i.e., load hoisting and lowering dynamics were not addressed).
Now, we will discuss the dynamics of cranes including the hoisting motions of the
payload. Figure 5.4 depicts a payload of mass m suspended from point P using a
flexible hoisting rope. The control input F h is the hoisting force resulting in a time-
varying rope length l(t). Since the rope can be hoisted, the flexible rope exhibits the
coupled inline deflection u(x, t) along the j-axis and axial deflection η(x, t) along the
i-axis. The kinetic energy (E K ) of the system can be obtained as follows.

schematic of hoisting a
payload using a flexible rope
undergoing coupled axial
and lateral deflections
l(t)
m Dη(l(t), t) 2 1 Dη(x, t) 2
EK l̇(t) + + ρ l̇(t) + dx
2 Dt 2 Dt
0
l(t) 2
m Du(l(t), t) 2 ρ Du(x, t) ρ
+ + dx + (x − l(t))(l̇(t))2 , (5.17)
2 Dt 2 Dt 2
0
D(·)
where D(t) ∂(·)
∂t
+ l̇(t) ∂(·)
∂x
is the material derivative and l̇(t) ∂x/∂t. Now, the
potential energy (E P ) is obtained as follows.
l(t) l(t)
EP (EA/2) (η (x, t) + (1/2)u (x, t) ) dx + (1/2) T (x, t)(u (x, t)2 )dx,
2 2
0 0
(5.18)
where EA signifies the axial stiffness of the flexible rope and T (x, t) denotes the
time-varying distributed tension, which is given as follows.
T (x, t) (m + ρ(l(t) − x))(g − l̈(t)). (5.19)
The virtual work due to the hoisting force at the top boundary is obtained as follows.
δW (t) Fh (t)δη(0, t). (5.20)
Now, using Hamilton’s principle, the equations of motion of the considered system
are obtained as follows (He et al. 2014).

D2 η(x, t) ∂
ρ l̈(t) + − EA (η (x, t) + (1/2)u (x, t)2 ) 0, (5.21)
Dt 2 ∂x
D2 u(x, t) ∂ ∂
ρ − (T (x, t)u (x, t)) − EA (η (x, t)u (x, t) + (1/2)u (x, t)3 ) 0.
Dt 2 ∂x ∂x
(5.22)
The associated boundary conditions are given as follows.

D2 η(l(t), t)
m l̈(t) + + (EA/2)(2η (l(t), t) + u (l(t), t)2 ), (5.23)
Dt 2
EA(η (0, t) + (1/2)u (0, t)2 Fh (t), (5.24)
D2 u(l(t), t) EA
m + T (l(t), t)u (l(t), t) + (u (l(t), t)(2η (l(t), t) + u (l(t), t)2 ) 0,
Dt 2 2
(5.25)
EA
T (0, t)u (0, t) + (u (0, t)(2η (0, t) + u (0, t)2 ) 0. (5.26)
2
5.1.3 Overhead Crane as Axially Moving System
Equations (5.21)–(5.26) do not include the dynamics of the supporting structure (i.e.,
the bridge or the trolley of the crane). Now, we will develop the equations of motion
for an overhead crane transporting a payload using a time-varying flexible hoisting
rope (i.e., the hoisting of the payload using a flexible rope will be considered).
Figure 5.5 shows that a bridge of mass mb transports a payload of mass m along
the j-axis, where the payload is suspended below the moving bridge using a flexible
rope of a time-varying length l(t). The control input F b is applied to displace the
bridge along the j-axis, where the position of the bridge is denoted by y(t). Both
Fig. 5.5 Two-dimensional schematic of an overhead crane hoisting system modeled as an axially
moving system
the movements of the bridge and hoisting of the payload result in generating the
distributed tension T and lateral deflection u of the rope in x and t. The kinetic
energy of the system is obtained as follows.
l(t)
mb ˙ ρ m
EK ū(0, t)2 + (l̇(t)2 + (Dū/Dt)2 )dx + l̇(t)2
2 2 2
0
+ (Dū(l(t), t)/Dt)2 , (5.27)
where ū(x, t) y(t) + u(x, t). The potential energy is given below.
l(t)
EP (1/2) T (x, t)(ū (x, t)2 ), (5.28)
0
where T (x, t) is defined in (5.19). Considering the virtual work done by the control
input to the bridge,
δW (t) Fb (t)δ ū(0, t), (5.29)
the following equations of motion of the considered system are obtained by using
Hamilton’s principle (Kim and Hong 2009; Ngo et al. 2009).
∂
ρ(D2 ū(x, t)/Dt 2 ) − (T (x, t)ū (x, t)) 0.
∂x
Or
¨ t) + 2l̇(t)ū˙ (x, t) + l̈(t)ū (x, t) + l̇(t)2 ū (x, t) − ∂ (T (x, t)ū (x, t)) 0,
ρ(ū(x,
∂x
(5.30)
where 0 < x < l(t). The resulting boundary conditions are given as follows.
¨ t) + ρ l̇(t)(Dū(x, t)/Dt) − T (x, t)ū (x, t) Fb (t), at x 0.

mb ū(x, (5.31)
m(D2 ū(x, t)/Dt 2 ) + T (x, t)ū (x, t) 0, at x l(t). (5.32)
5.2 Underwater Applications
5.2.1 Offshore Crane for Subsea Installation
In the previous section, we have discussed the formulation for cranes operating in
air. However, crane systems are often employed for load transportation in water
such as the offshore crane system for subsea installations and the nuclear RM for
transporting fuel rods within a nuclear reactor. In this section, we will discuss first the
formulation of an offshore crane. Figure 5.6 depicts a 2D schematic of an offshore
crane system, where a ship-mounted boom crane of mass mc is positioning a payload
of mass m on the sea floor. The payload is suspended from point P (i.e., the tip of
the boom) using a flexible hoisting rope of length l, which is under the influence
of a hydrodynamic force f (x, t) caused by ocean currents (Hannan and Bai 2016).
The control input F v to the vessel moves the vessel to position the load on the target
location, where y(t) denotes the position of the vessel along the j-axis. Owing to the
movement of the vessel and the ocean currents acting on the rope, the rope undergoes
lateral deflections, which are denoted as u(x, t). The equation of motion of the vessel
can be obtained as follows (How et al. 2011).
mv ÿ(t) + cv ẏ(t) Fv (t), (5.33)
where mv is the mass of the vessel and cv denotes the viscous damping coefficient
of the vessel. The equation of motion of the flexible hoisting rope is given below.
ρ ü(x, t) + cc (x, t)u̇(x, t) (∂/∂x)(T (x, t)u (x, t)) + f (x, t), (5.34)
where cc denotes the viscous damping coefficient of the rope and T is the tension
within the rope. Now, the associated boundary conditions are obtained as follows.
Fig. 5.6 Two-dimensional schematic of an offshore crane system with a flexible rope
mc ü(0, t) −T (0, t)u (0, t) − mc ÿ(t), (5.35)
mü(l, t) T (l, t)u (l, t) + cc (l, t)u̇(l, t) + f (l, t). (5.36)
5.2.2 Nuclear RM
The refueling machine (RM) is a type of overhead crane that transports a master fuel
assembly (MFA) to the desired location within the nuclear reactor. RM is required to
transport the MFA quickly to ensure continuous generation of electricity. However,
5.2 Underwater Applications 77
Fig. 5.7 Three-dimensional

schematic of a nuclear RM
(Shah and Hong 2018)
when the MFA is moved in water, hydrodynamic forces act on the rod (i.e., the
MFA), and it undergoes large deflections both during its transference (i.e., transient
vibrations) and at the target position (i.e., residual vibrations). Figure 5.7 depicts a
3D schematic of a nuclear RM, where the MFA (i.e., the fuel rod) is assumed to be
an Euler–Bernoulli beam with a circular cross section moving in water. Let l, d, I,
E, and mr denote the length, diameter, area moment of inertia, Young’s modulus,
and the mass of the rod, respectively; u(x, t) and w(x, t) are the inline and transverse
deflections of the rod, respectively; y(t) and z(t) indicate the displacements of the
bridge and the trolley moving along the j and k axes, respectively; mb and mt are
the masses of the bridge and the trolley, respectively; and F b (t) and F t (t) denote the
associated control inputs, respectively.
For a rod moving in water, the interaction between the rod and the surrounding
water generates hydrodynamic forces in the inline and normal directions of the motion
of the rod, namely the inline and normal (or transverse) forces, f I (x, t) and f N (x, t),
respectively. For instance, a rod moving along the j-axis generates inline and normal
forces in the ij- and ik-plane, respectively. In this study, the inline force is adopted
from Morison’s equation (Morison et al. 1950) as follows.
fI (x, t) (π/4)ρw Ca (x)d 2 v̇(x, t) + (1/2)ρw Cd (x)d vr (x, t)|vr (x, t)|, (5.37)
where ρ w is the density of water, C a is the added mass coefficient, C d is the drag
coefficient, and vr (x, t) is the velocity of the rod. The normal force is given as follows
(How et al. 2009).
fN (x, t) (1/2)ρw Cl (t)d vr2 (x, t) cos(ωv t + ψ), (5.38)

where C l (t) is the time-varying lift coefficient due to vortex shedding, ψ is the phase
angle, and ωv is the frequency of vortex shedding given as follows (Williamson and
Govardhan 2004).
ωv 2π St vr (x, t)/d , (5.39)
where St is the Strouhal number. The lift coefficient in (5.38) is given as follows.
Cl (t) α1 cos(ωv t) + α2 cos(ωv t + π/2), (5.40)
where α 1 1.23 and α 2 0.042 (Marzouk et al. 2007). This study investigates
the underwater responses of the rod caused by the planar movements of the crane.
Therefore, the hydrodynamic forces caused by the simultaneous movement of the
bridge and trolley are to be included. First, assuming only the movement of the
bridge, the velocity of the rod is given by vr (x, t) ẏ(t) + u̇(x, t). Then, the inline
force (f I,y ) and normal force (f N,z ) are obtained as follows.
fI,y (x, t) (π/4)ρw Ca (x)d 2 (ÿ(t) + ü(x, t))

+ (1/2)ρw Cd (x)d (ẏ(t) + u̇(x, t))|ẏ(t) + u̇(x, t)|, (5.41)
fN,z (x, t) (1/2)ρw Cl (t)d (ẏ(t) + u̇(x, t))2 cos(ωv t + ψ). (5.42)
Second, assuming only the movement of the trolley, the velocity of the rod becomes
vr (x, t) ż(t) + ẇ(x, t). Then, the inline and normal forces become
fI,z (x, t) (π/4)ρw Ca (x)d 2 (z̈(t) + ẅ(x, t))

+ (1/2)ρw Cd (x)d (ż(t) + ẇ(x, t))|ż(t) + ẇ(x, t)|, (5.43)
fN,y (x, t) (1/2)ρw Cl (t)d (ż(t) + ẇ(x, t))2 cos(ωv t + Ψ ). (5.44)
In deriving the equations of motion, the friction forces in the bridge and trolley
system are assumed negligible. The kinetic energy E K of the bridge, trolley, and
flexible rod system is given as follows.
⎛ ⎞
l
EK (1/2)⎝(mb + mt )ẏ (t) + mt ż (t) + m̃
2 2
((ẏ(t) + u̇(x, t)) + (ż(t) + ẇ(x, t)) )dx⎠,
2 2
(5.45)
0
where m̃ (mr /l) + (π/4)ρw Ca (x)d 2 is the combined mass per unit length of the rod
and the fluid itself displaced by the rod. The potential energy E P of the rod is given
as follows.
l
(u (x, t) + w (x, t)) dx.
2 2
EP (EI/2) (5.46)
0
5.2 Underwater Applications 79
Let c be the viscous damping coefficient of water. Then, the damping forces
opposing the motions of the rod along the inline and the transverse directions are
given by −cu̇(x, t) and −cẇ(x, t), respectively, which will be added to the equations
of motion. Now, using Hamilton’s principle, the following equations of motion are
obtained (Shah et al. 2017; Shah and Hong 2018).
l
(mb + mt + ml)ÿ(t) + m̃ ü(x, t)dx Fb (t), (5.47)
0

EIu (x, t) + cu̇(x, t) + m̃ü(x, t) −m̃ÿ(t) − fD,y (x, t) − fN,y (x, t), (5.48)
l
(mt + ml)z̈(t) + m̃ ẅ(x, t)dx Ft (t), (5.49)
0
EI w (x, t) + cẇ(x, t) + m̃ẅ(x, t) −m̃z̈(t) − fD,z (x, t) − fN,z (x, t), (5.50)
where
fD,y ρw Cd (x)d (ẏ(t) + u̇(x, t))|ẏ(t) + u̇(x, t)|/2,

fD,z ρw Cd (x)d (ż(t) + ẇ(x, t))|ż(t) + ẇ(x, t)|/2.
Equations (5.47)–(5.48) represent the dynamics of the bridge and the rod along
the j-axis, whereas (5.49)–(5.50) indicate the dynamics of the trolley and the rod
along the k-axis, respectively. Substituting ÿ(t) in (5.47) into (5.48), the following
equation representing the coupled dynamics of the RM and the rod along the j-axis
is obtained.
⎛ ⎞
l
EIu (x, t) + cu̇(x, t) + m̃ü(x, t) −(m̃/(mb + mt + m̃l))⎝Fb (t) − m̃ ü(x, t)dx⎠
0
− fD,y (x, t) − fN,y (x, t). (5.51)
Similarly, substituting z̈(t) in (5.49) into (5.50) leads to the following equation for
the coupled transverse dynamics of the RM and the rod.
⎛ ⎞
l
EI w (x, t) + cẇ(x, t) + m̃ẅ(x, t) −(m̃/(mt + m̃l))⎝Ft (t) − m̃ ẅ(x, t)dx⎠
0
− fD,z (x, t) − fN,z (x, t). (5.52)
The boundary conditions are obtained as follows.

u(0, t) u (0, t) u (l, t) u (l, t) w(0, t) w (0, t) w (l, t) w (l, t) 0. (5.53)
5.3 Simulations
In the previous chapter, we had used SIMULINK for simulating the ODE models
of cranes. In this chapter, distributed parameter crane models are discussed, which
involve PDEs. In order to simulate PDE-based models, we have utilized the finite
difference method to develop MATLAB-based codes. As an example, in this section,
the most complex crane model (out of all the discussed ones in this book) has been
simulated (i.e., the model of the RM given by (5.47)–(5.50)). The said model
is a hybrid ODE–PDE model involving integral terms. In order to simulate the
underwater responses of the flexible fuel rod upon the movements of the trolley and
the bridge of the RM, the code given in Sect. 5.3.1 is used. The obtained responses
of the RM system are illustrated in Fig. 5.8: Fig. 5.8a shows the input F b to the
bridge; Fig. 5.8b indicates the displacement of the bridge along the j-axis; Fig. 5.8d
depicts that there is no input to the trolley; therefore, the trolley does not move,
see Fig. 5.8e; Fig. 5.8c and f depicts the inline and transverse endpoint deflections,
respectively, of the rod upon the movement of the bridge, shown in Fig. 5.8b. The
3D deflections of the rod upon the movement of the bridge are shown in Fig. 5.9:
Fig. 5.9a represents the inline deflections u(x, t) of the rod, whereas Fig. 5.9b depicts
the transverse deflections w(x, t) or the vortex-induced vibrations (VIVs) of the rod.
Fig. 5.8 Inline and transverse endpoint deflections of the fuel rod in water: a Input F b to the
bridge, b displacement of the bridge, c inline endpoint deflections of the rod, d Input F t to the
trolley, e displacement of the trolley, f transverse endpoint deflections of the rod
5.3 Simulations 81
Fig. 5.9 3D deflections of the rod upon the movement of the bridge: a Inline deflection u(x, t),
b transverse deflection w(x, t)
5.3.1 MATLAB Code for the Underwater Responses

of the RM
% Acceleration and velocity commands generated in SIMULINK

load acc1;
load vel1;
load disp1;
a1=acc1; vt1=vel1; y1=disp1;
% Algorithm
L=1; T=10;
J=100; K=1000; % No. of nodes (space and time)
dx=L/J; dt=T/K; % Defining the sapce and time grids
x=[0:J]'*dx; % Length vector
t=[0:K]'*dt; % Time vector
d=0.008;
EI=0.5;
mr=0.037;
mt=3; % Trolleymass
mb=7; % Bridgemass
ro=1000; % Water density
CM=1.93; % Inertial coefficient
CD=1.38; % Drag coefficient
CA=0.93; % Coefficient of added mass
ma=(pi/4)*CA*ro*(dˆ2); % Fluid inertia
m=(mr/L);
M=m+ma;
M2=M+mt;
M3=M+mt+mb;
c1=0.2;
fd=0.5*ro*CD*d;
St=0.2;
fv=(St/d)*vt1;
phi=(2*pi*fv.*t)';
a2=0;
vt2=0;
% Lift co-efficient and lift force

a_1=1;
a_3=0.5;
ws=0.5;
alpha=0;
CL=a_1*cos((ws*t))+a_3*cos(((3*ws*t)+alpha));
fl=0.5*ro*d*cos(phi);
fly=0.2*cos(2*phi);
% FDM scheme variables

r1=M/(dtˆ2); r2=c1/dt; r3=EI/(dxˆ4); r=2*r1+r2;
s1=r3/r; s2=(6*r3+r2+r1)/r; s3=r1/r; s4=1/r;
% Initial and boundary conditions

it0=inline('0');
bx0=inline('0');
bxf=inline('0');
fori=1:J+1
w1(i,1)=it0(x(i));
w2(i,1)=it0(x(i));
w3(i,1)=it0(x(i));
w4(i,1)=it0(x(i));
w1_t(i,1)=it0(x(i));
w2_t(i,1)=it0(x(i));
w3_t(i,1)=it0(x(i));
w4_t(i,1)=it0(x(i));
end
% Output matrix with zero entries

for n=1:K+1
w1([1 J+1],n)=[bx0(t(n));bxf(t(n))];
w2([1 J+1],n)=[bx0(t(n));bxf(t(n))];
w3([1 J+1],n)=[bx0(t(n));bxf(t(n))];
w4([1 J+1],n)=[bx0(t(n));bxf(t(n))];
end
% Generating the system matrix (A)

fori=1:J+1
A(i,i)=s2;
ifi>1, A(i-1,i)=-4*s1; A(i,i-1)=-4*s1;end
ifi>2, A(i-2,i)=s1; A(i,i-2)=s1;end
end
A(1,1)=s2+s1;
A(J+1,J+1)=s2-4*s1;
A(J+1,J-1)=2*s1;
A(J,J+1)=-2*s1;
A(J,J)=s2-s1;
% Initialization of variables
Iz=0; Iy=0; Fz=0; Fy=0; ak=0; aj=0; vd_y=0; v1=0; a11=0;
s1=0; az1=0; sz1=0; vz1=0; vy1=0; ay1=0; sy1=0;
% Calculating 3D rod deflections

for n=2:K+1
if n<=3
q2=[-s4*(Iz+Fz);zeros(J,1)]+w2(1:J+1,n-1)-s4*(fl(n)*CL(n)*(vt1(n)ˆ2));
5.3 Simulations 83
q3=[-s4*(M*ay1);zeros(J,1)]+w3(1:J+1,n-1)-s4*(fd*vy1*abs(vy1));
I1(n)=0;
Fz(n)=0;
a_z(n)=0;
I2(n)=0;
FY(n)=M*a1(n);
Fy(n)=0;
ad(n)=0;
ac(n)=a1(n)+ad(n);
vy(n)=vy1+(ac(n))*dt/2;
sy(n)=sy1+(vy1*dt)+0.5*(ac(n))*(dtˆ2);
sy1=sy(n);
vy1=vy(n);
ay1=ac(n);
a_z(n)=(Fz(n)/M)-(M/M2)*Iz;
vz(n)=vz1+(a_z(n)+az1)*dt/2;
sz(n)=sz1+(vz1*dt)+0.5*(a_z(n)-az1)*(dtˆ2);
sz1=sz(n);
vz1=vz(n);
az1=a_z(n);
vel(n)=v1+(a1(n)+a11)*dt/2;
disp(n)=s1+(v1*dt)+0.5*(a1(n)-a11)*(dtˆ2);
s1=disp(n);
v1=vel(n);
a11=a1(n);
w3_xxx(n)=0;
w2_xxx(n)=0;
else
if n>458
vy1=0;
CL(n)=0;
fd=0;
K1=0;
K2=0;
K3=0;
K4=0;
K5=0;
K6=0;
K7=0;
K8=0;
end
q2=[-s4*(Iz+Fz);zeros(J,1)]+w2(1:J+1,n-1)-s4*(fl(n)*CL(n)*(vr_3(1:J+1,n-1).ˆ2))-s3*
(w2(1:J+1,n-2));
q3=[-s4*(M*ay1);zeros(J,1)]+w3(1:J+1,n-1)-s4*(fd*vr_1(1:J+1,n-1).
*abs(vr_1(1:J+1,n-1))-0)-s3*(w3(1:J+1,n-2));
I1(n)=(sum(w2(1:J+1,n-1))-2*sum(w2(1:J+1,n-2))+sum(w2(1:J+1,n-3)))
+0.5*(w2(J+1,n-1)-2*(w2(J+1,n-2))+w2(J+1,n-3));
w2_xxx(n)=(w2(5,n-1)-2*w2(4,n-1)+2*w2(2,n-1)-w2(1,n-1))/(2*dxˆ3);
w2_x(n)=(1/dx)*(w2(J+1,n-1)-w2(J,n-1));
Fz(n)=0;
sz(n)=sz1+(vz1*dt)+(0.5*(a_z(n))*(dtˆ2));
vz(n)=(sz(n)-sz(n-1))/dt;
sz1=sz(n);
vz1=vz(n);
az1=a_z(n);
FY(n)=M*a1(n)+m*Iy;
+0.5*(w3(J+1,n-1)-2*(w3(J+1,n-2))+w3(J+1,n-3));
w3_x(n)=(1/dx)*(w3(J+1,n-1)-w3(J,n-1));
Fy(n)=0;
ad=(Fy(n)/M)-(M/M3)*Iy;
ac(n)=a1(n)-ad;
vy(n)=vy1+(ac(n)+ay1)*dt/2;
sy(n)=(p3*(sy1+p4))+(vy1*dt)+(0.5*(ac(n)-ay1)*(dtˆ2));
sy1=sy(n);
vy1=vy(n);
ay1=ac(n);
vel(n)=v1+(a1(n)+a11)*dt/2;
v1=vel(n);
a11=a1(n);
end
w2(1:J+1,n)=inv(A)*q2;
w3(1:J+1,n)=inv(A)*q3;
w4(1:J+1,n)=w3(1:J+1,n)-w1(1:J+1,n);
w2_t(1:J+1,n)=(1/dt)*(w2(1:J+1,n)-w2(1:J+1,n-1));
w3_t(1:J+1,n)=(1/dt)*(w3(1:J+1,n)-w3(1:J+1,n-1));
w4_t(1:J+1,n)=(1/dt)*(w4(1:J+1,n)-w4(1:J+1,n-1));
vr_1(1:J+1,n)=(vy(n).*ones(J+1,1))+w3_t(1:J+1,n);
vr_3(1:J+1,n)=(vz(n).*ones(J+1,1))+w3_t(1:J+1,n);
Iz=(dx/(dtˆ2))*I1(n);
Iy=(dx/(dtˆ2))*I2(n);
Fz=Fz(n);
F_z(n)=Fz*M2/M;
ak=a_z(n);
az(n)=a_z(n);
F_y(n)=FY(n)+Fy(n);
ay(n)=ac(n);
aj=ay(n);
end
% FIGURES %
figure(1)
subplot(3,2,1) % BRIDGE FORCE
plot(t,F_y,'k')
ylabel('Fy [N]')
xlabel('Time [s]')
hold on;
subplot(3,2,3) % BRIDGE DISP
plot(t,sy,'k')
ylabel('BRIDGE displacement [m]')
xlabel('Time [s]')
hold on;
subplot(3,2,5) % u(l,t) INLINE DEF
plot(t,w3(J+1,1:K+1),'k')
ylabel('u(L,t) [m]')
5.3 Simulations 85
xlabel('t [s]')
hold on;
subplot(3,2,2) % TROLLEY FORCE
plot(t,F_z,'k')
ylabel('Fz [N]')
xlabel('Time [s]')
hold on;
subplot(3,2,4) % TROLLEY DISP
plot(t,sz,'k')
ylabel('Trolley displacement [m]')
xlabel('Time [s]')
hold on;
subplot(3,2,6) % w(l,t) TRANSVERSE
plot(t,w2(J+1,1:K+1),'k')
ylabel('w(L,t) [m]')
xlabel('t [s]')
hold on;
figure(2)
subplot(2,2,1) % BRIDGE VEL
plot(t,vy,'k')
ylabel('Bridge velocity [m/s]')
xlabel('Time [s]')
hold on;
subplot(2,2,2) % TROLLEY VEL
plot(t,(vz-0.01056),'k')
ylabel('Trolley velocity [m/s]')
xlabel('Time [s]')
hold on;
subplot(2,2,3) % BRIDGE ACC
plot(t,ay,'k')
ylabel('Bridge acceleration [m/sˆ2]')
xlabel('Time [s]')
hold on;
subplot(2,2,4) % TROLLEY ACC
plot(t,a_z,'k')
ylabel('TROLLEY acceleration [m/sˆ2]')
xlabel('Time [s]')
hold on;
figure(3)
subplot(1,2,1) % 3D INLINE DEF
mesh(t,x,w3);
xlabel('t [s]')
ylabel('x [m]')
zlabel('u(x,t) [m]')
subplot(1,2,2) % TRANSVERSE DEF
mesh(t,x,w2);
xlabel('t [s]')
ylabel('x [m]')
zlabel('w(x,t) [m]')
References
Alli H, Singh T (1999) Passive control of overhead cranes. J Vib Control 5(3):443–459
d’Andrea-Novel B, Boustany F, Conrad F et al (1994) Feedback stabilization of a hybrid PDE-ODE
system: application to an overhead crane. Math Control Signal Syst 7(1):1–22
Hannan MA, Bai W (2016) Analysis of nonlinear dynamics of fully submerged payload hanging
from offshore crane vessel. Ocean Eng 128:132–146
He W, Zhang S, Ge SS (2014) Adaptive control of a flexible crane system with the boundary output
constraint. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 61(8):4126–4133
How BVE, Ge SS, Choo YS (2009) Active control of flexible marine risers. J Sound Vibr
320(4–5):758–776
How BVE, Ge SS, Choo YS (2011) Control of coupled vessel, crane, cable, and payload dynamics
for subsea installation operations. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol 19(1):208–220
Kim CS, Hong K-S (2009) Boundary control of container cranes from the perspective of controlling
an axially moving string system. Int J Control Autom Syst 7(3):437–445
Marzouk O, Nayfeh AH, Akhtar I et al (2007) Modeling steady-state and transient forces on a
cylinder. J Vib Control 13(7):1065–1091
Morison JR, O’Brien MP, Johnson JW et al (1950) The force exerted by surface waves on piles. Pet
Trans 189:149–157
23(12):3332–3339
O’Connor WJ (2003) A gantry crane problem solved. J Dyn Syst Meas Control-Trans ASME
125(4):569–576
Sano H (2008) Boundary stabilization of hyperbolic systems related to overhead cranes. IMA J
Math Control Inf 25(3):353–366
Shah UH, Hong K-S (2018) Active vibration control of a flexible rod moving in water: application
to nuclear refueling machines. Automatica 93:231–243
Shah UH, Hong K-S, Choi S-H (2017) Open-loop vibration control of an underwater system:
application to refueling machine. IEEE-ASME Trans Mechatron 22(4):622–1632
Williamson CHK, Govardhan R (2004) Vortex-induced vibrations. Annu Rev Fluid Mech
36:413–455
Chapter 6
Open-Loop Control
This chapter discusses the open-loop control techniques applied to crane systems.
Several open-loop control methods including input shaping control, time-optimal
control, command smoothing, and frequency filters are available for transporting
the payload to a target position with minimal oscillations. The benefit of an open-
loop control method is that no feedback sensor is required for its implementation,
which results in an economical method for mitigating oscillations of the payload.
For cranes, the main control objective is to transport the payload to a target position
rapidly with minimal oscillations. However, quick transportation of the load results
in excessive oscillations of the payload, both during (i.e., transient vibrations) and
after the maneuver (i.e., residual vibrations). The main challenge in the design of an
open-loop technique is to achieve the control objective without using feedback.
Generation of such open-loop commands requires a thorough understanding
of the dynamics of a crane system. First, let us consider a 2D model, given by
(2.11)–(2.13), of the overhead crane in Chap. 2. Defining y rb θb , l (1/2)rh θh ,
Jb m mbrb2 , Jh m mhrh2 , τb Fbrb , τh Fhrh , where mmb and mmh denote
the masses of the bridge-drive motor and the hoisting motor, respectively. Equa-
tions (2.13)–(2.15) can be rewritten as follows.
¨ sin(φ(t)) − m l(t)
(m mb + m b + m) ÿ(t) + m l(t) ˙ φ̇ 2 (t) sin(φ(t))
˙ φ̇(t) + ml(t)φ̈(t) cos(φ(t)) Fb (t),
+ 2m l(t) (6.1)
¨ − (1/2)ml(t)φ̇ 2 (t)
(1/2)m ÿ(t) sin(φ(t)) + 2(m mh + (1/4)m)l(t)
− (1/2)mg cos(φ(t)) Fh (t), (6.2)
˙ φ̇(t) + g sin(φ(t)) + ÿ(t) cos(φ(t)) 0.

l(t)φ̈(t) + 2l(t) (6.3)
Since an open-loop control cannot handle nonlinearities, the above nonlinear

system needs to be linearized. If the sway angle is significantly small, cos φ ∼
1,
sin φ ∼
φ, and φ α φ̇ β 0 (for α ≥ 0, β ≥ 0, α + β ≥ 2), the following linearized
equations of motion are obtained.
88 6 Open-loop Control
˙ φ̇(t) + ÿ(t)) − m l(t)φ(t),

(m mb + m b ) ÿ(t) Fb (t) − m(l(t)φ̈(t) + 2l(t) ¨ (6.4)
¨ − (1/2)mg Fh (t) − (1/2)mφ(t) ÿ(t),

2(m mh + (1/4)m)l(t) (6.5)
˙ φ̇(t) − ÿ(t).
l(t)φ̈(t) + gφ(t) −2l(t) (6.6)
Equation (6.4) depicts the dynamics of the bridge, (6.5) represents the hoisting motion
of the payload, and (6.6) shows the sway dynamics of the payload. Substituting (6.6)
into (6.4) results in the following equation of motion of the bridge.
¨
(m mb + m b ) ÿ(t) Fb (t) − mgφ(t) − m l(t)φ(t). (6.7)
In (6.5)–(6.7), all the terms on the right-hand side are inputs to the system, where
¨
except for F b , F h , and ÿ, the other terms (i.e., mgφ(t), m l(t)φ(t), and (1/2)mφ(t) ÿ(t))
are due to the coupling between the bridge movement, the hoisting motion, and the
sway motion of the payload. If the sway angle φ(t) is very small, the coupling terms
can be ignored, and (6.5)–(6.7) can be further simplified as follows (Hong et al.
1997a).
(m mb + m b ) ÿ(t) Fb (t), (6.8)
¨ − (1/2)mg Fh (t),
2(m mh + (1/4)m)l(t) (6.9)
l(t)φ̈(t) + gφ(t) − ÿ(t). (6.10)
Equations (6.8)–(6.10) represent the completely decoupled equations of motion of

the bridge, the hoisting motion of the payload, and the sway dynamics of the payload,
respectively. For a 2D crane system with a constant rope length, (6.10) can be utilized
in generating the open-loop control input to the bridge/trolley for suppressing the
residual sway motion of the payload. It is observed from (6.10) that the acceleration
of the trolley ( ÿ(t)) becomes the control input to suppress the sway motion of the load.
Now, we will derive two typical velocity profiles of the trolley from the perspective
of controlling the sway motion: trapezoidal and staircase velocity profiles, which are
considered the most commonly used open-loop control commands to the 2D crane
system.
Trapezoidal Velocity Profile
For a constant acceleration ( ÿ(t) A) of the bridge, the solution of (6.10) is obtained
as follows (Hong et al. 1997b).
φ(t) ( A/g) cos(ωt − 1), (6.11)

√
where ω g/l is the natural frequency of the system, and A/g is the amplitude of
the response. In a trapezoidal command, the magnitude of the acceleration input is set
6 Open-loop Control 89
Fig. 6.1 Trapezoidal

velocity profile (Hong et al.
1997a)
to ÿ(t) ẏmax /tup , where ẏmax is the maximum velocity of the bridge and tup 2π/ω,
which is the time for one complete cycle of oscillation of the payload, is the time
interval for acceleration. At t t up , both the acceleration input and the sway angle are
zero. This ensures that φ(tup ) φ̇(tup ) 0. For t ≥ tup , the acceleration is set to zero
and the bridge travels with the constant maximum velocity ẏmax and the sway angle
remains zero (i.e., φ(t) 0, t ≥ tup ). Since the displacement of the bridge during √
the acceleration period can be obtained as ytravel (1/2) ẏmax /tup π ẏmax l/g,
the deceleration command (i.e., symmetric to the acceleration input) is applied at
y yf − ytravel , where yf is the target position. In this way, the bridge reaches the
target position with zero sway of the payload. The trapezoidal command is shown in
Fig. 6.1, and the resultant sway response of the payload is shown in Fig. 6.2.
Staircase Velocity Profile
In this case, see Fig. 6.3, the bridge/trolley is moved from zero velocity to the max-
imum velocity (vmax ) using two acceleration periods of the maximum magnitude
(amax ). Mathematically, the staircase acceleration command is given as follows.
ÿ(t) a(u s (t) − u s (t − t1 ) + u s (t − t2 ) − u s (t − t3 )), (6.12)
where a is the acceleration of the bridge, us denotes the unit step input, and t 1 , t 2 , and
t 3 , represent the time instances shown in Fig. 6.3. Solving (6.10) for the acceleration
command given in (6.12), the sway response is obtained as follows.
φ(t) (a/g)(cos ωt − cos ω(t − t1 ) + cos ω(t − t2 ) − cos ω(t − t3 )

− u s (t) + u s (t − t1 ) − u s (t − t2 ) + u s (t − t3 )). (6.13)
At t 3 , the acceleration command becomes zero and afterward the bridge moves with
a constant velocity ẏmax resulting in the following sway response of the payload.
Fig. 6.2 Control using a

trapezoidal command (Hong
et al. 1997a)
Fig. 6.3 Staircase velocity

profile (Hong et al. 1997a)
6 Open-loop Control 91
φ(t) −4(a/g) sin(ωt1 /2) cos(ωt2 /2) sin(ω(t − (t3 /2))), t ≥ t3 . (6.14)
To obtain zero sway at the end of the acceleration command, t 3 must satisfy the
following condition.
ω(t − (t3 /2)) 0, π, 2π, · · · . (6.15)
When t ≥ t3 , t (t3 /2) + (π/ω) is the shortest travel time. The angular velocity of
the payload can be obtained as follows.
φ̇(t) −(a/g)ω(sin ωt − sin ω(t − t1 ) + sin ω(t − t2 ) − sin ω(t − t3 )). (6.16)
According to the above criterion, (6.13)–(6.16), two different types of staircase com-
mand can be obtained (i.e., by varying the time of application of the second acceler-
ation input).
Staircase Command 1 The acceleration command consists of two acceleration
periods of the same magnitude (a) and time interval such that
t1 ẏmax /2a, t2 π/ω and t3 t2 + t1 (π/ω) + ( ẏmax /2a). (6.17)
For the considered case, the sway angle and angular velocities of the payload are
obtained as follows.
φ(t1 ) (a/g) cos(ωt1 − 1), (6.18)
φ(t2 ) (a/g)(cos ωt2 − cos ω(t2 − t1 ))|t2 π/ω φ(t1 ), (6.19)
φ̇(t1 ) −(a/g)ω sin ωt1 −φ̇(t2 ). (6.20)
After the completion of the acceleration command, the sway angle becomes zero at
the following time instance.
t (3/2)(π/ω) + ( ẏmax /4a). (6.21)
For the constant rope length case, the deceleration and acceleration commands are
considered to be symmetric and the total distance (yf ) travelled by the bridge is
yf ẏmax × t4 2at1 t4 , (6.22)
and the time instances t 4 , t 5 , and t 6 are obtained as follows.
t4 yf /2at1 t4 , t5 t4 + t1 , t6 t4 + (π/ω). (6.23)

Staircase Command 2 Similar to the staircase command 1, the Staircase Command

2 also consists of two acceleration periods of the same magnitude and time intervals.
However, the time instance of the application of the second acceleration pulse is
different: In Staircase Command 2, the second pulse is applied earlier as compared
with that of Command 1. Considering (6.16), for the interval t1 ≤ t ≤ t2 , the angular
velocity of the payload is obtained as follows.
φ̇(t1 ) −2(a/g)ω cos ω(t − (t1 /2)) sin(ωt1 /2). (6.24)
In Command 2, the second pulse is applied at t2 such that φ̇(t2 ) 0, which gives t2
(1/2)(π/ω)+(t1 /2). If ẏmax /a < 2π/ω, then t2 −t2 (1/4)(2π/ω−(vmax /a)) > 0.
So far, we have discussed the most general types of open-loop commands applied
to crane systems with a constant rope length. Now, we will discuss two different open-
loop control techniques (i.e., time-optimal control and input shaping) for obtaining
the control inputs to drive the crane systems while ensuring residual sway suppres-
sion.
6.1 Optimal Control
Optimal control is one of the earliest methods applied to crane systems for trans-
porting the payload to a target position with minimal vibrations (Sakawa and Shindo
1982; Desantis and Krau 1994; Hamalainen et al. 1995; Jaddu and Vlach 2002;
Terashima et al. 2007; Da Cruz and Leonardi 2013; Treleaven et al. 2013; Spruogis
et al. 2015; Chen et al. 2016; Maghsoudi et al. 2016). In an optimal control problem,
first, the equations of motion of the crane are required to be written in a state-space
form q̇ ϑ(q, F), where q denotes the state, and F signifies the control input to
the system. Then, an optimal control law satisfying Pontryagin’s principle has to be
obtained, which requires the control input to minimize the performance index, J,
tf
J (q(tf ), tf ) + (q, F, t)dt, (6.25)
t0
H (q, F, t) Ψ (q, F, t) + χ T ϑ(q, F, t), (6.26)
and to maximize the scalar Hamiltonian, H, where t 0 and t f signify the initial and
final times, respectively, and
−χ̇ ∂ H/∂q (∂ϑ/∂q)T χ + (∂Ψ/∂q), t ≤ tf , (6.27)
is the co-state equation.

6.1 Optimal Control 93
First, we will discuss the problem of obtaining an optimal control law that would
ensure that the payload reaches the target position yf in the given time t f in the state of
rest (i.e., with zero residual vibration). Consider the single-rope gantry crane system
shown in Fig. 2.3, where the bridge of mass mb transports the payload of mass m
along the j-axis to the target position. The equations of motion, (2.3) to (2.4), of the
considered system were obtained in Sect. 2.3 as follows.
(m b + m) ÿ(t) + ml φ̈(t) Fb (t),

l φ̈(t) + ÿ(t) + gφ(t) 0.
Assuming that the initial conditions correspond to the system at rest (i.e., φ(0)
φ̇(0) ẏ(0) 0 and y(0) −yf ), the control input F b should be designed in such
a way that the payload reaches the target position in time t f in the state of rest (i.e.,
y(tf ) ẏ(t√f ) φ(tf ) φ̇(tf ) 0). Considering √
the dimensionless variables ỹ y/l
and t˜ t g/l and constants ỹf yf /l, t˜f tf g/l, and F b Fb /(m + m b )g, the
following form of the equations of motion (2.3) to (2.4) is obtained.
¨ + ((m/m b )/(1 + (m/m b )))φ̈(t) F

ỹ(t) b , (6.28)
¨ + φ(t) 0.
φ̈(t) + ỹ(t) (6.29)
Accordingly, the initial conditions can be rewritten as follows.
˙
ỹ(0) −yf and φ(0) φ̇(0) ỹ(0) 0. (6.30)
The terminal conditions become
˙ t˜f ) φ(t˜f ) φ̇(t˜f ) 0,

ỹ(t˜f ) ỹ( (6.31)
and the cost function as (Bryson and Ho 1968)
tf
b2 (t) dt → min.
F (6.32)
0
In order to determine the optimal control law F b , first, we need to write the
equations of motion, (6.28) to (6.29), in the state-space form. Defining the state
variables as q1 ỹ, q2 q̇1 ỹ, ˙ q3 φ, and q4 q̇3 φ̇, the canonical
state-space form (i.e., q̇ ϑ(q, F)) of (6.28) to (6.29) is obtained as follows.
˙
q̇1 (t) ỹ(t), (6.33)
b (t),
q̇2 (t) (m/m b )φ(t) + (1 + (m/m b )) F (6.34)
q̇3 (t) φ̇(t), (6.35)
b (t)).
q̇4 (t) −(1 + (m/m b ))(φ(t) + F (6.36)
Now, the Hamiltonian in (6.26) can be written as follows (Karihaloo and Parbery
1982).
b (t)) + χq3 q4
H χq1 q2 + χq2 ((m/m b )q3 + (1 + (m/m b )) F
− χq4 (q3 + Fb )(1 + (m/m b )) + χ0 F
b ,
2
(6.37)
where χ0 , χq1 , χq2 , χq3 , and χq4 are the co-state variables. By considering (6.37)
and the co-state (6.27), it is revealed that the co-state variables satisfy the following
conditions.
χ̇0 0,
χ̇q1 0,
χ̇q2 −χq1 , (6.38)
χ̇q3 −(m/m b )χq2 + (1 + (m/m b ))χq4 ,
χ̇q4 −χq3 .
b , which minimizes
According to Pontryagin’s principle, the optimal control law F
the cost function, (6.32), should maximize the Hamiltonian function (6.37) whose
control law for the considered system (6.33)–(6.36) is given as follows (Karihaloo
and Parbery 1982).
b −(1 + (m/m b ))(χq2 − χq4 )/2χ0 ,

F (6.39)
where χ0 must satisfy χ0 (tf ) ≤ 0.

The optimal control problem discussed above addresses only the residual vibration
control of the payload. However, in cranes, time-optimal solutions are more desirable
in order to accomplish a task in the minimum possible time. In such a control problem,
the optimal control is required to minimize the following cost function.
tf
J dt tf − t0 . (6.40)
t0
Now, we will present the method to obtain time-optimal control inputs to crane sys-
tems, which can be generated based on the maximum acceleration and deceleration
limits (i.e., |F(t)| ≤ amax ) of the trolley/bridge (Singhose et al. 2000). First, let us
consider the simplified crane dynamics given by (6.10), which can be converted into
the following state-space form (Hong et al. 1997b).
⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤
ÿ(t) 0 0 0 ẏ(t) 1
q̇(t) ⎣ φ̇(t) ⎦ ⎣ 0 0 1 ⎦⎣ φ(t) ⎦ + ⎣ 0 ⎦ Fb (t). (6.41)
φ̈(t) 0 −g/l 0 φ̇(t) −1/l
Considering zero initial conditions (i.e., ẏ(0) φ(0) φ̇(0) 0), the control input,
F b , should be designed in such a way that the following terminal conditions are
achieved.
ẏ(tf ) ẏmax ; φ(tf ) φ̇(tf ) 0. (6.42)
The Hamiltonian can be written as follows.
H 1 + χq1 (t)Fb (t) + χq2 (t)φ̇(t) − χq3 (t)((φ(t)g/l) + Fb (t)/l). (6.43)
The necessary conditions to optimize q̇ ∗ , Fb∗ , χ ∗ are as follows.
q̇ ∗ (t) (∂ H/∂χ )(q ∗ (t), Fb∗ (t), χ ∗ (t), t), (6.44)
χ̇ ∗ (t) −(∂ H/∂q)(q ∗ (t), Fb∗ (t), χ ∗ (t), t). (6.45)
Considering (6.43)–(6.45), it is revealed that the co-state variables (χq1 , χq2 , χq3 )
satisfy the following conditions.
∗
χq1 c1 , (6.46)
∗
χq2 c2 ω sin(ωt − c3 ), (6.47)
∗
χq3 c2 cos(ωt − c3 ), (6.48)
where c1 , c2 , and c3 are constants. Therefore, H can be written as follows.
H 1 + c1 Fb∗ (t) + c2 ωφ̇ ∗ (t) sin(ωt − c3 ) − c2 cos(ωt − c3 )((φ ∗ (t)g/l) + u ∗ (t)/l).

(6.49)
Moreover, according to Pontryagin’s principle, the optimal control input Fb∗ (t) has
to satisfy the following relationship.
H (q ∗ (t), Fb∗ (t), χ ∗ (t), t) ≤ H (q ∗ (t), Fb (t), χ ∗ (t), t), for ∀ admissible Fb . (6.50)
If only the terms including the control inputs are considered,
χ ∗ (t)bFb∗ (t) ≤ χ ∗ (t)bFb (t), (6.51)

T
where b 1 0 −1/l in (6.41), the following solution of (6.49) is obtained.
χ ∗ (t)bFb∗ (t) (c1 − (c2 /l) cos(ωt − c3 ))Fb∗ (t). (6.52)
Considering the coefficients of Fb∗ (t), the solution (6.52) becomes a sine wave
going up and down through the j-axis. Moreover, to satisfy (6.51), F b is designed as
the minimum value of the acceleration (i.e., −amax ) when c1 − (c2 /l) cos(ωt − c3 )
is positive and as amax when c1 − (c2 /l) cos(ωt − c3 ) is negative. Therefore, the
following time-optimal control input Fb∗ (t) is obtained (Hong et al. 1997b).
Fb∗ (t) −amax sgn(c1 − (c2 /l) cos(ωt − c3 )). (6.53)
6.1.1 Bang–Bang and Bang–Offbang Trajectories
By applying different constraints on the time-optimal control input F b in (6.53), we

can obtain two different time-optimal acceleration commands/trajectories (i.e., the
bang–bang and the bang–offbang trajectories). Below, we present the state trajecto-
ries of the system, (6.10), corresponding to the two commands.
Bang–Bang Trajectory
For obtaining the bang–bang trajectory, the acceleration input should satisfy the
following constraints.
−amax ≤ ÿ(t) ≤ amax , (6.54)
0 ≤ ẏ(t) ≤ ẏmax , t ≥ 0, (6.55)
amax ≥ ( ẏmax g/l)/2π. (6.56)
In view of the constraints, the time-optimal acceleration command obtained from

(6.53) is called the bang–bang command and is plotted in Fig. 6.4. Considering
(6.41), the state trajectory (φ − (φ̇/ω)) of the bang–bang control is shown in Fig. 6.5.
From Fig. 6.5, the following relations are obtained.
η̃ 2 tan−1 (sin ξ̃ /(2 − cos ξ̃ )), (6.57)
∴ 2ξ̃ − η̃ ( ẏmax ω/amax ) K l , (6.58)
where K l is the variable related to the length of the hoisting rope.

Bang–Offbang Trajectory
For obtaining the bang–offbang trajectory, the acceleration input should satisfy the
following constraints.
Fig. 6.4 Bang–bang control

(Hong et al. 1997b)
Fig. 6.5 State trajectory of

bang–bang control (Hong
et al. 1997b)
0 ≤ ÿ(t) ≤ amax , (6.59)
0 ≤ ẏ(t) ≤ ẏmax , t ≥ 0 (the same as bang-bang trajectory), (6.60)
amax ≥ ( ẏmax g/l)/2π (the same as bang-bang trajectory). (6.61)
Now, considering (6.41), the state trajectory (φ − (φ̇/ω)) of the bang–offbang

control is shown in Fig. 6.6, which reveals the following relation.
tan(η̃/2) AB/O B sin ξ̃ /(1 − cos ξ̃ ). (6.62)
To make the trolley velocity reach ẏmax after two acceleration periods with amax and
one period with a constant velocity, the following equation has to be satisfied.
Fig. 6.6 State trajectory of

bang–offbang control (Hong
et al. 1997b)
2amax (ξ̃ /ω) + 1 × 0 × (η̃/ω) ẏmax . (6.63)
Therefore, the first acceleration time is given as follows when the rope length is fixed.
t1 (ξ̃ /ω) (1/2)( ẏmax /amax ) t3 . (6.64)
Then the acceleration times t1 and t3 are only dependant on the motor with-
out considering rope length. The time period with constant velocity from (6.62) is
t2 η̃/ω. (6.65)
The bang–bang and the bang–offbang acceleration commands discussed above

were obtained while considering the minimum time constraints. Another approach in
obtaining the time-optimal flexible-body commands is by considering both the min-
imum time and vibration free maneuvers, which result in zero residual vibrations
(Auernig and Troger 1987). However, such commands are difficult to obtain for
hoisting motions of the payload because, in such cases, the system behaves nonlin-
early. If the system model is linearized, then the associated frequency is time-varying.
Optimal control based on a nonlinear model is troublesome to generate (Moustafa and
Ebeid 1988). Now, we will present the method to obtain time-optimal acceleration
commands for crane systems considering the hoisting of the payload.
6.1.2 Time-Optimal Control Considering Load Hoisting
To include the hoisting motion of the payload, the crane model in (6.10) can be
˙ φ̇(t)) as shown below.
updated with the inclusion of the damping term (2l(t)
˙ φ̇(t) + gφ(t) − ÿ(t), φ(0) φ̇(0) 0.

l(t)φ̈(t) + 2l(t) (6.66)
It is assumed that the length of the rope changes at a constant speed as follows.
l(t) l0 + vh t, (6.67)
where l0 is the initial rope length, and vh is the hoisting velocity of the payload.
The solution of the time-varying system, (6.66), appears as a Bessel function and
˙
is complex. The damping coefficient ζ (t) l(t)/l(t) and the natural frequency
ω2 (t) g/l(t) also change with the change of the rope length. It is noteworthy
that the damping coefficient becomes negative due to the hoisting-up motion and,
consequently, the system becomes unstable, which results in the divergence of the
sway angle. During the hoisting-down motion, the damping coefficient becomes
positive and results in reduced oscillations of the payload. The following values are
defined in order to approximate (6.66).
Nominal value of the attenuation coefficient:
ζ ((vh /l0 ) + vh /(l0 + vh td ))/2, (6.68)
Nominal value of the natural frequency:
ω02 2g/(2l0 + vh td ), (6.69)
Nominal value of the length of the hoisting rope:
lave (2l0 + vh td )/2, (6.70)
where td is the vibration period of the time-invariant damped system given below.
φ̈(t) + 2ζ φ̇(t) + ω02 φ(t) − ÿ(t)/lave , φ(0) φ̇(0) 0. (6.71)
Now, the solution of (6.66) with the control input ÿ(t) amax is obtained as
follows.
φ(t) −(amax /g) + (amax /g)e−ζ t (cos ωd t + (ζ /ωd ) sin ωd t)
−(amax /g) + (amax /g)( ζ 2 + ωd2 /ωd )e−ζ t cos(ωd t − θd ), (6.72)
where ωd2 ω02 − ζ 2 , θd tan−1 (ζ /ωd ). Then,
φ̇(t) −(amax /g)((ζ 2 + ωd2 )/ωd )e−ζ t sin ωd t. (6.73)
From (6.72), it can be seen that td 2π/ωd . To calculate the vibration angle and
vibration angular velocity at t td , the following relations are used.
φ(td ) −(amax /g)(1 − e−ζ td ), (6.74)

Fig. 6.7 State-trajectory of

the damped model (6.71)
(Hong et al. 1997b)
φ̇(td ) 0. (6.75)
Equations (6.72) to (6.73) are drawn on the phase plane φ − φ̇/ ζ 2 + ωd2 as a
solid line in Fig. 6.7. In order to maintain the sway angle at zero after reaching the
maximum speed, the phase trajectory should be located at the origin at the end of
the acceleration input. However, it can be seen that it deviates from the origin due
to the attenuation effect caused by the change of the length of the rope. Therefore,
by changing the magnitude of the acceleration in the plot, we set up a strategy such
that the trajectory passes through the origin as shown by the dotted line in Fig. 6.7.
Denoting the magnitude of the changed acceleration by β, when t td /2, the initial
conditions are as follows.
φ(td /2) −(amax /g)(1 + e−ζ π/ωd ), φ̇(td /2) 0. (6.76)
For the solution of (6.71) to pass through the origin, the value of β should satisfy
the following condition.
β amax e−ζ π/ωd . (6.77)
Now, we will demonstrate the effectiveness of the bang–bang profile in sup-

pressing the residual vibrations of the payload considering its hoisting motions, see
Fig. 6.8: Fig. 6.8a depicts the velocity and acceleration commands of the bridge
upon the application of bang–bang control; Fig. 6.8b represents the changes in the
Fig. 6.8 Application of the

bang–bang acceleration
command to suppress the
oscillations of the payload
considering its hoisting
motions (Hong et al. 1997a)
length of the hoisting rope; Fig. 6.8c shows the displacement of the bridge upon the
application of the input shown in Fig. 6.8a; and finally Fig. 6.8d portrays the sway
response of the payload, where the black-dashed and solid lines indicate the sway
responses considering zero and nonzero initial conditions, respectively.
After discussing the optimal control method for obtaining open-loop acceleration
inputs for suppressing the sway of the payload, now, we will discuss another open-
loop technique (i.e., the input shaping or command shaping method) for obtaining
open-loop-shaped commands to drive the crane system resulting in minimal residual
oscillations of the payload.
Fig. 6.9 Generation of shaped commands using input shaping
6.2 Input Shaping
The concept of input shaping was first introduced by Smith (1957) as the posicast
control, in which it was shown that the responses to two different inputs, applied at
different time instances, could cancel each other (i.e., the superposition principle).
Input shaping is the most widely applied open-loop control technique to crane sys-
tems, which convolves a given command (i.e., the reference command to drive the
crane) with multiple impulses applied at different instances in generating a shaped
command (Teo et al. 1998; Hong et al. 2003; Khalid et al. 2006; Garrido et al. 2008;
Vaughan et al. 2008; Sung and Singhose 2009; Manning 2010; Alhazza and Masoud
2013; Alghanim et al. 2015; Maghsoudi et al. 2017). Then the shaped control input,
when given to the crane, transports the payload to the target position with minimal
oscillations at the target position. The set of impulses is called the shaper, and the
magnitudes and the time locations for the application of the impulses are obtained by
utilizing the information of the system’s natural frequency (ωn ) and damping ratio (ζ ).
Figure 6.9 illustrates the procedure for obtaining the shaped commands by con-
volving a reference command with the zero vibration (ZV) and the zero vibration and
derivative (ZVD) shaper, where Ai and t i (i 1, 2, 3) signify the amplitudes and time
instances of application of impulses, respectively. The method for obtaining Ai and
t i and consequently, ZV and ZVD shapers, is given by Singhose’s (2009) method, in
which, first, the percentage vibration (i.e., the ratio of vibration to the input-shaped
command to a single command of unit magnitude) of a second-order harmonic is
modeled as the following equation.
√
V (ω, ζ ) e−ζ ωtn (C(ω,ζ )2 +S(ω,ζ )2
, (6.78)
where
6.2 Input Shaping 103
n
C(ω, ζ ) Ai eζ ωti cos ωti 1 − ζ 2 ,
i1
n
S(ω, ζ ) Ai eζ ωti sin ωti 1 − ζ 2 .
i1
The ZV shaper is obtained by solving (6.78) for the following three conditions.
n
V (ω, ζ ) 0, Ai 1, min(tn ), (6.79)
i1
where n 2 is the number of impulses. Similarly, to obtain the ZVD shaper, (6.78)
is solved for the following four conditions, given n 3:
n
d
V (ω, ζ ) 0, V (ω, ζ ) 0, Ai 1, min(tn ). (6.80)
dω i1
Mathematically, the ZV shaper can be described as

1 K
A1 A2
1+K 1+K , (6.81)
t1 t2 0 ωπ
d
and the ZVD shaper as

1 2K K2
A1 A2 A3
(1+K )2 (1+K )2 (1+K )2
π 2π , (6.82)
t1 t2 t3 0 ωd ωd
√ 2
where K e−ζ π/ 1−ζ and ωd ω 1 − ζ 2 . The ZV and ZVD shapers are the two
basic types of shapers, where the ZV shaper is highly sensitive to variations in the
natural frequency and damping ratio of the system. A comparison of the constraint
equations used for obtaining the ZV and ZVD shapers, given by (6.79) and (6.80),
respectively, reveals that an additional constraint of the derivative of V with respect
to the natural frequency taken equal to zero in obtaining the ZVD shaper makes it
robust to parametric variations and can therefore perform well in crane operations
involving load hoisting. It should be noted that the increased robustness of the ZVD
shaper comes with the compromise of an increased duration of the shaper, because
of the additional third impulse. From (6.81)–(6.82), it is evident that the ZV shaper
is 0.5 vibration periods in duration, whereas the ZVD shaper is one complete period.
For increasing the robustness of the input shapers, several other types of shapers
have also been reported in the literature, e.g., in the extra-insensitive (EI) shaper, the
constraint of zero vibration at the modeling frequency is replaced with a constraint
Fig. 6.10 Sensitivity curves

of input shapers (Singhose
2009)
Fig. 6.11 Frequency

sampling to suppress a range
of frequencies using the SI
shaper (Singhose 2009)
merely limiting the vibration to a small value. The EI shaper has the same duration as
that of the ZVD shaper. A comparison of the sensitivity curves of the ZV, ZVD, and EI
shapers is given in Fig. 6.10 (Singhose 2009). Another robust input shaping method
is the specified-insensitivity (SI) shaper, which is capable of suppressing a specific
range of frequencies (Singhose et al. 2008). The most straightforward method for
generating a shaper with specified insensitivity to frequency errors is the technique
of frequency sampling. This method requires repeated use of the vibration amplitude
equation, (6.78). In each case, V is set as less than or equal to a tolerable level of
vibration, V tol .
√
V (ω, ζ ) ≥ e−ζ ωi tn (C(ωi ,ζ )2 +S(ωi ,ζ )2
, (6.83)
where ωi represents the i unique frequencies at which the vibration is limited.

Figure 6.11 shows how the SI shaper is utilized in suppressing vibrations over a
given range.
All the shapers discussed so far are designed for suppressing single-mode vibra-
tions. However, in some systems, two or even more modes have a significant influence
on the vibrations of the system. For such systems, multi-mode shapers are designed
Fig. 6.12 Application of input shaping to a tower crane: a ZV shaper, b ZVDir shaper (Blackburn
et al. 2010a, b)
by either using the convolution method, which combines different shapers designed
for separate modes, or using a direct approach, which obtains the multi-mode shaper
directly by solving simultaneously the constraints on all the natural frequencies of
the system (Singhose et al. 1997). The convolution design approach is easier to
implement, whereas the direct approach generates faster shapers with less number
of impulses.
So far, we have discussed open-loop control techniques for gantry crane systems,
which are driven using Cartesian motions and therefore behave almost linearly for
the movements at low and moderate velocities. However, due to the natural rotational
motions, rotary cranes behave nonlinearly. Now, we will discuss the application of
command shaping to rotary cranes (Glossiotis and Antoniadis 2003, 2007; Maleki
and Singhose 2011; Uchiyama et al. 2013).
Figure 6.12 depicts the application of command shaping to a tower crane
(Lawrence and Singhose 2010). Application of the ZV shaper to the tower crane
does not suppress the nonlinear oscillations of the payload satisfactorily. A conven-
tional ZV shaper convolved with a slewing command yields two accelerations in the
tangential direction (see Fig. 6.12a), which induce oscillations represented by the
arrows A1 and A2 . Since the second acceleration vector is rotated through an angle
Δβ s , which is the change in the slewing angle, the direction of the two accelerations,
A1 and A2 , is different. Therefore, the oscillation induced by the second acceleration
fails to cancel completely the oscillation resulting from the first acceleration, and
therefore, the effectiveness of the ZV shaper is decreased. To effectively cancel the
oscillations, a directional ZV (ZVDir ) shaper, which utilizes the radial motions of the
trolley in such a way that all accelerations are forced to act in the same direction, is
used. Figure 6.12b depicts the ZVDir shaper, where A1 and A2 are the amplitudes of
impulses in the angular direction, B1 and B2 are the amplitudes of the impulses in the
radial direction, and v1 and v2 are the resultant vectors from the radial and angular
movements, which must be set to be equal.
The ZVDir shaper, given below, consists of two sets of impulses: One for angular
motions and the other for radial motions (Blackburn et al. 2010a, b).

A1 A2 γ1 γ 2 B1 B2 δ1 δ2
, . (6.84)
t1 t2 0 π/ωd t1 t2 0 π/ωd

Setting v1 v2 and constraining Ai 1, given i 1, 2, yields
γ1 + γ2 1,
δ
1 β1 γ1 R, (6.85)

γ2 R − (δ1 s̈tr /2)((π/ωd ) − tr β2 γ1 R,
is the starting radial position of the trolley, s̈ is the acceleration of an

where R
assumed trapezoidal velocity profile with rise time tr < π/ωd , and
β1 1/((1 + cos(βs )) cot(βs ) + sin(βs )),

β2 β1 (1 + cos(βs ))/ sin(βs ),
βs (γ1 s̈tr )((π/ωd ) − tr )/2. (6.86)
6.2.1 Input Shaping for Underwater Systems
So far, we have discussed input shaping techniques applied to crane systems oper-
ating in air. However, in actual situations, some crane systems are also required to
transport payloads in water, for example, during the moon pool and nuclear refu-
eling operations. Therefore, in this subsection, we will discuss the application of
input shaping to crane systems operating underwater. The response of the moving
object is different in water (than that in air): (i) The response is highly damped due
to the viscosity of the surrounding fluid, (ii) the natural frequency of oscillation
of the payload becomes different because of the added mass, and (iii) the payload
achieves a steady-state deflection δ value when transported with a constant speed
due to the drag force. Consequently, application of input shaping in water results
not in cancelation of the transient response but rather in its amplification. Therefore,
the above-mentioned differences have to be considered for developing input shapers
that can work well in water. It is also important to note that, in water, consideration
of the load as a flexible entity is important to account for the deflections within the
load caused by the action of large hydrodynamic forces. Therefore, here, we will
discuss the formulation of the underwater command (UW) shaper, which can drive
the bridge of an overhead crane to transport a flexible rod to a given underwater
location with minimal residual vibrations (i.e., the case of the nuclear RM discussed
earlier in Chap. 5).
Figure 6.13 depicts a 2D schematic of the RM, which is transporting the MFA (i.e.,
a flexible rod) in water. The bridge moves along the j-axis. The friction between the

schematic of crane
transporting a flexible rod in
water (Shah et al. 2017)
bridge and the rails (in air) is assumed to be negligible. Let y(t) be the displacement
of the bridge along the j-axis, u(x, t) denote the lateral deflection of the rod at x and
t, and mb and mr be the masses of the bridge and the rod, respectively. Let l, d, I,
and E denote the length, diameter, area moment of inertia, and Young’s modulus of
the rod, respectively, and F b (t) the control input to the bridge. Let f I (x, t) denote the
inline hydrodynamic force exerted on it by the surrounding water, which is given by
Morison’s equation as follows (Morison et al. 1950).
f I (x, t) (π/4)ρw Ca (x)d 2 v̇r (x, t) + (1/2)ρw Cd (x)dvr (x, t)|vr (x, t)|, (6.87)
where C a is the added mass coefficient, C d is the drag coefficient, and vr (x, t)
ẏ(t) + u̇(x, t) is the velocity of the rod. By splitting f (x, t) into two parts (inertial and
drag components), (6.73) can be rewritten as follows.
f I (x, t) f M (x, t) + f D (x, t), (6.88)
where f M and f D are the inertial and drag forces, which are given as follows.
f M (x, t) (π/4)ρw Ca (x)d 2 ( ÿ(t) + ü(x, t)),

f D (x, t) (1/2)ρw Cd (x)d( ẏ(t) + u̇(x, t))| ẏ(t) + u̇(x, t)|.
Let c be the viscous damping coefficient in water. Then, the damping force oppos-
ing the motion of the rod is given by −cu̇(x, t). The formulation (5.47)–(5.50) in
Chap. 5 can be used to obtain the lateral dynamics of the RM as follows.
l
(m b + m r ) ÿ(t) + m̃ ü(x, t)d x Fb (t), (6.89)
0
E I u (x, t) + cu̇(x, t) + m̃ ü(x, t) −m̃ ÿ(t) − f D (x, t), (6.90)
where m̃ (m r /l) + (π/4)ρw Ca d 2 is the (combined) mass per unit length of the rod
and the fluid displaced by the rod. The boundary conditions are given as follows.
u(0, t) 0, u (0, t) 0, u (l, t) 0, and u (l, t) 0. (6.91)
Now, for developing the UW shaper, first, we have to obtain the relation between
the transport speed vmax of the bridge and the resultant steady-state endpoint deflec-
tion uss of the rod, which can be obtained by applying a modal analysis method as
follows (Shah et al. 2017).

u ss −(1/2)ρw Cd d(Φ(l)vmax /ω1 )2 , (6.92)
where Φ(l) is the first mode shape, and ω1 is the natural frequency corresponding
to the first mode. Furthermore, utilizing the above relation between uss and vmax , the
similarity condition in water is represented by the equation
2
u m /u p vmax,m /vmax, p , (6.93)
which signifies that a change (i.e., um /up ) in endpoint deflection in the steady state
is equal to the square of the change in maximum velocity of the bridge (i.e.,
vmax
2
,m /vmax, p ). Where the subscripts m and p correspond to the model and the
2
plant, respectively, in the similarity condition (6.93). In order to avoid structural

damage to the rod transported in water, the following constraint on the maximum
endpoint displacement of the rod is used in formulating the magnitudes of two accel-
eration inputs.

max|u(l, t)| |u ss |(1 + K ) ≤ δ̄ , (6.94)
√ 2
where K e−ζ π/ 1−ζ and δ̄ denote the maximum allowable value for the endpoint
deflection of the rod. Now, let u1 denote the steady-state deflection of the rod caused
by the maximum bridge velocity vmax,1 . Substituting (6.94) into (6.92) yields

ω1 |u 1 | ω1 δ̄
vmax,1 . (6.95)
Φ(l) (1/2)ρw Cd d Φ(l) (1/2)ρw Cd d(1 + K )
Accordingly, the magnitude of the first input can be obtained as follows.

vmax,1 1
a1 amax , (6.96)
ta 1+K
where ta vmax /amax , and amax is the given allowable maximum acceleration to the
bridge system. If δ̄ is the resultant steady-state deflection of the rod due to the two
acceleration inputs, the maximum bridge velocity can be obtained from (6.92) as
follows.

vmax (ω1 /Φ(l)) δ̄ /((1/2)ρw Cd d). (6.97)
Now, by application of similarity condition (6.93), the maximum bridge velocity

corresponding to the second input vmax,2 can be obtained as follows.
⎛ ⎞

δ̄ √
vmax,2 vmax,1 ⎝ − 1⎠ vmax,1 1 + K − 1 . (6.98)
u1
Therefore, the magnitude of the second acceleration input becomes

vmax,2 1
a2 amax 1 − . (6.99)
ta 1+K
Now, in order to obtain the magnitudes of the deceleration inputs, the deflection
constraint (6.94) is written in the following form.

δ̄ K − |u ss |(1 + K ) 0. (6.100)
Now, let u3 denote the steady-state deflection of the rod caused by the maximum
bridge velocity vmax,3 (associated with the first deceleration input a3 ). Substituting
(6.100) into (6.92) yields

ω1 δ̄ K
vmax,3 vmax − . (6.101)
Φ(l) ((1/2)ρw Cd d)(1 + K )
Accordingly, the magnitude of the first deceleration input a3 can be obtained as

follows.

vmax,3 K
a3 amax 1 − . (6.102)
ta 1+K
The bridge velocity corresponding to the second input vmax,4 can be obtained from
similarity condition (6.93) as vmax, 4 vmax − vmax, 3 . This results in the following
magnitude of the second deceleration input.

vmax,4 K
a4 . (6.103)
ta 1+K
In light of the foregoing discussion, the UW shapers for obtaining the acceleration
and deceleration inputs can be summarized as follows.
UW shaper for acceleration inputs:
⎡ ⎤

A1 A2 1
1− 1
⎣ 1+K
π
1+K ⎦, (6.104)
t1 t2 0 ωd
UW shaper for deceleration inputs:
⎡ ⎤

A1 A2 1− K K
⎣ 1+K 1+K ⎦, (6.105)
t1 t2 t3 t3 + ωπ
d
where t 3 is the time of application of the first deceleration input. Finally, (6.104) to
(6.105) can be utilized to generate the following shaped acceleration command to
drive the bridge to the target position in time t f t 3 + t a + π /ωd :
⎧
⎪
⎪
1
for 0 ≤ t ≤ ta ,
⎪ amax 1+K
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ π π
⎨ amax 1 − ≤ t ≤ ta + ,
1
⎪ for ωd ωd
1+K

ÿ(t) −amax 1 − K
for t3 ≤ t ≤ t3 + ta , (6.106)
⎪
⎪ 1+K
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ −amax 1+K
K π
≤ t ≤ tf ,
⎪
⎪
for t3 + ωd
⎩
0 otherwise.
6.3 Simulations
In continuation of the simulations of Chap. 5, in this section, we will apply command

shaping to the RM. The same code can be modified for implementing command
shaping. First, the UW-shaped command is generated in SIMULINK, as shown in
Fig. 6.14: Fig. 6.14a shows the UW-shaped velocity command (blue-dashed line)
to drive the bridge, whereas Fig. 6.14b indicates the acceleration of the bridge;
meanwhile, Fig. 6.14c indicates that the trolley does not move and the corresponding
zero acceleration of the trolley is shown in Fig. 6.14d. When the said acceleration
and velocity commands together with the corresponding displacement of the bridge
are fed into the code, using the following commands, the underwater responses of
the fuel rod are obtained, as shown in Fig. 6.15.
6.3 Simulations 111
Fig. 6.14 Trapezoidal and UW-shaped commands to the RM: a velocity of the bridge, b accelera-
tion of the bridge, c velocity of the trolley, d acceleration of the trolley
Fig. 6.15 A comparison of the endpoint deflections of the rod upon the trapezoidal and UW-shaped
commands: a control input to the bridge, b displacement of the bridge, c lateral endpoint deflections,
d control input to the trolley, e displacement of the trolley, f transverse endpoint deflections
% Acceleration and velocity commands generated in SIMULINK

loadaccuw1;
loadveluw1;
loaddispuw1;
a1=accuw1; vt1=veluw1; y1=dispuw1;
Figure 6.15a shows the control inputs to the bridge corresponding to the trape-
zoidal (black solid line) and the UW-shaped (blue-dashed line) commands, which
induce the same displacement of the bridge, as shown in Fig. 6.15b; Fig. 6.15d
depicts that there is no input to the trolley; therefore, the trolley does not move; see
Fig. 6.15e; Figs. 7.15c compares the lateral endpoint deflections of the rod upon the
Fig. 6.16 3D deflections of the rod to UW-shaped command: a Inline deflections u(x, t), b trans-
verse deflections w(x, t)
two inputs shown in Fig. 6.15a, whereas Fig. 6.15f compares the transverse endpoint
deflections for the same inputs. Finally, the 3D deflections of the rod upon applica-
tion of the UW-shaped command to the bridge are shown in Fig. 6.16: Fig. 6.16a
represents the lateral deflections u(x, t) of the rod, whereas Fig. 6.16b depicts the
transverse deflections w(x, t) or VIVs of the rod.
References
Alghanim KA, Alhazza KA, Masoud ZN (2015) Discrete-time command profile for simultaneous
travel and hoist maneuvers of overhead cranes. J Sound Vibr 345:47–57
Alhazza K, Masoud Z (2013) A novel wave-form command shaper for overhead cranes. J Eng Res
1(3):181–209
Auernig JW, Troger H (1987) Time optimal control of overhead cranes with hoisting of the load.
Automatica 23(4):437–447
Blackburn D, Lawrence J, Danielson J et al (2010a) Radial-motion assisted command shapers for
nonlinear tower crane rotational slewing. Control Eng Pract 18(5):523–531
Blackburn D, Singhose W, Kitchen J et al (2010b) Command shaping for nonlinear crane dynamics.
J Vib Control 16(4):1–25
Bryson AE, Ho YC (1968) Applied optimal control. Blaisdell, Massachusetts
Chen H, Fang YC, Sun N (2016) Optimal trajectory planning and tracking control method for
overhead cranes. IET Contr Theory Appl 10(6):692–699
Da Cruz JJ, Leonardi F (2013) Minimum-time anti-swing motion planning of cranes using linear
programming. Optim Control Appl Methods 34(2):191–201
Desantis RM, Krau S (1994) Bang bang motion control of a Cartesian crane. Robotica 12:449–454
Garrido S, Abderrahim M, Gimenez A et al (2008) Anti-swinging input shaping control of an
automatic construction crane. IEEE Trans Autom Sci Eng 5(3):549–557
References 113
Glossiotis G, Antoniadis I (2003) Payload sway suppression in rotary cranes by digital filtering of
the commanded inputs. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part K: J Multi-Body Dyn 217(2):99–109
Glossiotis G, Antoniadis I (2007) Digital filter based motion command preconditioning of time
varying suspended loads in boom cranes for sway suppression. J Vib Control 13(5):617–656
Hamalainen JJ, Marttinen A, Baharova L et al (1995) Optimal path planning for a trolley crane—fast
and smooth transfer of load. IEE Proc-Control Theory Appl 142(1):51–57
Hong KT, Huh CD, Hong K-S (2003) Command shaping control for limiting the transient sway
angle of crane systems. Int J Control Autom Syst 1(1):43–53
Hong K-S, Sohn S-C, Lee M-H (1997a) Sway control of a container crane (Part I): modeling, control
strategy, error feedback control via reference velocity profiles. J Control Autom Syst 3(1):23–31
Hong K-S, Sohn S-C, Lee M-H (1997b) Sway control of a container crane (Part II): regulation of the
pendulum sway through patternizing trolley moving velocity. J Control Autom Syst 3(2):132–138
Jaddu H, Vlach M (2002) Successive approximation method for nonlinear optimal control problems
with application to a container crane problem. Optim Control Appl Methods 23(5):275–288
Khalid A, Huey J, Singhose W et al (2006) Human operator performance testing using an input-
shaped bridge crane. J Dyn Syst Meas Contr Trans ASME 128(4):835–841
Lawrence J, Singhose W (2010) Command shaping slewing motions for tower cranes. J Vib Acoust
Trans ASME 132(1):011002
Maghsoudi MJ, Mohamed Z, Husain AR et al (2016) An optimal performance control scheme for
a 3D crane. Mech Syst Signal Proc 66–67:756–768
Maghsoudi MJ, Mohamed Z, Sudin S et al (2017) An improved input shaping design for an efficient
sway control of a nonlinear 3D overhead crane with friction. Mech Syst Signal Proc 92:364–378
Maleki E, Singhose W (2011) Dynamics and control of a small-scale boom crane. J Comput Non-
linear Dyn 6(3):031015
Manning R, Clement J, Kim D et al (2010) Dynamics and control of bridge cranes transporting
distributed-mass payloads. J Dyn Syst Meas Contr Trans ASME 132(1):014505
Morison JR, O’Brien MP, Johnson JW et al (1950) The force exerted by surface waves on piles. Pet
Trans 189:149–157
Moustafa KAF, Ebeid AM (1988) Nonlinear modeling and control of overhead crane load sway. J
Dyn Syst Meas Contr Trans ASME 110(3):266–271
Sakawa Y, Shindo Y (1982) Optimal control of container cranes. Automatica 18(3):257–266
Shah UH, Hong K-S, Choi S-H (2017) Open-loop vibration control of an underwater system:
application to refueling machine. IEEE-ASME Trans Mechatron 22(4):622–1632
Singhose W (2009) Command shaping for flexible systems: a review of the first 50 years. Int J
Precis Eng Manuf 10(4):153–168
Singhose W, Crain E, Seering W (1997) Convolved and simultaneous two-mode-input shapers. IEE
Singhose W, Kim D, Kenison M (2008) Input shaping control of double-pendulum bridge crane
oscillations. J Dyn Syst Meas Contr Trans ASME 130(3):034504
Singhose W, Porter L, Kenison M et al (2000) Effects of hoisting on the input shaping control of
gantry cranes. Contr Eng Pract 8(10):1159–1165
Smith OJM (1957) Posicast control of damped oscillatory systems. Proc IRE 45(9):133–139
Spruogis B, Jakstas A, Gican V et al (2015) Overhead crane anti-swing system based on the
Pontryagin’s maximum principle. Transport 30(1):61–68
Sung YG, Singhose WE (2009) Robustness analysis of input shaping commands for two-mode
flexible systems. IET Contr Theory Appl 3(6):722–730
Teo CL, Ong CJ, Xu M (1998) Pulse input sequences for residual vibration reduction. J Sound Vibr
211(2):157–177
Terashima K, Shen Y, Yano K (2007) Modeling and optimal control of a rotary crane using the
straight transfer transformation method. Contr Eng Pract 15(9):1179–1192
Treleaven K, Pavone M, Frazzoli E (2013) Asymptotically optimal algorithms for one-to-one pickup
and delivery problems with applications to transportation systems. IEEE Trans Autom Contr
58(9):2261–2276
Uchiyama N, Ouyang H, Sano S (2013) Simple rotary crane dynamics modeling and open-loop
control for residual load sway suppression by only horizontal boom motion. Mechatronics
23(8):1223–1236
Vaughan J, Yano A, Singhose W (2008) Comparison of robust input shapers. J Sound Vibr
315(4–5):797–815
Chapter 7
Feedback Control
The open-loop control techniques, discussed in Chap. 6, are the most widely applied
methods for controlling crane systems due to their easy and cost-effective application
(i.e., feedback sensors are not required). However, they have serious limitations in
dealing with nonlinearities, modeling uncertainties, and external disturbances. There-
fore, such systems are feasible for only simple crane operations that can be carried out
under controlled environments, for example, within an enclosure (such as a factory),
where external disturbances such as wind cannot have significant impacts on the crane
system. However, crane systems are also used for field or offshore operations and
are exposed to external disturbances such as wind, sea currents, and waves. Further-
more, the repetitive nature of crane operations causes degradation and wear within
the constituent parts of the support mechanism, which changes their friction-related
properties, consequently resulting in modeling uncertainties. Therefore, to achieve
the required performance of the crane in a challenging environment, either hybrid
open- and closed-loop or solely feedback control strategies are pursued. First, we
will discuss the feedback control strategies applied to crane systems, which mostly
utilize the feedback of the sway angle of the payload and the position/velocity of the
support mechanism (i.e., the trolley, bridge, boom, etc.) in generating control inputs
(either force or torque) to the support mechanisms themselves in achieving both the
sway suppression of the payload and the position control of the entire crane.
7.1 Linear Feedback Control
First, we will discuss the linear feedback control methods, which are based on lin-
earized models of crane systems. Let us consider the model, given by (2.16)–(2.20),
of the 3D overhead crane in Chap. 2. The system can be represented in the following
matrix form.
M(q)q̈ + Dq̇ + C(q̇, q)q̇ + G(q) F, (7.1)

116 7 Feedback Control
where q is the state vector, M(q) is the symmetric mass matrix, D is the damping
matrix, C(q̇, q) is the Coriolis and centrifugal matrix, G(q) is the gravitational force
vector, and F is the control input vector, which are defined as follows.
⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤
y Fb m 11 0 m 13 m 14 m 15
⎢ z ⎥ ⎢F ⎥ ⎢ 0 m m ⎥
⎢ ⎥ ⎢ t⎥ ⎢ 22 23 0 m 25 ⎥
⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥
q ⎢ l ⎥, F ⎢ Fh ⎥, M(q) ⎢ m 31 m 32 m 33 0 0 ⎥,
⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥
⎣ φy ⎦ ⎣ 0 ⎦ ⎣ m 41 0 0 m 44 0 ⎦
φz 0 m 51 m 52 0 0 m 55
⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤
cy 0 0 0 0 0 0 c13 c14 c15
⎢ 0 c 0 0 0⎥ ⎢0 0 c 0 c ⎥
⎢ z ⎥ ⎢ 23 25 ⎥
⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥
D ⎢ 0 0 cx 0 0 ⎥, C(q, q̇) ⎢ 0 0 0 c34 c35 ⎥,
⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥
⎣ 0 0 0 0 0⎦ ⎣ 0 0 c43 c44 c45 ⎦
0 0 0 00 0 0 c53 c54 c55
G [ 0 0 −mg cos φ y cos φz mgl sin φ y cos φz mgl cos φ y sin φz ]T .
The elements of the mass matrix are given as follows.

m 11 m y + m, m 22 m z + m, m 33 m x + m, m 44 ml 2 cos2 φz , m 55 ml 2 ,
m 13 m 31 m sin φ y cos φz , m 23 m 32 m sin φz ,
m 14 m 41 ml cos φ y cos φz ,
m 15 m 51 −ml sin φ y sin φz , m 25 m 52 ml cos φz .
The nonzero elements of the Coriolis and centrifugal matrix are given as follows.
c13 m cos φ y cos φz φ̇ y − m sin φ y sin φz φ̇z ,

c14 m cos φ y cos φz l˙ − ml sin φ y cos φz φ̇ y − ml cos φ y sin φz φ̇z ,
c15 −m sin φ y sin φz l˙ − ml cos φ y sin φz φ̇ y − ml sin φ y cos φz φ̇z ,
c23 m cos φz φ̇z , c43 ml cos2 φz φ̇ y , c25 m cos φz l˙ − ml sin φz φ̇z ,
c44 ml cos2 φz l˙ − ml 2 sin φz cos φz φ̇z , c34 −ml cos2 φz φ̇ y ,
c45 −ml 2 sin φz cos φz φ̇ y , c35 −ml φ̇z , c53 ml φ̇z ,
˙
c54 ml 2 cos φz sin φz φ̇ y , c55 −ml l.

Assuming that |z̈| << g, | ÿ| << g, ¨l << g, the length of the hoisting rope is
either kept constant or slowly varying (i.e., ˙l << |l|), and assuming that the swing
angles of the payload are small, the nonlinear model, (2.16)–(2.20), is linearized as
follows.
(m y + m) ÿ + c y ẏ + ml φ̈ y Fb , (7.2)
(m z + m)z̈ + cz ż + ml φ̈z Ft , (7.3)
7.1 Linear Feedback Control 117
(m x + m)l¨ + cx l˙ − mg Fh , (7.4)
l φ̈ y + ÿ + gφ y 0, (7.5)
l φ̈z + z̈ + gφz 0. (7.6)
The formulation above shows that the lateral and transverse dynamics are decou-
pled and symmetric. Hence, the 3D control problem is transformed into that of two
independent 2D overhead cranes. In this way, the control formulation for the lateral
dynamics will also hold true for the transverse dynamics of the crane. Therefore,
the control formulation for only the dynamics of the bridge will be formulated as
indicated below.
First, let us define the control input to the bridge as follows (Lee 1998).
Fb k y Fy − mgφ y (7.7)
where k y is a crane-dependent design constant, F y is the new control input to be

determined, and the last term is included to cancel the coupling term (mgφ y ) in
(7.3). Substitution of (7.7) into (7.3) results in the following equation of motion of
the bridge.
m y ÿ + c y ẏ k y Fy . (7.8)
Taking the Laplace transform of (7.8) leads to the following transfer function of the
bridge.
V (s) ky
G b (s) , (7.9)
Fy (s) m y s + cy
where V (s) and F y (s) are the Laplace transforms of the velocity ẏ(t) and the control
input to the bridge F y (t), respectively.
Now, for the bridge to follow a desired velocity profile, a velocity servo system
will be designed (see Fig. 7.1). Based on Gb (s), the velocity controller Gvc (s) is
designed as follows.
Kv m y s + cy
G vc (s) , (7.10)
ky s
Fig. 7.1 Schematic of the velocity servo system (Gvs (s)) for an overhead crane
where K v is the control gain (related to velocity control). The closed-loop transfer
function for the velocity servo system is obtained as follows.
V (s) Kv
G vs (s) , (7.11)
Vr (s) s + Kv
where V r denotes the reference velocity input to the bridge.

Now, we will discuss the position control of the bridge, i.e., the position servo
system. Figure 7.2 depicts a schematic of the position servo system, where Gpc (s)
represents the velocity controller, d v is the velocity disturbance (e.g., slippage in the
wheels of the bridge), and 1/s is the integrator for the conversion of the velocity of
the crane to its position. The resulting closed-loop transfer function Gps (s) of the
position servo system of the bridge is obtained as follows.
Y (s) K v (K p s + K I )
G ps (s) 3 , (7.12)
Yr (s) s + Kvs2 + Kv K ps + Kv K I
where Y r (s) and Y (s) signify the Laplace transforms of the reference and actual posi-
tions of the bridge, respectively, and K p and K I are positive control gains. Now, we
will ultimately design the controller for simultaneous position and sway control of the
bridge and the payload, respectively. Figure 7.3 depicts a schematic of the complete
control system, where Gφ (s) −s2 /(ls2 + g) is the transfer function representing
the sway dynamics, obtained by taking the Laplace transform of (7.5) or (7.6), and
Gφc (s) is the transfer function of the controller designed for suppressing the sway,
which is given as follows.
s s + K1
G φs (s) K φ , (7.13)
K ps + K I s + K2
Fig. 7.2 Schematic of the position servo system (Gps (s)) for an overhead crane
Fig. 7.3 Simultaneous

position and sway control
scheme
7.1 Linear Feedback Control 119
where K φ is the control gain and K 1 and K 2 are design constants satisfying
K 1 > K 2 > 0. In Gφs , the term s/(K p s + K I ) is designed to cancel (K p s + K I )/s
in Gps , which makes Gφs a lead compensator when its output is directly given to Gvs ,
which results in separately controlling the position of the crane and the sway of the
payload.
The transfer function-based control scheme given above is not capable of control-
ling the hoisting motion of the payload. Therefore, we will discuss the development of
a control scheme, based on the state-space model, which can also handle the hoisting-
up and hoisting-down motions of the payload. Considering q [ y l φ ẏ l˙ φ̇ ]T as
the state vector, the state equation representing the lateral dynamics of an overhead
crane can be written as follows.
q̇ Aq + BF, (7.14)
where A is the system matrix, B is the input matrix, and F is the control input vector.
Utilizing two control inputs available (i.e., control input to the bridge F b and the hoist
motor F h ), the following state-variable feedback control scheme can be developed
(Nguyen 1994).
⎡ ⎤
y
⎢l ⎥
⎢ ⎥
⎢ ⎥
Fb K1 K3 K4 K5 0 0 ⎢ φ ⎥ K1 0 yr
− ⎢ ⎥+ , (7.15)
Ft 0 0 0 0 K 2 K 6 ⎢ ẏ ⎥ 0 K2 lr
⎢ ⎥
⎣ l˙ ⎦
φ̇
where yr and l r represent the reference values for the position of the trolley and the
length of the hoisting rope, respectively.
7.2 Nonlinear Feedback Control
The feedback control schemes discussed so far were developed for simplified lin-
earized models of overhead cranes; however, simplification is practical only for low-
or moderate-speed maneuvers. Such linear feedback control schemes cannot handle
highly nonlinear processes, for example, load hoisting, rotary motion, and parametric
uncertainties (Cho et al. 2008). Several nonlinear control techniques can be applied
to crane systems. Feedback linearization is one of the common approaches applied
to nonlinear systems. By changing some variables and selecting a suitable control
input, it transforms a nonlinear system into an equivalent linear system (Cheng and
Chen 1996; Park et al. 2007; Wu and He 2016). Model predictive control (MPC) is
another optimization-based nonlinear control technique, which is used for control-
ling a process while satisfying a set of constraints (Jolevski and Bego 2015). MPC
is mostly applied to rotary cranes for both trajectory tracking and anti-sway control
(Neupert et al. 2010; Van den Broeck et al. 2011; Bock and Kugi 2014).
7.2.1 Delayed Feedback Control
The delayed feedback technique is a nonlinear control strategy, which induces damp-
ing in response to the system upon a proper choice of time delay in the feedback
(Erneux and Kalmar-Nagy 2007). Application of the said control to a crane system
that uses a suspension rope for transporting the load can be achieved by actuating the
suspension point in the horizontal plane (Masoud et al. 2003, 2004a; Masoud 2007;
Nayfeh and Baumann 2008). First, the commands of the operator are transformed
into the desired position (yd , zd ) of the suspension point. Then, the horizontal motion
of the position relative to the suspension point is measured based on the measurement
of the angle of the hoisting rope. Eventually, a delay control law of the following
form can be used (Masoud et al. 2004b).
yref (t) yd (t) + K y l cos(φz (t − τ y )) sin(φ y (t − τ y )), (7.16)
z ref (t) z d (t) + K z l sin(φz (t − τz )), (7.17)
where K y and K z are the control gains and τ y and τ z are the time delays. The control
laws, (7.16) and (7.17), can be implemented by using a simple PD control for tracking
the reference trajectory (yref (t), zref (t)) of the suspension point.
7.2.2 Sliding Mode Control
The sliding mode control (SMC), which is a variable structure control technique, is
a robust nonlinear control strategy that is applied to complex high-order nonlinear
dynamical plants operating under uncertain conditions (Lee et al. 2006; Wang et al.
2004, 2007; Chen and Saif 2008; Xi and Hesketh 2010; Vazquez et al. 2014, 2015;
Yakut 2014; Sun et al. 2015). Using the SMC, the states of the system are driven
onto a particular surface in the state space, which is called the sliding surface or the
sliding manifold. First, an appropriate manifold is designed in the state space such
that the desired behavior of the plant is achieved when it is constrained to evolve
on such a manifold. Then, a robust control action is defined to force the system to
slide onto the manifold in the presence of modeling uncertainties and disturbances
(Bartolini et al. 2002).
7.2 Nonlinear Feedback Control 121
7.2.2.1 Sliding Mode Control of 3D Overhead Crane
Consider the nonlinear mathematical model of the 3D overhead crane given by (7.1).
For ease in developing the control scheme, the dynamics of the overhead crane can
be separated into actuated and unactuated dynamics by considering the state vector
T
into actuated state variables q1 y z l and unactuated state variables q2
T T
φ y φz , separately. Now, considering the new force vector F1 Fb Ft Fh ,
(7.1) can be written in the following two equations (Almutairi and Zribi 2009).
M11 (q)q̈1 + M12 (q)q̈2 + D11 q̇1 + C11 (q, q̇)q̇1 + C12 (q, q̇)q̇2 + G1 (q) F1 , (7.18)
M21 (q)q̈1 + M22 (q)q̈2 + C21 (q, q̇)q̇1 + C22 (q, q̇)q̇2 + G2 (q) 0, (7.19)
where
⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤
m 11 0 m 13 m 14 m 15
m 41 0 0
M11 ⎣ 0 m 22 m 23 ⎦, M12 ⎣ 0 m 25 ⎦, M21 ,
m 51 m 52 0
m 31 m 32 m 33 0 0
⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤
00 c13 c14 c15
m 44 0
M22 , C11 ⎣ 0 0 c23 ⎦, C12 ⎣ 0 c25 ⎦,
0 m 55
00 0 c34 c35
⎡ ⎤
cy 0 0
0 0 c43 c44 c45
C21 , C22 , D11 ⎣ 0 cz 0 ⎦,
0 0 c53 c54 c55
0 0 cx
⎡ ⎤
0
G1 ⎣ 0 ⎦, G2 mgl sin φ y cos φz .
mgl cos φ y sin φz
−mg cos φ y cos φz
Now, (7.19) can be written as
−1
q̈2 −M22 (q) M21 (q)q̈1 + C21 (q, q̇)q̇1 + C22 (q, q̇)q̇2 + G2 (q) . (7.20)
Substituting (7.20) into (7.18) yields
−1
M11 (q)q̈1 − M12 (q) M22 (q) M21 (q)q̈1 + C21 (q, q̇)q̇1 + C22 (q, q̇)q̇2 + G2 (q)
+ D11 q̇1 + C11 (q, q̇)q̇1 + C12 (q, q̇)q̇2 + G1 (q) F1 . (7.21)
Now, (7.21) can be written in the following compact form.
M(q)q̈1 + C(q, q̇)q̇1 + C2 (q, q̇)q̇2 + G(q) F1 , (7.22)
where
−1
M(q) M11 (q) − M12 (q)M22 (q)M21 (q),
. . .
−1
C(q, q) D11 + C11 (q, q) − M12 (q)M22 (q)C21 (q, q),
. . .
−1
C2 (q, q) C12 (q, q) − M12 (q)M22 (q)C22 (q, q),
−1
G G1 (q) − M12 (q)M22 (q)G2 (q).
Equation (7.22) can be used to design a control scheme. To compensate for the
coupling term C12 (q, q̇)q̇2 , a control input of the following form is chosen.
F1 F + C2 (q, q̇)q̇2 . (7.23)
Based on the above equation, (7.22) can be written as follows.
M(q)q̈1 + C(q, q̇)q̇1 + G(q) F. (7.24)
The above equation will now be used for the development of the sliding mode
control scheme. The control objective is twofold: regulation of the position and
suppression of the sway of the payload. The desired values of the positions of the
bridge and trolley, and the length of the hoisting rope are denoted as constants yd ,
zd , and ld , respectively, whereas the desired values of the sway angles φ y and φ z
T T
are considered as zero (i.e., q1,d yd z d ld and q2,d 0 0 ). Now, let
T
the error vectors be defined as e1 q1 − q1,d y − ytextd z − z d l − ld and
T
e2 q2 − q2,d φ y φz , where e1 is associated with the actuated state variables
and e2 with the unactuated ones. In order to formulate the SMC scheme, the following
sliding surface s is defined first.
s ė1 + λ1 e1 + σ2 ė2 + λ2 e2 , (7.25)
where
⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤
λ11 0 0 σ21 0 λ21 0
λ1 ⎣ 0 λ12 0 ⎦, σ2 ⎣ 0 σ22 ⎦, λ2 ⎣ 0 λ22 ⎦,
0 0 λ13 0 0 0 0
given that λ11 , λ12 , and λ13 are positive scalars and σ 21 , σ 22 , λ21 , and λ22 are design
parameters. It is evident from (7.25) that the sliding surface has three components
T
(i.e., s s1 s2 s3 ). Now, taking the time derivative of s results in
ṡ q̈1 + λ1 q̇1 + σ2 q̈2 + λ2 q̇2 . (7.26)

Substituting (7.20) into (7.26) and considering (7.24), (7.26) can be written as fol-
lows.
−1 −1 −1
ṡ (I − σ2 M22 (q)M21 (q))M (q)(F − C(q, q̇)q̇1 − G(q)) − σ2 M22 (q)G2 (q)
−1 −1
+ (λ1 − σ2 M22 (q)C21 (q, q̇))q̇1 + (λ2 − σ2 M22 (q)C22 (q, q̇))q̇2 . (7.27)
The control objective can be achieved by choosing the control input F as follows.
−1
F C(q, q̇)q̇1 + G(q) − M(q)(I − σ2 M22 (q)M21 (q))−1
−1 −1
× (λ1 − σ2 M22 (q)C21 (q, q̇))q̇1 + (λ2 − σ2 M22 (q)C22 (q, q̇))q̇2
−1
−σ2 M22 (q)G2 (q) − K · sgn(s) , (7.28)
where K diag{K 1 , K 2 , K 3 } is a positive-definite gain matrix, which determines

how quickly s converges to zero and
⎧
⎨ +1 if si > 0
sgn(si ) 0 if si 0 . (7.29)
⎩
−1 if si < 0
The control input in (7.28) guarantees that s converges to zero in a finite time,
provided the individual components of s satisfy the following sufficient condition
(Slotine and Li 1991).
ṡi2 ≤ −ςi |si |, ∀i ∈ {1, 2, 3}, (7.30)
where ςi is a positive constant.

Similar sliding mode control formulations, based on decoupled actuated and unac-
tuated dynamic models, can be used for controlling rotary crane systems (Tuan and
Lee 2013).
7.2.2.2 Sliding Mode Control of Mobile Harbor System
Now, we will discuss the application of SMC to the mobile harbor system shown in
Fig. 5.5. The control objective is to suppress the lateral sway φ x of the payload upon
the roll motion of the ship, caused by sea waves, by utilizing the movements of the
trolley. The equations of motion of the mobile harbor system for the considered case
can be written as follows.
(m t + m) ÿ(t) + ml φ̈x (t) cos(φx (t) − θv,x (t)) + ml φ̇x (t)2 sin(φx (t) − θv,x (t))
− (m t + m)(y(t)θ̇v,x (t)2 + h θ̈v,x (t) − z̈ c (t) sin(θv,x (t)) − g sin(θv,x (t))) Ft (t),
(7.31)
l φ̈x (t) + ÿ(t) cos(φx (t) − θv,x (t)) + (2 ẏ(t)θ̇v,x (t) + y(t)θ̈v,x (t)) sin(φx (t) − θv,x (t))
− θ̇v,x (t)2 (y(t)θ̇v,x (t)2 + h θ̈v,x (t)2 )h sin(φx (t) − θv,x (t)) − cos(φx (t) − θv,x (t))
+ (z̈ c (t) + g) sin(φx (t)) 0, (7.32)
where zc is the position of the CG along the k-axis. Now, the equations of motion,
(7.31) and (7.32), of the mobile harbor can alternately be represented in the following
matrix form.
M(q)q̈ + C(q̇, q)q̇ + G(q) F, (7.33)
where
mt + m m cos (φx (t) − θv,x (t))l

M(q)
cos( φx (t) − θv,x (t)) l
denotes the mass matrix,
0 −m sin(φx (t) − θv,x (t))l φ̇x (t)

C(q̇, q)
2θ̇v,x (t) sin(φx (t) − θv,x (t)) 0
represents the centripetal matrix, and

T
G(q) b̃4 b̃5
signifies the gravity vector, where
b̃4 −(m t + m)y θ̇v,x

2
− (m t + m)h θ̈v,x + (m t + m)z̈ c sin(θv,x )
+ (m t + m)g sin(θv,x ),
b̃5 sin(φx − θv,x )y θ̈v,x − cos(φx − θv,x )y θ̇v,x
2
− sin(φx − θv,x )h θ̇v,x
2
− cos(φx − θv,x )h θ̈v,x + z̈ c sin(φx ) + g sin(φx ).
F [F t 0]T denotes the vector of the control forces of the driving motors, and q
[y φ x ]T indicates the vector of the generalized coordinates. Now, for control system
design, first, an error vector consisting of the position error of the trolley and the
error in the sway angle need to be defined as follows.
T T
e e y eφx y − yd φx − 0 , (7.34)
where yd denotes the desired trolley position and the desired sway angle is assumed
to be zero. Without loss of generality, it can be assumed that the first and second time
derivatives of the trolley goal position are bounded. Additionally, it can be assumed
that φ x is not close to π /2 and l is not equal to zero (i.e., to avoid the zero rope
length). Next, the sliding surface s is defined as follows.
s ė y + k1 e y − k2 φx , (7.35)
where k 1 and k 2 are positive control gains. Note that both the trolley and sway
dynamics are incorporated into the sliding surface. Finally, the following sliding
mode control law is proposed.
Ft −(h 1 (φx ) − r̈ + ksat(s))/g1 (φx ), (7.36)
where r̈ ÿd − k1 ė y + k2 φ̇x , k is the gain, and the functions g1 and h1 are given as
follows.
g1 (φx ) 1/(m t + m sin2 (φx − θv,x )), (7.37)

h 1 (φx ) (b̃5 − b̃4 )/1/(m t + m sin (φx − θv,x )).
2
(7.38)
On the other hand, the saturation function sat(s) is defined as follows.

s / ε if |s| ≤ ε,
sat(s) (7.39)
sgn(s) if |s| > ε,
where ε is a small positive constant.
7.2.3 Intelligent Control
In addition to the classical control techniques discussed above, intelligent control

methods (i.e., fuzzy logic- and neural network-based methods) can also be applied
to crane systems. For cranes, fuzzy control methods have been widely applied. These
are rule-based methods in which the decision-making mechanism is given by a set
of fuzzy rules that compensate for the effects of any causes coming from the system
(Liang and Koh 1997; Mahfouf et al. 2000; Al-mousa et al. 2003; Omar et al. 2004;
Sucevic et al. 2004; Hayajneh et al. 2006; Chang and Chiang 2008, 2009; Trabia et al.
2008; Li and Yu 2012; Zdesar et al. 2013; Smoczek 2014, 2015; Smoczek and Szpytko
2014; Almutairi and Zribi 2016; Qian et al. 2016). Usually, the objective of the fuzzy
control is to replace the human operator with a fuzzy rule-based system. Figure 7.4
depicts the basic structure of a fuzzy control system (Benhidjeb and Gissinger 1995),
which consists of input fuzzification, fuzzy control rules, fuzzy inference, and output
defuzzification. Let us consider an anti-swing fuzzy control scheme for an overhead
crane. First, for input fuzzification, fuzzy sets and membership functions are defined
(see Fig. 7.5). Each abbreviation, i.e., negative big (NB), negative small (NS), positive
big (PB), positive small (PS), positive medium (PM), negative medium (NM), and
zero (ZR), represents a fuzzy set and its membership function for the input w, which
represents each of the swing angles φ, change in the swing angle φ, and control
input f . Next, the fuzzy control rules are defined (see Table 7.1), where all the entries
Fig. 7.4 Block diagram for fuzzy control application to crane systems
Fig. 7.5 Definition of fuzzy control groups
Table 7.1 Fuzzy control

φ φ
rules for overhead crane (Cho
and Lee 2002) NB NM NS ZR PS PM PB
NB NB NB NB NB NM NS ZR
NM NB NB NB NM NS ZR PS
NS NB NB NM NS ZR PS PM
ZR NB NM NS ZR PS PM PB
PS NM NS ZR PS PM PB PB
PM NS ZR PS PM PB PB PB
PB ZR PS PM PB PB PB PB
are the fuzzy sets of φ, φ, and f . Considering a constant length l of the hoisting
rope, the swing dynamics is represented by (2.4), l φ̈(t) + ÿ(t) + gφ(t) 0, which
can be utilized in designing the fuzzy control rules. Considering (2.4), the following
anti-swing control law guarantees that the load swing can be effectively damped out
(Cho and Lee 2002).

ẏ(t) 2ζ gl φ(t), (7.40)
where ζ denotes the damping ratio. According to the anti-swing control, (7.40), all
the fuzzy sets of control action are set proportional to the swing angle φ. In addition,
all the fuzzy sets of the control action are also set proportional to the swing velocity
φ̇(t) as well as the swing angle φ. Consequently, the resulting control rules are in
excellent agreement with the control rules; for example, when the swing angle is
PB and the swing velocity is NB, a ZR control action is required since the swing
angle is rapidly decreasing. Now, for fuzzy inference, Mamdani’s min–max method
is adopted, which reveals the following fuzzy control output F 0 (f ) for the inputs φ 0
and φ 0 (Cho and Lee 2002).

n
F0 ( f ) [ i (φ0 ) ∧ i( φ0 ) ∧ Fi ( f )], (7.41)
i1

where and ∧ denote the union and minimum operators, respectively, n is the
number of rules, and i , i , and Fi denote the membership functions for the
fuzzy sets of the swing angle, change in swing angle, and control action, respectively.
Finally, for defuzzification, the center of gravity method is used to compute the control
output as follows.

f0 F0 ( f ) f d f F0 ( f )d f . (7.42)
7.3 Hybrid Control Methods
Every control method has associated advantages and disadvantages. Some are suit-
able for a quick load transference, whereas some lack an effective sway suppression.
Some methods are easily implementable, whereas others require the development
of complex algorithms or installation of expensive hardware, such as feedback sen-
sors. Therefore, to achieve a better control performance, designers often pursue a
combination of control methods called hybrid control techniques. Open-loop control
methods, such as command shaping, are the most easily implementable methods
because they do not require feedback sensors for implementation. Practical crane
systems usually suffer from uncertainties (i.e., in the length of hoisting rope, in the
rolling friction coefficients between the support mechanism and rails, and in the
mass of payload), strong nonlinearities (e.g., due to the rotational motions in boom
and tower cranes), and external disturbances, such as winds. Unfortunately, open-
loop methods cannot effectively handle such parametric uncertainties, nonlinearities,
and external disturbances. Therefore, their application is mostly limited to overhead
crane systems with fixed length of hoisting rope, i.e., when a quick load hoisting
operation is not considered. To overcome the above-mentioned issues related to the
application of open-loop control methods, most researchers have developed hybrid
open-loop and feedback control strategies. Such control schemes have been success-
fully applied to overhead cranes undergoing fast hoisting operations utilizing a hybrid
feed-forward, nonlinear PID control scheme (Lee 2003); to crane systems under the
effect of external disturbances (Huey et al. 2008); to gantry cranes undergoing fast
hoisting operations considering uncertain mass of the payload utilizing a combined
feed-forward, feedback, and disturbance observer-based trajectory tracking control
scheme (Sawodny et al. 2002); and to highly nonlinear rotary crane systems under-
going simultaneous rotation, load hoisting, and boom hoisting motions (Sakawa and
Nakazumi 1985; Sato and Sakawa 1988; Yoshimoto and Sakawa 1989).
In addition to the above-mentioned hybrid open-loop and feedback control
schemes, researchers have also developed hybrid control schemes by combining two
different feedback methods. For tackling the issue of parametric uncertainties, most
researchers opt for hybrid adaptive techniques, for example, adaptive fuzzy control
(Chang 2007; Yu et al. 2011), adaptive sliding mode (Lee 2004; Chang and Shaw
2012; Ngo and Hong 2012; Park and Le 2012), adaptive fuzzy sliding mode (Liu
et al. 2005; Park et al. 2008), and adaptive input shaping. Such schemes are mostly
used for estimation of uncertainties and tuning of variable control gains. Fuzzy logic
can also be combined with other feedback schemes for tuning feedback gains, for
example, with the sliding mode control (Chang et al. 2008; Ngo et al. 2015), optimal
control (Zhang et al. 2014a, b), and the PID control (Solihin et al. 2010; Azeloglu
et al. 2016).
Other notable hybrid control techniques include the combined optimal, feedback
linearization, and variable structure control (Hong et al. 2000), the combined state
feedback and the sliding mode control (Karkoub and Zribi 2001), the combined
PD control and feedback linearization (Chwa 2009), and the combined dynamic
inversion-based feed-forward and state feedback control (Piazzi and Visiol 2002).
7.4 Feedback Control Application to Distributed

Parameter Systems
Control system development of cranes in the form of distributed parameter sys-

tems is limited. Other than the fuzzy control (Moustafa et al. 2006) and optimal
passive control (Alli and Singh 1999), most of the studies had focused on the bound-
ary control (d’Andra-Novel and Coron 2000; Hong et al. 2004; Yang et al. 2004a,
b, 2005a, b; Kim et al. 2005a, b; He et al. 2011; Nguyen and Hong 2012a, b).
In boundary control, actuation and sensing are applied to the boundaries of the
flexible hoisting rope. First, we will discuss a boundary control scheme for a sim-
ple 2D overhead crane considering a flexible hoisting rope of constant length (see
Fig. 5.2). The equations of motion of the said 2D system can be represented by
the hybrid ODE–PDE system given in (5.6) and (5.7) and the boundary conditions
given in (5.9) and (5.10). For such systems, the boundary control law is usually the
control input to the bridge, F b , which can be a proportional, derivative, and coupling
amplification control law of the following form (Rahn et al. 1999):
Fb (t) −K p (u(0, t) − yd ) − K d u̇(0, t) + K a u (0, t), (7.43)

7.4 Feedback Control Application to Distributed Parameter Systems 129
where K p and K d are the proportional and derivative gains, respectively, which influ-
ence the position control of the bridge, yd is the target position of the bridge, and K a
is the gain associated with the sway motion of the hoisting rope, which affects the
coupling between the movements of the bridge and the hoisting rope.
Now, we will consider the boundary control problem of the 2D overhead crane
system with a flexible hoisting rope undergoing hoisting operations (see Fig. 5.5).
The dynamics of such a system can be modeled as an axially moving system
(see (5.30)–(5.32)). The boundary feedback control law for the said system can
be designed as follows (Kim and Hong 2009).
˙ Du(0, t)
Fb (t) −K p (u(0, t) − yd ) + ρ l(t) − K d u̇(0, t) + (K a − 1)T (0, t)u (0, t)
Dt
Ka ˙
+ l(t)T (0, t)u (0, t)2 , (7.44)
(u̇(0, t) + σ )
where D(·) ∂(·) ˙ ∂(·) is the material derivative, T is the tension in the hoisting
+ l(t)
Dt ∂t ∂x
rope, and σ is defined as follows.
˙ · u̇(0, t)) · |u̇(0, t)/2|.

σ sgn(l(t) (7.45)
Now, considering the case of an unknown and immeasurable external disturbance

d(t) acting on the bridge in the opposite direction of motion of the bridge, an adap-
tive boundary control law is discussed below. Assuming that the magnitude of the
disturbance is μd (i.e., a positive constant) and d(t) sgn(u̇(0, t))μd , the boundary
control law can be defined as follows (Ngo et al. 2009).
˙ u̇(0, t) + l(t)u
Fb (t) −K p (u(0, t) − yd ) + ρ l(t)( ˙
(0, t))
− K d u̇(0, t) + (K a − 1)T (0, t)u (0, t)
Ka ˙
+ l(t)T (0, t)u (0, t)2 − sgn(u̇(0, t))μ̂d . (7.46)
(u̇(0, t) + σ0 )
where

˙ u̇(0, t)).|u̇(0, t)/2|, if u̇(0, t) 0,
sgn(l(t).
σ0
δ0 , if u̇(0, t) 0,
and δ0 is a positive constant and μ̂d is the adaptive estimate of μd . The adaptive law
is given as follows.
μ̂˙ d −γd sgn(u̇(0, t))u̇(0, t). (7.47)

7.4.1 Boundary Control of Refueling Machine
Here, we will discuss the simultaneous position control of the refueling machine
(RM), consisting of a bridge and a trolley, and the vibrations of the master fuel
assembly (MFA) affixed to the RM in pursuit of the given underwater locations
in the nuclear reactor. Figure 5.7 depicts a 3D schematic of the RM, where the
dynamics of the RM are given as (5.51)–(5.53). A boundary control scheme will be
developed for the RM system considering the nonlinear hydrodynamic forces given
by (5.41)–(5.44) acting on the rod (i.e., MFA). The control objective is to transport
the fuel rod to a target position within the nuclear reactor and to suppress its lateral
and transverse vibrations under the effect of inline and normal hydrodynamic forces
during the course of its transportation. Based on Lyapunov’s direct method, the
following control inputs to the bridge F b (t) and to the trolley F t (t) are designed such
that the uniform ultimate boundedness of the inline and transverse rod vibrations and
the convergence of the crane’s position errors to zero are achieved (Shah and Hong
2018).
Fb (t) −k1 e y (t) − k2 ẏ(t) − k3 u (0, t), (7.48)

Ft (t) −k4 ez (t) − k5 ż(t) − k6 w (0, t), (7.49)
where ki (i 1, 2, . . . , 6) are positive control gains and ey and ez are the position
errors, which are defined as follows.
e y (t) y(t) − yd , ez (t) z(t) − z d . (7.50)
Here, the desired positions (yd and zd ) and the respective initial position errors at t
0 of the bridge and trolley are assumed to be bounded as follows.

|yd | ≤ ξ1 , |z d | ≤ ξ2 , e y (0) ≤ ξ3 , and |ez (0)| ≤ ξ4 , (7.51)
where ξi (i 1, 2, 3, 4) are positive constants.
7.5 Simulations
In this section, we will present the simulation results for the sliding mode control
of the MH system and the boundary control of the RM system, as examples for
lumped mass and distributed parameter systems, respectively. First, in simulating
the responses of the MH system upon the sliding mode control, given by (7.36), the
schematic shown in Fig. 4.6 is used. Considering the roll motions of the ship as a
disturbance, see Fig. 4.7, the positions of the payload using open-loop control, see
7.5 Simulations 131
Fig. 7.6 Control inputs to the MH system (4.29)–(4.31): a open-loop control and b SMC
the shaped trolley velocity command in Fig. 7.6a, and the proposed SMC in (7.36),
see Fig. 7.6b, are compared in Fig. 7.7: The black dashed line corresponds to the
response to the input-shaped command and the blue solid line represents the response
to the proposed SMC.
Second, for simulating the inline vibration u(x, t) and transverse vibration w(x,
t) of the fuel rod upon the application of boundary control, (7.48) and (7.49), to the
RM, the code given in Sect. 7.5.1 is used. The obtained responses of the RM are
shown in Fig. 7.8: Fig. 7.8a, d shows the control inputs to the bridge and the trolley,
respectively, where the black dashed lines represent the trapezoidal command (i.e.,
when boundary control is not applied) and the red solid lines indicate the proposed
boundary control inputs and Fig. 7.8b, e depicts the positions of the bridge and the
Fig. 7.7 Sway responses of the MH system upon the application of sliding mode control
Fig. 7.8 Responses of the RM upon the trapezoidal and boundary control inputs: a control input
to the bridge, b position of the bridge, c inline endpoint deflections, d control input to the trolley,
e position of the trolley, f transverse endpoint deflections of the rod
trolley, respectively, for the above-mentioned inputs, whereas Fig. 7.8c, f compares
the inline and transverse endpoint responses, respectively, for the trapezoidal and the
proposed boundary control inputs. Finally, 3D responses of the rod to the proposed
boundary control scheme, (7.48) and (7.49), are illustrated in Fig. 7.9.
7.5 Simulations 133
Fig. 7.9 Three-dimensional responses of the fuel rod upon the application of the boundary control:
a inline vibrations and b transverse- or vortex-induced vibrations
7.5.1 MATLAB Code for Boundary Control of the RM System
% Acceleration and velocity commands

load acc1;
load vel1;
load disp1;
load accuw1;
load veluw1;
load dispuw1;
a1=accuw1; vt1=veluw1; y1=dispuw1;
% Control gains
K1=0.002;
K2=0.0035;
K3=0.003;
K4=0.5;
K5=0.3;
K6=3.2;
% Algorithm
L=1; T=10;
J=100; K=1000; % No. of nodes (space and time)
dx=L/J; dt=T/K; % Defining the sapce and time grids
x=[0:J]'*dx; % Length vector
t=[0:K]'*dt; % Time vector
% Varialbles/parameters data
d=0.008;
EI=0.5;
mr=0.037;
mt=3; % Trolley mass
mb=7; % Bridge mass
ro=1000; % Water density
CM=1.93; % Inertial coefficient
CD=1.38; % Drag coefficient
CA=0.93; % Coefficient of added mass
ma=(pi/4)*CA*ro*(dˆ2); % Fluid inertia
m=(mr/L);
M=m+ma;
M2=M+mt;
M3=M+mt+mb;
c1=0.2;
fd=0.5*ro*CD*d;
St=0.2;
fv=(St/d)*vt1;
phi=(2*pi*fv.*t)';
a2=0;
vt2=0;
% Lift co-efficient and lift force

a_1=1;
a_3=0.5;
ws=0.5;
alpha=0;
CL=a_1*cos((ws*t))+a_3*cos(((3*ws*t)+alpha));
fl=0.5*ro*d*cos(phi);
fly=0.2*cos(2*phi);
% FDM scheme variables

r1=M/(dtˆ2); r2=c1/dt; r3=EI/(dxˆ4); r=2*r1+r2;
s1=r3/r; s2=(6*r3+r2+r1)/r; s3=r1/r; s4=1/r;
% Initial and boundary conditions

it0=inline('0');
bx0=inline('0');
bxf=inline('0');
fori=1:J+1
w1(i,1)=it0(x(i));
w2(i,1)=it0(x(i));
w3(i,1)=it0(x(i));
w4(i,1)=it0(x(i));
w1_t(i,1)=it0(x(i));
w2_t(i,1)=it0(x(i));
w3_t(i,1)=it0(x(i));
w4_t(i,1)=it0(x(i));
end
% Output matrix with zero entries

for n=1:K+1
w1([1 J+1],n)=[bx0(t(n));bxf(t(n))];
w2([1 J+1],n)=[bx0(t(n));bxf(t(n))];
w3([1 J+1],n)=[bx0(t(n));bxf(t(n))];
w4([1 J+1],n)=[bx0(t(n));bxf(t(n))];
end
% Generating the system matrix (A)

fori=1:J+1
A(i,i)=s2;
ifi>1, A(i-1,i)=-4*s1; A(i,i-1)=-4*s1;end
ifi>2, A(i-2,i)=s1; A(i,i-2)=s1;end
end
A(1,1)=s2+s1;
7.5 Simulations 135
A(J+1,J+1)=s2-4*s1;
A(J+1,J-1)=2*s1;
A(J,J+1)=-2*s1;
A(J,J)=s2-s1;
% Initialization of variables
Iz=0; Iy=0; Fz=0; Fy=0; ak=0; aj=0; vd_y=0; v1=0; a11=0;
s1=0; az1=0; sz1=0; vz1=0; vy1=0; ay1=0; sy1=0;
% Calculating 3D rod deflections

for n=2:K+1
if n<=3
q2=[-s4*(Iz+Fz);zeros(J,1)]+w2(1:J+1,n-1)-s4*(fl(n)*CL(n)*(vt1(n)ˆ2));
q3=[-s4*(M*ay1);zeros(J,1)]+w3(1:J+1,n-1)-s4*(fd*vy1*abs(vy1));
I1(n)=0;
Fz(n)=0;
a_z(n)=0;
I2(n)=0;
FY(n)=M*a1(n);
Fy(n)=0;
ad(n)=0;
ac(n)=a1(n)+ad(n);
vy(n)=vy1+(ac(n))*dt/2;
sy(n)=sy1+(vy1*dt)+0.5*(ac(n))*(dtˆ2);
sy1=sy(n);
vy1=vy(n);
ay1=ac(n);
vz(n)=vz1+(a_z(n)+az1)*dt/2;
sz(n)=sz1+(vz1*dt)+0.5*(a_z(n)-az1)*(dtˆ2);
sz1=sz(n);
vz1=vz(n);
az1=a_z(n);
vel(n)=v1+(a1(n)+a11)*dt/2;
disp(n)=s1+(v1*dt)+0.5*(a1(n)-a11)*(dtˆ2);
s1=disp(n);
v1=vel(n);
a11=a1(n);
w3_xxx(n)=0;
w2_xxx(n)=0;
else
if n>458
vy1=0;
CL(n)=0;
fd=0;
K1=0;
K2=0;
K3=0;
K4=0;
K5=0;
K6=0;
K7=0;
K8=0;
end
q2=[-s4*(Iz+Fz);zeros(J,1)]+w2(1:J+1,n-1)-s4*(fl(n)*CL(n)*(vr_3(1:J+1,n-1).ˆ2))
-s3*(w2(1:J+1,n-2));
q3=[-s4*(M*ay1);zeros(J,1)]+w3(1:J+1,n-1)-s4*(fd*vr_1(1:J+1,n-1)
.*abs(vr_1(1:J+1,n-1))-0)-s3*(w3(1:J+1,n-2));
+0.5*(w2(J+1,n-1)-2*(w2(J+1,n-2))+w2(J+1,n-3));
w2_x(n)=(1/dx)*(w2(J+1,n-1)-w2(J,n-1));
Fz(n)=-K4*(sz1)-(K5*vz1)-K6*(w2_xxx(n));
sz(n)=sz1+(vz1*dt)+(0.5*(a_z(n))*(dtˆ2));
vz(n)=(sz(n)-sz(n-1))/dt;
sz1=sz(n);
vz1=vz(n);
az1=a_z(n);
FY(n)=M*a1(n)+m*Iy;
+0.5*(w3(J+1,n-1)-2*(w3(J+1,n-2))+w3(J+1,n-3));
w3_x(n)=(1/dx)*(w3(J+1,n-1)-w3(J,n-1));
Fy(n)=-K1*(sy1-0.4)-K2*vt1(n)-K3*(w3_xxx(n));
ad=(Fy(n)/M)-(M/M3)*Iy;
ac(n)=a1(n)-ad;
vy(n)=vy1+(ac(n)+ay1)*dt/2;
sy(n)=sy1+(vy1*dt)+(0.5*(ac(n)-ay1)*(dtˆ2));
sy1=sy(n);
vy1=vy(n);
ay1=ac(n);
vel(n)=v1+(a1(n)+a11)*dt/2;
v1=vel(n);
a11=a1(n);
end
w2(1:J+1,n)=inv(A)*q2;
w3(1:J+1,n)=inv(A)*q3;
w4(1:J+1,n)=w3(1:J+1,n)-w1(1:J+1,n);
w2_t(1:J+1,n)=(1/dt)*(w2(1:J+1,n)-w2(1:J+1,n-1));
w3_t(1:J+1,n)=(1/dt)*(w3(1:J+1,n)-w3(1:J+1,n-1));
w4_t(1:J+1,n)=(1/dt)*(w4(1:J+1,n)-w4(1:J+1,n-1));
vr_1(1:J+1,n)=(vy(n).*ones(J+1,1))+w3_t(1:J+1,n);
vr_3(1:J+1,n)=(vz(n).*ones(J+1,1))+w3_t(1:J+1,n);
Iz=(dx/(dtˆ2))*I1(n);
Iy=(dx/(dtˆ2))*I2(n);
Fz=Fz(n);
F_z(n)=Fz*M2/M;
ak=a_z(n);
az(n)=a_z(n);
F_y(n)=FY(n)+Fy(n);
ay(n)=ac(n);
aj=ay(n);
end
7.5 Simulations 137
% FIGURES %
figure(1)
subplot(3,2,1) % Bridge control force
plot(t,F_y,'r')
ylabel('Fy [N]')
xlabel('Time [s]')
hold on;
subplot(3,2,3) % Bridge displacement
plot(t,sy,'r')
ylabel('Bridge displacement [m]')
xlabel('Time [s]')
hold on;
subplot(3,2,5) % Lateral endpoint rod def
plot(t,w3(J+1,1:K+1),'r')
ylabel('u(L,t) [m]')
xlabel('t [s]')
hold on;
subplot(3,2,2) % Trolley control force
plot(t,F_z,'r')
ylabel('Fz [N]')
xlabel('Time [s]')
hold on;
subplot(3,2,4) % Trolley displacement
plot(t,sz,'r')
ylabel('Trolley displacement [m]')
xlabel('Time [s]')
hold on;
subplot(3,2,6) % Transverse end=point rod def
plot(t,w2(J+1,1:K+1),'r')
ylabel('w(L,t) [m]')
xlabel('t [s]')
hold on;
figure(2)
subplot(2,2,1) % Bridge velocity
plot(t,vy,'r')
ylabel('Bridge velocity [m/s]')
xlabel('Time [s]')
hold on;
subplot(2,2,2) % Trolley velocity

plot(t,(vz-0.01056),'r')
ylabel('Trolley velocity [m/s]')
xlabel('Time [s]')
hold on;
subplot(2,2,3) % Bridge acceleration
plot(t,ay,'r')
ylabel('Bridge acceleration [m/sˆ2]')
xlabel('Time [s]')
hold on;
subplot(2,2,4) % Trolley acceleration
plot(t,a_z,'r')
ylabel('Trolley acceleration [m/sˆ2]')

xlabel('Time [s]')
hold on;
figure(3)
subplot(1,2,1) % 3D-lateral rod def
mesh(t,x,w3);
xlabel('t [s]')
ylabel('x [m]')
zlabel('u(x,t) [m]')
subplot(1,2,2) % 3D-transverse rod def
mesh(t,x,w2);
xlabel('t [s]')
ylabel('x [m]')
zlabel('w(x,t) [m]')
References
Alli H, Singh T (1999) Passive control of overhead cranes. J Vib Control 5(3):443–459
Al-mousa AA, Nayfeh AH, Kachroo P (2003) Control of rotary cranes using fuzzy logic. Shock
Vib 10(2):81–95
Almutairi NB, Zribi M (2009) Sliding mode control of a three-dimensional overhead crane. J Vib
Control 15(11):1679–1730
Almutairi NB, Zribi M (2016) Fuzzy controllers for a gantry crane system with experimental
verifications. Math Probl Eng. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/1965923
Azeloglu CO, Sagirli A, Edincliler A (2016) Vibration mitigation of nonlinear crane system
against earthquake excitations with the self-tuning fuzzy logic PID controller. Nonlinear Dyn
84(4):1915–1928
Bartolini G, Pisano A, Usai E (2002) Second-order sliding-mode control of container cranes. Auto-
matica 38(10):1783–1790
Benhidjeb A, Gissinger GL (1995) Fuzzy control of an overhead crane performance comparison
with classic control. Control Eng Practice 3(12):1687–1696
Bock M, Kugi A (2014) Real-time nonlinear model predictive path-following control of a laboratory
tower crane. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol 22(4):1461–1473
Chang CY (2007) Adaptive fuzzy controller of the overhead cranes with nonlinear disturbance.
IEEE Trans Ind Inform 3(2):164–172
Chang CY, Chiang KH (2008) Fuzzy projection control law and its application to the overhead
crane. Mechatronics 18(10):607–615
Chang CY, Chiang KH (2009) Intelligent fuzzy accelerated method for the nonlinear 3-D crane
control. Expert Syst Appl 36(3):5750–5752
Chang YC, Shaw JS (2012) Adaptive hierarchical sliding control of overhead crane system with
haar wavelet function estimator. J Chinese Soc Mech Eng 33(3):193–202
Chang CY, Hsu KC, Chiang KH et al (2008) Modified fuzzy variable structure control method to
the crane system with control deadzone problem. J Vib Control 14(7):953–969
Chen WT, Saif M (2008) Output feedback controller design for a class of mimo nonlinear systems
using high-order sliding-mode differentiators with application to a laboratory 3-D crane. IEEE
Trans Ind Electron 55(11):3985–3997
Cheng CC, Chen CY (1996) Controller design for an overhead crane system with uncertainty.
Control Eng Practice 4(5):645–653
Cho SK, Lee HH (2002) A fuzzy-logic antiswing controller for three-dimensional overhead cranes.
ISA Trans 41(2):235–243
References 139
Cho H, Lee J, Lee Y et al (2008) Lyapunov theory based robust control of complicated nonlinear
mechanical systems with uncertainty. J Mech Sci Technol 22(11):2142–2150
Chwa D (2009) Nonlinear tracking control of 3-D overhead cranes against the initial swing angle
and the variation of payload weight. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol 17(4):876–883
d’Andra-Novel B, Coron JM (2000) Exponential stabilization of an overhead crane with flexible
cable via a back-stepping approach. Automatica 36(4):587–593
Erneux T, Kalmar-Nagy T (2007) Nonlinear stability of a delayed feedback controlled container
crane. J Vib Control 13(5):603–616
Hayajneh MT, Radaideh SM, Smadi IA (2006) Fuzzy logic controller for overhead cranes. Eng
Comput 23(1–2):84–98
He W, Ge SS, How BE et al (2011) Robust adaptive boundary control of a flexible marine riser with
vessel dynamics. Automatica 47(4):722–732
Hong K-S, Park BJ, Lee MH (2000) Two-stage control for container cranes. JSME Int J Ser C-Mech
Syst Mach Elem Manuf 43(2):273–282
Hong K-S, Kim CW, Hong K-T (2004) Boundary control of an axially moving belt system in a
thin-metal production line. Int J Control Autom Syst 2(1):55–67
Huey JR, Sorensen KL, Singhose W (2008) Useful applications of closed-loop signal shaping
controllers. Control Eng Practice 16(7):836–846
Jolevski D, Bego O (2015) Model predictive control of gantry/bridge crane with anti-sway algorithm.
J Mech Sci Technol 29(2):827–834
Karkoub MA, Zribi M (2001) Robust control schemes for an overhead crane. J Vib Control
7(3):395–416
Kim CS, Hong K-S (2009) Boundary control of container cranes from the perspective of controlling
an axially moving string system. Int J Control Autom Syst 7(3):437–445
Kim C-W, Hong K-S, Park H (2005a) Boundary control of an axially moving string: Actuator
dynamics included. J Mech Sci Technol 1(1):40–50
Kim C-W, Park H, Hong K-S (2005b) Boundary control of axially moving continua: Application
to a zinc galvanizing line. Int J Control Autom Syst 3(4):601–611
Lee HH (2003) A new approach for the anti-swing control of overhead cranes with high-speed load
hoisting. Int J Control 76(15):1493–1499
Lee HH (2004) A new design approach for the anti-swing trajectory control of overhead cranes
with high-speed hoisting. Int J Control 77(10):931–940
Lee HH, Liang Y, Segura D (2006) A sliding-mode antiswing trajectory control for overhead cranes
with high-speed load hoisting. J Dyn Syst Meas Control-Trans ASME 128(4):842–845
Li XO, Yu W (2012) Anti-swing control for an overhead crane with fuzzy compensation. Intell
Autom Soft Comput 18(1):1–11
Liang YC, Koh KK (1997) Concise anti-swing approach for fuzzy crane control. Electron Lett
33(2):167–168
Liu DT, Yi JQ, Zhao DB et al (2005) Adaptive sliding mode fuzzy control for a two-dimensional
overhead crane. Mechatronics 15(5):505–522
Mahfouf M, Kee CH, Abbod MF et al (2000) Fuzzy logic-based anti-sway control design for
overhead cranes. Neural Comput Appl 9(1):38–43
Masoud ZN (2007) Oscillation control of quay-side container cranes using cable-length manipula-
tion. J Dyn Syst Meas Control-Trans ASME 129(2):224–228
Masoud ZN, Nayfeh AH, Al-Mousa A (2003) Delayed position-feedback controller for the reduction
of payload pendulations of rotary cranes. J Vib Control 9(1–2):257–277
Masoud ZN, Daqaq MF, Nayfeh NA (2004a) Pendulation reduction on small ship-mounted tele-
scopic cranes. J Vib Control 10(8):1167–1179
Masoud ZN, Nayfeh AH, Mook DT (2004b) Cargo pendulation reduction of ship-mounted cranes.
Moustafa KAF, Ismail MIS, Gad EH et al (2006) Fuzzy control of flexible cable overhead cranes
with load hoisting. Trans Inst Meas Control 28(4):371–386
Nayfeh NA, Baumann WT (2008) Nonlinear analysis of time-delay position feedback control of
container cranes. Nonlinear Dyn 53(1–2):75–88
Neupert J, Arnold E, Schneider K (2010) Tracking and anti-sway control for boom cranes. Control
Eng Practice 18(1):31–44
Ngo QH, Hong K-S (2012) Adaptive sliding mode control of container cranes. IET Contr Theory
Appl 6(5):662–668
Ngo QH, Hong K-S, Jung IH (2009) Adaptive control of an axially moving system. J Mech Sci
Technol 23(11):3071–3078
Ngo QH, Nguyen NP, Nguyen CN et al (2015) Fuzzy sliding mode control of container cranes. Int
J Control Autom Syst 13(2):419–425
Nguyen HT (1994) State-variable feedback controller for an overhead crane. J Elect Electronics
Eng 14(12):75–84
Nguyen QC, Hong K-S (2012a) Simultaneous control of longitudinal and transverse vibrations of
an axially moving string with velocity tracking. J Sound Vibr 331(13):3006–3019
Nguyen QC, Hong K-S (2012b) Transverse vibration control of axially moving membranes by
regulation of axial velocity. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol 20(4):1124–1131
Omar F, Karray F, Basir O et al (2004) Autonomous overhead crane system using a fuzzy logic
controller. J Vib Control 10(9):1255–1270
Park H, Le NT (2012) Modeling and controlling the mobile harbour crane system with virtual
prototyping technology. Int J Control Autom Syst 10(6):1204–1214
Park H, Chwa D, Hong K-S (2007) A feedback linearization control of container cranes: varying
rope length. Int J Control Autom Syst 5(4):379–387
Park MS, Chwa D, Hong SK (2008) Antisway tracking control of overhead cranes with system
uncertainty and actuator nonlinearity using an adaptive fuzzy sliding-mode control. IEEE Trans
Ind Electron 55(11):3972–3984
Piazzi A, Visioli A (2002) Optimal dynamic-inversion-based control of an overhead crane. IEE
Qian DW, Tong SW, Lee S (2016) Fuzzy-logic-based control of payloads subjected to double-
pendulum motion in overhead cranes. Autom Constr 65:133–143
Rahn CD, Zhang FM, Joshi S et al (1999) Asymptotically stabilizing angle feedback for a flexible
cable gantry crane. J Dyn Syst Meas Control-Trans ASME 121(3):563–566
Sakawa Y, Nakazumi A (1985) Modeling and control of a rotary crane. J Dyn Syst Meas Control-
Trans ASME 107(3):200–206
Sato K, Sakawa Y (1988) Modelling and control of a flexible rotary crane. Int J Control
48(5):2085–2105
Sawodny O, Aschemann H, Lahres S (2002) An automated gantry crane as a large workspace robot.
Control Eng Practice 10(12):1323–1338
Shah UH, Hong K-S (2018) Active vibration control of a flexible rod moving in water: application
to nuclear refueling machines. Automatica 93:231–243
Slotine JJE, Li W (1991) Applied Nonlinear Control. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs
Smoczek J (2014) Fuzzy crane control with sensorless payload deflection feedback for vibration
reduction. Mech Syst Signal Proc 46(1):70–81
Smoczek J (2015) Experimental verification of a GPC-LPV method with RLS and P1-TS fuzzy-
based estimation for limiting the transient and residual vibration of a crane system. Mech Syst
Signal Proc 62–63:324–340
Smoczek J, Szpytko J (2014) Evolutionary algorithm-based design of a fuzzy TBF predictive model
and TSK fuzzy anti-sway crane control system. Eng Appl Artif Intell 28:190–200
Solihin MI, Wahyudi, Legowo A (2010) Fuzzy-tuned PID anti-swing control of automatic gantry
crane. J Vib Control 16(1):127–145
Sucevic M, Novakovic B, Crnekovic M (2004) Control of a load hoisting and transfering using
analytic fuzzy logic controller. Strojarstvo 46(4–6):125–136
References 141
Sun N, Fang YC, Chen H (2015) A new antiswing control method for underactuated cranes with
unmodeled uncertainties: theoretical design and hardware experiments. IEEE Trans Ind Electron
62(1):453–465
Trabia MB, Renno JM, Moustafa KAF (2008) Generalized design of an anti-swing fuzzy logic
controller for an overhead crane with hoist. J Vib Control 14(3):319–346
Tuan LA, Lee SG (2013) Sliding mode controls of double-pendulum crane systems. J Mech Sci
Technol 27(6):1863–1873
Van den Broeck L, Diehl M, Swevers J (2011) A model predictive control approach for time optimal
point-to-point motion control. Mechatronics 21(7):1203–1212
Vazquez C, Collado J, Fridman L (2014) Super twisting control of a parametrically excited overhead
crane. J Frankl Inst-Eng Appl Math 351(4):2283–2298
Vazquez C, Fridman L, Collado J et al (2015) Second-order sliding mode control of a perturbed-
crane. J Dyn Syst Meas Control-Trans ASME 137(8):081010
Wang W, Yi J, Zhao D et al (2004) Design of a stable sliding-mode controller for a class of second-
order underactuated systems. IEE Proc-Control Theory Appl 151(6):683–690
Wang W, Liu XD, Yi JQ (2007) Structure design of two types of sliding-mode controllers for a
class of under-actuated mechanical systems. IET Control Theory Appl 1(1):163–172
Wu XQ, He XX (2016) Partial feedback linearization control for 3-D underactuated overhead crane
systems. ISA Trans 65:361–370
Xi Z, Hesketh T (2010) Discrete time integral sliding mode control for overhead crane with uncer-
tainties. IET Contr Theory Appl 4(10):2071–2081
Yakut O (2014) Application of intelligent sliding mode control with moving sliding surface for
overhead cranes. Neural Comput Appl 24(6):1369–1379
Yang K-J, Hong K-S, Matsuno F (2004a) Boundary control of an axially moving steel strip under a
spatiotemporally varying tension. JSME Int J Ser C-Mech Syst Mach Elem Manuf 47(2):665–674
Yang K-J, Hong K-S, Matsuno F (2004b) Robust adaptive boundary control of an axially moving
string under a spatiotemporally varying tension. J Sound Vibr 273(4–5):1007–1029
Yang K-J, Hong K-S, Matsuno F (2005a) Boundary control of a translating tensioned beam with
varying speed. IEEE-ASME Trans Mechatron 10(5):594–597
Yang K-J, Hong K-S, Matsuno F (2005b) Robust boundary control of an axially moving string by
using a PR transfer function. IEEE Trans Autom Control 50(12):2053–2058
Yoshimoto T, Sakawa Y (1989) Modelling and control of a rotary crane with a flexible joint. Optim
Control Appl Methods 10(1):21–38
Yu W, Moreno-Armendariz MA, Rodriguez FO (2011) Stable adaptive compensation with fuzzy
CMAC for an overhead crane. Inf Sci 181(21):4895–4907
Zdesar A, Cerman O, Dovzan D et al (2013) Fuzzy control of a helio-crane. J Intell Robot Syst
72(3–4):497–515
Zhang HY, Wang J, Lu GD (2014a) Hierarchical fuzzy-tuned multiobjective optimization control
for gantry cranes. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part C-J Mech Eng Sci 228(7):1119–1131
Zhang HY, Wang J, Lu GD (2014b) Self-organizing fuzzy optimal control for under-actuated sys-
tems. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part I-J Syst Control Eng 228(8):578–590
Chapter 8
Conclusions and Future Research
Directions
This book has discussed in detail the dynamics and various control methods of
crane systems being used in the industry. Depending on the dynamics, cranes were
first classified into gantry and rotary cranes. Then, based on their mobility and usage,
cranes were further classified as fixed and mobile cranes. Mathematical formulations
representing individual cranes were presented. Both the lumped mass and distributed
parameter models of cranes were included. The lumped mass models of gantry cranes
were discussed first. As a starter, a lumped mass formulation of the 2D overhead
crane, (2.1)–(2.7), considering a constant length single hoisting rope mechanism, was
discussed. Then, the equations of motion, (2.10)–(2.15), of the 2D overhead crane
considering hoisting motions (assuming the single-rope hoisting mechanism) of the
payload were derived. In the end, a detailed formulation, (2.16)–(2.20), of the 3D
overhead crane (considering the single-rope hoisting mechanism) was derived. The
said formulation described the planar dynamics of the crane (i.e., the 2D movements
of the trolley and the bridge), the hoisting motion of the payload, and the sway of
the payload.
After discussing the single hoisting rope models of overhead cranes, container
crane models with multi-rope hoisting mechanisms were discussed. First, the
equations of motion, (2.21)–(2.23), of a container crane with a four-rope hoisting
mechanism were derived considering polar coordinates. The dynamic responses of
multi-rope systems are significantly different from those of single-rope systems.
The behavior of such systems is highly nonlinear and includes coupled translational
and rotational motions of the payload due to uneven distribution of the tensions
along the hoisting ropes. The said model, due to its complexity, is very difficult
to use for control development. Therefore, the dynamics of the four-rope system
can alternatively be represented by a simplified two-rope model. Such a two-rope
model can be further simplified as a 2D crane system with hoisting mechanisms
represented as a double-pendulum system; see (2.24)–(2.28).
After considering the lumped mass models of the single- and multi-rope gantry
crane systems, lumped mass models of an overhead crane used for transporting loads
in water were presented. Such a system finds its applications in nuclear power plants
in the form of a refueling machine, which transports nuclear fuel rods underwater for
144 8 Conclusions and Future Research Directions
restricting the escape of radiation from the fuel into the environment. A 2D model,
given by (2.46) and (2.47), of the refueling machine was discussed, considering the
hydrodynamic forces acting on the fuel rod.
After discussing the gantry crane models, the lumped mass models of rotary
cranes were discussed. First, the equations of motion of a tower crane, (3.1)–(3.4),
depicting the slew motion of the jib, the translational motion of the trolley along
the jib, and the hoisting motion of the payload, were derived. Then, various
simplified models of tower cranes were discussed, which included the formulations
(3.5)–(3.8) and (3.9) and (3.10) without considering the hoisting motion of the pay-
load, and the formulation (3.11) and (3.12) considering only the slew motion of the
jib. After discussing the dynamics of the tower crane, lumped mass formulations of a
boom crane were derived, which depicted the sway response of the payload upon only
the slew motions of the jib [see (3.13)–(3.16)], upon both the slew and luff motions of
the boom, (3.17)–(3.22), and upon the complete slew and luff motions of the boom
and the hoisting motion of the payload [see (3.23)–(3.27)]. Further, formulations
(3.30)–(3.35), depicting the dynamics of knuckle boom cranes, were also discussed.
After discussing fixed crane systems, lumped mass formulations of mobile cranes,
which included formulations (4.1)–(4.18) representing a truck-mounted crane,
a ship-mounted boom crane [see (4.22)–(4.26)], and the mobile harbor system [see
(4.29)–(4.31)], were discussed.
After presenting the lumped mass models, distributed parameter-based formula-
tions of cranes were discussed. First, a very simple model, (5.1)–(5.3), of a sin-
gle hoisting rope under distributed wind disturbance was represented using the
wave equation. Then, using Hamilton’s principle, an ODE–PDE-based formulation,
(5.6)–(5.10), of a 2D overhead crane with a flexible hoisting rope of constant length
was derived. Further, considering a double-pendulum hoisting system in distributed
parameter setting, an ODE–PDE model of the 2D overhead crane was discussed [see
(5.11)–(5.16)]. Then, to model the hoisting motions of the payload, the 2D overhead
crane system was modeled as an axially moving system, where the hybrid ODE–PDE
formulation (5.30)–(5.32) was obtained by using Hamilton’s principle. Moreover, for
systems operating underwater, a 2D model, (5.33)–(5.36), of a ship-mounted boom
crane (i.e., offshore crane) was developed to investigate the underwater response of
the payload considering the ocean current disturbance acting on the flexible hoist-
ing rope. Finally, a hybrid ODE–PDE model, (5.47)–(5.53), of the nuclear refueling
machine was developed to investigate the coupled lateral and transverse deflections
of the flexible fuel rod in water upon the rigid body movements of the trolley and
the bridge (in air).
After discussing the dynamics of crane systems, control formulations were dis-
cussed. First, open-loop control techniques, which included the optimal control and
input shaping strategies, were introduced. The application of such open-loop tech-
niques to both gantry and rotary crane systems was discussed. From an implementa-
tion viewpoint, open-loop control is very effective and is widely applied to industrial
cranes in ware houses. However, it cannot successfully handle external disturbances
and the high nonlinearity appearing in several crane operations. Therefore, feed-
back control strategies were pursued. The feedback control strategies discussed in
8 Conclusions and Future Research Directions 145
this book include both the linear and the nonlinear control schemes. Linear con-
trol strategies include the state feedback and the transfer function-based control. The
nonlinear control techniques include delayed feedback control, sliding mode control,
and fuzzy logic control. In addition, some discussions on hybrid control strategies,
which include both combined open-loop and feedback and two different feedback
control strategies, were also included. Finally, the feedback control application to
distributed parameter systems was discussed. The discussion was restricted to only
the boundary control technique due to various applications to crane systems modeled
in a distributed parameter setting.
8.1 Future Research Directions
Based on all the discussions related to the modeling and control of crane systems
covered in this book, the following topics are identified for future research in the
area of dynamics and control of cranes.
1. For cranes with multi-rope hoisting mechanisms, further dynamic analyses are
necessary to establish exact relationships between the rope configuration, elas-
ticity of ropes, and damping of the sway response. Moreover, control strategies
based on a complete nonlinear model of multi-rope systems, which can effectively
suppress the coupled translational and rotational response of the payload, have
to be developed. For simple two-rope container crane systems, simple open-loop
control strategies need to be formulated; these strategies can be developed based
on approximations of the natural frequencies and damping ratios of two-rope
systems.
2. Considering underwater applications of gantry cranes, a lumped mass model
depicting planar crane movements and sway motions of the load in the 3D space
has to be formulated. Such systems are used as refueling machines in nuclear
power plants and as deep sea oil and gas field installation systems. For such
systems, robust control strategies, such as sliding mode control, can be formulated
to cater for uncertainties in damping behavior of the system and unknown external
disturbances acting on the hoisting mechanism and the payload.
3. For rotary cranes, lumped mass formulations of boom cranes with additional two
or more booms have to be developed. Additionally, the dynamics of telescopic
boom cranes also have to be explored thoroughly. Based on the formulations of
such systems, feedback control strategies have to be developed.
4. Considering ship-mounted cranes, more detailed formulations that can depict
the sway responses of the payload upon the complete six DOF movements of
the ship have to be developed. In addition, the concept on the mobile harbor
system needs to be further polished for the realization of an actual system. For
such highly nonlinear systems, predictive control strategies in addition to artificial
intelligence, fuzzy logic control, and neural network-based strategies are required
146 8 Conclusions and Future Research Directions
to be developed. By using such advanced control strategies, the response of the

payload in highly unpredictable and uncertain environments can be controlled.
5. Considering the distributed parameter formulations of cranes, in the future, more
detailed 3D models are required to be developed, which can be used for ana-
lyzing coupled inline, transverse, and axial deformations of the flexible hoisting
rope upon the planar rigid body movements of the trolley and the bridge. These
models need to be developed considering the friction between the rails and the
support mechanism and external disturbances, such as wind, acting on the flexi-
ble hoisting rope. In addition, for offshore crane systems, more detailed models
are required to be formulated for analyzing the response of the payload upon six
DOF movements of the vessel and hoisting of the payload, and considering the
influence of the waves and currents (as disturbances) on the distributed parameter
system.
Appendix A
Derivation of the equations of motion
for the lateral dynamics of overhead
cranes considering a fixed length single
hoisting rope mechanism using Lagrange’s
method (Karihaloo and Parbery 1982)
Considering the schematic (Fig. 2.3) of the 2D overhead crane, the position (xm, ym)
of the payload in the ij-plane is obtained as follows.
xm ¼ l cos /ðtÞ; ðA:1Þ
ym ¼ yðtÞ þ l sin /ðtÞ; ðA:2Þ
where l is the length of the hoisting rope, and / is the lateral sway angle (i.e., the
angle between the hoisting rope and the i-axis). Now, by differentiating (A.1) and
(A.2) with respect to time, the following velocity vector vm of the payload is
obtained.
vm ¼ x_ m ðtÞi þ y_ m ðtÞj: ðA:3Þ
The inner product of (A.3) is given as follows.
v2m ¼ jvm j2 ¼ x_ 2m þ y_ 2m ¼ ðl/_ sin /Þ2 þ ð_y þ l/_ cos /Þ2

¼ l2 /_ 2 sin2 / þ y_ 2 þ l2 /_ 2 cos2 / þ 2_yl/_ cos / ðA:4Þ
¼ y_ þ 2_yl/_ cos / þ l / :
2 2 _2
Now, the kinetic energy (EK) for the trolley and payload together can be for-
mulated as
EK ¼ ð1=2Þðmb y_ 2 þ mv2m Þ ¼ ð1=2Þðmb y_ 2 þ mð_y2 þ 2_yl/_ cos / þ l2 /_ 2 ÞÞ

ðA:5Þ
¼ ð1=2Þðmb þ mÞ_y2 þ m_yl/_ cos / þ ð1=2Þml2 /_ 2 :

Advances in Industrial Control, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-5770-1
148 Appendix A: Derivation of the equations of motion for the lateral …
The potential energy (EP) of the payload becomes
EP ¼ mglð1 cos /Þ: ðA:6Þ
Now, we will use Lagrange’s equation, given below, to obtain the equations of
motion of the considered system.

@ @L @L
¼ Qi : ðA:7Þ
@t @ q_ i @qi
Here, L ¼ EK EP is the Lagrangian and qi and Qi signify the generalized coor-

dinates and the generalized forces, respectively, where the subscript i corresponds
to the ith generalized coordinate. In this formulation, q1 = y(t) and q2 = /(t) are
considered as two generalized coordinates, whereas Q1 = Fb and Q2 = 0 are the
corresponding generalized forces. Q2 = 0 signifies that the sway dynamics does not
involve any actuation.
Now, considering the kinetic energy, potential energy, generalized coordinates,
and generalized forces, the Lagrange’s equation is evaluated as follows.
@L @L @L
¼ 0; ¼ ml_y/_ sin / mgl sin /; ¼ ðmb þ mÞ_y þ ml/_ cos /;
@y @/ @ y_

@ @L € cos /_ ml/_ 2 sin /; @L ¼ ml_y cos / ml2 /;
_
¼ ðmb þ mÞ€y þ ml/
@t @ y_ @ /_

@ @L €
¼ ml€y cos / ml_y/_ sin / þ ml2 /:
@t @ /_
For qi ¼ yðtÞ, (A.7) reveals the equation of motion of the bridge as follows.
€ cos / ml/_ 2 sin / ¼ Fb ðtÞ:

ðmb þ mÞ€y þ ml/ ðA:8Þ
For qi ¼ /ðtÞ, using (A.7), the following equation for the lateral sway dynamics is
obtained.
€ þ mgl sin / ¼ 0:
ml€y cos / þ ml2 / ðA:9Þ
Appendix B
of a 3D overhead crane considering
a single hoisting rope mechanism using
Lagrange’s method (Lee 1998)
Considering the schematic (Fig. 2.1) of the overhead crane, the position (xm, ym, zm)
of the payload in the 3D space is obtained as follows.
xm ¼ lðtÞ cos /y ðtÞ cos /z ðtÞ; ðB:1Þ
ym ¼ yðtÞ þ lðtÞ sin /y ðtÞ; ðB:2Þ
zm ¼ zðtÞ þ lðtÞ cos /y ðtÞ sin /z ðtÞ; ðB:3Þ
where /z is the projection of / on the ik-plane, and /y is the sway angle measured
from the ik-plane (see Fig. 2.2a). The kinetic energy (EK) of the crane and its
payload, and the potential energy (EP) of the payload are given as follows.
EK ¼ ð1=2Þðmx _l2 þ my y_ 2 þ mz z_ 2 Þ þ ð1=2Þmv2m ; ðB:4Þ
EP ¼ mglð1 cos /y cos /z Þ; ðB:5Þ
where mx, my, and mz are the hoisting, traveling (bridge), traversing (trolley)
components of the total mass of the crane including the equivalent masses of the
rotating parts such as motors and their drive trains along the i-, j-, and k-axes,
respectively, m is the payload, and vm is the velocity of the payload. Now, by
differentiating (B.1)–(B.3) with respect to time, the following velocity vector vm of
the payload is obtained.
vm ¼ x_ m i þ y_ m j þ z_ m k; ðB:6Þ

150 Appendix B: Derivation of the equations of motion of a 3D overhead …
v2m ¼ jvm j2 ¼ x_ 2m þ y_ 2m þ z_ 2m
¼ y_ 2 þ z_ 2 þ _l2 þ l2 /_ 2 cos2 /y þ l2 /_ 2 þ 2ð_l sin /y þ l/_ y cos /y Þ
z y
þ 2ð_l cos /y sin /z þ l/_ z cos /y cos /z l/_ y sin /y sin /z Þ_z: ðB:7Þ
The Lagrangian, L, and Rayleigh’s dissipation function, D, are defined as follows.
1 1
L ¼ EK EP ¼ ðmx _l2 þ my y_ 2 þ mz z_ 2 Þ þ mv2m þ mglðcos /y cos /z 1Þ; ðB:8Þ
2 2
D ¼ ð1=2Þðcx _l2 þ cy y_ 2 þ cz z_ 2 Þ; ðB:9Þ
where cx ; cy ; cz are the viscous damping coefficients of the crane along the i-, j-, and
k-axes, respectively. Substituting L and D into Lagrange’s equation given below,

@ @L @L @D
þ ¼ Qi ; ðB:10Þ
@t @ q_ i @qi @qi
and considering q1 = y, q2 = z, q3 = l, q4 = /y, and q5 = /z as the five generalized

coordinates and Q1 = Fb, Q2 = Ft, and Q3 = Fh as the generalized forces, the
equations of motion are obtained as follows.
€ ðtÞ cos / ðtÞ þ m€lðtÞ sin / ðtÞ þ cy y_ ðtÞ

ðmy þ mÞ€yðtÞ þ mlðtÞ/y y y
ðB:11Þ
_ _
_ /y ðtÞ cos /y ðtÞ mlðtÞ/y ðtÞ sin /y ðtÞ ¼ Fb ðtÞ;
þ 2mlðtÞ 2
ðmz þ mÞ€zðtÞ þ mlðtÞ/€ ðtÞ cos / ðtÞ cos / ðtÞ þ cz z_ ðtÞ

z y z
€ _ _
þ mlðtÞ sin /z ðtÞ cos /y ðtÞ þ 2mlðtÞ/z ðtÞ cos /z ðtÞ cos /y ðtÞ
2m_lðtÞ/_ y ðtÞ sin /y ðtÞ sin /z ðtÞ mlðtÞ/_ z ðtÞ2 cos /y ðtÞ sin /z ðtÞ
2mlðtÞ/_ y ðtÞ/_ z ðtÞ sin /y ðtÞ cos /z ðtÞ mlðtÞ/ € ðtÞ sin / ðtÞ sin / ðtÞ
y y z
mlðtÞ/_ y ðtÞ cos /y ðtÞ sin /z ðtÞ ¼ Ft ðtÞ;

2
ðB:12Þ
ðmx þ mÞ€lðtÞ þ m€zðtÞ cos /y ðtÞ sin /z ðtÞ þ m€yðtÞ sin /y ðtÞ þ cx _lðtÞ
mlðtÞ/_ ðtÞ2 cos2 / ðtÞ mlðtÞ/_ ðtÞ2 mg cos / ðtÞ cos / ðtÞ ¼ Fh ðtÞ;
z y y y z ðB:13Þ
€ ðtÞ þ €yðtÞ cos / ðtÞ €zðtÞ sin / ðtÞ sin / ðtÞ þ 2_lðtÞ/_ ðtÞ
lðtÞ/y y y z y
_ 2
þ lðtÞ/ ðtÞ sin / ðtÞ cos / ðtÞ þ g sin / ðtÞ cos / ðtÞ ¼ 0; ðB:14Þ
z y y y z
€ ðtÞ cos2 / ðtÞ þ €zðtÞ cos / ðtÞ cos / ðtÞ þ 2_lðtÞ/_ z ðtÞ cos2 / ðtÞ
lðtÞ/z y y z y
2lðtÞ/_ ðtÞ/_ ðtÞ sin / ðtÞ cos / ðtÞ þ g cos / ðtÞ sin / ðtÞ ¼ 0:
y z y y y z ðB:15Þ
Appendix C
of the spreader–payload system
considering four-rope hoisting
mechanism using Lagrange’s method
(Cartmell et al. 1998)
Considering the 2D schematic, Fig. 2.7, for representing the motions of the spreader
in the polar coordinates, r and a (r depicts the projected length of the hoisting cable
(s) on the jk-plane and a is the angle between r and the axis of the bridge), the
position (xm, ym, zm) of the payload in the 3D space is obtained as follows.
l ðl2 2R2 Þ1=2

xm ¼ xt ðl2 r 2 Þ1=2 þ 2
ðl2 r 2 Þ1=2 h2s ; ðC:1Þ
lðp=2Þ
l ðl2 2R2 Þ1=2

ym ¼ yb þ ztb cos hb þ r cosðhb þ aÞ 2
rh2s cosðhb þ aÞ; ðC:2Þ
lðp=2Þ
l ðl2 2R2 Þ1=2

zm ¼ zb þ ztb sin hb þ r sinðhb þ aÞ 2
rh2s sinðhb þ aÞ; ðC:3Þ
lðp=2Þ
where xt is the height of the trolley from the jk-plane, l is the hoist length, R is the
half diagonal dimension of the trolley/spreader, hs is the rotation of the spreader
about the i-axis, yb is the position of the CG of the bridge along the j-axis, zt-b is the
position of the trolley relative to the CG of the bridge, hb is the angle of rotation of
the bridge with respect to the i-axis, and zb is the position of the CG of the bridge
along the k-axis.
The kinetic (EK) and potential (EP) energies are given as follows.
1 1 1
EK ¼ Ib h_ 2b þ ðIt þ mt z2tb Þh_ 2b þ Iðh_ s þ h_ b Þ2
2 2 2 ðC:4Þ
1 1 1
þ mb ð_yb þ z_ b Þ þ mt ð_yt þ z_ 2t Þ þ mð_x2m þ y_ 2m þ z_ 2m Þ;
2 2 2
2 2 2

152 Appendix C: Derivation of the equations of motion of the spreader–payload …
EP ¼ mgxm ; ðC:5Þ
where Ib, It, and Im denote the mass moments of inertia of the bridge, trolley, and
spreader, respectively, and yt and zt signify the positions of the trolley along the j-
and k-axes, respectively.
Now, the Lagrangian L becomes
1 1 1
L ¼ EK EP ¼ Ib h_ 2b þ ðIt þ mt z2tb Þh_ 2b þ Iðh_ s þ h_ b Þ2
2 2 2 ðC:6Þ
1 1 1
þ mb ð_x2b þ y_ 2b Þ þ mt ð_x2t þ y_ 2t Þ þ mð_x2m þ y_ 2m þ z_ 2m Þ mgxm :
2 2 2
Let cr , ca , and chs denote the linear viscous damping coefficients associated with the
generalized coordinates q1 = r, q2 = a, and q2 = hs. Then, Rayleigh’s dissipation
function becomes
D ¼ ð1=2Þðcr r_ 2 þ ca a_ 2 þ chs h_ 2s Þ: ðC:7Þ
Considering no actuation (i.e., Q1 = Q2 = Q3 = 0) associated with the generalized

coordinates, the Lagrange equation reveals the following equations of motion of the
four-rope hoisting mechanism.
r_ €l ðr _l r_ lÞ2 n _
€r þ cr r þ r 4 _ 2 þ ztb h_ 2b cos a
rðhb þ aÞ
m l l l2 r 2
ð1 ð4=p2 Þð1 ð1 2ðR2 =l2 ÞÞ1=2 Þh2s Þ ð€yb cosðhb þ aÞ þ €zb sinðhb þ aÞ
16R2 _lhs
þ €ztb cos a þ 2_ztb h_ b sin a þ ztb €
hb sin a þ
p2 l3 ð1 2R2 =l2 Þ1=2
0 11
4 1 ð1 2R2 =l2 Þ1=2 ð_r l2 rl_lÞ h ð_r l 2
rl_
lÞ
@ þ r h_ s AA
s
h3s
p2 ðl2 r 2 Þ l2 r 2
2
16 1 ð1 2R2 =l2 Þ1=2 h3s rl_l r_ l2
þ 4 _s
h þ rð _ b þ aÞ
h _ 2
h s
p4 l2 r 2

4 1 ð1 2R2 =l2 Þ1=2
2_r hs h_ s 2rhs €
hs 2r h_ 2s ztb h_ 2b h2s cos a
p2
0 19
_l rr_ 1 ð4=p2 Þ 1 ð1 2R2 =l2 Þ1=2 =
l
2rðh_ b þ aÞ
_ hs 4r 2
2 2
hs h_ s @ rghs A
2
l r 2
ðl2 r 2 Þ 1=2 ;
l2 r 2
2 ¼ 0;
l2 1 ð4=p2 Þ 1 ð1 2R2 =l2 Þ1=2 h2s
ðC:8Þ
Appendix C: Derivation of the equations of motion of the spreader–payload … 153
a_ 1
€
a þ ca þ €hb 2
Ir
1 ð4=p2 Þ 1 ð1 2R2 =l2 Þ1=2 h2s r
n
2_r ðh_ b þ aÞ _ þ ð32=p4 Þð1 ð1 2ðR2 =l2 ÞÞ1=2 Þðh_ b þ aÞh _ 3s
!
2R2 _lrhs 2 2 1=2 _
ð1 ð1 2ðR =l ÞÞ Þð_r hs þ 2r hs Þ
l3 ð1 2R2 =l2 Þ1=2

þ ð4=p2 Þð1 ð1 2ðR2 =l2 ÞÞ1=2 Þh2s 1 ð€zb cosðhb þ aÞ €yb sinðhb þ aÞ

€ztb sin a þ 2_ztb hb cos a þ ztb €hb cos a þ ztb h_ 2b sin a ð8=p2 Þðh_ b þ aÞh
_ s
1=2 ! !)
2R2 _lrhs R2
2 1 1 2 ð_r hs þ r h_ s Þ ¼ 0;
l3 ð1 2R2 =l2 Þ1=2 l2
ðC:9Þ
€ h_ s 1
hs þ chs 2
m
I þ ð64=p2 ÞÞm 1 ð1 2R2 =l2 Þ1=2 l2 h2s
8
< 128R2 _l 1 ð1 2R2 =l2 Þ1=2
I €hb m h2s ð2lh_ s þ _lhs Þ
: p4 l2 ð1 2R2 =l2 Þ1=2
ð8=p2 Þð1 ð1 2R2 =l2 Þ1=2 Þrhs ð€yb cosðhb þ aÞ þ €zb sinðhb þ aÞ

þ €ztb cos a þ ztb €
hb sin a þ 2_ztb h_ b sin a ztb h_ 2b cos a rðh_ b þ aÞ
_ 2

þ ð32=p4 Þ ð1 ð1 2R2 =l2 Þ1=2 Þ2 h3s ð8=p2 Þð1 ð1 2R2 =l2 Þ1=2 Þhs
ð2r r_ l_l þ l3€l r_ 2 l2 _l2 r 2 r 2 l€lÞð1=ðl2 r 2 ÞÞ þ ð32=p4 Þð1 ð1 2R2 =l2 Þ1=2 Þ2 hs
64R2 €ll3 2R2€ll 3l2 _l2 þ 4R2 _l2
4l_lhs h_ s þ 2l2 h_ 2s r 2 ðh_ b þ aÞ_ 2 h2s
p4 l4 ð1 2R2 =l2 Þ3=2
1=2 ! 1=2 ! )
R2 8 R2
2 1=2
1 12 2 hs þ 2 1 1 2 2
3
ðl r Þ hs g
2
¼ 0:
l p l
ðC:10Þ
Appendix D
of the gantry crane using Lagrange’s
method considering the hoisting system
as a double-pendulum system
(Ramli et al. 2017)
Figure 2.8 depicts the double-pendulum representation of the hoisting system of the
gantry crane, where l1 denotes the length of the hoisting rope connecting the hook
to the bridge, m1 is the mass of the hook, and /1 signifies the sway angle of the
hook (i.e., the angle between l1 and the i-axis). Similarly, l2, m2, and /2 represent
the distance/length between the CGs of the hook and the payload, mass of the
payload, and sway angle of the payload, respectively. The positions of the two
payloads in the ij-plane are given as follows.
xm1 ¼ l1 cos /1 ; ðD:1Þ
ym1 ¼ l1 sin /1 ; ðD:2Þ
xm2 ¼ l1 cos /1 þ l2 cos /2 ; ðD:3Þ
ym2 ¼ l1 sin /1 þ l2 sin /2 : ðD:4Þ
The kinetic (EK) and potential (EP) energies are obtained as follows.
1 1
EK ¼ mb y_ 2 þ m1 l21 /_ 21 þ y_ 2 þ 2l1 /_ 1 y_ cos /1
2 2
1 2_2 2_2
þ m2 l1 /1 þ l2 /1 þ 2l1 l2 /_ 1 /_ 2 cosð/1 /2 Þ þ y_ 2 þ 2l1 /_ 1 y_ cos /1 þ 2l2 /_ 2 y_ cos /2 ;
2
ðD:5Þ
EP ¼ m1 gl1 ð1 cos /1 Þ þ m2 gðl1 ð1 cos /1 Þ þ l2 ð1 cos /2 ÞÞ: ðD:6Þ

156 Appendix D: Derivation of the equations of motion of the gantry crane using …
Now, the Lagrangian (L = EK – EP) can be formulated as follows.
1 1
L ¼ mb y_ 2 þ m1 l21 /_ 21 þ y_ 2 þ 2l1 /_ 1 y_ cos /1
2 2
1 2_2 2_2
þ m2 l1 /1 þ l2 /1 þ 2l1 l2 /_ 1 /_ 2 cosð/1 /2 Þ þ y_ 2 þ 2l1 /_ 1 y_ cos /1 þ 2l2 /_ 2 y_ cos /2
2
m1 gl1 ð1 cos /1 Þ m2 gðl1 ð1 cos /1 Þ l2 ð1 cos /2 ÞÞ:
ðD:7Þ
Considering q1 = y(t), q2 = /1(t), and q3 = /2(t) as the three generalized coordinates

and Q1 = Fb as the only generalized force acting on the bridge along the j-axis, the
Lagrange equation reveals the following equations of motion of the
double-pendulum system.
€ ðtÞ cosð/ ðtÞÞ þ m2 l2 /

ðmb þ m1 þ m2 Þ€yðtÞ þ ðm1 þ m2 Þl1 / € ðtÞ cosð/ ðtÞÞ
1 1 2 2
_ 2 _ 2
ðm1 þ m2 Þl1 / ðtÞ sinð/ ðtÞÞ m2 l2 / ðtÞ sinð/ ðtÞÞ ¼ Fb ðtÞ;
1 1 2 2
ðD:8Þ
€ ðtÞ þ m2 l1 l2 /
ðm1 þ m2 Þl1€yðtÞ cosð/1 ðtÞÞ þ ðm1 þ m2 Þl21 / € ðtÞ cosð/ ðtÞ / ðtÞÞ
1 2 1 2
_ 2
þ m2 l1 l2 / ðtÞ sinð/ ðtÞ / ðtÞÞ þ ðm1 þ m2 Þgl1 sinð/ ðtÞÞ ¼ 0;
2 1 2 1
ðD:9Þ
€ ðtÞ cosð/ ðtÞ / ðtÞÞ þ m2 l2 /

m2 l2€yðtÞ cosð/2 ðtÞÞ þ m2 l1 l2 / €
1 1 2 2 2 ðtÞ
ðD:10Þ
m2 l1 l2 /_ ðtÞ2 sinð/ ðtÞ / ðtÞÞ þ m2 gl2 sinð/ ðtÞÞ ¼ 0:
1 1 2 2
Appendix E
of the nuclear refueling machine using
Lagrange’s method (Shah and Hong 2014)
Considering the 2D schematic, Fig. 2.10, of the refueling machine, the position of
the CG of the rod is given below.
yc ðtÞ ¼ yðtÞ l sin /ðtÞ; ðE:1Þ
xc ðtÞ ¼ l cos /ðtÞ: ðE:2Þ
The kinetic energy (EK) of the bridge and the rod and the potential energy (EP) of
the rod are given as follows.
EK ¼ ð1=2Þðmb y_ ðtÞ2 þ mv _ 2 Þ;
~ r ðtÞ2 þ Ir /ðtÞ ðE:3Þ
EP ¼ lðmr g FB ðtÞÞð1 cosð/ðtÞÞÞ; ðE:4Þ
where m ~ is the mass of the rod (mr) combined with the additional mass of the fluid
itself displaced by the rod (ma), vr is the velocity of the CG of the rod, and Ir is the
inertia of the rod. Note that vr2 is given as
_ 2 cos2 ð/ðtÞÞ 2l_yðtÞ/ðtÞ

v2r ¼ y_ ðtÞ2 þ l2 /tÞ _ 2 sin2 ð/ðtÞÞ: ðE:5Þ
_ cosð/ðtÞÞ þ l2 /ðtÞ
Rayleigh’s dissipation function (D) is given as follows.
_ 2 Þ;
D ¼ ð1=2Þðcy y_ ðtÞ2 þ D/ /ðtÞ ðE:6Þ
where cy and c/ correspond to the viscous damping coefficients associated with the
movement of the bridge (y) and the rod (/), respectively. Considering q1 = y
(t) and q2 = /(t) as the generalized coordinates and considering the generalized

158 Appendix E: Derivation of the equations of motion of the nuclear refueling …
force Q1 = Fb – FD, Lagrange’s equation reveals the following equations of motion

of the considered refueling machine system.
~ yðtÞ ml
ðmb þ mÞ€ € cos /ðtÞ þ ml
~ /ðtÞ _ 2 sinð/ðtÞÞ
~ /ðtÞ
þ cy y_ ðtÞ þ ð1=2ÞCd qw Ap jvr jvr ¼ Fb ðtÞ; ðE:7Þ
~ yðtÞ cosð/ðtÞÞ ð7=3Þml

ml€ € þ c/ /ðtÞ
~ 2 /ðtÞ _ ðmr g q Vr gÞl sinð/ðtÞÞ ¼ 0:
w
ðE:8Þ
Appendix F
of the tower crane considering the slew
motion of the jib, the translational motion
of the trolley on the jib, and the hoisting
motion of the payload using Lagrange’s
method (Omar and Nayfeh 2003)
Considering the schematic (Fig. 3.1) of the tower crane, the position vectors sm and
st of the payload and the trolley, respectively, are obtained as follows.
sm ¼ ½lðtÞ cosð/x ðtÞÞ cosð/z ðtÞÞ yðtÞ þ lðtÞ cosð/x ðtÞÞ sinð/z ðtÞÞ lðtÞ sinð /x ðtÞÞT ;
ðF:1Þ
st ¼ ½ 0 yðtÞ 0 T : ðF:2Þ
The angular velocity xt of the tower is obtained as follows.
xt ¼ ½ b_ s T
0 0 ; ðF:3Þ
where bs is the slew angle. The velocities of the payload and the trolley, s_ m and s_ t ,
are obtained as follows.
dsm
s_ m ¼ þ x t sm ; ðF:4Þ
dt
dst
s_ t ¼ þ x t st : ðF:5Þ
dt

160 Appendix F: Derivation of the equations of motion of the tower crane …
The total kinetic energy EK and the potential energy EP are given as follows.
1
EK ¼ ð1=2Þm_sm s_ m þ ð1=2Þmt s_ t s_ t þ Js :b_ s ðtÞ2
2
¼ ð1=2Þm lðtÞ cosð/x ðtÞÞ cosð/z ðtÞÞ þ lðtÞ/_ x ðtÞ sinð/x ðtÞÞ cosð/z ðtÞÞ
_
2
þ lðtÞ/_ z ðtÞ cosð/x ðtÞÞ sinð/z ðtÞÞ þ y_ ðtÞ þ _lðtÞ cosð/x ðtÞÞ sinð/z ðtÞÞ
lðtÞ/_ x ðtÞ sinð/x ðtÞÞ sinð/z ðtÞÞ þ lðtÞ/_ z ðtÞ cosð/x ðtÞÞ cosð/z ðtÞÞ
2
þ b_ s ðtÞlðtÞ sinð/x ðtÞÞ þ _lðtÞ sinð/x ðtÞÞ lðtÞ/_ x ðtÞ cosð/x ðtÞÞ
2
þ b_ s ðtÞðyðtÞ þ lðtÞ cosð/x ðtÞÞ sinð/z ðtÞÞ

þ ð1=2Þmt y_ ðtÞ2 þ b_ s ðtÞ2 yðtÞ2 þ ð1=2ÞJs b_ s ðtÞ2 ;
ðF:6Þ

EP ¼ mglðtÞ 1 cosð/x ðtÞÞ cosð/z ðtÞÞ : ðF:7Þ
Rayleigh’s dissipation function D is given as follows.
_ 2;
D ¼ ð1=2Þcy y_ ðtÞ2 þ ð1=2Þcs bðtÞ ðF:8Þ
where cy and cs are the viscous damping coefficients associated with the transla-
tional motion of the trolley and the slew motion of the jib, respectively. Substituting
(F.6)–(F.8) into the Lagrange equation (B.10) and considering the generalized
coordinates as q1 ¼ bs ðtÞ, q2 ¼ yðtÞ, q3 ¼ /z ðtÞ, and q4 ¼ /x ðtÞ, and the general-
ized forces as Q1 ¼ ss ðtÞ and Q2 ¼ Ft ðtÞ, the equations of motion are obtained as
follows.
Appendix F: Derivation of the equations of motion of the tower crane … 161

Js þ mlðtÞ2 sinð/x ðtÞÞ2 þ m cosð/x ðtÞÞ2 lðtÞ2 sinð/z ðtÞÞ2 þ ðmt þ mÞyðtÞ2

þ 2mlðtÞ cosð/x ðtÞÞ sinð/z ðtÞÞyðtÞ b€ ðtÞ þ mlðtÞyðtÞ sinð/ ðtÞÞ/_ ðtÞ2
s x x
_
2mlðtÞyðtÞ cosð/x ðtÞÞ/x ðtÞ 2mlðtÞ cosð/z ðtÞÞ sinð/x ðtÞÞ /x ðtÞ/_ z ðtÞ
_ 2 2 _
mlðtÞ2 cosð/x ðtÞÞ sinð/x ðtÞÞ sinð/z ðtÞÞ/_ z ðtÞ2 m€lðtÞyðtÞ sinð/x ðtÞÞ
mlðtÞ_lðtÞð2 sinð/z ðtÞÞ/_ x ðtÞ þ cosð/z ðtÞÞ sinð2/x ðtÞÞ/_ z ðtÞÞ þ b_ s ðtÞðcs
þ yðtÞð2m_lðtÞ cosð/x ðtÞÞ sinð/z ðtÞÞ þ 2ðmt þ mÞ_yðtÞÞ
þ mlðtÞ2 ðcosð/z ðtÞÞ2 sinð2/x ðtÞÞ/_ x ðtÞ cosð/x ðtÞÞ2 sinð2/x ðtÞÞ/_ z ðtÞÞ
_
þ 2mlðtÞðlðtÞðsinð/ 2 2
x ðtÞÞ þ cosð/x ðtÞÞ sinð/z ðtÞÞ Þ
2
þ y_ ðtÞ cosð/x ðtÞÞ sinð/z ðtÞÞ yðtÞ sinð/x ðtÞÞ sinð/z ðtÞÞ/_ x ðtÞ

þ yðtÞ cosð/x ðtÞÞ cosð/z ðtÞÞ/_ z ðtÞÞ þ mlðtÞ€yðtÞ sinð/x ðtÞÞ
€ ðtÞ
þ mlðtÞ2 cosð/x ðtÞÞ sinð/x ðtÞÞ cosð/z ðtÞÞ/z
þ ððmlðtÞ2 cosð/x ðtÞÞ2 sinð/z ðtÞÞÞ mlðtÞ2 sinð/x ðtÞ2 sinð/z ðtÞ
€ ðtÞ;
þ mlðtÞyðtÞ cosð/ ðtÞÞÞ/
x x
ðF:9Þ
ðmt þ mÞð€yðtÞ yðtÞb_ s ðtÞ2 Þ þ cy y_ ðtÞ þ mlðtÞb_ s ðtÞ2 cosð/x ðtÞÞ sinð/z ðtÞÞ
þ 2mlðtÞb_ ðtÞ/_ ðtÞ cosð/ ðtÞÞ mlðtÞ cosð/ ðtÞÞ sinð/ ðtÞÞ/_ ðtÞ2
s x x x z x
2mlðtÞ cosð/z ðtÞÞ sinð/x ðtÞÞ/_ x ðtÞ/_ z ðtÞ þ mlðtÞ sinð/x ðtÞÞb
€ ðtÞ
s
_
mlðtÞ cosð/x ðtÞÞ sinð/z ðtÞÞ/z ðtÞ þ m cosð/x ðtÞÞ sinð/z ðtÞÞ€lðtÞ
2
mlðtÞ sinð/x ðtÞÞ sinð/z ðtÞÞ/ € ðtÞ þ mlðtÞ cosð/ ðtÞÞ cosð/ ðtÞÞ/ € ðtÞ
x x z z
_ _ _
2mlðtÞð sinð/x ðtÞÞbs ðtÞ sinð/x ðtÞÞ sinð/z ðtÞÞ/x ðtÞ

þ cosð/x ðtÞÞ cosð/z ðtÞÞ/_ z ðtÞ ¼ Ft ðtÞ; ðF:10Þ

€ ðtÞ þ cosð/ ðtÞÞ g sinð/ ðtÞÞ cosð/ ðtÞÞyðtÞb_ ðtÞ2
lðtÞ cosð/x ðtÞÞ2 /z x z z s
2lðtÞ sinð/x ðtÞÞ/_ x ðtÞ/_ z ðtÞ þ 2lðtÞ cosð/x ðtÞÞ cosð/z ðtÞÞb_ s ðtÞ/_ z ðtÞ
þ lðtÞ cosð/x ðtÞÞ cosð/z ðtÞÞ sinð/z ðtÞÞb_ s ðtÞ2 þ 2_lðtÞðcosð/x ðtÞÞ/_ z ðtÞ

þ cosð/z ðtÞÞ sinð/x ðtÞÞb_ s ðtÞÞ þ cosð/x ðtÞÞ cosð/z ðtÞÞ€yðtÞ
€ ðtÞ ¼ 0;
þ lðtÞ cosð/x ðtÞÞ cosð/z ðtÞÞ sinð/x ðtÞÞb ðF:11Þ
s
162 Appendix F: Derivation of the equations of motion of the tower crane …
€ ðtÞ þ g cosð/ ðtÞÞ sinð/ ðtÞÞ 2 cosð/ ðtÞÞ_yðtÞb_ ðtÞ

lðtÞ/x z x x s
_
ðb ðtÞ =4ÞlðtÞ sinð2/ ðtÞÞð1 þ cosð/ ðtÞÞ sinð/ ðtÞÞ2 Þ
2 2
s x z z
þ yðtÞ sinð/x ðtÞÞ sinð/z ðtÞÞb_ s ðtÞ2 þ lðtÞ cosð/x ðtÞÞ sinð/x ðtÞÞ/_ z ðtÞ2
_lðtÞð2 sinð/z ðtÞÞb_ s ðtÞ 2/_ x ðtÞÞ 2lðtÞ cosð/x ðtÞÞ2 cosð/z ðtÞÞ/_ z ðtÞb_ s ðtÞ
€ ðtÞ ¼ 0:
€yðtÞ sinð/x ðtÞÞ sinð/z ðtÞÞ ðlðtÞ sinð/z ðtÞÞ þ yðtÞ cosð/x ðtÞÞÞb s
ðF:12Þ
Appendix G
of the boom crane considering
only the slewing motion of the boom
(Sakawa et al. 1981)
Considering the schematic, Fig. 3.3, of the boom crane, the position of the payload
is given as follows.
xm ¼ lb cos bl þ l sin / sinðu bs Þ; ðG:1Þ
ym ¼ lb cos bl þ l sin / cosðu bs Þ; ðG:2Þ
zm ¼ h lb cos /: ðG:3Þ
The equations of the rotational motion of the hoist motor and the crane are obtained
as follows.
Jh €hh ¼ rh T sh ; ðG:4Þ
€ ¼ ss þ lb T sin u sin u:
Js b ðG:5Þ
s
Now, the kinetic and potential energies of the considered system are obtained as
follows.
1
EK ¼ Js b_ 2s ; ðG:6Þ
2
1
EP ¼ mb lb g sin bl : ðG:7Þ
2

164 Appendix G: Derivation of the equations of motion of the boom crane …
Substituting (G.6)–(G.7) into the Lagrange equation (B.10), and utilizing q1 = xm,
q2 = ym, q3 = zm, and q4 = bs as generalized coordinates, the equations of motion are
€xm ðtÞ ¼ ðgJh =ðJh þ mrh2 ÞÞð1 þ rh sh =gJh Þððlb sinðbl Þ cosðbs ðtÞÞ xm Þ=lðtÞÞ; ðG:8Þ
€ym ðtÞ ¼ ðgJh =ðJh þ mrh2 ÞÞð1 þ rh sh =gJh Þððlb sinðbl Þ cosðbs ðtÞÞ ym Þ=lðtÞÞ; ðG:9Þ
€zm ðtÞ ¼ €lðtÞ ¼ ðgJh =ðJh þ mrh2 ÞÞððrh sh =gJh Þ ðmrh2 =Jh ÞÞ; ðG:10Þ

€ ðtÞ ¼ ðss =Js Þ þ ðmlb sinðb Þ=Js ÞðgJh =ðJh þ mr 2 ÞÞð1 þ rh sh =gJh Þ
b s l h
ðG:11Þ
ððym ðtÞ cosðbs ðtÞÞ xm ðtÞ sinðbs ðtÞÞÞ=lðtÞÞÞ:
Appendix H
simultaneous luff and slew motions
of the jib using Newton’s second law
of motion (Sakawa and Nakazumi 1985)
Considering the schematic, Fig. 3.3, of the boom crane, the position of the payload
is given below.
xm ¼ ðlb cos bl þ eo Þ sin bs þ l sin / sinðu bs Þ; ðH:1Þ
ym ¼ ðlb cos bl þ eo Þ cos bs þ l sin / cosðu bs Þ; ðH:2Þ
zm ¼ lb sin bl l cos /; ðH:3Þ
where eo signifies the offset of the base of the boom from the origin. Equations
(H.1)–(H.3) can be written as follows.
l sin / cos u ¼ xm sin bs þ ym cos bs ðlb cos bl þ eo Þ; ðH:4Þ
l sin / sin u ¼ xm cos bs þ ym sin bs ; ðH:5Þ
l cos / ¼ lb sin bl zm : ðH:6Þ
Using Newton’s second law of motion, the equations of motion of the payload
are obtained as follows.
m€xm ðtÞ ¼ T sinð/ðtÞÞ sinðuðtÞ bs ðtÞÞ; ðH:7Þ
m€ym ðtÞ ¼ T sinð/ðtÞÞ cosðuðtÞ bs ðtÞÞ; ðH:8Þ
m€zm ðtÞ ¼ mg þ T cosð/ðtÞÞ; ðH:9Þ

166 Appendix H: Derivation of the equations of motion of the boom crane …
Utilizing (H.1)–(H.3) and (H.7)–(H.9), we obtain
€xm ¼ ðT=mlÞðxm þ ðlb cos bl þ eo Þ sin bs Þ; ðH:10Þ
€ym ¼ ðT=mlÞðym þ ðlb cos bl þ eo Þ cos bs Þ; ðH:11Þ
€zm ¼ g þ ðT=mlÞðlb sin bl zm Þ: ðH:12Þ
Now, the equations of motion for the rotation of the hoist motor and the rotation
of the crane are obtained as follows.
Jh €hh ¼ rh T sh ; ðH:13Þ

d Js ðbl Þb_ s
¼ Js0 b_ l b_ s þ Js b
€ ¼ ss T ðlb cos b þ eo Þ sin / sin u:
s l ðH:14Þ
dt
The substitution of (H.5) into (H.14) yields
€ ¼ J 0 b_ b_ þ ss T
Js b s s l s ðlb cos bl þ eo Þðxm cos bs þ ym sin bs Þ: ðH:15Þ
l
Substituting hh ¼ ðl=rh Þ into (H.13) results in the following equation.
€l r 2 T sh r h
Jh ¼ rh T sh , €l ¼ h : ðH:16Þ
rh Jh Jh
Assuming a small sway angle /, we can approximate cos / 1 and sin / /.

Now, from (H.6), we obtain
l ffi lb sin bl zm : ðH:17Þ
Differentiating (H.17) two times with respect to time, the following equation is
obtained.
€ cos b lb b_ 2 sin b zm :
€l ffi lb b ðH:18Þ
l l l l
Substituting (H.10)–(H.12) and (H.16) into (H.18) and using the approximations
(H.17), we obtain

€ _ sh r h T rh2 m
lb bl cos bl ¼ g þ lb bl sin bl
2
þ þ 1 ðlb sin bl zm Þ: ðH:19Þ
Jh ml Jh
Appendix H: Derivation of the equations of motion of the boom crane … 167
Considering (H.7)–(H.9), (H.15), and (H.19) leads to the following equations of the
slew and luff motions of the boom crane.
€ ðtÞ ¼ ss J 0 ðb ðtÞÞb_ ðtÞb_ ðtÞ þ ðml2 ððeo =lb Þ þ sinðb ðtÞÞ

Js b s s l l s b l
ððxm ðtÞ=lb Þ sinðbs ðtÞÞ þ ðym ðtÞ=lb Þ cosðbs ðtÞÞÞðT=mlb lðtÞÞ; ðH:20Þ
€ ðtÞ sinðb ðtÞÞ þ ð1 þ ðmr 2 =Jh ÞÞðcosðb ðtÞÞ ðzm ðtÞ=lb ÞÞðT=mlb lðtÞÞ
bl l h l
_ 2
¼ ðg=lb Þ b ðtÞ cosðb ðtÞÞ þ ðrh =Jh lb Þsh ; ðH:21Þ
l l
where T is the tension in the hoisting rope, which is given as follows.
T ¼ mlð€zm ðtÞ þ gÞ=ðlb sinðbl ðtÞÞ zm ðtÞÞ: ðH:22Þ

Appendix I
simultaneous luff and slew motions
of the jib and hoisting motions
of the payload using Lagrange’s method
(Agostini et al. 2003)
Considering the schematic, Fig. 3.3, the position of the suspension point of the
payload (i.e., the tip of the boom) is obtained as follows.
xP ðtÞ ¼ eo cosðbs ðtÞÞ þ lb cosðbs ðtÞÞ cosðbl ðtÞÞ; ðI:1Þ
yP ðtÞ ¼ eo sinðbs ðtÞÞ þ lb sinðbs ðtÞÞ cosðbl ðtÞÞ; ðI:2Þ
zP ¼ lb sinðbl ðtÞÞ; ðI:3Þ
The kinetic (EK) and potential (EP) energies of the considered system are given
below.

Ek ¼ ð1=2Þm x_ m ðtÞ2 þ y_ m ðtÞ2 þ z_ m ðtÞ2 ; ðI:4Þ
Ep ¼ mgzm ðtÞ; ðI:5Þ
where
xm ðtÞ ¼ xP ðtÞ lðcosðbs ðtÞÞ sinð/ðtÞÞ cosðuðtÞÞ sinðbs ðtÞÞ sinðuðtÞÞÞ; ðI:6Þ
ym ðtÞ ¼ yP ðtÞ lðsinðbs ðtÞÞ sinð/ðtÞÞ cosðuðtÞÞ þ cosðbs ðtÞÞ sinðuðtÞÞÞ; ðI:7Þ
zm ðtÞ ¼ zP ðtÞ l cosð/ðtÞÞ cosð/ðtÞÞ: ðI:8Þ
Now, considering the generalized coordinates q1 = /(t) and q2 = u(t), the

substitution of (I.4)–(I.5) into the Lagrange equation (B.10) with zero generalized

170 Appendix I: Derivation of the equations of motion of the boom crane …
force leads to the following equations of motion representing the sway dynamics of
the boom crane.
uðtÞ ¼ 2_lðtÞuðtÞ
lðtÞ€ _ 2 cosðuðtÞÞ sinðuðtÞÞ g cosð/ðtÞÞ sinðuðtÞÞ
_ lðtÞ/ðtÞ
þ €xp ðtÞ sinð/ðtÞÞ sinðuðtÞÞ þ €yp ðtÞ cosðuðtÞÞ €zp ðtÞ cosð/ðtÞÞ sinðuðtÞÞ;
ðI:9Þ
€ ¼ 2lðtÞ/ðtÞ
lðtÞ cosðuðtÞÞ2 /ðtÞ _ uðtÞ _ cosðuðtÞÞ2
_ sinðuðtÞÞ cosðuðtÞÞ 2_lðtÞ/ðtÞ
€xp ðtÞ cosð/ðtÞÞ g sinð/ðtÞÞ cosðuðtÞÞ €zp ðtÞ sinð/ðtÞÞ cosðuðtÞÞ:
ðI:10Þ
Equations (I.9)–(I.10) depict the sway dynamics of the boom crane in terms of the
accelerations (€xp , €yp , €zp ) of the boom tip, which can be obtained, as the following
equations, by differentiating (I.1)–(I.3) two times with respect to time.
€xp ðtÞ ¼ eo ðb_ s ðtÞ2 cosðbs ðtÞÞ b

€ ðtÞ sinðb ðtÞÞÞ
s s
_ _
þ lb ð2bs ðtÞbl ðtÞ sinðbs ðtÞÞ sinðbl ðtÞÞ b€ ðtÞ cosðb ðtÞÞ sinðb ðtÞÞ
l s l
ðb_ ðtÞ2 þ b_ ðtÞ2 Þ cosðb ðtÞÞ cosðb ðtÞÞ b

s l s l
€ ðtÞ sinðb ðtÞÞ cosðb ðtÞÞ;
s s l
ðI:11Þ
€yp ðtÞ ¼ eo ðb_ s ðtÞ2 sinðbs ðtÞÞ b

€ ðtÞ cosðb ðtÞÞÞ
s s
þ lb ð2b_ s ðtÞb_ l ðtÞ cosðbs ðtÞÞ sinðbl ðtÞÞ b

€ ðtÞ sinðb ðtÞÞ sinðb ðtÞÞ
l s l
_ 2 _ 2 €
ðb ðtÞ þ b ðtÞ Þ sinðb ðtÞÞ cosðb ðtÞÞ þ b ðtÞ cosðb ðtÞÞ cosðb ðtÞÞ;
s l s l s s l
ðI:12Þ
€zp ðtÞ ¼ lb ðb_ l ðtÞ2 sinðbl ðtÞÞ þ b_ l ðtÞ2 cosðbl ðtÞÞ: ðI:13Þ
Appendix J
of the 2D overhead crane considering
a flexible hoisting rope of fixed length using
Hamilton’s principle
Derivation of the equations of motion of the 2D overhead crane considering a

flexible hoisting rope of fixed length using Hamilton’s principle.
The schematic of the considered 2D overhead crane is shown in Fig. 5.2. The
equations of motion of the considered system can be obtained by using the fol-
lowing Hamilton's principle expression.
Z t2
ðdL þ dWnc Þdt ¼ 0; ðJ:1Þ
t1
where L ¼ EK EP is the Lagrangian, EK and EP denote the kinetic and potential

energies of the system, respectively, given as
Z l
EK ¼ ð1=2Þðmb y_ ðtÞ2 þ q _ tÞÞ2 dx þ mð_yðtÞ þ uðl;
ð_yðtÞ þ uðx; _ tÞÞ2 ; ðJ:2Þ
0
Z l
EP ¼ ð1=2Þ Tu0 ðx; tÞ2 dx: ðJ:3Þ
0
Wnc is the work done by the non-conservative forces, and dðÞ represents the
variation of the corresponding variable, which can mathematically be expressed as
follows.
Z n Z
X Xn Z t2
t2 t2
@ðÞ @ðÞ
dðÞdt ¼ dqi þ dq_ i ; ðJ:4Þ
t1 i¼1 t1 @qi i¼1 t1
@ q_ i
where qi (i = 1, …, n) denote the generalized coordinates. Considering (J.2)–(J.4),

(J.1) can be written as follows.

172 Appendix J: Derivation of the equations of motion of the 2D overhead crane …
Z n Z
X
t2 t2
d @EK @EK
ðdEK þ dWnc Þdt ¼ Qi dqi dt ¼ 0; ðJ:5Þ
t1 i¼1 t1 dt @ q_ i @qi
where Qi denote the generalized forces acting on the system. Considering q1 ¼ y_ ,

_ and Q1 ¼ Fb , the following equations of motion of the considered 2D
q2 ¼ u,
overhead crane system are obtained.
Z l
ðmb þ m þ qlÞ€yðtÞ þ q €uðx; tÞdx þ m€
uðl; tÞ ¼ Fb ðtÞ; ðJ:6Þ
0
Tu00 ðx; tÞ q€uðx; tÞ ¼ q€yðtÞ: ðJ:7Þ
The associated boundary conditions are obtained as follows.
uð0; tÞ ¼ 0; ðJ:8Þ
Tu0 ðl; tÞ ¼ mð€yðtÞ þ €uðl; tÞÞ: ðJ:9Þ

Bibliography
Cartmell MP, Morrish L, Taylor AJ (1998) Dynamics of spreader motion in a gantry crane. Proc
Inst Mech Eng Part C-J Mech Eng Sci 212(2):85–105
Ramli L, Mohamed Z, Abdullahi AM et al (2017) Control strategies for crane systems: a
comprehensive review. Mech Syst Signal Proc 95:1–23
Omar HM, Nayfeh AH (2003) Gain scheduling feedback control for tower cranes. J Vib Control 9
(3–4):399–418
Sakawa Y, Shindo Y, Hashimoto Y (1981) Optimal control of a rotary crane. J Optim Theor Appl
35(4):535–557
Sakawa Y, Nakazumi A (1985) Modeling and control of a rotary crane. J Dyn Syst Meas
Agostini MJ, Parker GG, Schaub H et al (2003) Generating swing-suppressed maneuvers for crane
systems with rate saturation. IEEE Trans Contr Syst Technol 11(4):471–481

Index
A Co-state equation, 92
Absolute acceleration, 50, 53 Co-state variable, 94, 95, 121, 122
Added mass coefficient, 81, 133 Coupling, 5, 88, 117, 122, 128, 129
Added mass force, 25 Cranes, 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 11, 13, 18, 24, 26, 28, 35,
Angular acceleration, 52 39, 42, 44, 49, 50, 54, 71, 75, 80, 87, 94,
Angular momentum, 53 105, 117, 119, 120, 125, 127, 128,
Angular velocity, 52, 91, 92, 99 143–146
Anti-sway control, 120
Attenuation coefficient, 99 D
Auxiliary jib, 6, 42 Damping matrix, 116
Axially moving system, 73, 74, 129, 144 Defuzzification, 125, 127
Delayed feedback control, 23, 120, 145
B Directional ZV shaper, 105
Bang–bang trajectory, 96 Distributed-parameter system, 67, 128, 130,
Bang–offbang trajectory, 96 145, 146
Bessel function, 99 Docking mechanism, 57
Boundary control, 128–133, 145 Double-pendulum system, 11, 21–24, 70, 71,
Bridge, 5, 12–18, 20–22, 24, 26, 28, 29, 32, 34, 143
67–70, 73, 74, 77–81, 87–89, 91, 93, Drag coefficient, 25, 77, 81, 107, 133
94, 100, 106–112, 115, 117–119, 122, Drag force, 24, 25, 106
128–133, 137, 138, 143, 144, 146
Buoyancy force, 24, 25 E
Endpoint deflection, 80, 108, 111, 132
C Euler-Bernoulli beam, 77
Canonical state-space form, 93
Cartesian motion, 105 F
Centrifugal matrix, 116 Feedback control, 115, 119, 127–129, 144, 145
Command shaper, 23, 87, 101, 102, 105, 106, Feedback linearization, 119, 128
110, 127, 131 Finite-difference method, 80
Container crane, 2, 6, 7, 11, 18, 23, 49, 54, 57, Flexible joint, 6, 42, 44
143, 145 Flexible rope, 70–73, 76
Container ship, 2, 5–7, 49, 54 Fluid-structure interaction, 25
Convolution, 105 Forest crane, 7
Coriolis acceleration, 52, 53 Four-rope hoisting mechanism, 18, 143
Coriolis matrix, 116 Fuzzy control, 125–128

176 Index
Fuzzy logic, 125, 128, 145 Master fuel assembly, 76, 130
Fuzzy set, 125–127 Material derivative, 72, 129
Material handling, 1, 5, 7
G Membership function, 125
Gantry crane, 1, 5, 11, 14, 16, 19, 21, 26, 49, Method of multiple scales, 23
93, 105, 127, 143–145 Mobile crane, 49
Generalized coordinates, 15, 16, 18, 20, 40, 42, Mobile harbor system, 5, 7, 49, 54, 57–59, 123,
57, 124 144, 145
Global coordinates, 39 Modal analysis, 108
Gripper, 1, 6, 11 Model predictive control, 120
Morison’s equation, 77, 107
H Mother ship, 57
Hamiltonian, 92, 94, 95 Multi-mode shaper, 104, 105
Heave motion, 57 Multi-rope hoisting mechanism, 11
Hoisting mechanism, 1, 5, 11, 18, 67, 70, 143,
145 N
Hoisting rope, 5–7, 11–14, 18, 21, 23, 35, 38, Natural frequency, 23, 88, 99, 102, 103, 105,
39, 41, 44, 45, 50, 52–54, 57, 67–71, 73, 106, 108, 145
75, 96, 99, 100, 116, 119, 120, 122, Neural network control, 125
126–129, 143, 144, 146 Newton’s second law, 14, 41
Hook, 1, 5, 11, 20–22, 70 Nonlinear control, 119, 120, 145
Hybrid control method, 127 Nonlinear dynamics, 120
Hybrid ODE-PDE system, 80, 128 Nonlinear feedback control, 119
Hybrid system, 128 Nonlinearities, 87, 115, 127, 144
Normal hydrodynamic force, 130
I Nuclear fuel rods, 24, 28, 143
Inertial coefficient, 25, 81, 133 Nuclear power plant, 5, 24, 28, 143, 145
Inertial coordinate frame, 50, 53, 54, 57 Nuclear reactor, 2, 5, 24, 75, 76, 130
Inland operation, 7, 49 Nuclear refueling machine, 2, 144
Input shaping, 87, 92, 101, 102, 104–106, 128,
144 O
Intelligent control, 125 ODE-PDE model, 80
Offshore crane, 49, 54, 75, 76, 144, 146
J Open-loop commands, 87, 92
Jib, 7, 35, 38, 39, 44–46, 144 Open-loop control, 87, 88, 92, 102, 105, 115,
Jib crane, 6, 7, 35, 39, 42, 144 127, 130, 131, 144, 145
Joint, 6, 39, 42, 44 Optimal control, 87, 92–94, 98, 128, 144
Optimal control input, 95, 96
K Overhead crane, 1, 2, 5, 11–13, 17, 21, 24,
Kinetic energy, 69, 71, 74, 78 26–32, 49, 68–71, 73, 74, 76, 87, 106,
Knuckle boom crane, 3, 6, 42, 43, 144 115, 117–119, 121, 125–129, 143, 144
L P
Lagrange’s method, 13, 14, 17, 40, 41 Payload, 5–7, 11–17, 20–23, 26, 28, 29, 32, 35,
Lead compensator, 119 37–42, 45, 47, 49, 50, 52, 54, 56, 57, 60,
Linear feedback control, 115, 119 62, 67–73, 75, 87–89, 91–94, 98–102,
Local coordinates, 39, 50, 54 105, 106, 115, 116, 118, 119, 122, 123,
Luff angle, 40, 47 127, 128, 130, 143–146
Lumped-mass model, 11, 145 Percentage vibration, 102
Lyapunov’s direct method, 130 Performance index, 92
Lyapunov stability, 130 Phase plane, 100
Phase trajectory, 100
M Pitch motion, 54, 57
Mamdani’s min-max method, 127 Polar coordinates, 18, 19, 143
Maritime transport, 7 Pontryagin’s principle, 92, 94, 95
Index 177
Posicast control, 102 T

Position servo system, 118 Telescopic boom crane, 3, 6, 145
Potential energy, 15, 42, 69, 72, 74, 78 Tower crane, 1, 4, 7, 35–39, 44–46, 49, 105,
127, 144
Q Transfer function of the bridge, 117
Quay crane, 6 Transformation matrix, 56
Transient vibrations, 77, 87
R Translational acceleration, 52, 53
Radius of gyration, 23 Trapezoidal velocity profile, 88, 89, 106
Reeving configuration, 18 Trolley, 5–7, 11, 12, 16–18, 20, 22, 35, 38, 39,
Refueling machine, 5, 76, 130, 143–145 44–46, 57, 67, 68, 73, 77–81, 88, 89, 94,
Relative acceleration, 50, 53 97, 105, 106, 110, 111, 115, 119,
Residual vibration, 77, 87, 93, 94, 98, 100, 106 122–125, 130–133, 137, 138, 143, 144,
Resultant angular momentum, 53 146
Roll motion, 61, 123, 130 Truck-mounted boom crane, 4
Rotary crane, 1, 6, 35, 42, 44, 105, 120, 123, Truck-mounted telescopic boom crane, 4, 50,
128, 143–145 51
Two-rope hoisting mechanism, 23
S
Saturation function, 125 U
Sheaves, 1 Underwater load transportation, 24
Ship-bound coordinate frame, 54 Underwater shaper, 106
Ship-mounted crane, 4, 54, 145 Uniform ultimate boundedness, 130
Similarity condition, 108, 109
Single-boom crane, 3, 6 V
Single-rope hoisting mechanism, 11, 12, 18, Velocity controller, 117, 118
143 Velocity servo system, 117, 118
Slew angle, 35, 45, 47 Virtual work, 73, 74
Sliding mode control, 120–123, 125, 128, 130, Viscous damping coefficient, 17, 20, 22, 26,
132, 145 56, 75, 79, 107
Sliding surface/sliding manifold, 120, 122,
124, 125 W
Specified-Intensity (SI) shaper, 104 Wave equation, 67, 70, 144
Staircase Command 1, 91, 92 Wind-induced force, 67
Staircase Command 2, 92 Workspace, 1, 6, 42, 49
Staircase velocity profile, 88–90
State trajectory, 96–98 Y
Strouhal number, 78 Yaw motion, 54, 57
Superposition principle, 102 Young’s modulus, 77, 107
Support mechanism, 1, 5, 67, 68, 115, 127, 146
Sway dynamics, 17, 22, 38, 39, 42, 88, 118, Z
125 Zero vibration and derivative shaper, 102
Symmetric mass matrix, 116 Zero vibration shaper, 102, 103

(Advances in Industrial Control) Keum-Shik Hong, Umer Hameed Shah - Dynamics and Control of Industrial Cranes-Springer Singapore (2019)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

(Advances in Industrial Control) Keum-Shik Hong, Umer Hameed Shah - Dynamics and Control of Industrial Cranes-Springer Singapore (2019)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Advances in Industrial Control

Professor Antonella Ferrara

More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/1412

Dynamics and Control

ISSN 1430-9491 ISSN 2193-1577 (electronic)

Library of Congress Control Number: 2018965912

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

The control approaches illustrated include open-loop control schemes, largely

Pavia, Italy Antonella Ferrara

Chapter 5 discusses the mathematical modeling of crane systems in the distributed

Busan, Korea (Republic of) Keum-Shik Hong

A Amplitude of the oscillation of the payload

J Cost function/performance index

mb1 Mass of the ﬁrst boom in a telescopic boom crane

zP Coordinate of the tip of the boom along the k-axis

xn Natural frequency of a double-pendulum system

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019 1

1.1 Gantry Cranes

1.1.1 Overhead Cranes

1.1.2 Container Cranes

1.2 Rotary Cranes

1.2.1 Boom Cranes

1.2.2 Tower Cranes

1.3 Mobile Cranes

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019 11

2.1 Single-Rope Hoisting Models

Figure 2.1 depicts a 3D schematic of an overhead crane with a single-rope hoisting

We begin our discussion on the dynamics of overhead cranes by a simple formu-

(m b + m) ÿ(t) + ml φ̈(t) cos(φ(t)) − ml φ̇(t)2 sin(φ(t)) Fb (t), (2.1)

l φ̈(t) + cos(φ(t)) ÿ(t) + g sin(φ(t)) 0, (2.2)

where g is the gravitational acceleration. Equation (2.1) represents the dynamics of

(m b + m) ÿ(t) + ml φ̈(t) Fb (t), (2.3)

l φ̈(t) + ÿ(t) + gφ(t) 0. (2.4)

Fig. 2.3 Two-dimensional

Another way of obtaining the equations of motion of the system considered in

m b ÿ(t) + T sin(φ(t)) Fb (t), (2.5)

−ml φ̇(t)2 cos(φ(t)) mg − T cos(φ(t)), (2.6)

m( ÿ(t) + l φ̈(t) cos(φ(t)) − l φ̇(t)2 sin(φ(t))) T sin(φ(t)), (2.7)

E P −mgl cos(φ(t)). (2.9)

(m b + m) ÿ(t) + ml(t)(φ̈(t) cos(φ(t)) − φ̇(t)2 sin(φ(t)))

¨ − ml(t)φ̇(t)2 − mg cos(φ(t)) + m ÿ(t) sin(φ(t)) −Fh (t),

˙ φ̇(t) + g sin(φ(t)) + ÿ(t) cos(φ(t)) 0.

from a control application viewpoint, it is important to include the dynamics of the

¨ sin φ y (t) + c y ẏ(t)

(m z + m)z̈(t) + ml(t)φ̈z (t) cos φ y (t) cos φz (t) + cz ż(t)

¨ + m z̈(t) cos φ y (t) sin φz (t) + m ÿ(t) sin φ y (t) + cx l(t)

˙ φ̇ z (t) cos2 φ y (t)

2.2 Multi-rope Hoisting Models

Fig. 2.6 Four-rope hoisting mechanism of a container crane

− (8/π 2 )(1 − (1 − 2R 2 l 2 )1/ 2 )r θs × ( ÿb cos(θb + α) + z̈ b sin(θb + α)

× (2r ṙl l˙ + l 3 l¨ − ṙ 2 l 2 − l˙2 r 2 − r 2 l l)(1/(l

2.3 Double-Pendulum Crane Models

Fig. 2.8 Double-pendulum representation of an overhead crane

Fig. 2.9 Assumption of a two-rope model as a double-pendulum system

l1 + ã 2 l2 ÿ(t) + (c/m) ẏ(t)

is the natural frequency of the double-pendulum system and

In (2.30) and (2.31), r g denotes the radius of gyration of the container–spreader

is the linear frequency of the double-pendulum system, A is the amplitude of the

b1 (m 1 (4ã32 + (ã(1 + ã)2 − 6ã1 )ã22 l2 ) + 6J1 ã ã1 ã22

b2 m 1 (6ã3 + ã2 (ã2 − ã 3l2 + 6ã1l2 ))/2(J1 ã 2 + m 1 (ã2 − ãl2 )2 ), (2.35)

b3 −gm 1 (12ã3 + ã3 (ã2 − 24ã2 ã4 + ã(ã 3 − 24ã1 l2 ))

b4 m 1 ã2 (ã2 − ãl2 )/(J1 ã 2 + m 1 (ã2 − ãl2 )2 ), (2.37)

ã1 st (st2 − ss2 )/6ss3 , (2.38)

ã3 st ss /8, (2.40)

is the transformation matrix given as