Journal of
Marine Science
and Engineering
Article
Integral Sliding Mode-Based Fault-Tolerant Control for
Dynamic Positioning of Unmanned Marine Vehicles Based on
a T-S Fuzzy Model
Yang Wang 1 , Li-Ying Hao 2, * , Tieshan Li 3,4 and C. L. Philip Chen 5
Citation: Wang, Y.; Hao, L.-Y.; Li, T.;
Chen, C.L.P. Integral Sliding
Mode-Based Fault-Tolerant Control
for Dynamic Positioning of
Unmanned Marine Vehicles Based on
a T-S Fuzzy Model. J. Mar. Sci. Eng.
2023, 11, 370. https://doi.org/
10.3390/jmse11020370
Academic Editor: Marco Cococcioni
Received: 19 January 2023
Revised: 29 January 2023
Accepted: 30 January 2023
Published: 7 February 2023
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 370. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse11020370
1 College of Navigation, Dalian Maritime University, Dalian 116026, China
2 Marine Electrical Engineering College, Dalian Maritime University, Dalian 116026, China
3 College of Automation Engineering, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China,
Chengdu 611731, China
4 Yangtze Delta Region Institute, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China,
Huzhou 313000, China
5 College of Computer Science and Engineering, South China University of Technology,
Guangzhou 510006, China
* Correspondence: haoliying@dlmu.edu.cn
Abstract: This paper investigates a fault-tolerant control problem for the dynamic positioning of
unmanned marine vehicles based on a Takagi–Sugeno (T-S) fuzzy model using an integral sliding
mode scheme. First, the T-S fuzzy model of an unmanned marine vehicle is established by taking
the yaw angle variable range into account. An integral sliding mode control scheme combined with
the H∞ performance index is then developed to attenuate the initial influence of thruster faults and
ocean disturbances. The unknown nonlinear function is approximated using a fuzzy logic system
based on a representation of marine data, which provides a good tradeoff between resolution of the
unknown nonlinear term approximation and computational complexity for marine engineering by
adjusting the number of fuzzy logic system rules. In addition, the fault estimation information is
utilized to design the sliding mode surface on the basis of an adaptive mechanism and a matrix full
rank decomposition technique, which reduces conservatism. The validity of the proposed approach
is finally demonstrated by an analysis of simulation results using a typical floating production
vessel model.
Keywords: dynamic positioning; fault tolerant control; fuzzy logic system; integral sliding mode;
T-S fuzzy models
1. Introduction
As an important offshore operating platform in recent decades, unmanned marine
vehicles (UMV) have a wide range of applications including scientific exploration, mineral
resources sampling, environmental monitoring, military reconnaissance, and more [1–7].
These applications have contributed to the development of UMV motion control in theory
and implementation, and significant advances have been achieved, including heading
control [8], trajectory tracking control [9], formation control [10], and others. In addition to
the aforementioned topics, the dynamic positioning (DP) problem for UMV has attracted
the attention of many scholars [11–15]. In [11], the authors designed a DP controller by
taking advantage of H∞ and mixed-µ techniques to improve the robustness of the DP
system. A dynamic surface control approach was proposed in [12] for ship dynamic
positioning systems (DPS) to eliminate the impact of input saturation and unknown time-
varying disturbances in the meantime. In [13], a synchronous online optimal control was
developed for DPS to avoid repetitive computation and save runtime while guaranteeing
the real-time performance of the control scheme. A model predictive control technique
on the base of state-space equations was used for a ship DPS in [14]. Again for DPS, an
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/jmse
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 370 2 of 21

adaptive discrete-time optimal control strategy was investigated in [15] based on adaptive
dynamic programming and a broad learning system to save energy and time.
Admittedly, the above literature shows that good results have been achieved in the
UMV DP problem. As stated in [16], modeling resolution can be improved by increasing the
number of the fuzzy local models. However, the corresponding computational complexity
increases as well, making control synthesis and stability analysis more difficult. Fortunately,
the T-S fuzzy model is a very useful tool to express this kind of complex nonlinear system
with uncertainties. The primary characteristic of a T-S fuzzy model is the use of a linear
system model to represent the local dynamics of each fuzzy rule, which provides the breadth
and convenience of using mature linear theory to solve nonlinear control problems [17].
Thus, the T-S fuzzy model has quickly become a hot spot in the field of DP research; for
example, quadratic finite-horizon optimal control problems have been solved using a
hybrid Taguchi-genetic algorithm and orthogonal function approach for T-S fuzzy control
of DPS in [18]. In [19], a robust DP controller was developed by utilizing an optimal H∞
control strategy and a T-S fuzzy method. Network-based modeling, controller design, and
stability analysis for observer-based T-S fuzzy DPS were investigated in [20]. Although the
T-S fuzzy models in the above-mentioned literature achieved good results, they simplified
the original nonlinear system as far as possible, resulting in loss of modeling resolution.
On the other hand, for T-S fuzzy models, when the resolution is increased by increasing the
number of the fuzzy local models, the complexity is increased as well, which makes control
synthesis and stability analysis more difficult. Therefore, the first aim of this paper is to
achieve a good tradeoff between modeling resolution and computational complexity in T-S
models for UMVs.
In another research scenario, the failure of UMV propellers is inevitable in the complex
marine environment; the failure of a propeller may cause performance loss or mission
abort, and can even cause serious consequences for navigational safety [21–23]. Therefore,
it is essential to study fault-tolerant control (FTC) of UMV [24–28]. At present, progress
is being made in this field. For example, an FTC method based on fault detection and
identification (FDI) was proposed in [24] to improve ship operational reliability. A control
allocation algorithm based on the estimates of isolated and identified actuator failures
was utilized to carry out fault-tolerant control allocation in [25]. It should be noted that
the aforementioned controllers were designed by obtaining all or part of the propeller
failure information in advance. However, in a complex marine environment the FDI may
cause false alarms or undetected faults, which can have a negative impact on FTC. To
avoid this situation, developing robust fault-tolerant controllers independent of the FDI is
wise. In [26], a quantized sliding mode fault-tolerant controller without an FDI module
was designed to solve the quantization-based DP control problem for a UMV. A novel
robust adaptive fault-tolerant control scheme for the path-following problem of UMVs was
provided in [27]. A novel quantized sliding mode FTC design scheme for UMV under a
T-S fuzzy model framework was provided in [28] to compensate for the effects of thruster
faults. However, the sliding mode control design schemes in the above studies cannot
ensure that the system always meets the desired robustness from the initial stage, which
means that the system is sensitive to perturbations satisfying the matching condition, as
it has not yet reached the sliding manifold in the initial period of time. In other words,
after the system begins to maintain the sliding manifold at the very beginning, it has the
advantage of being robust throughout the entire system response phase against thruster
faults, which can be modeled as matched uncertainty. Thus, another motivation of ours is
to design a fault-tolerant controller that can guarantee robustness from the initial stage of
the T-S fuzzy model for UMVs with thruster failures.
Inspired by the above discussion, the DP problem for T-S fuzzy models in UMVs with
actuator faults is addressed in this paper. An integral sliding mode control (ISMC) scheme
considering the fault estimation information is developed to ensure that the T-S fuzzy UMV
model is robust from the initial stage.
The main contributions of this article are as follows:
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 370 3 of 21

(1) Using a T-S fuzzy model with an adjustable number of fuzzy logic system (FLS) to
locally approximate the nonlinear terms of a UMV model in order to achieve a good
compromise between modeling resolution and computational complexity.
(2) An ISMC methodology with fault information is applied to design the fault-tolerant
controller for the T-S fuzzy UMV model such that the conservatism of the controller
can be reduced and the robustness and fault-tolerance of the UMV controller are
guaranteed from the initial time.
The rest of this article is structured as follows: Section 2 presents the system description
and preliminary knowledge; in Section 3, the main results of the ISMC scheme are provided;
a simulation case study is provided to illustrate the merit of the proposed method in
Section 4; finally, our conclusions are presented in Section 5.
Notation: for matrix Y, the symbols Y −1 , Y † , and Y T express the inverse, pseudo-
inverse, and transpose of matrix Y, respectively. Positive definite and semi-positive-definite
matrices are denoted by the notations Y > 0 and Y ≥ 0. A diagonal matrix with the
diagonal elements h1 , h2 , · · · , hn is written as diag h1 , h2 , . . . , hn . Here, “∗” stands for a
term produced by matrix symmetry. The notations O and I express the zero and identity
matrices, respectively. Rn means a Euclidean space with n-dimensions. The symbol || p|| is
utilized to express the Euclidean norm of the vector p. Finally, the exponential function
with base e is expressed by the symbol exp(x).

2. Problem Formulation
2.1. Umv Model
For a UMV operating in surge, sway, and yaw, the equation of motion is

M ν̇(t) + Nν(t) + Gη (t) = Eu F (t) + w(t) (1)

 T
where ν(t) = ϑ (t) v(t) r (t) means the velocity vector of the UMV described in the
body-fixed frame, as shown in Figure 1, which consists of the surge velocity ϑ (t), the sway
 T
velocity v(t), and the yaw velocity r (t). Moreover, η (t) = x p (t) y p (t) ϕ(t) is the
earth-fixed orientation vector formed with positions x p (t), y p (t), and the heading angle
ϕ(t). u F (t) expresses the unified thruster fault model, described as follows [26]:

u F (t) = ρu(t) + σus (t) (2)

where ρ is an unknown actuator effectiveness level

n matrix, andois a diagonal weighting
j j j j j j j
matrix with ρl ≥ 0 and ρ ∈ ∆ρ j = {ρ j | ρ j = diag ρ1 , ρ2 , . . . , ρm , ρl ∈ [ρl , ρl ]}, 0 6 ρ` 6
j
ρ` 6 1 for l ∈ M̄ = {1, 2, · · · , m} and j ∈ N̄ = {1, 2, · · · , n}, l, j, m, and n express the
lth thruster, the jth malfunction mode, the total number of thrusters, and the number of
j j j j
fault modes respectively. Here, σ ∈ ∆σ j = {σ j | σ j = diag{σ1 , σ2 , . . . , σm }, σi = 0 or 1}; the
stuck fault us (t) is bounded by |us (t)|2 6 ūs , which can be shown in Table 1. Moreover,
u(t) ∈ R6×1 , w(t) represents ocean disturbances, the form of which can be seen in [20];
finally, M, N, and G express the matrix of inertia, the matrix of damping, and the matrix of
mooring forces, respectively. For an arbitrary angle Θ, the thruster configuration matrix
E [29] can be defined as

cos Θ
 
1 1 0 0 0
E= 0 0 1 1 1 sin Θ 
l1 −l2 −l3 −l4 l5 l6 sin Θ

where l  expresses the moment arms with  = 1, · · · , 6 and

η̇ (t) = R( ϕ(t))ν(t), (3)

J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 370 4 of 21

with  
cos( ϕ(t)) − sin( ϕ(t)) 0
R( ϕ(t)) =  sin( ϕ(t)) cos( ϕ(t)) 0 
0 0 1
Because g(t, ν) represents a nonlinear function of ν(t), let g(t, ν) = η (t) [2,26]. Then,
the following equation can be derived from (1):

ν̇(t) = Aν(t) + B(ρu(t) + σus (t)) + D w(t) + F g(t, ν) (4)

   
a11 a12 a13 b11 b12 b13 b14 b15 b16
where A = − M−1 N = 
 a21 a22 a23 , B = − M−1 E =  b21
 
b22 b23 b24 b25 b26 ,

a31 a32 a33 b31 b32 b33 b34 b35 b36
   
d11 d12 d13 f 11 f 12 f 13
D = − M −1 = d21
 d22  − 1
d23 , and F = − M G =  f 21 f 22 f 23 .
d31 d32 d33 f 31 f 32 f 33

Table 1. Table of fault types.

j j j
Fault Type ρl ρl σl
normal 1 1 0
loss of effectiveness >0 <1 0
stuck 0 0 1

(East) Ye

Ze

Earth-fixed frame Surge(u) Xb

y Ob Body-fixed frame

Sway(v)

Yb
Yaw(r)

Zb

 (North)
Oe x Xe

Figure 1. UMV in the reference coordinate system.

2.2. T-S Fuzzy UMV Modeling

Establishing T-S fuzzy models for the UMV is the goal of this subsection. The sys-
 T
tem below is derived by letting x (t) = x p (t) y p (t) ϕ(t) ϑ (t) v(t) r (t) and
combining (3) with (4):
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 370 5 of 21

ẋ p (t) = cos( ϕ(t))ϑ (t) − sin( ϕ(t))v(t)

ẏ p (t) = sin( ϕ(t))ϑ (t) + cos( ϕ(t))v(t)
ϕ̇(t) =r (t)
ϑ̇ (t) = a11 ϑ (t) + a12 v(t) + a13 r (t) + b11 u1F (t) + b12 u2F (t)
+ b13 u3F (t) + b14 u4F (t) + b15 u5F (t) + b16 u6F (t)
+ f 11 g(t, ϑ(t)) + f 12 g(t, v(t)) + f 13 g(t, r (t))
+ d11 w1 (t) + d12 w2 (t) + d13 w3 (t)
v̇(t) = a21 ϑ (t) + a22 v(t) + a23 r (t) + b21 u1F (t) + b22 u2F (t) (5)
+ b23 u3F (t) + b24 u4F (t) + b25 u5F (t) + b26 u6F (t)
+ f 21 g(t, ϑ(t)) + f 22 g(t, v(t)) + f 23 g(t, r (t))
+ d21 w1 (t) + d22 w2 (t) + d23 w3 (t)
ṙ (t) = a31 ϑ (t) + a32 v(t) + a33 r (t) + b31 u1F (t) + b32 u2F (t)
+ b33 u3F (t) + b34 u4F (t) + b35 u5F (t) + b36 u6F (t)
+ f 31 g(t, ϑ(t)) + f 32 g(t, v(t)) + f 33 g(t, r (t))
+ d31 w1 (t) + d32 w2 (t) + d33 w3 (t)
It is reasonable to consider that the variation scope of the yaw angle ϕ(t)h ranges i
1 1
from − π6 to 6 [20]. Furthermore, we can derive that ς 1 ( t ) = sin( ϕ ( t )) ∈ − 2 , 2 ,
π
h√ i
ς 2 (t) = cos( ϕ(t)) ∈ 23 , 1 . Then, the T-S fuzzy UMV system is obtained by adopt-
ing the rules below.

Plant Rule i:
IF ς 1 (t) is Qi1 and ς 2 (t) is Qi2
THEN

ẋ (t) = Ai x (t) + B2 (ρu(t) + σus (t)) + B1i w(t) + D0i g(t, x )
(6)
z(t) = Ci x (t)

where i= 1, 2, 3, 4; Q
 i1 and Qi2 are fuzzy
 sets and z(t) isthe regulated
 output: 
03×3 Ai 03×6 03×3 03×3 03×3
Ai = , B2 = , B1i = , D0i = , A1 =
03×3 A B D 03 × 3 F
 √   √ 
3 3
1 − 12 0 1 1 1
   
− 0 1 0 0
 2 √2 2  2 √2
 1 1 0  , A2 =  1 3
0 , A3 =  − 2 1 0 , A4 =  − 12
1 3
0 ,
 
2 2 2 2
0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1
where Ci is a known matrix. For convenience, g(t, x ) is abbreviated to g( x ).
Then the global T-S fuzzy UMV model of (6) is described as

4

 ẋ (t) = ∑ hi (ς(t))[ Ai x (t) + B2 (ρu(t) + σus (t)) + B1i w(t) + D0i g( x )]


i =1 (7)
4
 z(t) = ∑ hi (ς(t))Ci x (t)


i =1

4
κi (ς(t))
where ∑ hi (ς(t)) = 1, hi (ς(t)) = 4
> 0, κi (ς(t)) = Qi1 (ς 1 (t)) Qi2 (ς 2 (t)).
i =1 ∑ κi (ς(t))
i =1

Remark 1. It should be mentioned that there exist the nonlinear terms cos( ϕ(t)) and sin( ϕ(t))
in system (5), which are modeled by constructing the T-S fuzzy models.

Before the fault-tolerant controller is designed, we assume the following.

J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 370 6 of 21

Assumption 1. For all unknown actuator effectiveness levels ρ ∈ ∆ρ j , j ∈ I (1, L), all pairs
{ Ai , B2 ρ} are completely controllable.

Assumption 2. All actuators could have loss-of-effectiveness failures at the same time; nevertheless,
the remaining actuators have the capability of completing the intended control task even while up to
m − l (l = 1, 2, · · · , m − 1) actuators become stuck or experience an outage.

Assumption 3. There exist unknown constants ūs > 0 and w̄ > 0 which make the nonparametric
actuator stuck fault and external disturbances piecewise continuous with kus (t)k ≤ ūs , kw(t)k ≤
w̄ as the bound.

Assumption 4. Rank( B2 ρ) = Rank( B2 ) = l for all ρ ∈ ∆ρ j , j = 1, 2, · · · , L.

Remark 2. The first two assumptions above ensure that the FTC system is internally stable
and that the actuator failure accommodation problem has a feasible solution [26,28], respectively.
Assumption 3 is natural and widely used [30]. The actuator redundancy condition in Assumption 4
accommodates stuck faults and outages [26,28].

The later control law design makes use of the following definition and two lemmas.

Definition 1 ([31]). Let a closed-loop system be defined as

ξ̇ (t) = Ac ξ (t) + Bc w(t)

z(t) = Cc ξ (t), ξ (0) = 0 (8)
R∞ R∞
For any ζ > 0, if 0 zT (t)z(t)dt ≤ γ02 0 wT (t)w(t)dt + ζ is valid, where γ0 > 0, then it is
said that the system (8) satisfies an adaptive H∞ performance index that is no more than γ0 .

Lemma 1 ([31]). The closed-loop system (8) is stable and T (s) = Cc (sI − Ac )−1 Bc satisfies
k T (s)k < γ0 if there exists γ0 > 0 and a matrix P = PT > 0 such that

PAc + ATc P CcT

 
PBc
 ∗ −γ02 I 0  < 0.
∗ ∗ −I

This article is aimed at constructing an appropriate integral sliding surface and an

integral sliding mode (ISM) fault-tolerant controller for a T-S fuzzy model of a UMV that can
guarantee system stability and achieve the H∞ performance index shown in Definition 1
in the presence of thruster failures and external disturbance. The whole control strategy is
shown in Figure 2.
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 370 7 of 21

Ocean
Faults
disturbance

Thruster UMV

Unmodeled
dynamics

u
Adaptive parameters
T-S fuzzy model
estimation

Thruster Integral Sliding Mode-based

allocation Fault-Tolerant Controller

Full-rank Fuzzy logic

decomposition system method

Figure 2. Integral sliding mode fault-tolerant strategy for T-S model of UMV with faults.

3. Integral Sliding Mode Fault-Tolerant Compensation Strategy Design

This section introduces an integral sliding surface design approach by combining a
matrix factorization method with an adaptive mechanism. Then, the existing conditions
of the integral sliding surface design scheme are provided by a linear matrix inequality
(LMI). Here, θ, δ0 , w̄, and σ, µ0 , ūs are the estimation parameters updated by the adaptive
law, representing the unknown weighted matrix, the approximation error, the disturbance
upper bounds, and the unknown fault information respectively. Furthermore, an ISM FTC
law is developed to guarantee the stability of the sliding dynamics and subsequent sliding
mode maintenance.
Suppose that B2 has a matrix full-rank decomposition as follows:

B2 = B2v N (9)

where B2v ∈ Rn×l , N ∈ Rl ×m , and rank( B2v ) = rank( N ) = l < m [26].

Lemma 2 ([26]). For the full-rank decomposition in Equation (9), there exists µ > 0 such that

NρN T ≥ µNN T (10)

for every ∀ρ ∈ ∆ρ j , j = 1, 2, · · · , L.

Then, an FLS is used to find an approximation of the unknown smooth function g( x )

in (7). The ability to uniformly approximate any nonlinear smooth function defined on
compact sets is well demonstrated in the literature [32]. Thus, it is not difficult to obtain the
following equation by taking advantage of the properties of an FLS:

M
g( x ) = θ T ξ ( x ) + δ( x ) = ∑ θr ξ r ( x ) + δ ( x ) (11)
r =1

where θ ∈ Rn denotes an unknown adjustable parameter vector, ξ ( x ) represents a fuzzy

basis function vector (which is commonly selected as a Gaussian function to ensure that
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 370 8 of 21

the basis vector is positive), M expresses the number of FLS rules, and δ0 is an unknown
constant bound of the approximate error δ( x ) which satisfies

k δ( x ) k≤ δ0 (12)

Remark 3. The unknown nonlinear term g( x ) is present in the T-S fuzzy UMV model (7), because
the yaw angle of the DPS varies within a certain range. Though [28] used a linear matrix inequality
to deal with it, only the sector bounds were used, which leads to conservativeness. To compensate for
the effects of the nonlinear term more accurately, an FLS is utilized in this paper, which can exploit
a good tradeoff between conservatism and computational burden by adjusting the number of FLS
rules M.

The following two components make up the ISM controller developed in this paper:

u ( t ) = u0 ( t ) + u1 ( t ) (13)

where
4
u0 ( t ) = ∑ h j (ς(t))K j x(t)
j =1
(14)
β( x )
u1 (t) = −η ( x, t)µ̂0 N T
k β( x )k
where K j = L j P−1 , L j ∈ Rm×n , and P ∈ Rn×n ; the term u0 (t) is the linear part, the function
of which is to attenuate disturbances, while u1 (t) is the discontinuous control term of
the controller, which is used to reject nonlinearity terms and force the system state onto
the sliding manifold in (16). Let the parameter µ be the positive number introduced in
Lemma 2. In particular, µ̂0 is an approximation of µ0 with µ0 = µ1 and

M
1
η ( x, t) = k N kk E0 kδ̂0 + k N kk E0 k ∑ θ̂r ξ r ( x )
λN r =1
q
! (15)
m
+ ∑ k Ni kσ̂i ūˆ si + ∑ kGB1k kw̄ˆ k + e
i =1 k =1

where λ N and e denote the smallest eigenvalue of NN T and any positive scalar, respectively,
while δ̂0 , θ̂, σ̂, ūˆ s , and w̄ˆ represent estimates of the upper bound of the reconstruction error
δ0 , the weight matrix θ, the fault impact factor σ, the stuck fault upper bound ūs , and the
disturbance upper bound w̄, respectively.
The definition of the integral sliding manifold is provided by the set below:

Ω , { x ∈ R n : β ( x ) = 0} (16)

and the integral switching surface in this paper is constructed using the following form:
Z t
β( x ) = G [ x (t) − x (t0 )] − G ( Ax (τ ) + B2 ρ̂u0 (τ ))dτ (17)
t0

where G ∈ Rl ×n is a freely designed matrix that meets condition (19) and ρ̂ = diag{ρ̂1 , ρ̂2 , . . . , ρ̂m }
in (17) is the estimated matrix of ρ, which can use the projection algorithms below to update
(
0, if(ρ̂i = ρ and k ≤ 0) or(ρ̂i = ρ̄i and k ≥ 0)
ρ̂˙ i (t) = Proj[ρ ,ρ̄i ] {k} = i (18)
i k, otherwise
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 370 9 of 21

4
where k = γ0 βT GB2i ∑ h j (ς(t))Kij x (t), γ0 , B2i , and Kij are the adjusted parameter, the
j =1
ith column of input matrix B2 , and the ith row of gain matrix K in the jth fuzzy rule,
respectively.
The reaching phase is avoided [33], as the term − Gx (t0 ) satisfies β( x (t0 ), t0 ) = 0.
According to the literature [33],
  −1
† T T
G = B2v = B2v B2v B2v (19)

Remark 4. As far as the authors know, little fault information has been considered in the design
of previous sliding surfaces for FTC using T-S fuzzy models (7). In this paper, estimation of the
actuator efficiency factor ρ̂ is used in (17) to construct the sliding manifold for the T-S fuzzy mode
of the UMV, which makes full use of the fault information to achieve better robustness and less
conservatism than the traditional construction method.

The following Theorem 1 demonstrates the existing conditions of the sliding dynamics
on the provided integral sliding surface (17), showing that the H∞ performance index
cannot be greater than γ0 when there are external disturbances and actuator failures.

Theorem 1. The sliding mode dynamics are asymptotically stable at the beginning and the H∞
performance index is not greater than γ0 > 0 if there exists P = P T > 0 and matrix L j ∈ Rm×n
that makes the following inequality hold for the integral sliding surface (17):

A j P + PATj + B2 ρ̂L j + LTj ρ̂B2T PCT B̃1

 
 ∗ −I 0 <0 (20)
∗ ∗ −γ02 I

Proof. The derivative of the integral sliding surface (17) can be obtained as follows:

β̇( x ) = G ẋ (t) − GAx (t) − GB2 ρ̂u0 (t) (21)

Substituting (7) into (21) results in

4
β̇( x ) = G ∑ hi (ς(t))[ Ai x (t) + B2 (ρu(t) + σus (t)) + D0i g( x ) + B1i w(t)]
i =1 (22)
− GAx (t) − GB2 ρ̂u0 (t)

4 4 4
Because ∑ hi (ς(t)) Ai = A, ∑ hi (ς(t)) B2 = B2 , ∑ hi (ς(t)) D0i = D0 = B2 E0 ,
i =1 i =1 i =1
4
∑ hi (ς(t)) B1i = B1 , we have β̇( x ) = GB2 (ρ − ρ̂)u0 (t) + GB2 (ρu1 (t) + σus (t) + E0 g( x ))
i =1
+ GB1 w(t). An equivalent control [34] is therefore achieved as follows:

uleq (t) = − ( Nρ)† GB2 (ρ − ρ̂)u0 (t) − ( Nρ)† GB2 σus (t)
(23)
− ( Nρ)† GB2 E0 g( x ) − ( Nρ)† GB1 w(t)

Substituting (23) into (7) and taking advantage of the property that ( Nρ)( Nρ)† = Il ,
the following equation is derived:

ẋ (t) = Ax (t) + B2 ρu0 (t) + B2 σus (t) + B2 E0 g( x ) + B1 w(t)

(24)
+ B2v {− GB2 (ρ − ρ̂)u0 (t) − GB2 σus (t) − GB1 w(t) − GB2 E0 g( x )}
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 370 10 of 21

Using G as described in (19) and u0 (t) as specified in (14), subsequent simplification

of Equation (24) yields

4 nh i o
ẋ (t) = ∑ h j (ς(t)) A j + B2 ρ̂L j P−1 x (t) + ( I − B2v G ) B1 w(t) (25)
j =1

By Schur’s complement lemma and Lemma 1, if there exists matrix P0 > 0 such that
the inequality
4 n 
∑ j h ( ς ( t )) A j + B2 ρ̂L j P −1
P0 + γ0−2 B̃1 B̃1T
j =1
 (26)
 T
−1 T
+ P0 A j + B2 ρ̂L j P + P0 C CP0 < 0

holds, where B̃1 = ( I − B2v G ) B1 , then the quadratic stability of the sliding dynamics and
the H∞ performance index are assured.
Application of Schur’s complement lemma can be used to show that Equation (20) is
4 n o
equivalent to ∑ h j (ς(t)) A j P + PATj + B2 ρ̂L j + LTj ρ̂B2T + γ0−2 B̃1 B̃1T + PCT CP < 0. Con-
j =1
sequently, with P0 = P, inequality (26) is true. As a result, the H∞ performance index γ0 is
satisfied from the start, and the sliding dynamics are guaranteed to exist.
The proof is completed.

j j j
Remark 5. Despite the presence of ρ̂ in the LMI (20), ρ̂ ∈ {ρ j | ρ j = diag{ρ1 , ρ2 , . . . , ρm },
j j
ρi = 0 or ρi = 1} can be ensured by the projection procedure (18); hence, the LMI (20) is solvable
using the Matlab LMI tool.

Remark 6. Sliding-mode control can be maintained from the very beginning using the ISM
technique [35–38]. Compared with the traditional sliding mode control strategy in [26], greater
robustness against actuator faults can be obtained.

The matrix decomposed forms used in the subsequent analysis are defined as follows:
   
F1 = F11 F12 · · · F1q , N = N1 N2 · · · Nm ,
   T
ūs = ūs1 ūs2 · · · ūsm , θ = θ1 θ2 · · · θ M ,
 T
ξ (x) = ξ 1 (x) ξ 2 (x) · · · ξ M (x)

where F1 ∈ Rm×q , N ∈ Rl ×m , ūs ∈ Rm×1 and θ, ξ ( x ) ∈ R M×1 .

Before the main points are presented, the following adaptive laws are provided:

µ̂˙ 0 (t) = γηλ N k β( x )k, w̄ˆ˙ k (t) = γ3k k β( x )kk GB1k k,

ūˆ˙ si (t) = γ1i k β( x )kk Ni k, θ̂˙r (t) = γ4r k β( x )kk N kk E0 kξ r ( x ),
σ̂˙ (t) = γ k β( x )kk N kūˆ , δ̂˙ (t) = γ k β( x )kk N kk E k,
i 2i i si 0 5 0
(27)
µ̂0 (0) = µ00 , ūˆ si (0) = ūsi0 , σ̂i (0) = σi0 ,
w̄ˆ k (0) = w̄k0 , θ̂r (0) = θr0 , δ̂0 (0) = δ00 .

where η is as shown in (15), k ∈ Q̄ = {1, 2, . . . , q}, i ∈ M̄ = {1, 2, . . . , m}, r ∈ P̄ =

{1, 2, . . . , p}, and
µ00 , ūsi0 , σi0 , w̄ˆ k0 , θr0 , and δ00 are bounded initial values of µ̂0 , ūˆ si , σ̂i , w̄ˆ k , θ̂r , and δ̂0 , respec-
tively. The design parameters γ, γ1i , γ2i , γ3k , γ4r , and γ5 are positive.
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 370 11 of 21

We define

µ̃0 (t) = µ̂0 (t) − µ0 , ρ̃(t) = ρ̂(t) − ρ, θ̃ (t) = θ̂ (t) − θ,

ū˜ s (t) = ūˆ s (t) − ūs , w̄˜ (t) = w̄ˆ (t) − w̄, (28)
δ̃0 (t) = δ̂0 (t) − δ0 , σ̃(t) = σ̂ (t) − σ.

Because µ0 , ρ, θ, ūs , w̄k , δ0 , and σ are unknown constants, it is not difficult to obtain the
error systems
µ̃˙ 0 (t) = µ̂˙ 0 (t), ρ̃˙ (t) = ρ̂˙ (t), θ̃˙ (t) = θ̂˙ (t), ū˜˙ s (t) = ūˆ˙ s (t),
(29)
w̄˜˙ (t) = w̄ˆ˙ (t), δ̃˙ (t) = δ̂˙ (t), σ̃˙ (t) = σ̂˙ (t).
0 0

Remark 7. It can be seen from (27) that θ (t) > 0 is true for t > t0 with θ (t0 ) > 0. Obviously,
for the purposes of this paper we can further assume that θ (t) > 0. Therefore, θ T ξ ( x ) > 0 can
be obtained.

The reachability analysis of the ISM is provided by the following theorem.

Theorem 2. Suppose that Assumptions 1–4 hold and that LMI (20) has feasible solutions. Then,
the ISMC law in (14) and (15) and the parameter adaptive laws (27) can be used to drive the state of
the system (7) onto the manifold Ω , { x ∈ Rn : β( x ) = 0}.
T
Proof. Let β̃(t) = β(t)T , ρ̃T , µ̃T0 , ū˜ Ts , σ̃T , w̄˜ Tk , θ̃ T , δ̃0T , then consider the candidate Lyapunov


function below for the analysis of reachability:

1 ρ̃2 σi ũ2si
V β̃(t) =V0 (t) + γ−1 µµ̃20 + ∑ i + ∑


2 i ∈ M̄
2γ0i i∈ M̄ 2γ1i
(30)
σ̃2 w̄˜ 2k θ̃ 2 δ̃2
+ ∑ i + ∑ +∑ r + 0
i ∈ M̄
2γ2i k∈Q̄ 2γ3k r∈ P̄ 2γ4r 2γ5

where V0 (t) = (1/2) βT ( x ) β( x ).

Deriving V0 (t) with respect to time by substituting the system (7), the outcome is

V̇0 = βT ( x ) β̇( x ) = βT ( x )( GB2 (ρ − ρ̂)u0 (t) + GB1 w(t)

(31)
+ GB2 (ρu1 (t) + σus (t) + E0 g( x )))

Simplifying Equation (31) by the estimated error in (28), we can conclude that

V̇0 = βT ( x )(− GB2 ρ̃u0 (t) + GB1 w(t) + GB2 (ρu1 (t) + σus (t) + E0 g( x ))) (32)

Recalling the property GB2 = GB2v N = N, the above inequality (32) can be reorga-
nized into the following equation:

V̇0 = β( x )T N (ρu1 (t) + σus (t) + E0 g( x )) − β( x )T GB2 ρ̃u0 (t) + β( x )T GB1 w(t)

For convenience, we abbreviate β( x ) as β. It is proven that the inequalities below are

true according to Assumption 2:

βT GB1 w(t) = ∑ βT GB1k wk ≤ ∑ k βkkGB1k kw̄k

k ∈ Q̄ k ∈ Q̄
(33)
βT Nσus (t) = ∑ βT Ni σi usi (t) ≤ ∑ k βkk Ni kσi kusi (t)k ≤ ∑ k βkk Ni kσi ūsi
i ∈ M̄ i ∈ M̄ i ∈ M̄
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 370 12 of 21

Based on (31) and (33), we can show that

V̇0 ≤ βT Nρu1 (t) + βT NE0 g( x ) − βT GB2 ρ̃u0 (t) + ∑ k βkk Ni kσi ūsi + ∑ k βkkGB1k kw̄k
i ∈ M̄ k ∈ Q̄

Considering (14), we can obtain

β
k βk i∑
V̇0 ≤ − βT Nρη µ̂0 N T + k βkk Ni kσi ūsi + βT NE0 g( x )
∈ M̄
4 (34)
+ ∑ k βkk B1k kw̄k − βT GB2 ρ̃ ∑ h j (ς(t))K j x (t)
k ∈ Q̄ j =1

According to [32], by substituting (28) into (34) we have

β
k βk i∑
V̇0 ≤ − βT Nρη µ̂0 N T + k βkk Ni kσ̂i ūˆ si − ∑ k βkk Ni kσ̃i ūˆ si
∈ M̄ i ∈ M̄
− ∑ k βkk Ni kσi ū˜ si + ∑ k βkkGB1k kw̄ˆ k − ∑ k βkk B1k kw̄˜ k (35)
i ∈ M̄ k ∈ Q̄ k ∈ Q̄
4  
− βT GB2 ρ̃ ∑ h j (ς(t))K j x (t) + βT NE0 θ T ξ ( x ) + δ( x )
j =1

Further, the following property holds:

   
βT NE0 θ T ξ ( x ) + δ( x ) ≤ k βkk N kk E0 k θ T ξ ( x ) + kδ( x )k
(36)
!
M
≤ k βkk N kk E0 k ∑ θr ξ r ( x ) + δ0
r =1

The following inequality can be achieved by combining (35) with (36):

β
k βk i∑
V̇0 ≤ − β( x )T Nρη µ̂0 N T + k βkk Ni kσ̂i ūˆ si − ∑ k βkk Ni kσ̃i ūˆ si
∈ M̄ i ∈ M̄
− ∑ k βkk Ni kσi ū˜ si + ∑ k βkkGB1k kw̄ˆ k − ∑ k βkkGB1k kw̄˜ k (37)
i ∈ M̄ k ∈ Q̄ k ∈ Q̄
( ) !
4
− ∑ h j (ς(t)) ∑ β( x )T GB2i ρ̃i Kij x (t) + k β( x )kk N kk E0 k ∑ θr ξ r (x) + δ0
j =1 i ∈ M̄ r ∈ P̄

From (28) and (37), the inequality below holds:

β( x )
k β( x )k i∑
V̇0 ≤ − β( x )T Nρη µ̂0 N T + k βkk Ni kσ̂i ūˆ si − ∑ k βkk Ni kσ̃i ūˆ si
∈ M̄ i ∈ M̄
( )
4
− ∑ k βkk Ni kσi ū˜ si + ∑ k βkkGB1k kw̄ˆ k − ∑ h j (ς(t)) ∑ β T
GB2i ρ̃i Kij x (t) (38)
i ∈ M̄ k∈ Q̄ j =1 i ∈ M̄
!
+ k βkk N kk E0 k ∑ θ̂r ξ r (x) − θ̃ T
ξ ( x ) + δ̂0 − δ̃0 − ∑ k βkkGB1k kw̄˜ k
r ∈ P̄ k ∈ Q̄

Obviously, µ̂0 (t) > 0 is true for t > t0 with µ̂0 (t0 ) > 0 in consideration of the adaptive
mechanism (27). From Lemma 2, we can derive the inequality

β
−η µ̂0 βT NρN T ≤ −η µ̂0 µλ N k βk
k βk
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 370 13 of 21

where λ N was introduced in (15). Now, it is easily obtained from (38) that

V̇0 ≤ − η (µ̂0 + µ̃0 )µλ N k βk + ∑ k βkk Ni kσ̂i ūˆ si − ∑ k βkk Ni kσ̃i ūˆ si
i ∈ M̄ i ∈ M̄
− ∑ k βkk Ni kσi ū˜ si + ∑ k βkkGB1k kw̄ˆ k − ∑ k βkkGB1k kw̄˜ k
i ∈ M̄ k ∈ Q̄ k ∈ Q̄
!
(39)
+ k β( x )kk N kk E0 k ∑ θ̂r ξ r (x) − θ̃ T
ξ ( x ) + δ̂0 − δ̃0
r ∈ P̄
( )
4
− ∑ h j (ς(t)) ∑ β( x ) T
GB2i ρ̃i Kij x (t)
j =1 i ∈ M̄

Substituting (15) into (39), we can obtain

V̇0 ≤ − ek βk − η µ̃0 µλ N k βk − ∑ k βkkGB1k kw̄˜ k − k βkk N kkE0 k ∑ θ̃r ξ r (x)

k ∈ Q̄ r ∈ P̄

− k βkk N kk E0 kδ̃0 − ∑ k βkk Ni kσ̃i ūˆ si − ∑ k βkk Ni kσi ū˜ si

i ∈ M̄ i ∈ M̄
( )
4
− ∑ h j (ς(t)) ∑ β( x )T GB2i p̃i Kij x (t)
j =1 i ∈ M̄

The derivative of (30) is derived considering the adaptive laws (27) and Equation (29):

ρ̃i ρ̃˙ i σ ū˜ ū˜˙

∑ + γ−1 µµ̃0 µ̃˙ 0 + ∑ i si si +


V̇ β̃(t) =V̇0 (t) +
i ∈ M̄
γ0i i ∈ M̄
γ1i
(40)
σ̃i σ̃˙ i w̄˜ w̄˜˙ θ̃r θ̃˙r δ̃ δ̃˙
∑ γ2i
+ ∑ k k+∑
γ3k γ
+ 0 0
γ5
i ∈ M̄ k ∈ Q̄ r ∈ P̄ 4r

Moreover, based on the adaptive laws listed in (27), it is not
difficult to show that
−ηµλ N µ̃0 k βk + γ−1 µµ̃0 µ̃˙ 0 = 0. Therefore,
the inequality V̇ β̃(t) ≤ −ek βk ≤ 0 can be ob-
tained from (40), which means that V β̃(t) is not an increasing function. Thus, the inequal-


ity V ( β̃(t)) ≤ V ( β̃(0)) , V0 is valid, that is, V, β̃ ∈ L∞ . It follows that lim V β̃(t) = V∞
t→∞
exists, as t → ∞. Then, the inequality below is obtained by integrating (40) on both
sides simultaneously:
Z t
V ( t ) − V (0) ≤ − ek βkdt (41)
0
R∞
Further, as t → ∞, 0 ek βkdt ≤ V0 − V∞ < ∞ can be obtained from the aforemen-
tioned inequality (41), which means that β ∈ L2 L∞ . Therefore, if the Barbalat lemma is
T

applied to (8), the trajectories of the system stay on the integral sliding manifold defined
in (16).
Thus, the proof is completed.

4. Simulation Result
This part shows the validity of the proposed methodology. Let the parameter matrices
of the UMV model [19,20] be
   
1.0852 0 0 0.0865 0 0
M= 0 2.0575 −0.4087 , N =  0 0.0762 0.0151 ,
0 −0.4087 0.2153 0 0.0151 0.031
   
0.0389 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0
G= 0 0.0266 0 , E =  0 0 1 1 1 1 .
   
0 0 0 0.0472 −0.0472 −0.4108 −0.3858 0.45540 0.3373
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 370 14 of 21

Figure 3 shows the position distribution of the thrusters.

aft tunnel aft tunnel bow tunnel

thruster Ⅰ:u3 thruster Ⅱ:u4 thruster:u5

port main
propeller:u1

starboard main
bow azimuth
propeller:u2
thruster:u6

Figure 3. Schematic drawing showing the UMV thruster configuration.

The ocean disturbances model is provided by [20]:


 w1 = 0.27M1 (s)N1 (t)N2 (t)
w = W(t)
 2
w3 = 0.58M2 (s)N3 (t)N4 (t)
Kξ1 s
where the shaping filter is M1 (s) = s2 +2e1 $1 s+$21
with dominant wave strength coefficient
Kξ 1 = 0.26, damping coefficient e1 = 0.5, wave encounter frequency $1 = 1.3, and band-
Kξ 2 s
limited white noise N1 (t) with noise power is 2.69. Similarly, M2 (s) = s2 +2e2 $2 s+$22
with
Kξ 2 = 0.2, e2 = 1.7, $2 = 0.9, and N3 (t) with noise power 1.56. Moreover, let
 
1 t ∈ [0s, 6s] 1 t ∈ [0s, 5.5s]
N2 (t) = , N4 ( t ) = ,
0 otherwise 0 otherwise
( 6
− 53 cos( 85 t)e− 50 t t ∈ [0s, 30s)
W(t) = 6
− 32 cos( 85 (t − 30))e− 50 (t−30) otherwise
The nonlinear term vector g( x ) can be chosen as
 T
g( x ) = cos(ϑ (t)) + 0.1t sin(v(t)) 0.02r (t)

From Formula (6), we can easily find Table 2, where, Positive = 21 + ς 1 (t), Negative =
1
√ √ √ √
2 − ς 1 (t), Big = −3 − 2 3 + (4 + 2 3)ς 2 (t), Small = 4 + 2 3 − (4 + 2 3)ς 2 (t).

Table 2. Rule table of the T-S fuzzy model.

Rule Number ς 1 (t ) ς 2 (t )
1 Positive Big
2 Positive Small
3 Negative Big
4 Negative Small

Additionally, in the simulation, after 30s we assume a loss of effectiveness 40% and
stuck at 0.1sin(2t) on the bow tunnel thruster and the aft tunnel thruster I, respectively.
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 370 15 of 21

β( x ) β( x )
The part k β( x)k in (14) is replaced by a continuous approximation (k β( x)k+0.001) to attenu-
ate chattering.
For the simulation, γ0 = 1 and the initial state x (0) = [0.1 − 0.01 − 0.05 0.11 −
0.07 0.07] T are chosen.
The following fuzzy membership functions can be defined:
2 /3
v j ( xi ) = e−( xi +3− j) , i = 1, · · · , 4, j = 1, 2, · · · , 5
ςi

Thus, the fuzzy basis functions can be expressed as

4
∏ vς j ( xi )
i =1 i
χ j (x) = , i = 1, · · · , 4, j = 1, 2, · · · , 5
5 4
∑ ∏ vς j ( xi )
j =1 i =1 i

0 0 0
 

 0 0 0 

 0 0 0 
In this case, B2v is chosen as B2v = .

 −0.9215 0 0 

 0.0699 −0.1718 −1.4547 
0.3519 1.5819 −4.8767
The relation rank( B2v ) = rank ( N ) = 3 < 6 = m holds by validation. Moreover, the
following initial estimation parameters and adjustment gain values are used: w̄ˆ (0) =
[0.5, −0.5, 0.01], µ̂0 (0) = 0.1, ūˆ s (0) = [0.12, 0.1, 0.1, 0.1, 0.1, 0.1], ρ̂(0) = [0.05, 0.05, 0.05, 0.05,
0.05, 0.05], σ̂ (0) = [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0], θ̂ (0) = [0.2, 0.1, −0.1, 0.2, 0], δ̂0 (0) = 0.1, γ = 10, γ0 =
[0.01, 0.01, 0.01, 0.01, 0.01, 0.01], γ1 = [0.001, 0.001, 0.001, 0.001, 0.001, 0.001] = γ2 , γ3 =
[0.023, 0.023, 0.023], γ4 = [1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1], γ5 = 0.01.
The results of this article are compared with those that do not take the impact of
thruster failures into account in [20] to demonstrate the validity of the proposed T-S fuzzy
DP control methodology. The response curves from this paper are shown using red solid
lines in Figures 4 and 5, while the simulation results without taking thruster faults into
account are shown using blue solid lines. Figure 4 depicts the state response of the proposed
methodology. It can be clearly seen that the states in this article converge to zero in the end,
whereas the comparison simulation shows a divergence from t = 30s. The control signals in
Figure 5 indicate that the proposed controller works well, especially when thruster failures
are present. In summary, the control approach in Section 3 offers much better control
performance compared to the controller that does not take thruster failures into account.
Adaptive parameter adjustments are shown in Figures 6–9. It is easy to observe that they are
convergent and meet our expectations. The ocean disturbance parameters were adjusted as
follows: dominant wave strength coefficient Kξ 1 = 0.2, damping coefficient e1 = 0.4, wave
encounter frequency $1 = 0.7, and band-limited white noise N1 (t) with noise power is 3.2;
and similarly, Kξ 2 = 0.6, e2 = 1.6, $2 = 1, and N3 (t) with noise power 4.2. From Figure 9b,
it is not difficult to see that the fault-tolerant controller designed in this paper can work
effectively under different ocean disturbance levels, which shows that the design of this
controller has good robustness.
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 370 16 of 21

350
250

150
150

50

-50 -50
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60

90

70 100

50

30 -100

10

-10 -300
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60

60
150
20

-20
-150

-60

-450 -100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60

xp(t), yp(t), (t), (t), v(t), r(t) without considering thruster faults in existing literature
x (t), y (t), (t), (t), v(t), r(t) in this paper
p p

Figure 4. Comparison of system responses x (t) with a normal controller and using the techniques
developed in this paper
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 370 17 of 21

104 104
3 3

0 0

-3 -3

-6 -6

-9 -9

-12 -12
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60

104 104
1 1

0 0

-1 -1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60

104 104
1 2

0 0

-1

-1 -2
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60

u i(t) (i=1,2,3,4,5,6) without considering thruster faults in existing literature

u i(t) (i=1,2,3,4,5,6) in this paper

Figure 5. Comparison of controller responses u(t) with a normal controller and using the techniques
developed in this paper.
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 370 18 of 21

0.12

0.09 0.12

0.06

0.03 0.11

-0.03 0.1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60

(a) (b)
Figure 6. (a) Responses of parameter ρ̂(t) using the proposed methodology in fault case with
ρ3 = 0, σ3 = 1, ρ5 = 0.6. (b) Responses of parameter ūˆ s (t) using the proposed methodology in fault
case with ρ3 = 0, σ3 = 1, ρ5 = 0.6.

10-4

0.6
2.6

2 0.3

1.4
0

0.8

-0.3
0.2

-0.4 -0.6
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60

(a) (b)
Figure 7. (a) Responses of parameter σ̂(t) using the proposed methodology in fault case with
ρ3 = 0, σ3 = 1, ρ5 = 0.6. (b) Responses of parameter w̄ˆ (t) using the proposed methodology in fault
case with ρ3 = 0, σ3 = 1, ρ5 = 0.6.
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 370 19 of 21

0.25 0.101

0.1008
0.15

0.1006

0.05

0.1004

-0.05
0.1002

-0.15 0.1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60

(a) (b)
Figure 8. (a) Responses of parameter θ̂ (t) using the proposed methodology in fault case with
ρ3 = 0, σ3 = 1, ρ5 = 0.6. (b) Responses of parameter δ̂0 (t) using the proposed methodology in fault
case with ρ3 = 0, σ3 = 1, ρ5 = 0.6.

7 0.15

6 0.1

0.05
5

0
4
-0.05
3
-0.1

2
-0.15

1 -0.2

0 -0.25
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60

(a) (b)
Figure 9. (a) Responses of parameter µ̂0 (t) using the proposed methodology in fault case with
ρ3 = 0, σ3 = 1, ρ5 = 0.6. (b) System responses x (t) using the controller developed in this paper with
different dominant wave strength coefficient, damping coefficient, and wave encounter frequency.

5. Conclusions
In this paper, an FTC scheme using an ISMC methodology with fault information has
been proposed for the DP of a UMV with thruster faults. The nonlinear terms in the T-S
fuzzy model have been approximated by the FLS to achieve a tradeoff between resolution
and complexity. Moreover, the fault information has been used in the design of the ISM
surface in the ISMC of the above UMV DP model, ensuring that the ISMC can further
reduce the conservatism and obtain better robustness while maintaining the dynamic
performance of the UMV system in severe sea conditions. The validity of our approach has
been demonstrated by simulation for a vehicle with realistic parameters.
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 370 20 of 21

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, L.-Y.H. and Y.W.; methodology, L.-Y.H. and Y.W.; software,
Y.W.; validation, Y.W. and L.-Y.H.; formal analysis, Y.W.; investigation, Y.W.; resources, L.-Y.H., T.L.
and C.L.P.C.; data curation, Y.W.; writing—original draft preparation, Y.W.; writing—review and
editing, Y.W.; visualization, Y.W.; supervision, L.-Y.H.; project administration, L.-Y.H.; funding
acquisition, L.-Y.H., T.L. and C.L.P.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of
the manuscript.
Funding: This work is supported in part by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (under
Grant Nos. 51939001, 52171292, 61976033, 62003069); the LiaoNing Revitalization Talents Program
(under Grant Nos. XLYC1908018, XLYC1807046); Dalian Outstanding Young Talents Program(under
Grant No.2022RJ05) , the Science and Technology Development Fund, Macau SAR (File no. SKL-
IOTSC-2018-2020, 0018/2019/AKP).
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Conflicts of Interest: The author declares no conflict of interest.

References
1. Roberts, G.N.; Sutton, R. Advances in Unmanned Marine Vehicles, 1st ed. ed.; Institution of Engineering and Technology: London,
UK, 2006.
2. Wang, Y.L.; Han, Q.L. Network-based modelling and dynamic output feedback control for unmanned marine vehicles in network
environments. Automatica 2018, 91, 43–53. [CrossRef]
3. Kahveci, N.E.; Ioannou, P.A. Adaptive steering control for uncertain ship dynamics and stability analysis. Automatica 2013,
49, 685–697. [CrossRef]
4. Zereik, E.; Bibuli, M.; Mišković, N.; Ridao, P.; Pascoal, A. Challenges and future trends in marine robotics. Annu. Rev. Control
2018, 46, 350–368. [CrossRef]
5. Wang, L.; Wu, Q.; Liu, J.; Li, S.; Negenborn, R.R. State-of-the-art research on motion control of maritime autonomous surface
ships. J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 438–438. [CrossRef]
6. Peng, Z.; Wang, J.; Wang, D.; Han, Q.L. An Overview of Recent Advances in Coordinated Control of Multiple Autonomous
Surface Vehicles. IEEE Trans. Ind. Informatics 2021, 17, 732–745. [CrossRef]
7. Ning, J.; Li, T.; Chen, C.P. Neuro-adaptive distributed formation tracking control of under-actuated unmanned surface vehicles
with input quantization. Ocean. Eng. 2022, 265, 112492. [CrossRef]
8. Wang, Y.L.; Han, Q.L. Network-Based Heading Control and Rudder Oscillation Reduction for Unmanned Surface Vehicles.
IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 2017, 25, 1609–1620. [CrossRef]
9. Katayama, H.; Aoki, H. Straight-Line Trajectory Tracking Control for Sampled-Data Underactuated Ships. IEEE Trans. Control
Syst. Technol. 2014, 22, 1638–1645.
10. Li, T.; Zhao, R.; Chen, C.L.P.; Fang, L.; Liu, C. Finite-Time Formation Control of Under-Actuated Ships Using Nonlinear Sliding
Mode Control. IEEE Trans. Cybern. 2018, 48, 3243–3253. [CrossRef]
11. Hassani, V.; Sørensen, A.J.; Pascoal, A.M.; Athans, M. Robust Dynamic Positioning of offshore vessels using mixed-µ synthesis
modeling, design, and practice. Ocean. Eng. 2017, 129, 389–400. [CrossRef]
12. Du, J.; Hu, X.; Krstić, M.; Sun, Y. Robust dynamic positioning of ships with disturbances under input saturation. Automatica 2016,
73, 207–214. [CrossRef]
13. Gao, X.; Li, T.; Shan, Q.; Xiao, Y.; Yuan, L.; Liu, Y. Online optimal control for dynamic positioning of vessels via time-based
adaptive dynamic programming. J. Ambient. Intell. Humaniz. Comput. 2019, 1–13. [CrossRef]
14. Li, W.; Sun, Y.; Chen, H.; Wang, G. Model predictive controller design for ship dynamic positioning system based on state-space
equations. J. Mar. Sci. Technol. 2017, 22, 426–431. [CrossRef]
15. Gao, X.; Bai, W.; Li, T.; Yuan, L.; Long, Y. Broad learning system-based adaptive optimal control design for dynamic positioning
of marine vessels. Nonlinear Dyn. 2021, 105, 1593–1609. [CrossRef]
16. Mendel, J.M. Fuzzy logic systems for engineering: A tutorial. Proc. IEEE 1995, 83, 345–377. [CrossRef]
17. Wang, Y.; Li, T.; Wu, Y.; Yang, X.; Chen, C.; Long, Y.; Yang, Z.; Ning, J. L∞ Fault Estimation and Fault-Tolerant Control for
Nonlinear Systems by T-S Fuzzy Model Method with Local Nonlinear Models. Int. J. Fuzzy Syst. 2021, 23, 1714–1727. [CrossRef]
18. Ho, W.H.; Chen, S.H.; Chou, J.H. Optimal control of Takagi-Sugeno fuzzy-model-based systems representing dynamic ship
positioning systems. Appl. Soft Comput. 2013, 13, 3197–3210. [CrossRef]
19. Ngongi, W.E.; Du, J.; Wang, R. Robust fuzzy controller design for dynamic positioning system of ships. Int. J. Control Autom. Syst.
2015, 13, 1294–1305. [CrossRef]
20. Wang, Y.L.; Han, Q.L.; Fei, M.R.; Peng, C. Network-Based T-S Fuzzy Dynamic Positioning Controller Design for Unmanned
Marine Vehicles. IEEE Trans. Cybern. 2018, 48, 2750–2763. [CrossRef]
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 370 21 of 21

21. Yu, X.N.; Hao, L.Y. Integral sliding mode fault tolerant control for unmanned surface vessels with quantization: Less iterations.
Ocean. Eng. 2022, 260, 111820. [CrossRef]
22. Lv, T.; Zhou, J.; Wang, Y.; Gong, W.; Zhang, M. Sliding mode based fault tolerant control for autonomous underwater vehicle.
Ocean. Eng. 2020, 216, 107855. [CrossRef]
23. Zhang, G.; Gao, S.; Li, J.; Zhang, W. Adaptive neural fault-tolerant control for course tracking of unmanned surface vehicle with
event-triggered input. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part I J. Syst. Control. Eng. 2021, 235, 1594–1604. [CrossRef]
24. Blanke, M.; Izadi-Zamanabadi, R.; Lootsma, T.F. Fault monitoring and re-configurable control for a ship propulsion plant. Int. J.
Adapt. Control. Signal Process. 1998, 12, 671–688. [CrossRef]
25. Baldini, A.; Felicetti, R.; Freddi, A.; Longhi, S.; Monteriù, A. Actuator fault tolerant control via active fault diagnosis for a remotely
operated vehicle. IFAC-Pap. 2022, 55, 310–316. [CrossRef]
26. Hao, L.Y.; Zhang, H.; Guo, G.; Li, H. Quantized Sliding Mode Control of Unmanned Marine Vehicles: Various Thruster Faults
Tolerated With a Unified Model. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Syst. 2021, 51, 2012–2026. [CrossRef]
27. Zhang, G.; Chu, S.; Huang, J.; Zhang, W. Robust adaptive fault-tolerant control for unmanned surface vehicle via the multiplied
event-triggered mechanism. Ocean. Eng. 2022, 249, 110755. [CrossRef]
28. Hao, L.Y.; Zhang, H.; Li, T.S.; Lin, B.; Chen, C.L.P. Fault Tolerant Control for Dynamic Positioning of Unmanned Marine Vehicles
Based on T-S Fuzzy Model With Unknown Membership Functions. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 2021, 70, 146–157. [CrossRef]
29. Fossen, T.; Sagatun, S.; Sørensen, A. Identification of dynamically positioned ships. Control Eng. Pract. 1996, 4, 369–376. [CrossRef]
30. Hao, L.Y.; Yu, Y.; Li, T.S.; Li, H. Quantized Output-Feedback Control for Unmanned Marine Vehicles With Thruster Faults via
Sliding-Mode Technique. IEEE Trans. Cybern. 2022, 52, 9363–9376. [CrossRef]
31. Zhou, K.; Doyle, J.C.; Glover, K. Robust Optim. Control, 1st ed.; Prentice-Hall, Inc.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 1996.
32. Gao, X.; Li, T.; Yuan, L.; Bai, W. Robust Fuzzy Adaptive Output Feedback Optimal Tracking Control for Dynamic Positioning of
Marine Vessels with Unknown Disturbances and Uncertain Dynamics. Int. J. Fuzzy Syst. 2021, 23, 2283–2296. [CrossRef]
33. Castanos, F.; Fridman, L. Analysis and design of integral sliding manifolds for systems with unmatched perturbations. IEEE Trans.
Autom. Control 2006, 51, 853–858. [CrossRef]
34. Edwards, C.; Spurgeon, S. Sliding Mode Control: Theory and Applications, 1st ed.; CRC Press: London, UK, 1998.
35. Manzanilla, A.; Ibarra, E.; Salazar, S.; Zamora, Á.E.; Lozano, R.; Munoz, F. Super-twisting integral sliding mode control for
trajectory tracking of an Unmanned Underwater Vehicle. Ocean. Eng. 2021, 234, 109164. [CrossRef]
36. Banza, A.T.; Tan, Y.; Mareels, I. Integral sliding mode control design for systems with fast sensor dynamics. Automatica 2020,
119, 109093. [CrossRef]
37. Li, P.; Liu, D.; Baldi, S. Adaptive integral sliding mode control in the presence of state-dependent uncertainty. IEEE/ASME Trans.
Mechatronics 2022, 27, 3885–3895. [CrossRef]
38. Qi, W.; Gao, X.; Ahn, C.K.; Cao, J.; Cheng, J. Fuzzy integral sliding-mode control for nonlinear semi-Markovian switching systems
with application. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Syst. 2020, 52, 1674–1683. [CrossRef]

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.