06.02.2013 Views

Underwater Robots - Gianluca Antonelli.pdf

Underwater Robots - Gianluca Antonelli.pdf

Underwater Robots - Gianluca Antonelli.pdf

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

7.8 Output Feedback Control 167<br />

where the matrix L p = blockdiag { l pP I 3 ,lpOI 3 , L pQ} is diagonal positive<br />

definite. The matrix L v =blockdiag { L vP ,lvOI 3 , L vQ} is symmetric and po-<br />

sitive definite, and<br />

A ( � Q e )=blockdiag<br />

�<br />

I 3 , E ( � �<br />

Q e ) / 2 , I n .<br />

The estimated quantities η 1 ,e and q e are computed byintegrating the corresponding<br />

estimated velocities ˙η 1 ,e = R I B ν 1 ,e and ˙q e ,respectively, whereas<br />

theestimated orientation Q e is computed from the estimated angular velocity<br />

ν I 2 ,e = R I B ν 2 ,e via the quaternion propagation rule.<br />

Implementation issues. Implementation ofthe above controller-observer<br />

scheme (7.38),(7.40), requires computation of the dynamic compensation<br />

terms. While this can be done quite effectively for the terms related to rigid<br />

body dynamics, the terms related tohydrodynamic effects are usually affected<br />

by some degree of approximation and/or uncertainty. Besides the use of<br />

adaptive control schemes aimed at on-line estimation ofrelevant model parameters,<br />

e.g. [22, 197, 314], it is important to have an estimate ofthe main<br />

hydrodynamic coefficients.<br />

An estimate of the added mass coefficients can be obtained via strip<br />

theory [127]. Arough approximation of the hydrodynamic damping isobtained<br />

byconsidering only the linear skin friction and the drag generalized<br />

forces.<br />

Another important point concerns the computational complexity associated<br />

with dynamic compensation against the limited computing power typically<br />

available on board. This might suggest the adoption of acontrol law<br />

computationally lighter than the one derived above. Areasonable compromise<br />

between tracking performance and computational burden is achieved<br />

if the compensation of Coriolis, centripetal and damping terms is omitted<br />

resulting in the controller<br />

u = B † � M ( q ) a r + K v ( ζ r − ζ o )+K p e d + g ( q , R I B ) � , (7.41)<br />

with the simplified observer<br />

�<br />

˙z = M ( q ) a r − � L p + L v A ( � �<br />

Q e ) Λ e e e + K p e d<br />

ζ = M − 1 ( q )(z − L v e e ) − Λ e e e ,<br />

(7.42)<br />

The computational load can be further reduced if asuitable constant<br />

diagonal inertia matrix � M is used in lieu of the matrix M ( q ), i.e.,<br />

u = B † � � Mar + K v ( ζ r − ζ o )+K p e d + g ( q , R I B ) � , (7.43)<br />

with the observer<br />

�<br />

˙z = Mar<br />

� − � L p + L v A ( � �<br />

Q e ) Λ e e e + K p e d<br />

�ζ = � − 1<br />

M ( z − L v e e ) − Λ e e e ,<br />

(7.44)

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!