Hybrid Switching Controller Design for the Maneuvering and Transit of a Training Ship

Open access


The paper presents the design of a hybrid controller used to control the movement of a ship in different operating modes, thereby improving the performance of basic maneuvers. This task requires integrating several operating modes, such as maneuvering the ship at low speeds, steering the ship at different speeds in the course or along the trajectory, and stopping the ship on the route. These modes are executed by five component controllers switched on and off by the supervisor depending on the type of operation performed. The desired route, containing the coordinates of waypoints and tasks performed along consecutive segments of the reference trajectory, is obtained by the supervisory system from the system operator. The former supports switching between component controllers and provides them with new set-points after each change in the reference trajectory segment, thereby ensuring stable operation of the entire hybrid switching controller.

The study also presents designs of all controller components, which are done using a complex mathematical model of the selected ship, after its simplification depending on the type of controller. The developed control system was tested on the training ship Blue Lady and used to train captains at the Ship Handling Research and Training Center near Iława in Poland.

The conducted research involved an automatic movement of the ship from one port to another. The performed transit route required the ship to leave the port, pass the water area, and berth at the port of destination. The study revealed good quality of the designed hybrid controller.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Antsaklis P.J. and Nerode A. (1989). Hybrid control systems: An introductory discussion to the special issue IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 43(4): 457–460 DOI: 10.1109/TAC.1998.664148.

  • Balbis L. Ordys A. Grimble M. and Pang Y. (2007). Tutorial introduction to the modelling and control of hybrid systems International Journal of Modelling Identification and Control 2(4): 259–272 DOI: 10.1504/IJMIC.2007.016409.

  • Bańka S. Brasel M. Dworak P. and Jaroszewski K. (2015). A comparative and experimental study on gradient and genetic optimization algorithms for parameter identification of linear MIMO models of a drilling vessel International Journal of Applied Mathematics and Computer Science 25(4): 877–893 DOI: 10.1515/amcs-2015-0063.

  • Breivik M. Hovstein V.E. and Fossen T.I. (2008). Straight-line target tracking for unmanned surface vehicles Modeling Identification and Control 29(4): 131–149 DOI: 10.4173/mic.2008.4.2.

  • Brodtkorb A.H. Sorensen A.J. and Teel A.R. (2014). Increasing the operation window of dynamic positioned vessels using the concept of hybrid control Proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on Ocean Offshore and Arctic Engineering San Francisco CA USA.

  • Brown R.G. and Hwang P.Y.C. (2012). Introduction to Random Signals and Applied Kalman Filtering with Matlab Exercises John Wiley & Sons New York NY.

  • Davidson K.S.M. and Schiff L.I. (1946). Turning and course keeping qualities Transactions of the Society of Naval Architects Marine Engineers 54: 152–190.

  • Fossen T.I. (2011). Handbook of Marine Craft Hydrodynamics and Motion Control John Wiley & Sons Chichester.

  • Gelb A. (1974). Applied Optimal Estimation MIT Press Cambridge MA.

  • Gierusz W. (2001). Simulation model of the shiphandling training boat Blue Lady Proceedings of the 5th IFAC Conference on Control Application in Marine Systems (CAMS) Glasgow UK.

  • Godhavn J.M. Lauvdal T. and Egeland O. (1996). Hybrid control in sea traffic management systems in R. Alur et al. (Eds.) Hybrid Systems III Springer New York NY pp. 149–160.

  • Goedel R. Sanfelice R.G. and Teel A.R. (2012). Hybrid Dynamical Systems: Modeling Stability and Robustness Princeton University Press Princeton NJ.

  • Hespanha J.P. (2001). Tutorial on supervisory control 40th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control Orlando FL USA.

  • Holzhüter T. (1990). A high precision track controller for ships Proceedings of the 11th IFAC World Congress Tallin Estonia pp. 118–123.

  • Iława (2016). Ship Handling Research and Training Centre Iława Poland http://www.ilawashiphandling.com.pl.

  • Kamgarpour M. Soler M. Tomlin C. Olivares A. and Lygeros J. (2011). Hybrid optimal control for aircraft trajectory design with a variable sequence of modes Preprints of the 18th IFAC World Congress Milan Italy pp. 7238–7243.

  • Kurt A. and Özgüner Ü. (2013). Hierarchical finite state machines for autonomous mobile systems Control Engineering Practice 21(2): 184–194 DOI: 10.1016/j.conengprac.2012.09.020.

  • Lisowski J. (2013). Sensitivity of computer support game algorithms of safe ship control International Journal of Applied Mathematics and Computer Science 23(2): 439-446 DOI: 10.2478/amcs-2013-0033.

  • Lygeros J. Godbole D.N. and Sastry S. (1996). Verified hybrid controllers for automated vehicles IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 43(4): 522–539 DOI: 10.1109/9.664155.

  • Nguyen T.D. Sorensen A.J. and Quek S.T. (2007). Design of hybrid controller for dynamic positioning from calm to extreme sea conditions Automatica 43(5): 768–785 DOI: 10.1016/j.automatica.2006.11.017.

  • Nguyen T.D. Sorensen A.J. and Quek S.T. (2008). Multi-operational controller structure for station keeping and transit operations of marine vessels IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology 16(3): 491–498 DOI: 10.1109/TCST.2007.906309.

  • Nguyen T. D. and Sorensen A. J. (2009). Switching control for thruster-assisted position mooring Control Enginering Practice 17(9): 985–994 DOI: 10.1016/j.conengprac.2009.03.001.

  • Nomoto K. Taguchi T. Honda K. and Hirano S. (1957). On the steering qualities of ships: Technical Report International Shipbuilding Progress 4(35): 354–370.

  • Pomirski J. Rak A. and Gierusz W. (2012). Control system for trials on material ship model Polish Maritime Research 19(S1): 25–30.

  • Pritchett A.R. Lee S.M. and Goldsman D. (2001). Hybrid-system simulation for national airspace system safety analysis Journal of Aircraft 38(5): 835–840 DOI: 10.2514/2.2868

  • Salehi R Shahbakhti M. and Hedrick J.K. (2014). Real-time hybrid switching control of automotive cold start hydrocarbon emission Journal of Dynamic Systems Measurement and Control 136(4): 041002-041002-10 DOI: 10.1115/1.4026534.

  • Smogeli O.N. Sorensen A.J. and Fossen T.I. (2004). Design of a hybrid power/torque thruster controller with thrust loss estimation Proceedings of the IFAC Conference on Control Application in Marine Systems (CAMS) Ancona Italy pp. 409–414.

  • Taghavipour A. Azad N.L. and McPhee J. (2015). Real-time predictive control strategy for a plug-in hybrid electric powertrain Mechatronics 29(8): 13–27 DOI: 10.1016/j.mechatronics.2015.04.020.

  • Tomera M. (2010). Discrete Kalman filter design for multivariable ship motion control: Experimental results with training ship Joint Proceedings of Gdynia Martime University and Hochschule Bremerhaven: 26–34.

  • Tomera M. (2014). Dynamic positioning system for a ship on harbour manoeuvring with different observers: Experimental results Polish Maritime Research 21(3): 3–24 DOI: 10.2478/pomr-2014-0025.

  • Tomera M. (2015). A multivariable low speed controller for a ship autopilot with experimental results Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Methods and Models in Automation and Robotics (MMAR) Międzyzdroje Poland pp. 17-22 DOI: 10.1109/MMAR.2015.7283699.

  • Tutturen S.A. and Skjetne R. (2015). Hybrid control to improve transient response of integral action in dynamic positioning of marine vessels IFAC-PapersOnLine 48(16): 166–171 DOI: 10.1016/j.ifacol.2015.10.275.

  • Xiang Z. Wang R. and Chen Q. (2010). Fault tolerant control of switched nonlinear systems with time delay under asynchronous switching International Journal of Applied

Impact Factor

IMPACT FACTOR 2018: 1.504
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 1.553

CiteScore 2018: 2.09

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.493
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 1.361

Mathematical Citation Quotient (MCQ) 2018: 0.08

Cited By
Gesamte Zeit Letztes Jahr Letzte 30 Tage
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 230 114 5
PDF Downloads 129 83 4