Underwater Robotics

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/227168671
Underwater Robotics
Chapter · January 2008

DOI: 10.1007/978-3-540-30301-5_44
CITATIONS READS
87 17,254
3 authors, including:
Thor I. Fossen Dana Yoerger

Norwegian University of Science and Technology Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
436 PUBLICATIONS 24,187 CITATIONS 244 PUBLICATIONS 8,802 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Inertial Navigation Systems and Sensor Fusion View project
UAV icing View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Thor I. Fossen on 20 May 2014.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

987
Underwater R
43. Underwater Robotics
Gianluca Antonelli, Thor I. Fossen, Dana R. Yoerger
Part F 43
43.1 The Expanding Role of Marine Robotics
This chapter deals with the main underwater
in Oceanic Engineering ......................... 987
robotic topics. First, a brief introduction showing
43.1.1 Historical Background ................. 989
the constantly expanding role of marine robotics
in oceanic engineering is given; this section 43.2 Underwater Robotics ............................ 989
also contains some historical backgrounds. Most 43.2.1 Modeling .................................. 989
of the following sections strongly overlap with 43.2.2 Sensor Systems .......................... 995
the corresponding chapters presented in this 43.2.3 Actuating Systems ...................... 996
handbook; hence, to avoid useless repetitions, 43.2.4 Mission Control System ............... 998
only those aspects peculiar to the underwa- 43.2.5 Guidance and Control ................. 998
ter environment are discussed, assuming that 43.2.6 Localization ............................... 1000
43.2.7 Underwater Manipulation ........... 1001
the reader is already familiar with concepts
43.2.8 Fault Detection/Tolerance ............ 1002
such as fault detection systems when discussing
43.2.9 Multiple Underwater Vehicles ...... 1003
the corresponding underwater implementation.
The modeling section is presented by focusing 43.3 Applications ......................................... 1003
on a coefficient-based approach capturing the 43.4 Conclusions and Further Reading ........... 1005
most relevant underwater dynamic effects. Two
sections dealing with the description of the sen- References .................................................. 1005
sor and the actuating systems are then given.
Autonomous underwater vehicles require the im-
plementation of mission control system as well coordination control of multiple underwater
as guidance and control algorithms. Underwa- vehicles, conclude the theoretical part of the
ter localization is also discussed. Underwater chapter. Two final sections, reporting some
manipulation is then briefly approached. Fault successful applications and discussing future
detection and fault tolerance, together with the perspectives, conclude the chapter.
43.1 The Expanding Role of Marine Robotics in Oceanic Engineering

The world’s oceans cover 2/3 of the Earth’s surface and technologies. The first scientific explorations were
have been critical to human welfare throughout history. conducted primarily through the use of diving and
As in ancient times, they enable the transport of goods human-occupied submersibles, complemented by a va-
between nations. Presently, the seas represent critical riety of other technologies such as towed or lowered
sources of food and other resources such as oil and gas. instruments, trawls, dredges, autonomous seafloor in-
In the near term, we may soon see the emergence of struments, and deep-sea drilling. More recently remotely
offshore mining for metals as well as the exploitation operated and autonomous vehicles have begun to revo-
of gas hydrates. Conversely, the ocean can also threaten lutionize seafloor exploration, often returning superior
human safety and damage infrastructure through natural data at reduced costs. In the near future, seafloor obser-
phenomena such as hurricanes and tsunamis. vatories linked by fiber-optic cables and satellites will
Our scientific understanding of the deep sea is return massive amounts of data from coastal and deep-
expanding rapidly through the use of a variety of sea sites. These observations will complement those
988 Part F Field and Service Robotics
Offshore oil and gas installations are presently ser-

viced almost exclusively by remotely operated vehicles
(ROVs), physically connected via a tether to receive
power and data, with human divers used only for the
shallowest installations. Subsea systems require ex-
tensive work capability during installation, and need
frequent inspection and intervention to support drilling
Part F 43.1
operations, actuate valves, repair or replace subsea com-

ponents, and to accomplish a variety of tasks required to
maintain production rates and product quality. The trend
toward robotic and teleoperated subsea intervention is
certain to continue as offshore oil and gas production
moves into deeper waters, and economic considerations
push key production steps from surface platforms to the
seafloor. Remotely operated manipulators enable these
Fig. 43.1 The ROV Jason 2 (courtesy of the Woods Hole systems to perform complex tasks such as debris re-
Oceanographic Institute, http://www.whoi.edu) moval, cleaning using abrasive tools, and to operate
a variety of nondestructive testing tools. The effective-
from conventional expeditionary investigations, and will ness of using ROVs decreases with depth mainly due to
require teleoperated or robotic intervention during in- the cost increase and the difficulties of handling the long
stallation and for service. An example of a remotely tether.
operated vehicle developed for the scientific study of the Autonomous underwater vehicles (AUVs) are free-
seafloor is the Jason 2 vehicle developed at the Woods swimming unoccupied underwater vehicles that can
Hole Oceanographic Institution (shown in Fig. 43.1), overcome the limitations imposed by ROV tethers for
and a list of remotely operated vehicles for scientific some tasks. Such vehicles carry their own energy sup-
exploration appears in Table 43.1 (the last vehicle in the plies (presently batteries, perhaps fuel cells in the future)
table, Kaiko, was lost several years ago). and communicate only through acoustics and perhaps
optical links in the near future. Limited communica-
Table 43.1 ROVs for scientific use tions require these vehicles to operate independently of
continuous human control, in many cases the vehicles
Vehicle Depth Institution Manufacturer
operate completely autonomously. AUVs are currently
(m)
used for scientific survey tasks, oceanographic sampling,
Hyperdolphin 3000 JAMSTECa ISE underwater archeology and under-ice survey. Military
Dolphin 3K 3000 JAMSTEC JAMSTEC applications, such as mine detection and landing site
Quest 4000 MARUMb Shilling survey, are presently operational, and more ambitious
Tiburon 4000 MBARIc MBARI applications such as long-term undersea surveillance are
ROPOS 5000 CSSFd ISE in engineering development. Presently, AUVs are incap-
Victor 6000 IFREMERe IFREMER able of sampling or manipulations tasks like those done
Jason 6500 WHOIf WHOI
routinely by ROVs, as typical work environments tend
to be complex and challenging even to skilled human
ISIS 6500 NOCg WHOI
pilots.
UROV 7K 7000 JAMSTEC JAMSTEC
Today, approximately 200 AUVs are operational,
Kaiko 11000 JAMSTEC JAMSTEC many of them experimental. However, they are maturing
a Japan Marine. Science and Technology Center rapidly. Recently several companies now offer commer-
b Zentrum für Marine Umweltwissenschaften cial services with AUVs. As an example, for the oil and
c Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute gas industry the cost reduction of a survey performed
d Canadian Scientific Submersile Facility with an AUVs instead of a towed vehicle is up to 30%
e Institut français de recherche pourl’exploitation de la mer and the data quality is generally higher. Likewise, com-
f Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution mercial manufacturers in several countries now offer
g National Oceanography Centre turnkey AUV systems for specific, well-defined tasks.
Currently, remotely operated manipulators are standard
Underwater Robotics 43.2 Underwater Robotics 989
equipment for most ROVs, while on the contrary au- stroyed the results as he judged them to be too dangerous.
tonomous manipulation is still a research challenge; the The first use of feedback theory for marine control was
two projects SAUVIM [43.1] and ALIVE [43.2] were probably the Northseeking device, patented in 1908,
devoted to studying this control problem. that used gyroscopic principals to develop the first au-
topilot [43.3]. From that point on, the use of feedback
43.1.1 Historical Background theory in marine control grew continuously; it is inter-
esting to notice that the proportional–integral–derivative
Part F 43.2
Boats have been used by humans since the start of (PID) control commonly used today in numerous indus-
recorded history, but vehicles able to go under water trial applications was first formally analyzed in 1929 by
are more recent. Perhaps the first recorded idea of an Minorsky [43.4]. The first remotely operated underwa-
underwater machine came from Aristotle; according to ter vehicle, POODLE, was built in 1953, and the ROV
legend he built the: skaphe andros (boat-man) that al- evolved through the 1960s and 1970s, mostly for mil-
lowed Alexander the Great (Alexander III of Macedonia, itary purposes. In the 1980s ROVs became established
356–323 BC) to stay submerged for at least half a day for use in the commercial offshore industry and began
during the war of Tiro in 325 BC. This is probably to emerge for scientific applications. The first tether-
unrealistic; if true it would precede Archimedes’ law, less, autonomous vehicles were built for experimental
which was first articulated in approximately 250 BC. purposes in the 1970s. Currently, AUVs are becom-
Leonardo Da Vinci may have been the first to design ing increasingly commonplace for scientific, military,
an underwater vehicle. His efforts were recorded in the and commercial applications. Turnkey AUV systems for
Codice Atlantico (Codex Atlanticus), written between a range of tasks are available from commercial vendors,
1480 and 1518. Legends say that Leonardo worked on and AUV services can be acquired from a number of
the idea of an underwater military machine but he de- companies [43.5].
43.2 Underwater Robotics

43.2.1 Modeling Let us define η2 ∈ R3 as
A rigid body is completely described by its posi- η2 = (φ θ ψ)⊤

tion and orientation with respect to a reference frame
the vector of body Euler angle coordinates in a Earth-
Σi , Oi − xyz that is supposed to be Earth-fixed and
fixed reference frame. In the nautical field those are
inertial. Let us define η1 ∈ R3 as
commonly named roll, pitch, and yaw. Yaw is de-
η1 = (x y z)⊤ , fined as rotation around the z axis of the fixed frame;
the vector of the body position coordinates in an Earth- pitch is defined as rotation around the y axis resulting
fixed reference frame. The vector η̇1 is the corresponding after the yaw movement; and roll is defined as rota-
time derivative (expressed in the Earth-fixed frame). If tion around the x axis resulting after both yaw and
one defines pitch movements. The vector η̇2 is the corresponding
time derivative (expressed in the inertial frame). Let us
ν 1 = (u v w)⊤ define
as the linear velocity of the origin of the body-fixed ν 2 = ( p q r)⊤
frame Σb , Ob − xb yb z b with respect to the origin of
the Earth-fixed frame expressed in the body-fixed frame as the angular velocity of the body-fixed frame with
(from now on: body-fixed linear velocity) the following respect to the Earth-fixed frame expressed in the body-
relation between the defined linear velocities holds fixed frame (from now on: body-fixed angular velocity).
ν 1 = RB (43.1) The vector η̇2 does not have a physical interpretation
I η̇1 ,
and it is related to the body-fixed angular velocity by
where RB
I is the rotation matrix expressing the trans- a proper Jacobian matrix
formation from the inertial frame to the body-fixed
frame. ν 2 = J k,o (η2 )η̇2 . (43.2)
Table 43.2 Common notation for the motion of a marine

vehicle φ (roll)
Forces and ν1 , ν2 η1 , η2 υ (surge)
moments
θ (pitch) xb
Motion in the Surge X u x
x-direction υ (sway) ψ (yaw) η1
yb
Part F 43.2
Motion in the Sway Y v y

y-direction
ω (heave) x
Motion in the Heave Z w z
z-direction zb y
Rotation about Roll K p φ
the x-axis z
Rotation about Pitch M q θ Fig. 43.2 Motion variables for an underwater vehicle
the y-axis
Rotation about Yaw N r ψ of a four-parameter description given by quaternions.
the z-axis The term quaternion was introduced by Hamilton in
1840, 70 years after the introduction of a four-parameter
The matrix J k,o ∈ R3×3 can be expressed in terms of the rigid-body attitude representation by Euler. An intro-
Euler angles as duction to alternative orientation representations can be
  found in Chap. 1 and concerning the marine environment
1 0 −sθ in [43.7].
J k,o (η2 ) = 0 cφ cθ sφ  ,
 
(43.3) It is useful to collect the kinematic equations in
0 −sφ cθ cφ six-dimensional matrix forms. Let us define the vector
η ∈ R6 as
where cα and sα are abbreviations for cos(α) and sin(α), Ã !
respectively. The matrix J k,o (η2 ) is not invertible for η
η= 1 (43.6)
every value of η2 . In detail, it is η2
 
1 sφ sθ cφ sθ and the vector ν ∈ R6 as
1
J −1
k,o (η2 ) = 0 cφ cθ −cθ sφ  , (43.4)
 
cθ
Ã !
0 sφ cφ ν
ν= 1 , (43.7)
ν2
that it is singular for θ = (2l + 1)π/2 rad, with l ∈ N,
i. e., for a pitch angle of ±π/2 rad. and, defining the matrix J e (RIB ) ∈ R6×6
The rotation matrix RB I , needed in (43.1) to trans- Ã !
form the linear velocities, is expressed in terms of the RB 03×3
I I
Euler angles by J e (RB ) = , (43.8)
03×3 J k,o
RB (η2 ) =
I  where the rotation matrix RB
I is given in (43.5) and J k,o
cψ cθ sψ cθ −sθ is given in (43.3),
−sψ cφ + cψ sθ sφ cψ cφ + sψ sθ sφ sφ cθ  .
 
sψ sφ + cψ sθ cφ −cψ sφ + sψ sθ cφ cφ cθ ν = J e (RIB )η̇ . (43.9)

(43.5)
The inverse mapping, given the block-diagonal structure
Table 43.2 shows the common notation used for of J e , is given by
marine vehicles according to the Society of Naval Archi- Ã !
tects and Marine Engineers (SNAME) notation [43.6]; −1 I RIB 03×3
η̇ = J e (RB )ν = ν, (43.10)
a sketch is shown in Fig. 43.2. 03×3 J −1
k,o
As for any representation of a rigid body’s orien-
tation several possibilities arise, among them, the use where J −1
k,o is given in (43.4).
Defining as the hydrodynamics generalized forces, i. e., the forces

Ã ! and moments caused by the presence of the fluid. In
τ hydrodynamics it is common to assume that the gener-
τv = 1 ,
τ2 alized hydrodynamics forces on a rigid body can be
linearly superimposed [43.8]; in particular, those are
the vector of generalized forces, where
separated into radiation-induced forces, environmental
τ 1 = (X Y Z)⊤ , (43.11) disturbances, and restoring forces due to gravity and
Part F 43.2
buoyancy.
the resultant forces acting on the rigid body expressed Radiation-induced forces are defined as the forces
in a body-fixed frame, and on the body when the body is forced to oscillate with
τ 2 = (K M N)⊤ , (43.12) the wave excitation frequency and there are no incident
waves; these can be identified as the sum of the added
the corresponding resultant moment to the pole Ob , it mass due to the inertia of the surrounding fluid and the
is possible to rewrite the Newton–Euler equations of radiation-induced potential damping due to the energy
motion of a rigid body moving in the space as: dissipated by generated surface waves.
MRB ν̇ + C RB (ν)ν = τ v . (43.13) Environmental disturbances can be identified as the
generalized forces caused by the wind, the waves, and
The derivation of (43.13) can be found in Chap. 2. the ocean current.
The matrix MRB is constant, symmetric, and positive The overall equations of motions can therefore be
definite, i. e., ṀRB = 0 and MRB = M⊤ RB > 0. Its unique written in matrix form as [43.7, 9, 10]:
parametrization is of the form
Ã
b)
! Mv ν̇ + C v (ν)ν + Dv (ν)ν + gv (RIB ) = τ v , (43.16)
m I 3 −m S(r C
MRB = , (43.14)
m S(r bC ) I Ob where Mv = MRB + MA and C v = C RB + C A also in-
clude the added mass terms.
where r bCis the 3 × 1 distance vector to the center of
In the following subsections these generalized
gravity (CG) expressed in the body-fixed frame, I 3 is
forces, specific to the marine environment, will be briefly
the 3 × 3 identity matrix, and I Ob is the inertia tensor
discussed.
expressed in the body-fixed frame S(x) is the matrix op-
erator performing the cross product between two (3 × 1)
Added Mass and Inertia
vectors
  When a rigid body is moving in a fluid, the addi-
0 −x3 x2 tional inertia of the fluid surrounding the body that is
S(x) =  x3

0 −x1  .
 accelerated by the movement of the body has to be
−x2 x1 0 considered. This effect can be neglected in industrial
robotics since the density of the air is much lower than
On the other hand, there does not exist a unique the density of a moving mechanical system. In under-
parametrization of the matrix C RB , which represents the water applications, however, the density of the water,
Coriolis and centripetal terms. It can be demonstrated ρ ≈ 1000 kg/m3 , is comparable with the density of the
that the matrix C RB can always be parameterized such vehicles. In particular, at 0 ◦ C, the density of freshwater
that it is skew symmetric, i. e., is 1002.68 kg/m3 ; for sea water with 3.5% salinity it is
ρ = 1028.48 kg/m3 .
C RB (ν) = −C ⊤
RB (ν) ∀ν ∈ R6 ; (43.15)
The fluid surrounding the body is accelerated with
explicit expressions for C RB can be found in [43.7]. the body, so a force is necessary to achieve this accel-
Notice that (43.13) can be greatly simplified if the eration, while the fluid exerts a reaction force which is
origin of the body-fixed frame is chosen to be coincident equal in magnitude and opposite in direction. This re-
with the central frame, i. e., r bC = 0. action force is the added mass contribution. The added
mass is not a quantity of fluid to add to the system such
Hydrodynamic Generalized Forces that it has an increased mass. Different properties hold
Equation (43.13) represents the motion of a rigid body with respect to the 6 × 6 inertia matrix of a rigid body
in an empty space, while dealing with ships or underwa- due to the fact that the added mass is a function of the
ter vehicles requires the consideration of the presence of body’s surface geometry.
The hydrodynamic force along xb due to the linear the matrices MA can be considered:
acceleration in the xb -direction is defined as:  
X u̇ 0 X ẇ 0 X q̇ 0
∂X 
 0 Yv̇ 0 Y ṗ 0 Yṙ 

X A := −X u̇ u̇ , where X u̇ := ,
∂ u̇
 
 Z u̇ 0 Z ẇ 0 Z q̇ 0
MA = −   0 K 0 K 0
. (43.18)
where the symbol ∂ denotes the partial derivative. In the  v̇ ṗ K ṙ 

same way it is possible to define all the remaining 35
Part F 43.2
 
 Mu̇ 0 Mẇ 0 Mq̇ 0
elements that relate the six force/moment compo- 0 Nv̇ 0 N ṗ 0 Nṙ
nents (X Y Z K M N)⊤ to the six linear/angular
accelerations (u̇ v̇ ẇ ṗ q̇ ṙ)⊤ . These elements can be The added mass coefficients can theoretically be de-
grouped into the added mass matrix MA ∈ R6×6 . Usually, rived by exploiting the geometry of the rigid body or
all the elements of the matrix are nonzero. numerically by strip theory [43.16].
In general, added mass and potential damping will be In [43.17] the coefficients for the experimental AUV
frequency dependent and depend on the forward speed. Phoenix of the Naval Postgraduate School (NPS) are
This is also the case for certain viscous damping terms reported. These coefficients have been derived exper-
(skin friction, roll damping, etc.). This gives a pseudo imentally, and the geometry gives a nondiagonal MA
differential equation describing the frequency response matrix. To provide an order of magnitude for the added
of the vehicle. Since some of the coefficients depend on mass terms, for the vehicle mass of about 5000 kg, the
the frequency this is not an ordinary differential equa- X u̇ is approximately −500 kg.
tion (ODE). The frequency equation, however, can be The added mass also makes an added Coriolis and
transformed to the time domain using the concepts de- centripetal contribution. It can be demonstrated that the
scribed in [43.11] and [43.12], and recently in [43.13]. matrix expression can always be parameterized such that
The resulting equation is an ODE where the added inertia
matrix MA is constant, speed independent, and positive C A (ν) = −C ⊤
A (ν) , ∀ν ∈ R6 ,
definite:
whose symbolic expressions can be found in [43.3].
MA = M⊤ >0, ṀA = 0 . (43.17)
A Hydrodynamic Damping
The hydrodynamic damping for marine vehicles is
This result is well known from ship hydrodynam- mainly caused by
ics; see [43.14] for instance. The matrix MA can be
computed using numerical programs such as WAMIT • potential damping
or Matlab, based on the US Air Force Digital Dat- • skin friction
com [43.15]; in this case, the infinity-frequency result • wave drift damping
should be used, that is, MA = A(∞) where A(ω) is • vortex shedding damping
the frequency-dependent added mass matrix. The po- • viscous damping
tential damping matrix will be small compared to The radiation-induced potential damping due to
the viscous effects and drag/lift terms. Hence, this forced body oscillations is commonly known as potential
term can be set to zero for underwater vehicles. damping; its dynamic contribution is usually negligible
If the added mass is computed experimentally, it with respect to, e.g., the viscous friction for underwater
is common practice to symmetrize the results such vehicles while it may be significant for surface vessels.
that Linear skin friction is due to laminar boundary layers
1¡ and can affect the low-frequency motion of the vehicle.
Aexp + A⊤
¢
MA = exp , Together with this effect, at high frequencies it is pos-
2
sible to observe a quadratic, or nonlinear, skin friction
where Aexp denotes the experimentally obtained added phenomenon caused by turbulent boundary layers.
mass terms. Wave drift damping is the dominant dynamic damp-
If the body is completely submerged in the water ing effect in surge motion of surface vessels in high sea.
and is designed with port/starboard symmetry (xz- It can be considered as an added resistance for boats ad-
plane) as is common for underwater vehicles in six vancing in waves; its drift is proportional to the square
degrees-of-freedom (DOFs), the following structure of of the significant wave height. In the sway and yaw di-
Table 43.3 Lift and drag coefficient for a cylinder lift coefficient is approximatively proportional to α and
Reynolds number Regime motion Cd Cl
rapidly decays to zero as α increases [43.18].
The drag and lift coefficients are therefore dependent
Rn < 2 × 105 Subcritical flow 1 3 –0.6
on the Reynolds number, i. e., on the laminar/turbulent
2 × 105 < Rn < 5 × 105 Critical flow 1 –0.4 0.6
fluid motion
5 × 105 < Rn < 3 × 105 Transcritical flow 0.4 0.6
ρ|U|D
Rn = ,
µ
Part F 43.2
rections, however, its dynamic contribution is negligible
with respect to the effect of vortex shedding. where D is the characteristic dimension of the body
A body moving in a fluid causes a separation of perpendicular to the direction of U and µ is the dy-
the flow; this can still be considered as laminar in the namic viscosity of the fluid. Table 43.3 reports the drag
upstream while two antisymmetric vortices can be ob- coefficients as a function of the Reynolds number for
served in the downstream. In case that the body is a cylinder [43.19].
a cylinder moving in a direction normal to its axis, the re- A common simplification considers only linear and
sult is a periodic force normal to both the velocity and the quadratic damping terms and group these into a ma-
axis. This effect may cause the oscillation of cables and trix Dv as in (43.16) such that
other underwater structures. However, concerning un- Dv (ν) > 0 , ∀ν ∈ R6 .
derwater vehicles, this effect is negligible for ROVs and
may be counteracted by designing proper small control
surfaces for torpedo-like AUVs. Gravity and Buoyancy
Vortex shedding is an unsteady flow that takes place When a rigid body is completely or partially submerged
at special flow velocities (according to the size and shape in a fluid under the effect of the gravity two more forces
of the cylindrical body). In this flow vortices are created have to be considered: the gravitational force and buoy-
at the back of the body, periodically from each side. ancy. The latter is the only hydrostatic effect, i. e., it
The viscosity of the fluid also causes dissipative is not a function of the relative movement between the
forces. These are composed of drag and lift forces, the body and fluid.
former being parallel to the relative velocity of the vehi- Let us define as
cle with respect to the water while the latter are normal gI = (0 0 9.81)⊤ m/s2
to it. For a sphere moving in a fluid, the drag force can
be modeled as [43.8] the acceleration of gravity. This effect is not constant but
varies with depth, longitude, and latitude; however, this
1
Fdrag = ρU 2 SCd (Rn ) , (43.19) value is usually accurate enough for most applications
2 except for inertial navigation systems.
where ρ is the fluid density, U is the velocity of the For a completely submerged body the computation
sphere, S is the frontal area of the sphere, Cd is the of these dynamic effects is straightforward. The sub-
nondimensional drag coefficient, and Rn is the Reynolds merged weight of the body is defined as W = mkgI k,
number. For a generic body, S is the projection of the while its buoyancy B = ρ∇kgI k, where ∇ is the vol-
frontal area along the flow direction. The drag force ume of the body and m is its mass. The gravity force,
can be considered as the sum of two physical effects: which acts at the center of mass r B
C , is represented in the
the frictional contribution of the surface whose normal body-fixed frame by
is perpendicular to the flow velocity, and the pressure  
contribution of the surface whose normal is parallel to 0
the flow velocity. For a hydrofoil moving in a fluid, the f G (RB
I ) = RB 
I  0 ,
lift force can be modeled as [43.8] W
1 while the buoyancy force, acting at the center of buoy-
Flift = ρU 2 SCl (Rn , α) , (43.20)
2 ancy r B
B , is represented in the body-fixed frame by
 
where S is now the area, Cl is the nondimensional lift 0
coefficient, and α is the angle of attack, i. e., the an- f B (RB ) = −R B 
I I 0 .
gle between the relative velocity and the tangent to the

surface. For small angles of attack, i. e., |α| < 10◦ , the B
The 6 × 1 vector of force/moment due to gravity and Notice that the term C A (ν r )ν r includes the important
buoyancy in the body-fixed frame, included in the left- destabilizing effect known as the Munk moment [43.8].
hand side of the equations of motion, is represented If Dv (ν r ) is unknown, quadratic surge resistance and
by the cross-flow drag principle can be used to describe
Ã ! the dissipative forces and moments in surge, sway, and
B f G (RB
I ) + f B (RBI ) yaw [43.8]. Moreover:
gv (RI ) = − B .
r G × f G (RB B B
I ) + r B × f B (RI ) C A (ν r )ν r + Dv (ν r )ν r ≈ (X c Yc 0 0 0 Nc )⊤ ;
Part F 43.2
In the following, the symbol r B ⊤ (43.24)

G = (x G yG z G ) (with
rB
G = r B ) will be used for the center of gravity. The
C for large relative current angles |βc − ψ|, where βc is the
expression for gv in terms of the Euler angles is current direction, the cross-flow principles models the
sway force Yc and yaw moment Nc as
gv (η2 ) = Z
ρ
H(x)CD (x)vrx (x) ¯vrx (x)¯ dx
  ¯ ¯
(W − B)sθ Yc = (43.25)
2
−(W − B)cθ sφ
 
  ZL

−(W − B)cθ cφ
 ρ
x H(x)CD (x)vrx (x) ¯vrx (x)¯ dx ,
¯ ¯
Nc = (43.26)
 
−(y W − y B)c c + (z W − z B)c s  .
 
2
 G B θ φ G B θ φ L
 
 (z G W − z B B)sθ + (xG W − xB B)cθ cφ 
where L is the vehicle length, H(x) is the vehicle
−(xG W − xB B)cθ sφ − (yG W − yB B)sθ height, CD (x) is the two-dimensional drag coefficient,
(43.21) and vrx (x) = vr + rx is the relative cross-flow velocity
at x. In practice CD (x) can be chosen as a constant be-
tween 0 and 1. The proper value can be determined by
Current
curve fitting of experimental data. Along the surge direc-
Ocean currents are mainly caused by tidal movement,
tion, however, the quadratic damping contribution X c is
the atmospheric wind system over the sea surface, heat
still well represented by a term proportional to the square
exchange at the sea surface, salinity changes, the Cori-
of the relative velocity, whose symbolic expression can
olis force due to the Earth’s rotation, nonlinear waves,
be written as
the major ocean circulations such as the Gulf Stream,
the effect of setup phenomena or storm surges, and X c = −X u|u| u r |u r | , (43.27)
strong density gradients in the upper ocean. Currents
can be very different due to local climatic and/or ge- where −X u|u| > 0 is the quadratic surge damping
ographic characteristics; as an example, in fjords, the coefficient, which can be found by curve fitting of ex-
tidal effect can cause currents of up to 3 m/s, more- perimental data or relating it to the drag coefficient Cd
over, specific mathematical models exist for the various as in (43.19).
components [43.7]. Alternatively, the computation of the quadratic surge
Let us assume that the ocean current, expressed in resistance, nonlinear roll damping, and the cross-flow
the inertial frame, ν Ic , is constant and irrotational, i. e., drag effect can be made by resorting to the Datcom
database for aircraft, as shown in [43.20].
ν Ic = (νc,x νc,y νc,z 0 0 0)⊤
Model Properties
and ν̇ Ic = 0; its effects can be added to the dynamics of For completely submerged bodies in an ideal fluid mov-
a rigid body moving in a fluid simply by considering the ing at low velocity where there are no currents or
relative velocity in the body-fixed frame waves, (43.16) satisfies the following properties:
ν r = ν − RB I
I νc (43.22) • the inertia matrix is symmetric and positive definite,
i. e.,
in the derivation of the added Coriolis and centripetal
and the damping terms. Mv = M⊤
v >0;
Mv ν̇ + C RB (ν)ν + C A (ν r )ν r + Dv (ν r )ν r + gv (RIB ) • the damping matrix is positive definite, i. e.,

= τv . (43.23) Dv (ν) > 0 ;
• the matrix C v (ν) is skew symmetric, i. e., The control plant model is usually a simplified model
that captures the most important parts of the dynamics.
C v (ν) = −C ⊤ 6
v (ν), ∀ν ∈ R . The most accurate model of the vehicle should be used
for prediction and motion simulation.
Hydrodynamic Modeling
The mathematical model of an underwater robot as ex- 43.2.2 Sensor Systems
pressed in (43.16) is of great importance; even when
Part F 43.2
simplified it captures the most important part of the dy- Underwater vehicles are equipped with a sensor system
namics. Moreover, it is in a form appropriate for control devoted to enabling motion control as well as accom-
design. A wide literature exists on AUV/ROV controllers plishing the specific mission it has been commanded
whose stability relies on the properties reported above. to complete. In the latter case, sensors developed for
On the other hand, there are working conditions in which chemical/biological measurements or mapping may be
these assumptions are no longer valid, i. e., when the installed, which is beyond the scope of this chapter.
AUV is traveling at high speed, or close to the surface, AUVs need to operate underwater most of the time;
or when its shape does not allow geometric simplifica- one of the major problems with underwater robotics is
tions. The latter is the case of, e.g., several ROVs. In in the localization task due to the absence of a single,
addition, it is still common to design the controllers for proprioceptive sensor to measure the vehicle position.
AUVs based on linearized models and to control ROVs The global position system (GPS) cannot be used
with simple PID controllers. underwater. Redundant multisensor systems are com-
These considerations justify a modeling effort to cal- monly combined using state estimation or sensor fusion
culate the hydrodynamic terms more accurately with the techniques to provide fault detection and tolerance ca-
aim of prediction, simulation, and performance analysis pability to the vehicle. Table 43.4 lists the types of
rather than control design. This can be done by switching sensors and the corresponding variable measured com-
from a coefficient-based approach, such as that presented monly available for unmanned underwater vehicles
above, to a component modeling method, the latter being (UUVs).
based on computational fluid dynamics theory. In de- The sensors that can be found on an underwater
tail, each vehicle geometry, with its specific angle of vehicle are:
attack and sideslip, is taken into consideration when
computing the hydrodynamic forces/moments. This • Compass. A gyrocompass can provide an estimate
increased computational effort makes it possible to cap- of geodetic north accurate to a fraction of a de-
ture some dynamic effects, such as the vortex-induced gree. Magnetic compasses can provide estimates
roll moment, not justifiable with the coefficient-based of magnetic north with an accuracy of less than
approach. 1◦ if carefully calibrated to compensate for mag-
netic disturbances from the vehicle itself. Tables or
Table 43.4 UUVs: possible instrumentation models can be used to convert from magnetic north
to geodetic north.
Sensor Measured variable
• Inertial measurement unit (IMU). An IMU provides
Inertial system Linear acceleration and angular information about the vehicle’s linear accelera-
velocity tion and angular velocity. These measurements
Pressure meter Vehicle depth are combined to form estimates of the vehicle’s
Frontal sonar Distance from obstacles attitude including an estimate of geodetic (true)
Vertical sonar Distance from the bottom north from the most complex units. In most cases,
Ground speed sonar Relative velocity vehicle/bottom for slow-moving underwater vehicles, an indepen-
Current meter Relative velocity vehicle/current dent measurement of the vehicle’s velocity is also
Global positioning system Absolute position at the surface required to produce accurate estimates of the trans-
Compass Orientation lational velocity or relative displacement.
Acoustic baseline Absolute position in known area
• Depth sensor. Measuring the water pressure gives
the vehicle’s depth. At depths beyond a few hundred
Vision systems Relative position/velocity
meters, the equation of state of seawater must be in-
Acoustic Doppler current Water current at several positions
voked to produce an accurate depth estimate based
profiler on the ambient pressure [43.21]. With a high-quality
Table 43.5 JHUROV instrumentation

Measured Sensor Precision Update
variable rate
3-DOF vehicle SHARP acoustic 0.5 cm 10 Hz
position transponder
Depth Foxboro/ICT 2.5 cm 20 Hz
Part F 43.2
model n. 15
Heading Litton LN200 0.01◦ 20 Hz
IMU Gyro
Roll and pitch KVH ADGC 0.1◦ 10 Hz
Heading KVH ADGC 1◦ 10 Hz
Table 43.6 ODIN III sensors summary

Measured variable Sensor Update rate
Fig. 43.3 The fully actuated AUV ODIN (courtesy of the
xy vehicle position 8 sonars 3 Hz Autonomous Systems Laboratory, University of Hawaii,
Depth Pressure sensor 30 Hz http://www.eng.hawaii.edu/∼asl/)
Roll, pitch, and yaw IMU 30 Hz
• Vision systems. Cameras can be used to obtain esti-
mates of relative, and in some cases absolute, motion
sensor, these estimates are reliable and accurate, using a type of simultaneous localization and map-
giving a small error of order 0.01%. ping (SLAM) algorithm [43.22] and used to perform
• Altitude and forward-looking sonar. These are used tasks such as visual tracking of pipelines, station
to detect the presence of obstacles and distance from keeping, visual servoing or image mosaicking.
the seafloor.
• Doppler velocity log (DVL). By processing reflected As an example, Table 43.5 reports some data from
acoustic energy from the seafloor and the water col- the instrumentation of the ROV developed at the John
umn from three or more beams, estimates of vehicle Hopkins University [43.23], and Table 43.6 some data
velocity relative to the seafloor and relative water from the AUV ODIN III [43.24]. Reference [43.25]
motion can be obtained. Bottom-tracking velocity shows some data fusion results with a redundant sen-
estimates can be accurate to ≈ 1 mm/s. sorial system mounted on the AUV Oberon, while
• Global positioning system (GPS). This is used to reference [43.26] reviews advances in navigation tech-
localize the vehicle while on the surface to initial- nology.
ize or reduce drift of estimates from an IMU/DVL
combination. GPS only works at the surface. 43.2.3 Actuating Systems
• Acoustic positioning. A variety of schemes exist for
determining vehicle position using acoustics. Long- Marine vehicle are generally propelled by means of
baseline navigation can determine the position of thrusters or hydrojets. In the case of ROVs with struc-
the vehicle relative to a set of acoustic beacons an- tural pitch–roll stability, there are usually four thrusters
chored to the seafloor or on the surface through that provide holonomic mobility to the four remained
range estimates obtained from acoustic travel times. DOFs, in particular, the depth is often decoupled and
Ultrashort-baseline navigation uses phase infor- the vehicle is controlled on a plane in the surge, sway,
mation to determine direction from a cluster of and yaw DOFs. Those vehicles, being underactuated,
hydrophones; this is most often used to determine cannot easily be used for interactive control by means of
the direction of the vehicle (in two dimensions) from a manipulator due to the impossibility of counteracting
a surface support vessel, which is then combined the generalized forces exchanged with the manipulator’s
with an acoustic travel-time measurement to produce base; in such case, six or more thrusters are required.
an estimate of relative vehicle position in spherical AUVs generally have a torpedo-like shape and are used
coordinates. These techniques will be discussed later for mapping/exploration. They are propelled using one
in the localization section. or two thrusters parallel to the fore–aft direction and
KT, 10KQ, η0
ua 0.8
up 0.7
0.6
Part F 43.2
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
u 0.1
Fig. 43.4 Ambient water and axial flow velocities affecting 0
thruster behavior –0.6 –0.4 –0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
J0
a fin and a rudder; this kind of propulsion is obviously Fig. 43.5 Values of K T (solid), 10K Q (dotted), and η0 (dash-dotted)
nonholonomic and experiences a loss of mobility at low as a function of J0 [43.27]
velocities. Hydrojets, also known as pump jets or water
jets, are systems that create a jet of water for propul- case of steady-state motion, i. e., u̇ = 0, the ambient wa-
sion; they have certain advantages over thrusters such as ter velocity u a is related to the surge by the wake fraction
a higher power density and usability in shallow water, number w as:
but can provide thrust in one direction only.
u a = (1 − w)u . (43.28)
Several efforts have been made to accurately
and efficiently describe the mathematical model of Notice also that the unmeasured variable u p can be
a thruster; [43.28] reports a one-state model where the estimated using a nonlinear observer [43.31].
state is n, the propeller shaft speed. In [43.29] a two-state The outputs of the nonlinear three-state dynamic
model is proposed to take into account the experimen- systems are the thrust T and the torque Q, which
tally observed overshoot in the thrust; together with n, are functions of several variables; in the following,
the additional state variable is u p , the axial flow velocity unsteady flow effects such as air suction, cavitation,
in the propeller disc. In [43.30] a thruster model incorpo- the in-and-out-of-water (Wagner), boundary layer, and
rating the effects of rotational fluid velocity and inertia gust (Kuessner) effects will be neglected. This leads to
on thruster responses is presented together with a method a quasi-steady representation of the model:
for experimentally determining nonsinusoidal lift/drag
curves. A three-state model is described in [43.31]: T = ρ D4 K T (J0 )n |n| , (43.29)
5
Q = ρ D K Q (J0 )n |n| , (43.30)
Jm ṅ + K n n = τ − Q ,
¯ ¯
m f u̇ p + d f 0 u p + d f ¯u p ¯ (u p − u a ) = T , where D is the propeller diameter and K T (J0 ) and
K Q (J0 ) are the thrust and torque coefficients, respec-
(m − X u̇ )u̇ − X u u − X u|u| u |u| = (1 − t)T , tively. The latter are function of the advance ratio J0
where Jm is the moment of inertia for the dc- ua
J0 = . (43.31)
motor/propeller, K n is the linear motor damping nD
coefficient, τ is the motor control input, Q is the pro- The open-water propeller efficiency in undisturbed wa-
peller torque, m f is the mass of water in the propeller ter is given as the ratio of the work done by the propeller
control volume, u p is the axial flow velocity in the pro- in producing a thrust force divided by the work required
peller disc, d f 0 and d f are the linear and quadratic to overcome the shaft torque:
damping coefficients for control volume, respectively,
ua T J0 K T
u a is the ambient water velocity, T is the propeller thrust, η0 = = · . (43.32)
and t is the thrust deduction number (Fig. 43.4). In the 2πn Q 2π K Q
Guidance system Control system Disturbances
Way points
Trajectory Control
Autopilot ROV/AUV
generator allocation
Part F 43.2
Navigation system
Observer Sensors
Fig. 43.6 Guidance, navigation, and control for an autonomous marine vehicle
Figure 43.5 shows the values of K T , K Q , and η0 as As for most advanced robotics applications, an ef-
functions of the advance ratio for the Wageningen B4-70 ficient MCS should allow the use of complex robotic
propeller [43.27]. systems by users that do not necessarily know all of
Controlling a marine vehicle usually requires that their technical details. An overview relevant to un-
desired forces/moments act on the vehicle’s body; these derwater mission control is given in [43.33], which
generalized forces are mapped into desired thrusts to be includes an interesting classification of the MSCs
provided by the propellers. There is, thus, a nontrivial in use in several laboratories according to which
control problem in that the motors are required to pro- four major AUV control architectures were identified:
vide the appropriate propeller shaft speed n that satisfies the hierarchical, heterarchical, subsumption, and hy-
the nonlinear relationship with the thrust T presented brid.
above. From a mathematical point of view, the MCS gener-
To enable robustness with respect to possible fail- ally needs to be designed in order to be able to address
ures, the actuating system is often redundant. In this case, hybrid dynamical systems, i. e., handling both event-
the problem of allocation of the desired force/moment driven and time-driven processes. In [43.34], e.g., the
acting on the vehicle among the thrusters must also be MSC developed at the Portuguese Instituto Superior
solved. Reference [43.32] reports a survey of control Técnico (IST), named CORAL, is implemented by re-
allocation methods of ships and underwater vehicles. sorting to a Petri-net-based architecture that properly
handles all the necessary tasks in order to manage
43.2.4 Mission Control System navigation, guidance and control, sensing, communi-
cations, etc.
The mission control system (MCS) can be considered The motion-oriented operating system (MOOS), de-
as the highest-level process running during an AUV’s signed at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, is
mission; it is responsible for achieving several control a software tool capable of executing and coordinating
objectives. At the highest level it works as an inter- a multitude of subsea operations. The MSC developed at
face between the operator, accepting his instructions in the Naval Postgraduate School is in the framework of the
a higher-level language and decomposing those instruc- behavioral control organized in three layers [43.35]; it
tions into mission tasks according to the implemented is based on PROLOG, an artificial intelligence language
software architecture. The mission tasks are generally for predicate logic.
concurrent and their handling depends on the vehi-
cle state and environmental conditions; it is therefore 43.2.5 Guidance and Control
the MCS that handles the tasks, eventually suppress-
ing, sequencing, modifying, and prioritizing them. An The terms guidance and control can be defined as [43.7]:
MCS is also usually equipped with a graphical user
interface (GUI) to report the mission state to the op- Guidance is the action of determining the course, at-
erator. titude, and speed of the vehicle, relative to
some reference frame (usually the Earth), to the docking maneuver with algorithms designed on the
be followed by the vehicle, scope [43.41].
Control is the development and application to a ve- By combining vision-based guidance with a neuro-
hicle of appropriate forces and moments controller trained by reinforcement learning, in [43.42],
for operating point control, tracking, and an algorithm aimed at a hold station on a reef or
stabilization. This involves designing the swimming along a pipe has been presented. In [43.43]
feedforward and feedback control laws. guidance for AUVs specifically involved in a pre-
Part F 43.2
deployment survey of the sea bottom and visual
Figure 43.6 shows the corresponding block diagram, in inspection of pipelines is given. Reference [43.44]
which the navigation component is also outlined. reports a specific guidance system aimed at mine
avoidance for AUVs. Based on a three-dimensional
Guidance of Underwater Vehicles discretization of the environment, the path-planning
Guidance algorithms may benefit from a wide range of technique consists of computing a safe path avoiding
inputs, overall mission information, real-time operator the unsafe cells of the map. Due to the poor manoeuvra-
input, environmental measured data such as the ocean bility at low speed under some conditions, the vehicle
current, environmental topological information such as has to make a 360◦ turn to avoid stopping and to map the
a bathymetric map, exteroceptive sensors for obstacle environment close to it before generating a safe path.
avoidance, and obviously the vehicle state as output from A deep discussion on guidance for surface and un-
the navigation system. derwater vehicles can be found in [43.3, 7].
The vehicle may be required to follow a path, i. e.,
a curve geometrically represented in two or three di- Control of Underwater Vehicles
mensions, or a trajectory, i. e., a path with a specific Control of underwater vehicles needs to consider the dif-
time law assigned. Moreover, when the desired position ferent operating conditions and actuating configurations
is constant, the problem is called set-point regulation or in which a submerged vehicle is required to operate. In
maneuvering. The guidance problem is commonly de- particular, there are three main control problems.
composed into simple subtasks of lower dimension: an
attitude control problem and a path control. Moreover,
• An AUV traveling at high speed (> 1 m/s) generally
equipped with at least one thruster aligned in the
attitude is usually considered as a simple depth set-point
fore–aft direction and at least two control surfaces
with null roll and pitch and the path is usually a line in
(stern and rudder).
the horizontal plane.
One of the most common guidance approaches is
• An underactuated ROV, with high metacentric sta-
bility, i. e., structurally stable in roll and pitch, and
based on the generations of way-points. Those are
equipped with at least four thrusters.
usually stored in a database and are used to gen-
erate the vehicle path/trajectory; a passing velocity,
• A fully actuated AUV equipped with at least six
trusters.
in fact, may be defined together with the Cartesian
coordinates of the points. The simplest way to con- AUVs equipped with control surfaces are under-
nect the way-points is to use the segments connecting actuated vehicles mainly used for survey/exploration
two successive way-points. Efficient way-point-based missions. Inheriting the common practice of submarine
guidance approaches need to take into account the control, they are not allowed to perform arbitrary mo-
presence of the current and the eventual nonholonomic- tions in six DOFs but are rather designed to perform
ity of the vehicle [43.36]. A technique for adaptively specific movements such as: cruising along a given di-
tracking bathymetric contours by proper generation of rection at constant depth, steering at constant depth,
way-points is presented in [43.37]; environment in- or diving. Marine experience and mathematical insight,
formation is acquired by mean of a single vertical in fact, demonstrate that these movements are lightly
sonar. An alternative method is based on line-of-sight coupled in dynamic terms. For these vehicles, moreover,
guidance [43.38–40]. In this case, the heading con- specific manoeuvres such as homing or docking require
trol is computed by considering as input the angle special capabilities [43.41]. This requires the design of
formed by the vector from the vehicle to the next vehicles that are structurally stable in the roll DOF.
way-point rather than requiring the vehicle to exactly Cruising requires control of the surge velocity u(t);
follow the line segment between the current and the steering requires control of the sway velocity v(t) and
following way-point. Special care needs to be paid to the yaw DOF r(t), ψ(t), diving requires control of the
heave DOF ω(t), z(t) and the pitch DOF q(t), θ(t). similar properties as the equations of motion of an indus-
The simplest configuration of actuators that can con- trial manipulator. Based on this, it is obviously possible
trol an AUV through these movements is composed of to find a collection of approaches inherited from clas-
one thruster aligned along the fore–aft direction, one sical robotics, see, e.g., [43.3, 7] for some examples.
stern, and one rudder; the control variables, thus, are the In [43.49], some specific considerations for the under-
propeller speed and the deflection of the fins. Several water environment lead to a quaternion-based, adaptive
approaches can then be considered to solve this con- controller; it is worth noticing that adaptive control
Part F 43.2
trol problem, among them, in [43.45] the sliding mode requires a suitable, and simplified, expression for the
control is proposed, while [43.46] presents an adaptive hydrodynamic terms. In [43.50] a comparison among
sliding mode control for the diving manoeuvre. Ref- several 6-DOF controllers is made.
erence [43.17] reports a successful implementation of
multivariable sliding mode control on the NPS AUV II, 43.2.6 Localization
later also implemented on the NPS ARIES AUV [43.47].
As the model of an AUV traveling at high speed is Localization in the underwater environment can be
nonlinear and coupled, the tuning of the parameters is a complex task, mainly due to the absence of a sin-
mainly based on a linearized model around the working gle external sensor that gives the vehicle position such
conditions. as, e.g., the GPS for outdoor ground vehicles; moreover,
From a descriptive point of view, an ROV is mainly the environment is often poorly structured.
a box-shaped underwater vehicle equipped with tools One of the most reliable methods is based on
such as a video camera or robot manipulator, while its the use of acoustic systems such as the baseline
payload is often variable depending on the task. It is systems: the long-baseline system (LBL), the short-
remotely operated and physically connected to another baseline system (SBL), and the ultrashort-baseline
vehicle, either an underwater or a surface vessel. It is system (USBL). These systems are based on the pres-
mainly designed to travel at low speed and it is struc- ence of a transceiver mounted on the vehicle and
turally stable in roll and pitch, while its depth, surge, a variable number of transponders located in known po-
sway, and yaw are independently controllable. Due to sitions. The transceiver’s distance from each transponder
the absence of a specific shape, the varying payload, and can be measured via the measurement of an echo delay;
the relatively low required performances, it is common from this information the position of the vehicle can be
to control a ROV by means of single-input single-output calculated by basic triangulation operations. The USBL
(SISO) controllers. Moreover, the PID approach is of- can be used with a single transponder, which is usually
ten used due to its simplicity. A two-layer guidance mounted on a surface ship whose position is measured
and control architecture for the ROV Romeo is given by GPS.
in [43.48]. Another localization system is called terrain-aided
Control of a fully actuated AUV in six DOFs is navigation and is based on the use of terrain elevation
needed in the case of, e.g., an interaction task per- maps; bathymetric maps are available, especially in the
formed by a manipulator mounted on a vehicle; the case of well-known locations such as harbors where
latter, in fact, needs to provide all the force/moment they usually have a resolution of ≈ 1 m. In this case,
components in order to counteract the presence of the the vehicle position is obtained by filtering the informa-
manipulator dynamically. This problem is kinematically tion coming from a downward-looking sonar. In [43.51],
similar to the problem of controlling a satellite in six a particle filter approach was used to localize an AUV
DOFs; the underwater environment, however, makes in Sydney harbor.
it significatively different from the dynamic point of Moving vehicles may be equipped with an IMU or
view. In kinematic terms the main issue is in imple- DVL in order to measure its velocity and/or acceleration.
menting a suitable policy for orientation control; any This data can then be integrated to estimate the vehicle
three-parameter representation of orientation, in fact, position. This kind of information is subject to the drift
experiences representation singularities (Chap. 1). This phenomenon and may not be reliable for long-duration
problem may be overcome by resorting to a redundant runs or may become cost ineffective if accurate IMU
representation of the orientation such as the quaternion. devices are needed.
Most of the six-DOF controllers proposed in the litera- Relative localization can be obtained by resorting to
ture are based on (43.16), which model the simplified any device that provides information about the relative
effect of the hydrodynamic terms and which have very position of the vehicle with respect to the environment,
even in the absence of a map. In this case, by filtering case, the vehicle needs to be fully actuated to counteract
the distance measurements taken along the motion, the the forces and moments generated by the manipulator’s
vehicle’s position can be measured. This is the case, e.g., base. By considering a manipulator with n links, thus
of sonar or vision-based localization techniques [43.52]. six DOFs, the underwater vehicle manipulator system
Often, the techniques presented above are used to- (UVMS) is a (6 + n)-DOF robotic system whose velocity
gether in a redundant system and the effective position vector is
is obtained by resorting to sensor fusion techniques such
ζ = (ν ⊤ ⊤ ⊤ ⊤
Part F 43.2
as the Kalman filtering approach. 1 ν 2 q̇ ) , (43.33)
where q ∈ Rn is the vector collecting the manipulator

Simultaneous Localization and Mapping
joints positions.
Simultaneous localization and mapping (SLAM), also
Repeating the same considerations as for an under-
known as concurrent mapping and localization (CML),
water vehicle, it is possible to write the equations of
is a wide topic in mobile robotics. The problem can
motions of an UVMS in matrix form as
be formulated as the requirement for a mobile robot
to be placed in an unknown environment and progres- M(q)ζ̇ + C(q, ζ)ζ + D(q, ζ)ζ + g(q, RIB ) = τ ,
sively build a map while locating itself inside the map. (43.34)
Chapter 37 discusses this topic in detail. For the ma-
rine environment an additional issue arises due by the where M ∈ R(6+n)×(6+n) is the inertia matrix, including
large-scale map that needs to be used for long-duration added mass terms, C(q, ζ)ζ ∈ R6+n is the vector of the
missions; [43.53] implements a decoupled stochastic Coriolis and centripetal terms, D(q, ζ)ζ ∈ R6+n is the
mapping to handle this computational problem in an vector of dissipative effects, and g(q, RB
I ) ∈ R
6+n is the
extended Kalman filter. Terrain-aided navigation with vector of gravity and buoyancy effects. The relationship
the use of a scanning sonar is implemented in [43.54]. between the generalized forces τ and the control input
Reference [43.55] uses long-baseline range measure- is given by:
ments as the input for a nonlinear least-squares approach Ã ! Ã !
solved by the Gauss–Newton method; both the initially τv Bv 06×n
τ= = u = Bu , (43.35)
unknown position of the transponders and the vehicle po- τq 0n×6 I n
sition are estimated. An interesting survey on navigation
and SLAM for underwater vehicles is given in [43.26]. where u ∈ R pv +n is the vector of the control input. No-
tice that, while for the vehicle a generic number pv ≥ 6
43.2.7 Underwater Manipulation of control inputs is assumed, for the manipulator it is
supposed that n joint motors are available.
A manipulator may be mounted on an AUV or a ROV Under this hypothesis, which can be considered as
in order to accomplish interaction operations. In this reasonable at low velocity, it holds that:
Fig. 43.7 An underwater vehicle–

manipulator system: SAUVIM
(courtesy of Autonomous Systems
Laboratory, University of Hawaii,
http://www.eng.hawaii.edu/∼asl/)
• the inertia matrix M of the system is symmetric and ratory, University of Hawaii. A similar research project,
positive definite; ALIVE, was funded by the Fifth Framework Program
• for a suitable choice of the parametrization of C and of the European Community [43.2].
if all the single bodies of the system are symmetric,
Ṁ − 2C is skew symmetric; 43.2.8 Fault Detection/Tolerance
• the matrix D is positive definite.
Generally, AUVs must operate over long periods of
In [43.19] the mathematical model written with re-
Part F 43.2
time in unstructured environments in which an unde-

spect to the Earth-fixed-frame vehicle position and the
tected failure could cause the loss of the vehicle. Failure
manipulator end-effector can be found. However, it must
detection and a fault-tolerant strategy are required to de-
be noted that, in this case, a six-dimensional manipu-
termine whether a mission must be terminated in the
lator is considered in order to have a square Jacobian to
safest manner possible or if the vehicle can continue in
work with; moreover, kinematic singularities need to be
a diminished capacity. An example is the case of the
avoided.
arctic mission of Theseus [43.57].
The equations of motion of UVMSs in matrix form
In the case of the use of ROVs, a skilled human op-
presented in (43.34) are formally similar to the equa-
erator is in charge of commanding the vehicle; a failure
tions of motion of ground fixed manipulators (Chap. 2)
detection strategy is then of help in the human decision-
for which a wide control literature exists. This has sug-
making process. Based on the information detected, the
gested a suitable translation/implementation of existing
operator can decide on vehicle rescue or to terminate the
control algorithms. However, some differences, crucial
mission by, e.g., turning off a thruster.
from the control aspect, need to be underlined. UVMSs
Fault detection is the process of monitoring a system
are complex systems characterized by several strong
in order to recognize the presence of a failure; fault iso-
constraints:
lation or diagnosis is the capability to determine which
• uncertainty in the model knowledge, mainly due to specific subsystem is subject to failure. Often in the lit-
the poor knowledge about the hydrodynamic effects erature there is a certain overlap in the use of these terms.
• the complexity of the mathematical model Fault tolerance is the capability to complete the mission
• the kinematic redundancy of the system in the case of the failure of one or more subsystems; it
• the difficulty in controlling the vehicle in hovering, is also known as fault control, fault accommodation, or
mainly due to poor thruster performance control reconfiguration. In the following the terms fault
• the dynamic coupling between the vehicle and the detection/tolerance will be used.
manipulator The characteristics of a fault detection scheme are
• the low bandwidth of the sensor readings the capability to isolate the detected failure, sensitivity
in terms of the magnitude of the failure that can be de-
In 1996 McLain et al. [43.56] presented a control law tected, and robustness in the sense of the capability to
for UVMSs with some interesting experimental results continue working properly in non-nominal conditions.
conducted at the Monterey Bay Aquarium Research In- The requirements of a fault-tolerant scheme are reliabil-
stitute (MBARI). A one-link manipulator was mounted ity, maintainability, and survival. The common concept
on the OTTER vehicle controlled in all six DOFs by is that, to overcome the loss of capability due to a failure,
means of eight thrusters. A coordinated control system a kind of redundancy is required in the system.
was then implemented to improve the tracking errors of In this section, a survey of existing fault-detection
the end effector. and fault-tolerant schemes for underwater vehicles is
The monograph [43.50] is focused on the modeling presented. For these specific systems, if proper strate-
and control issues of such systems, and can be con- gies are applied, a hardware/software (HW/SW) sensor
sidered as a reference for further reading. Moreover, or thruster failure can be successfully handled. In some
interaction with the environment is also discussed. conditions, the fault-detection scheme must also be
Currently, remotely operated manipulator are stand- able to diagnose some external abnormal working con-
ard equipment for several underwater ROVs. However, ditions such as a multipath phenomena affecting the
autonomous manipulation is still a research challenge. echo-sounder system. It is worth noticing that, for au-
Figure 43.7 shows the SAUVIM vehicle, one of the tonomous systems such as AUVs, space systems or
first semiautonomous underwater vehicle manipulator aircraft, a fault-tolerant strategy is necessary to safely
systems, developed at the Autonomous Systems Labo- recover the damaged vehicle and, obviously, there is no
Underwater Robotics 43.3 Applications 1003
panic button in the sense that the choice of turning off the A possible consequence of different failures of
power or activating some kind of brake is not available. the thrusters is the zeroing of the blade rotation. The
Most fault-detection schemes are model based [43.58, thruster in question thus simply stops working. This
59] and consider the dynamic relationship between has been intentionally experienced during experiments
the actuators and vehicle behavior or the specific with, e.g., ODIN [43.59, 61], Roby 2 [43.58], and
input–output thruster dynamics. In general, fault- Romeo [43.62].
detection/tolerance theory has been applied to the Other failures include a hardware/software crash or
Part F 43.3
specific case of the underwater environment even if only the occurrence of fin sticking or loss. A very common
a few papers report experimental results; see [43.60] for type of failure involves the loss of electrical isolation
a survey on this topic. due to seawater intrusion into underwater electrical ca-
Most fault-tolerant schemes consider a thruster- bles or connectors. Such a condition can be detected
redundant vehicle that, after a fault has occurred in one of through a technique called ground-fault monitoring.
its thrusters, is still actuated in six DOFs. Based on this Should this occur, electrical power must be removed
assumption a reallocation of the desired forces on the from the affected device.
vehicle over the working thrusters is performed [43.61].
Of interest is also the study of reconfiguration strategies 43.2.9 Multiple Underwater Vehicles
if the vehicle becomes underactuated.
A growing research effort has recently been devoted
Possible Failures to developing strategies to design coordinated control
Underwater vehicles are currently equipped with several for underwater vehicles. The use of multiple AUVs,
sensors in order to provide information about their lo- in fact, might improve overall mission performance as
calization and velocity. The problem is not easy. No well as provide greater tolerance to failures (Chap. 40).
single, reliable sensor is available that gives the re- Specific applications of this method in the underwater
quired position/velocity measurement, or information environment might include the naval mine counter-
about the environment such as the presence of obstacles. measure problem, harbor monitoring, and inspection,
For this reason the use of sensor fusion by, e.g., a Kalman exploration, and mapping of large areas. AUVs might
filtering approach, is a common technique to provide be coordinated with one or more surface vessels or con-
the controller with the required variables. This struc- nected to ground or aerial vehicles to form a coordinated
tural redundancy can be used to provide fault-detection network of heterogeneous autonomous robots.
capabilities to the system. Beside several institutions that have developed sim-
For each of the sensors listed in Sect. 43.2.2 failure ulation packages for multiple-AUV operations, the use
can consist of an output of zero if, e.g., there is an elec- of real multiple AUVs is being considered for the adap-
trical trouble, or a loss of meaning. It can be considered tive sampling and forecasting plan of the Autonomous
as sensor failure also an external disturbance such as Ocean Sampling Network, formed by several research
a multipath reading of the sonar that can be interpreted institutions such as (for the robotic components) Cal-
as a sensor fault and correspondingly detected. tech, MBARI, Princeton, and WHOI [43.63]. Adaptive
Thruster blocking occurs when a solid body is sampling is also being investigated at the Autonomous
present between the propeller blades. It can be checked Systems and Controls Laboratory of Virginia Tech,
by monitoring the current required by the thruster. This which has developed five AUVs [43.64]. The Australian
was observed, e.g., during the Antarctic mission of National University is currently working on a shoal of
Romeo [43.62], in that case caused by a block of ice. small, autonomous robots, named Serafina [43.65]. At
During the same mission a thruster also flooded with Instituto Superior Técnico (IST), work is ongoing on the
water. The consequence was an electrical dispersion, coordination between an AUV and a catamaran [43.66],
causing an increasing blade rotation velocity and thus i. e., a multirobot system constituted by heterogeneous
a thruster force higher then desired. autonomous vehicles.
43.3 Applications
Underwater robots currently play prominent roles in Remotely teleoperated vehicles are very well established
a number of scientific, commercial, and military tasks. in all these areas, and are becoming increasingly auto-
mated to relieve the burden on human operators and to lowed by careful excavation. Beyond diver depths, ROVs
improve performance. Increasingly, autonomous under- are the preferred method for these investigations. Great
water vehicles are finding application in these areas as progress has been made in the detailed mapping phase,
well. Presently, AUVs are used almost exclusively for and capabilities for excavation are evolving. Unfortu-
survey work, but sampling and other intervention tasks nately, the same technology also opens the possibility
are becoming more feasible. Additionally, the line be- for shipwrecks to be looted for financial gain, which
tween ROVs and AUVs continues to blur, as systems usually results in the loss of the most valuable historical
Part F 43.3
that have the best properties of both evolve. information.

The offshore oil and gas industry relies heavily on After a long period of skepticism, AUVs are now
ROVs for installation, inspection, and servicing of plat- accepted for scientific tasks. Presently, AUVs most of-
forms, pipelines, and subsea production facilities. As the ten perform mapping tasks while tended by a vessel.
search for oil and gas goes deeper, this trend can only Specific mapping tasks include seafloor bathymetry,
continue. The Marine Technology Society estimates that sidescan sonar imaging, magnetic field mapping, hy-
there are over 435 work-class ROVs operating in the drothermal vent localization, and photo surveys. AUVs
commercial offshore industry today. AUVs are now be- have been shown to improve productivity and data qual-
ginning to appear in the commercial offshore industry ity compared to towed and tethered systems. They have
for survey tasks, and concepts for hybrid systems that also operated in environments where no other means of
can perform intervention tasks are now appearing. The gathering data is possible, such as under ice shelves.
goal is not only for these robotic vehicles to replace Likewise, the increasing availability of sophisticated
human divers or human-occupied vehicles, but to en- in situ chemical sensors, biological sensors, and mass
able an entire new generation of subsea equipment that spectrometers now allows AUVs to build spatial and
is serviced without intervention by drill ships or other temporal maps of environmental features that could pre-
heavy-lifting vessels. This holds the prospect of greatly viously only be studied by bringing samples back to
reduced cost. the laboratory. Plans are now underway for AUVs that
Scientific demand for ROVs and AUVs is also in- can dock to subsea moorings or observatory nodes to
creasing dramatically. Scientific applications for ROVs recharge batteries and receive new instructions.
include survey, inspection, and sampling tasks previ- The military has always been a leader in the develop-
ously performed by human-occupied submersibles or ment of underwater robotic capabilities. They pioneered
towed vehicles. While ROVs operating for science are ROVs for tasks such as recovering test weapons and
not nearly as numerous as those in the offshore oil and deep-sea salvage, and present-day commercial and sci-
gas industry, they are becoming commonplace. Most na- entific ROVs have descended directly from these early
tions involved in global seafloor studies have several systems. Likewise, military interests are presently push-
vehicles. Like the vehicles for the commercial off- ing AUV technology very hard. Many different countries
shore sector, these vehicles are becoming increasingly operate AUVs for military surveys, gathering environ-
automated. High-quality electronic imaging, includ- mental data as well as searching for hazards such as
ing high-definition television, is becoming increasingly mines. An operational success was achieved in sur-
common. Scientific ROVs are now equipped with so- veying for mines in the Persian Gulf harbor of Umm
phisticated sampling devices for sampling animals, Qasr using REMUS vehicles. AUVs in development
microbes, caustic hydrothermal vent fluids, and a variety will not only be able to detect mines, but to disable
of rock samples. Moreover, ROVs are also used to deploy them. Bolder, more innovative concepts are also in de-
and operate seafloor experiments, which can involve dif- velopment. These include networks of AUVs that can
ficult tasks such as drilling and delicate placement of act as extensions of conventional surface vessels and
instruments. submarines, enabling surveillance over wide areas for
ROVs have also emerged as powerful tools for inves- extended periods of time at costs far less than could
tigating underwater shipwrecks and other cultural sites. be achieved with conventional surface vessels, sub-
Applications include forensic investigations of modern marines, and aircraft. These developments will rely on
shipwrecks to determine the cause of sinking, archae- improvements in acoustic communications, energy sys-
ology, and salvage. For archaeology, the goals are the tems, sensors, and onboard intelligence that will likely
same as for excavation on land: detailed mapping fol- find their way into commercial and scientific practice.
Underwater Robotics References 1005
43.4 Conclusions and Further Reading

The underwater environment is extremely hostile for • Battery-operated ROVs can communicate with
human engineering activities. In addition to high pres- the surface by very lightweight fiber-optic links,
sures and hydrodynamic forces that are both nonlinear enabling the mobility of an AUV but with a high-
and unpredictable, water is not an appropriate media for bandwidth connection to skilled human operators
electromagnetic communication except at short ranges. for complex intervention or scientific sampling
Part F 43
This pushes underwater technology to rely on acoustic tasks.
communication and positioning systems that are charac- • Acoustic and optical data links can provide moder-
terized by low bandwidth. On the other hand, the ocean ate to high communication bandwidths over short
is extremely important for numerous human activities ranges, enabling human supervision without any
from the commercial, cultural, and environmental points tether restrictions. At longer ranges, more modest
of view. acoustic bandwidths are available.
Research on underwater robotic applications is ac- These developments make marine robotics a challenging
tive both from the technological and methodological engineering problem with strong connections to several
aspects. The power endurance of commercially AUVs engineering domains. Sending an autonomous vehicle
is currently up to 50 h; this will increase as energy- into an unknown and unstructured environment with
storage devices improve. Improved energy and power limited online communication requires some onboard
capability will enable longer missions, higher speeds, intelligence and the ability for the vehicle to react in
or better/additional sensors such as, e.g., more powerful a reliable way to unexpected situations [43.67, 68].
lighting for underwater video/photography. The current A major challenge concerning underwater robotics
trend for the price of AUVs prices is downward, with is the interaction with the environment by means of one
more and smaller research institutions building or buy- or more manipulators. Autonomous UVMSs are still the
ing AUVs to enrich their research results; moreover the object of research; the current trend is in developing the
setup of multiple-AUV systems is becoming cost effec- first semiautonomous robotic devices, which might be
tive. The goal is to develop fully autonomous, reliable, acoustically operated; moreover, if physically possible,
robust, decision-making AUVs. the capability to dock to the structure where the interven-
There are a number of technology issues that are tion is needed might significatively simplify the control.
needed in order to improve AUV capabilities: to in- The final aim might be to develop a completely au-
crease the underwater bandwidth of current acoustic tonomous UVMS, able to localize the intervention site,
modems, to increase onboard power to handle larger recognize the task to be performed, and act on it without
tools and interact more strongly with the environment, docking to the station and without human intervention.
to create AUVs with significant hovering capability to This might make it possible to perform missions that are
allow better interaction, and to enable easier launch and currently impossible such as autonomous archaeologi-
recovery. cal intervention at deep sites. This would also enable the
In the near future, the ROV/AUV dichotomy will oil and gas industry to significatively decrease costs and
likely become less prominent, with a variety of systems risks to humans.
appearing that have attributes of both systems: For further reading on the topic of underwater sys-
• For offshore oil and gas intervention tasks, a vehi- tems, the reader is referred to several survey articles,
cle could transit to the work site as a self-powered, including [43.5,26,32,33,60]. Additionally, several jour-
fully autonomous vehicle, then dock to the work site. nals cover oceanic engineering topics, including robotics
Utilizing energy and communications infrastructure aspects. A variety of symposia and workshops have
at the work site, the vehicle could then be operated been held on a regular basis. Some books/monographs
much like a conventional ROV. treating marine robotics are [43.3, 7, 8, 16, 50].
References
43.1 J. Yuh, S.K. Choi, C. Ikehara, G.H. Kim, G. McMurty, sign of a semi-autonomous underwater vehicle for
M. Ghasemi-Nejhad, N. Sarkar N., K. Sugihara: De- intervention missions (SAUVIM), (1998) pp. 63–68
43.2 P. Marty: ALIVE: An autonomous light intervention 43.21 N.P. Fofonoff, R.C. Millard: Algorithms for Compu-
vehicle, Advances in Technology for Underwater tation of Fundamental Properties of Seawater, 44th
Vehicles Conference, Oceanology Int. (2004) edn. (UNESCO Technical papers in marine science,
43.3 T.I. Fossen: Marine Control Systems, Guidance, Paris 1983)
Navigation and Control of Ships, Rigs and Under- 43.22 R. Eustice, H. Singh, J.J. Leonard, M. Walter, R. Bal-
water Vehicles (Marine Cybernetics AS, Trondheim lard: Visually navigating the RMS Titanic with SLAM
2002) information filters, Proc. Robot. Sci. Syst. (Cam-
43.4 S. Bennett: A brief history of automatic control, IEEE bridge 2005) pp. 57–64
Part F 43
Contr. Syst. Mag. 16(3), 17–25 (1996) 43.23 D.A. Smallwood, L.L. Whitcomb: Adaptive iden-
43.5 J. Yuh, M. West: Underwater robotics, J. Adv. Robot. tification of dynamically positioned underwater
15(5), 609–639 (2001) robotic vehicles, IEEE Trans. Contr. Syst. Technol.
43.6 SNAME: Marine engineers: nomenclature for treat- 11(4), 505–515 (2003)
ing the motion of a submerged body through 43.24 S. Zhao, J. Yuh: Experimental study on advanced
a fluid, Techn. Res. Bull. 1-5, (1950) underwater robot control, IEEE Trans. Robot. 21(4),
43.7 T.I. Fossen: Guidance and Control of Ocean Vehicles 695–703 (2005)
(Wiley, New York 1994) 43.25 S. Majumder, S. Scheding, H.F. Durrant-Whyte:
43.8 O.M. Faltinsen: Sea Loads on Ships and Offshore Multisensor data fusion for underwater navigation,
Structures (Cambridge Univ Press, Cambridge 1990) Robot. Autonom. Syst. 35(2), 97–108 (2001)
43.9 J. Yuh: Modeling and control of underwater robotic 43.26 J.C. Kinsey, R.M. Eustice, L.L. Whitcomb: A survey
vehicles, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 20, 1475– of underwater vehicle navigation: recent advances
1483 (1990) and new challenges, 7th IFAC Conf. Manoeuvring
43.10 T.I. Fossen, A. Ross: Guidance and control of un- Contr. Marine Craft (IFAC, Lisbon 2006)
manned marine vehicles, IEEE Contr. Eng. Series 43.27 W.P.A. Van Lammeren, J. van Manen, M.W.C. Oost-
(Peregrinus, Stevengce 2006) pp. 23–42 erveld: The Wageningen B-screw series, Trans.
43.11 W.E. Cummins: The impulse response function and SNAME 77, 269–317 (1969)
ship motions, Techn. Rep. 1661, David Taylor Model 43.28 D.R. Yoerger, J.G. Cooke, J.J. Slotine: The Influence
Basin, Hydromechanics Laboratory (DTIC, Washing- of thruster dynamics on underwater vehicle be-
ton 1962) havior and their incorporation into control system
43.12 T.F. Ogilvie: Recent progress towards the under- design, IEEE J. Oceanic Eng. 15, 167–178 (1990)
standing and prediction of ship motions, 5th 43.29 A.J. Healey, S.M. Rock, S. Cody, D. Miles, J.P. Brown:
Symposium Naval Hydrodynamics (1964) pp. 3–79 Toward an improved understanding of thruster dy-
43.13 T. Perez, T.I. Fossen: Time-domain models of ma- namics for underwater vehicles, IEEE J. Oceanic
rine surface vessels for simulation and control Eng. 20(4), 354–361 (1995)
design based on seakeeping computations, 7th 43.30 L. Bachmayer, L.L. Whitcomb, M.A. Grosenbaugh:
IFAC Conf. Manoeuvring Contr. Marine Craft (IFAC, An accurate four-quadrant nonlinear dynamical
Lisbon, 2006) model for marine trhusters: theory and experi-
43.14 T.I. Fossen: A nonlinear unified state-space model mental validation, IEEE J. Oceanic Eng. 25, 146–159
for ship maneuvering and control in a seaway, J. (2000)
Bifurc. Chaos 15(9), 2717–2746 (2005) 43.31 T.I. Fossen, M. Blanke: Nonlinear output feed-
43.15 M. Nahon: Determination of undersea vehicle hy- back control of underwater vehicle propellersusing
drodynamic derivatives usingthe USAF Datcom, feedback form estimated axial flow velocity, IEEE J.
Proc. Oceans Conf. (Victoria 1993) pp. 283–288 Oceanic Eng. 25(2), 241–255 (2000)
43.16 J.N. Newman: Marine Hydrodynamics (MIT Press, 43.32 T.I. Fossen, T.I. Johansen: A survey of control allo-
Cambridge 1977) cation methods for ships and underwater vehicles,
43.17 A.J. Healey, D. Lienard: Multivariable sliding mode 14th IEEE Mediterriaen Conf. Contr. Autom. (Ancona
control for autonomous diving and steering of un- 2006) pp. 1–6
manned underwater vehicles, IEEE J. Oceanic Eng. 43.33 K.P. Valavanis, D. Gracanin, M. Matijasevic,
18, 327–339 (1993) R. Kolluru: Control architecture for autonomous
43.18 B. Stevens, F. Lewis: Aircraft Control and Simula- underwater vehicles, IEEE Contr. Syst. 17, 48–64
tions (Wiley, New York 1992) (1997)
43.19 I. Schjølberg, T.I. Fossen: Modelling and control 43.34 P. Oliveira, A. Pascoal, V. Silva, C. Silvestre: Mission
of underwater vehicle-manipulator systems, 3rd control of the MARIUS AUV: system design, imple-
IFAC Conf. Manoeuvring Contr. Marine Craft (IFAC, mentation, and sea trials, Int. J. Syst. Sci. 29(10),
Southampton 1994) pp. 45–57 1065–1080 (1998)
43.20 E.A. de Barros, A. Pascoal, E. de Sea: Progress to- 43.35 D. Brutzman, M. Burns, M. Campbell, D. Davis,
wards a method for predicting AUV derivatives, 7th T. Healey, M. Holden, B. Leonhardt, D. Marco,
IFAC Conf. Manoeuvring Contr. Marine Craft (IFAC, D. McClarin, B. McGhee: NPS Phoenix AUV software
Lisbon 2006) integration and in-water testing, Autonomous
Underwater Robotics References 1007
Underwater Vehicle Technol. AUV’96 (1996) pp. 99– 43.51 S.B. Williams: A terrain aided tracking algorithm for
108 marine systems, 4th Int. Conf. Field Service Robot.
43.36 A.P. Aguiar, A.M. Pascoal: Dynamic positioning and (2003) pp. 55–60
way-point tracking of underactuated AUVs in the 43.52 M. Dunbabin, P. Corke, G. Buskey: Low-cost vision-
presence of ocean currents, 41st IEEE Conf. Decision based AUV guidance system for reef navigation,
Contr. (Las Vegas 2002) pp. 2105–2110 IEEE Int. Conf. Robot. Autom. (New Orleans 2004)
43.37 A.A. Bennett, J.J. Leonard: A behavior-based ap- pp. 7–12
proach to adaptive feature detection and following 43.53 J.J. Leonard, H.J.S. Feder: Decoupled stochas-
Part F 43
with autonomous underwater vehicles, IEEE J. tic mapping, IEEE J. Oceanic Eng. 26(4), 561–571
Oceanic Eng. 25(2), 213–226 (2000) (2001)
43.38 M. Breivik, T.I. Fossen: Principles of guidance- 43.54 S. Williams, G. Dissanayake, H. Durrant–Whyte:
based path following in 2D and 3D, 44th IEEE Towards terrain-aided navigation for underwater
Conf. Decision Contr. 8th Eur. Contr. Conf. (Sevilla robotics, Adv. Robot. 15(5), 533–549 (2001)
2005) 43.55 P. Newman, J. Leonard: Pure range-only sub-sea
43.39 F.A. Papoulias: Bifurcation analysis of line of sight SLAM, IEEE Int. Conf. Robot. Autom. (Taipei 2003)
vehicle guidance using sliding modes, Int. J. Bifurc. pp. 1921–1926
Chaos 1(4), 849–865 (1991) 43.56 T.W. McLain, S.M. Rock, M.J. Lee: Experiments
43.40 R. Rysdyk: UAV path following for constant line- in the coordinated control of an underwater
of-sight, Proc. 2nd AIAA Unmanned Unlimited arm/vehicle system, Auton. Robot. 3(2), 213–232
Syst. Technol. Operations – Aerospace (San Diego (1996)
2003) 43.57 J.S. Ferguson, A. Pope, B. Butler, R. Verrall: Theseus
43.41 M.D. Feezor, F.Y. Sorrel, P.R. Blankinship, AUV – two record breaking missions, Sea Technol.
J.G. Bellingham: Autonomous underwater vehi- Mag. 40, 65–70 (1999)
cle homing/docking via electromagnetic guidance, 43.58 A. Alessandri, M. Caccia, G. Veruggio: Fault detec-
IEEE J. Oceanic Eng. 26(4), 515–521 (2001) tion of actuator faults in unmanned underwater
43.42 D. Wettergreen, A. Zelinsky, C. Gaskett: Au- vehicles, Cont. Eng. Prac. 7, 357–368 (1999)
tonomous guidance and control for an underwater 43.59 K.C. Yang, J. Yuh, S.K. Choi: Fault-tolerant system
robotic vehicle, Int. Conf. Field Service Robot. design of an autonomous underwater vehicle –
(Pittsburgh 1999) ODIN: an experimental study, Int. J. Syst. Sci. 30(9),
43.43 G. Antonelli, S. Chiaverini, R. Finotello, R. Schiavon: 1011–1019 (1999)
Real-time path planning and obstacle avoidance 43.60 G. Antonelli: A survey of fault detection/tolerance
for RAIS: an autonomous underwater vehicle, IEEE strategies for AUVs and ROVs. Recent advances. In:
J. Oceanic Eng. 26(2), 216–227 (2001) Fault Diagnosis and Tolerance for Mechatronic Sys-
43.44 J.C. Hyland, F.J. Taylor: Mine avoidance techniques tems, Springer Tracts in Advanced Robotics, ed. by
for underwater vehicles, IEEE J. Oceanic Eng. 18, F. Caccavale, L. Villani (Springer, Berling, Heidel-
340–350 (1993) berg 2002) pp. 109–127
43.45 D.R. Yoerger, J.J. Slotine: Robust trajectory con- 43.61 T.K. Podder, G. Antonelli, N. Sarkar: An experimen-
trol of underwater vehicles, IEEE J. Oceanic Eng. 10, tal investigation into the fault-tolerant control of
462–470 (1985) an autonomous underwater vehicle, J. Adv. Robot.
43.46 R. Cristi, F.A. Pappulias, A. Healey: Adaptive sliding 15, 501–520 (2001)
mode control of autonomous underwater vehicles 43.62 M. Caccia, R. Bono, G. Bruzzone, G. Bruz-
in the dive plane, IEEE J. Oceanic Eng. 15(3), 152–160 zone, E. Spirandelli, G. Veruggio: Experiences on
(1990) actuator fault detection, diagnosis and accomo-
43.47 D.B. Marco, A.J. Healey: Command, control and dation for ROVs, Int. Symp. Unmanned Untethered
navigation experimental results with the NPS Submersible Technol. (Durham, New Hampshire
ARIES AUV, IEEE J. Oceanic Eng. 26(4), 466–476 2001)
(2001) 43.63 E. Fiorelli, P. Bhatta, N.E. Leonard, I. Shul-
43.48 M. Caccia, G. Veruggio: Guidance and control of man: Adaptive sampling using feedback control
a reconfigurable unmanned underwater vehicle, of an autonomous underwater glider fleet, Int.
Cont. Eng. Prac. 8(1), 21–37 (2000) Symp. Unmanned Untethered Submersible Tech-
43.49 G. Antonelli, F. Caccavale, S. Chiaverini, G. Fusco: nol. (Durham, New Hampshire 2003)
A novel adaptive control law for underwater vehi- 43.64 C.J. Cannell, D.J. Stilwell: A comparison of two ap-
cles, IEEE Trans. Contr. Syst. Technol. 11(2), 221–232 proaches for adaptive sampling of environmental
(2003) processes using autonomous underwater vehicles,
43.50 G. Antonelli: Underwater robots, Motion and force Proc. Oceans Conf. (Brest 2005) pp. 1514–1521
control of vehicle-manipulator systems. In: Tracts 43.65 S. Kalantar, U. Zimmer: Distributed shape control of
in Advanced Robotics, 2nd edn., ed. by G. Antonelli homogeneous swarms of autonomous underwater
(Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg 2006) vehicles, Auton. Robot. 22(1), 37–53 (2006)
43.66 A. Pascoal, C. Silvestre, P. Oliveira: Vehicle and mis- 43.67 J. Yuh: Exploring the mysterious underwater world
sion control of single and multiple autonomous with robots, 6th IFAC Conf. Manoeuvring Contr.
marine robots. In: Advances in Unmanned Ma- Marine Craft (IFAC, Girona 2003)
rine Vehicles, IEEE Control Engineering, ed. by 43.68 T. Ura: Steps to intelligent AUVs, 6th IFAC Conf.
G. Roberts, R. Sutton (Peregrinus, New York 2006) Manoeuvring Contr. Marine Craft (IFAC, Girona
pp. 353–386 2003)
Part F 43
View publication stats

Underwater Robotics

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Underwater Robotics

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

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

Underwater Robotics

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

Chapter · January 2008

Thor I. Fossen Dana Yoerger

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Inertial Navigation Systems and Sensor Fusion View project

UAV icing View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Gianluca Antonelli, Thor I. Fossen, Dana R. Yoerger

43.1 The Expanding Role of Marine Robotics in Oceanic Engineering

Offshore oil and gas installations are presently ser-

operations, actuate valves, repair or replace subsea com-

43.2 Underwater Robotics

A rigid body is completely described by its posi- η2 = (φ θ ψ)⊤

Table 43.2 Common notation for the motion of a marine

Motion in the Sway Y v y

sψ sφ + cψ sθ cφ −cψ sφ + sψ sθ cφ cφ cθ ν = J e (RIB )η̇ . (43.9)

Defining as the hydrodynamics generalized forces, i. e., the forces

In the following, the symbol r B ⊤ (43.24)

Mv ν̇ + C RB (ν)ν + C A (ν r )ν r + Dv (ν r )ν r + gv (RIB ) • the damping matrix is positive definite, i. e.,

Table 43.5 JHUROV instrumentation

Table 43.6 ODIN III sensors summary

Guidance system Control system Disturbances

where q ∈ Rn is the vector collecting the manipulator

Fig. 43.7 An underwater vehicle–

time in unstructured environments in which an unde-

that have the best properties of both evolve. information.

43.4 Conclusions and Further Reading

View publication stats

You might also like

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.