Abstract In this work, we investigate the trajectory

tracking and point stabilization problems of asymmetric

underactuated surface ships with non-diagonal inertia and
damping matrices. By combining the novel state and
input transformations, the direct Lyapunov approach, and
the nonlinear time-varying tools, the trajectory tracking
controller is derived, guaranteeing global -exponential
convergence of state trajectory to the reference one
satisfying mild persistent exciting conditions. By properly
designing the reference trajectory, the proposed tracking
scheme is also generalized to achieve global uniform
asymptotic point stabilization. Simulation examples are
given to illustrate the effectiveness of the proposed control
schemes.
Keywords Underactuated Surface Ships, Trajectory
Tracking; Point Stabilization, Non-Diagonal Inertia and
Damping Matrices, Persistent Exciting
1. Introduction
Control of surface ships is an active topic of research
that continues to receive a considerable interest in the
eld of nonlinear control systems [1-26]. Based on the
simplied assumption of the symmetric ship model with
diagonal inertia and damping matrices, various control
schemes have been developed for point stabilization [2-8],
trajectory tracking [8-13], both point stabilization and
trajectory tracking [14-15], and path following [16-18].
Realizing that such a simplifying model is unrealistic,
recent research has aimed to deal with an asymmetric ship
model with non-diagonal inertia and damping matrices
[19-26]. However, the presented results for such a
realistic ship model are limited to path following [19,
20, 22, 25] and position control [23, 26]. For the full
state trajectory tracking control of asymmetric ships,
a controller is designed in [21] to force position and
orientation to globally track their reference trajectories;
however, the tracking errors are only guaranteed bounded,
not convergent to zero, and the reference trajectory
must satisfy some strict assumptions, excluding the
reduced xed-point trajectory and the one converging to
a xed-point. In [24], a unied control law is proposed
to track an arbitrary position and orientation trajectory
including a xed point; however, the tracking errors
are still ensured bounded, not convergent to zero. To
the authors knowledge, no control scheme exists that
is able to achieve global asymptotic full state trajectory
tracking and global asymptotic full state stabilization
for the asymmetric ship model with non-diagonal
Ma Bao-Li and Xie Wen-Jing: Global Asymptotic Trajectory Tracking and Point Stabilization
of Asymmetric Underactuated Ships with Non-Diagonal Inertia/Damping Matrices
1
www.intechopen.com
International Journal of Advanced Robotic Systems
ARTICLE
www.intechopen.com
Int. j. adv. robot. syst., 2013, Vol. 10, 336:2013
1 The Seventh Research Division, School of Automation Science and Electrical Engineering, Beihang University, Beijing, P. R. China
* Corresponding author E-mail: mabaoli@buaa.edu.cn
Received 30 Aug 2012; Accepted 22 May 2013
DOI: 10.5772/56671
2013 Bao-Li and Wen-Jing; licensee InTech. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative
Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use,
distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Ma Bao-Li
1,*
and Xie Wen-Jing
1
Global Asymptotic Trajectory Tracking
and Point Stabilization of Asymmetric
Underactuated Ships with Non-Diagonal
Inertia/Damping Matrices
inertia/damping matrices even in the absence of model
uncertainties and external disturbances.
The purpose of this work is to solve the asymptotic
trajectory tracking and asymptotic point stabilization
problems of asymmetric surface ships having non-zero
off-diagonal terms presented in their inertia and damping
matrices. By introducing novel coordinate and input
transformations, we obtain the tracking error model in a
cascaded form allowing for deriving a tracking control law
via mild persistent exciting (PE) conditions imposed on the
reference trajectory. The PE conditions are simple to check
and allow for global -exponential tracking of a large class
of reference trajectories, including both the circular and
the straight line ones. By properly setting the reference
trajectory, the obtained tracking controller can also be used
to achieve global uniform asymptotic point stabilization,
and thus provides a unied frame to solve both the
trajectory tracking and the point stabilization problems of
the asymmetric ships with non-diagonal inertia/damping
matrices.
The remainder of the work is organized as follows. After
introducing the full state model of underactuated surface
ships and several novel state and input transformations,
the error model for trajectory tracking is formulated in
Section 2. The tracking controller is presented in Section 3,
and is generalized to solve the point stabilization problem
in Section 4. Simulation examples are illustrated in Section
5. Section 6 concludes the work.
2. Error model formulation
We consider the ship model described by [21]
M v +C(v)v +Dv = , (1)
where v = [u, v, r]
T
denotes the velocities in surge,
sway and yaw directions respectively, = [
u
, 0,
r
]
T
denotes the control input with (
u
,
r
) the control force
and moment in surge and yaw directions respectively. The
system matrices are given by
M =

m
11
0 0
0 m
22
m
23
0 m
23
m
33

, D =

d
11
0 0
0 d
22
d
23
0 d
32
d
33

,
C(v) =

0 0 m
22
v m
23
r
0 0 m
11
u
m
22
v + m
23
r m
11
u 0

,
(2)
where M, C(v), D are the inertia, Coriolis/centripetal,
and damping matrices respectively with m
ii
> 0, d
ii
>
0(i = 1, 2, 3).
The kinematics of the ship is described by

x
y

cos sin 0
sin cos 0
0 0 1

u
v
r

, (3)
where x, y and represent the position and orientation of
the ship in the Earth-xed frame.
In modelling the ships dynamics, it is assumed that:
A1) the high-order damping terms and the dynamics
associated with the motions in heave, roll and pitch are all
negligible;
A2) the inertia and damping matrices (M, D) are known
exactly;
A3) the external disturbances are not included in the
model.
The tracking and stabilization problems that arise by
relaxing these assumptions will be investigated in future
research.
By taking
1
= u,
2
= r as the new control inputs [21], the
dynamic equation (1) is simplied to

u =
1
,
r =
2
,
v =
1
m
22
(m
23
r m
11
ur d
22
v d
23
r)

= a
2
br cur dv,
(4)
where a =
m
23
m
22
, b =
d
23
m
22
, c =
m
11
m
22
> 0, d =
d
22
m
22
> 0.
The new control inputs (
1
,
2
) and the true ones (
u
,
r
)
are related by the following transformation

1
=
1
m
11
[
u
r(m
22
v m
23
r) d
11
u] ,

2
=
1
m
22
m
33
m
2
23

m
23
m
22

(m
11
ur + d
22
v + d
23
r)

r
((m
22
v + m
23
r)u m
11
uv + d
32
v + d
33
r)

(5)
=
1
m
22
m
33
m
2
23
[m
22

r
+ (m
11
m
22
)(m
23
r + m
22
v)u
+ (m
23
d
22
m
22
d
32
)v + (m
23
d
23
m
22
d
33
)r].
It is clear that the input transformation (5) is globally
invertible provided the matrix diag

1
m
11
,
m
22
m
22
m
33
m
2
23

is
invertible, which always holds as the inertia matrix
M dened in (2) is always positive denite, i.e., m
11
>
0, m
22
> 0, m
22
m
33
m
2
23
> 0.
The inverse of the input transformation (5) can be derived
as

u
=m
11

1
r(m
22
v +m
23
r) +d
11
u,
r
=
(m
22
m
33
m
2
23
)
2
m
22

[(m
11
m
22
)(m
23
r + m
22
v)u + (m
23
d
22
m
22
d
32
)v + (m
23
d
23
m
22
d
33
)r]
m
22
.
(6)
By introducing the following coordinate transformation
x = x cos + y sin , y = x sin + y cos , (7)
the dynamics of the new coordinates ( x, y) can be obtained
as

x = u + r y,

y = v r x.
To remove the term a
2
+ br in the sway dynamics (the
third equation of (4)) and the term v in the y-dynamics,
Int. j. adv. robot. syst., 2013, Vol. 10, 336:2013 2
www.intechopen.com
we further introduce the following novel coordinate and
input transformations
v = v + ar + b,
z = d y + v,
u = cu + d x,

1
= c
1
+ d(u + r y).
(8)
The dynamic equations of the new state variables
( x, v, z, , u, r) are derived as

x = u + r y =
1
c
( u d x) +
1
d
(z v)r,

v = a
2
br cur dv + a
2
+ br =
( u d x)r d( v ar b),
z = dv dr x ( u d x)r d( v ar b) = ur,

= r,

u = c
1
+ d

x = c
1
+ d(u + r y) =
1
,
r =
2
.
(9)
The new state equation (9) can be rewritten compactly as
the following two subsystems

x =
d
c
x
1
d
vr + D
1
,

v = d v + d xr + D
2
,
(10)

z = ur,

= r,

u =
1
, r =
2
,
(11)
where
D
1
=
u
c
+
zr
d
, D
2
= ur + d(ar + b). (12)
To formulate the trajectory tracking problem, the reference
trajectory is assumed to be generated by the same model
as that of the real one (3)-(4), that is,

x
d
y
d

cos
d
sin
d
0
sin
d
cos
d
0
0 0 1

u
d
v
d
r
d

, (13)

u
d
=
1d
,
r
d
=
2d
,
v
d
= a
2d
br
d
cu
d
r
d
dv
d
.
(14)
By using the similar coordinate and input transformations
x
d
= x
d
cos
d
+ y
d
sin
d
,
y
d
= x
d
sin
d
+ y
d
cos
d
,
v
d
= v
d
+ ar
d
+ b
d
,
z
d
= d y
d
+ v
d
,
u
d
= cu
d
+ d x
d
,

1d
= c
1d
+ d(u
d
+ r
d
y
d
),
(15)
the reference model (13)-(14) can be written as

x
d
=
d
c
x
d

1
d
v
d
r
d
+ D
1d
,

v
d
= d v
d
+ d x
d
r
d
+ D
2d
,
(16)

z
d
= u
d
r
d
,

d
= r
d
,

u
d
=
1d
, r
d
=
2d
,
(17)
where
D
1d
=
u
d
c
+
z
d
r
d
d
, D
2d
= u
d
r
d
+ d(ar
d
+ b
d
). (18)
By dening e = [e
1
, e
2
, e
3
, e
4
, e
5
, e
6
]
T
= [ x x
d
, v
v
d
, z z
d
,
d
, u u
d
, r r
d
]
T
as the tracking error, one
obtains the error model dynamics as

e
1
=
d
c
e
1

1
d
( vr v
d
r
d
) + D
1
D
1d
=
d
c
e
1

1
d
(e
2
r + v
d
e
6
) +
1
c
e
5
+
1
d
(e
3
(r
d
+ e
6
) + z
d
e
6
)
=
d
c
e
1

1
d
e
2
r + E
1
,
e
2
= de
2
+ d (e
1
r + x
d
e
6
) + D
2
D
2d
= de
2
+ de
1
r + d x
d
e
6
+ d(ae
6
+ be
4
)
(e
5
(r
d
+ e
6
) + u
d
e
6
)
= de
2
+ de
1
r + E
2
,
(19)

e
3
= e
5
(r
d
+ e
6
) u
d
e
6
,
e
4
= e
6
,
e
5
=
1

1d

= w
1
,
e
6
=
2

2d

= w
2
,
(20)
where
E
1
=
1
d
v
d
e
6
+
1
c
e
5
+
1
d
(e
3
(r
d
+ e
6
) + z
d
e
6
),
E
2
= d x
d
e
6
+ d(ae
6
+ be
4
) (e
5
(r
d
+ e
6
) + u
d
e
6
).
(21)
Remark 1. Thanks to the novel state and input
transformations (8) and (15), the error state dynamics has
been converted to an advantageous form (19)-(20), which
has a cascaded structure helpful for controller design in the
next Section.
To formulate the global -exponential trajectory tracking
problem, we need the following denitions.
Denition 1 [27]. A continuous function : [0, ) [0, )
is said to belong to class- if it is strictly increasing and
(0) = 0, and belong to class-

if it belongs to class-
with = , lim

() = .
Denition 2 [13]. The origin of a nonlinear system
x = f (t, x), f (t, 0) = 0, t 0 (with x R
n
and
f (t, x) piecewise continuous in t and locally Lipschitz in
x) is called global -exponential stable (GKES) if a class-

function () and a positive constant exist such that

the state trajectory starting from any initial state
x(t
0
) R
n
is globally -exponential convergent (GKEC), that
is, x(t) (x(t
0
)) e
(tt
0
)
.
The control object for trajectory tracking can now be stated
as: nd a feedback control law w
1
(), w
2
() such that the origin
of the closed-loop error model (19)-(20) is GKES.
3. Control development
3.1. Preliminaries
To facilitate the controller design, we rst prove that the
global -exponential stabilization problem of the whole
system (19)-(20) can be reduced to the one of its subsystem
(20).
Lemma 1. If (r
d
,
1d
) L

, then any control law

w
1
(), w
2
() that makes the origin of subsystem (20) GKES
also makes the origin of the whole system (19)-(20) GKES.
Ma Bao-Li and Xie Wen-Jing: Global Asymptotic Trajectory Tracking and Point Stabilization
of Asymmetric Underactuated Ships with Non-Diagonal Inertia/Damping Matrices
3
www.intechopen.com
Proof. As (r
d
,
1d
) L

, we conclude that (|
d
| , | u
d
|) are
at most increasing with a rate of t, |z
d
| and |D
1d
| , |D
2d
| are
at most increasing with a rate of t
2
in view of (13)-(18).
Consider the non-negative function V
1d
= 0.5(d
2
x
2
d
+ v
2
d
),
its derivative is calculated as

V
1d
=
d
3
c
x
2
d
d v
2
d
+ d
2
D
1d
x
d
+ D
2d
v
d
c
1d
V
1d
+ c
2d
(t)

V
1d
,
where c
1d
=
2 min{d
3
/c,d}
max{d
2
,1}
, c
2d
(t) =
max{d
2
|D
1d
|,|D
2d
|}

0.5 min{d
2
,1}
.
Let

V
1d
=

V
1d
, then

V
1d
=
1
2

V
1d

V
1d

1
2
c
1d

V
1d
+
1
2
c
2d
(t) =
1
2
c
1d

V
1d
+
1
2
c
2d
(t).
As |D
1d
| , |D
2d
| are at most increasing with a rate of t
2
, so
are c
2d
(t) and

V
1d
by applying comparison principal [27],
which in turn implies that (| x
d
| , | v
d
|) is at most increasing
at a rate of t
2
. As the origin of subsystem (20) is GKES,
(e
3
, e
4
, e
5
, e
6
) are thus GKEC, and so are (E
1
, E
2
) from (21).
Take V
1e
= 0.5(d
2
e
2
1
+ e
2
2
), its derivative along (19) is
calculated as

V
1e
=
d
3
c
e
2
1
de
2
2
+ d
2
E
1
e
1
+ E
2
e
2
c
1e
V
1e
+ c
2e
(t)

V
1e
,
where c
1e
=
2 min{d
3
/c,d}
max{d
2
,1}
, c
2e
(t) =
max{d
2
|E
1
|,|E
2|}

0.5 min{d
2
,1}
.
Let

V
1e
=

V
1e
, then

V
1e
=
1
2

V
1e

V
1e

1
2
c
1e

V
1e
+
1
2
c
2e
(t) =
1
2
c
1e

V
1e
+
1
2
c
2e
(t).
Since E
1
, E
2
are GKEC, so is c
2e
(t), and hence

V
1e
is also
GKEC by applying comparison principal [27], which in
turn implies that (e
1
, e
2
) are GKEC. As e
i
(i = 1, 2, , 6)
are all GKEC, the origin of system (19)-(20) is thus GKES.

Based on Lemma 1, the global -exponential trajectory

tracking problemof the ship has been reduced to the global
-exponential stabilization problem of system (20). The
remaining task is to: nd a feedback control law w
1
(), w
2
()
such that the origin of the closed-loop system(20) is GKES under
certain PE conditions imposed on the reference trajectory.
3.2. Controller design
To solve the global -exponential stabilization problem
of the subsystem (20), the error dynamics (20) is
further converted to a suitable form by a coordinate
transformation such that the obtained tracking control law
yields mild PE conditions satised by a large class of
reference trajectories.
Let e
3
= (e
3
+ e
4
u
d
), the subsystem (20) becomes

e
3
= e
5
r e
4

1d
, e
4
= e
6
, e
5
= w
1
, e
6
= w
2
. (22)
Take e
6d
as an assistant variable to be determined, and
dene new error variable as e
6
= e
6
e
6d
, the error
dynamics (22) can then be rewritten as

e
3
= e
5
r e
4

1d
, e
4
= e
6
+e
6d
, e
5
= w
1
,

e
6
= w
2
e
6d
. (23)
Consider the following positive denite function
V
2
= 0.5(k
1
e
2
3
+ e
2
4
+ e
2
5
+ e
2
6
). (24)
Its derivative along (23) is

V
2
=k
1
e
3
(e
5
r e
4

1d
)+e
4
( e
6
+e
6d
)+e
5
w
1
+ e
6
(w
2
e
6d
)
= e
4
(k
1
e
3

1d
+e
6d
)+e
5
(w
1
+k
1
e
3
r) + e
6
(w
2
e
6d
+ e
4
).
(25)
To make

V
2
0, we obtain the following control law
e
6d
= k
1
e
3

1d
k
2
e
4
,
e
6d
= k
1
(e
5
r e
4

1d
)
1d
+ k
1
e
3


1d
k
2
e
6
,
w
1
= k
1
e
3
r k
3
e
5
,
w
2
= e
6d
e
4
k
4
e
6
,
(26)
where k
i
(i = 1, 2, 3, 4) are all positive constants.
Substituting (26) into (25) results in

V
2
= k
2
e
2
4
k
3
e
2
5
k
4
e
2
6
0.
Proposition 1. The control law (26) guarantees that the
origin of the whole system (19)-(20) is GKES, provided the
reference trajectory satises the following PE conditions:
(
1d
,


1d
, r
d
, r
d
) L

, lim
t
(|r
d
| +|
1d
|) = 0. (27)
Proof. By V
2
> 0,

V
2
0, one gets ( e
3
, e
4
, e
5
, e
6
) L

and
V
2
converges to a constant limit V
2
() as t . From
(
1d
,


1d
, r
d
, r
d
) L

, one can verify that e

4
= e
6
+ e
6d
,
e
5
= w
1
= k
1
e
3
r k
3
e
5
= k
1
e
3
(r
d
+ e
6
) k
3
e
5
,

e
6
= w
2
e
6d
= e
4
k
4
e
6
are all bounded, which in
turn implies

V
2
L

, we can hence conclude lim

t

V
2
=
0 lim
t
(e
4
, e
5
, e
6
) = 0 from Barbalat Lemma [27], so that
e
3
converges to a constant limit e
3
().
As lim
t
e
4
= 0, e
4
= e
6
= w
2
L

, then lim
t
e
4
= 0
lim
t
e
6
= e
6
+ e
6d
= 0 lim
t
e
6d
= 0 lim
t
( e
3

1d
) =
e
3
() lim
t

1d
= 0.
By lim
t
e
5
= 0, e
5
= w
1
L

, one obtains lim

t
e
5
= 0
lim
t
w
1
= 0 lim
t
( e
3
r) = 0 e
3
() lim
t
r
d
= 0.
Combining the facts of e
3
() lim
t

1d
= 0 and
e
3
() lim
t
r
d
= 0, we conclude lim
t

1d
= 0, lim
t
r
d
=
0 if e
3
() = 0, which contradicts to the PE condition
lim
t
(|r
d
| +|
1d
|) = 0, therefore, e
3
() must be zero, that
is, the origin of the closed-loop system (23) (26) is globally
uniformly asymptotically stable.
The linearization of (23)(26) at the neighbourhood of origin
can be obtained as

e
3
= e
5
r
d
e
4

1d
,
e
4
= e
6
+ k
1
e
3

1d
k
2
e
4
,
e
5
= k
1
e
3
r
d
k
3
e
5
,

e
6
= e
4
k
4
e
6
.
(28)
Int. j. adv. robot. syst., 2013, Vol. 10, 336:2013 4
www.intechopen.com
The derivative of V
2
along (28) is

V
2
= k
2
e
2
4
k
3
e
2
5
k
4
e
2
6
.
According to the same line for proving the global uniform
asymptotic stability of the closed-loop system (23)(26), one
can conclude that system (28) is also globally uniformly
asymptotically stable.
Since the closed-loop system (23)(26) and its linearization
(28) are both globally uniformly asymptotically stable, it is
thus GKES [28].
As ( e
3
, e
4
, e
5
, e
6
) are GKEC and
1d
L

, thus | u
d
| is at
most linearly increasing with time, and e
3
= e
3
e
4
u
d
,
e
6
= e
6
+e
6d
= e
6
+k
1
e
3

1d
k
2
e
4
are all GKEC, that is, the
origin of the subsystem (20) is GKES, and so is the origin
of the system (19)-(20) by Lemma 1.
Remark 2. The PE conditions (27) for global
exponential tracking are very simple for verication,
and will be shown in the following discussions to be quite
a mild requirement on reference trajectories.
3.3. Discussions on the PE conditions
In this subsection, the PE conditions (27) are carefully
checked showing that they hold for a large class of
reference trajectories including both the straight line and
the circular-like ones.
The last equation of (15) can be written as

1d
= c u
d
+du
d
+d y
d
r
d
= c u
d
+du
d
+d(x
d
sin
d
+y
d
cos
d
)r
d
.
(29)
Now the following three cases are investigated.
Case 1. (r
d
, r
d
, u
d
, u
d
, u
d
, x
d
, y
d
) L

, lim
t
r
d
= 0.
By (r
d
, r
d
, u
d
, u
d
, u
d
, x
d
, y
d
) L

, one infers that (v

d
, v
d
)
L

( x
d
, y
d
) L

(
1d
,


1d
) L

from the dynamics

of the reference trajectory (13)(14)(29). Therefore, the PE
conditions (27) hold, so that the proposed control law
can achieve global -exponential tracking of circular-like
bounded trajectories.
Case 2. (u
d
(t), u
d
(t), u
d
(t)) L

, lim
t
u
d
(t) = 0, r
d
(t) 0.
In view of r
d
(t) 0, (29) is reduced to
1d
= c u
d
+ du
d
.
By (u
d
(t), u
d
(t), u
d
(t)) L

, we deduce (
1d
,


1d
) L

.
From lim
t
u
d
(t) = 0(c > 0, d > 0), one concludes
lim
t

1d
= 0 (otherwise, lim
t
u
d
(t) = 0), that is, the
PE conditions (27) are satised in this case, so that the
proposed control law can achieve global -exponential
tracking of a straight line unbounded trajectory.
Case 3. (r
d
, r
d
, u
d
, u
d
, u
d
) L

, lim
t
u
d
= 0, lim
t
(r
d
t) =
0.
By (r
d
, r
d
, u
d
, u
d
, u
d
) L

, one infers that (v

d
, v
d
)
L

, ( x
d
, y
d
) L

and (x
d
, y
d
) are at most linearly
increasing with time, implying (
1d
,


1d
) L

, lim
t
(r
d

x
d
) = 0, lim
t
(r
d
y
d
) = 0. By lim
t
u
d
(t) = 0, one induces
lim
t

1d
= 0 from lim
t
(
1d
(c u
d
+ du
d
)) = 0(c > 0, d >
0). The PE conditions (27) are thus satised.
Remark 3. The above analysis shows that the PE
conditions (27) hold for a large class of reference
trajectories including straight line, circular-like ones and
many others.
4. Generalization to point stabilization
Thanks to the mild PE conditions (27), the proposed
tracking scheme can be extended to achieve point
stabilization by properly designing the reference trajectory.
The results for point stabilization are summarized as the
following proposition.
Proposition 2. Suppose that the reference trajectory is set
to
(x
d
(0), y
d
(0),
d
(0), u
d
(0), v
d
(0), r
d
(0)) = (0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0),

1d
= k
5
x
d
k
6
u
d
+ f ( e
3
) cos(k
7
t),
2d
= 0,
(30)
then the control law (26) guarantees that the states
(x(t), y(t), (t), u(t), v(t), r(t)) are globally uniformly
asymptotically convergent to zero, where k
5
, k
6
, k
7
are
all positive constants, and f () a smooth function of
satisfying f () = 0 = 0.
Proof. By applying (30) to the dynamics (13)-(14), we have
y
d
(t) =
d
(t) = r
d
(t) = v
d
(t) 0(t 0),
x
d
= u
d
,
u
d
= k
5
x
d
k
6
u
d
+ f ( e
3
) cos(k
7
t).
(31)
From

V
2
= k
2
e
2
4
k
3
e
2
5
k
4
e
2
6
, one gets ( e
3
, e
4
, e
5
, e
6
)
L

and V
2
converges to a constant limit V
2
() as t .
By ( e
3
,

e
3
) L

, one deduces (x
d
, u
d
, u
d
, u
d
) L

from
(31), thus
1d
= c u
d
+ du
d
L

,


1d
= c u
d
+ d u
d
L

.
From (
1d
,


1d
) L

, r
d
0, we can verify

V
2
L

, hence
lim
t

V
2
= 0, that is, lim
t

e
4
, e
5
, e
6

= 0, so that e
3
converges
to a constant limit e
3
().
As lim
t
e
4
= 0, e
4
= e
6
= w
2
L

, then lim
t
e
4
= 0
lim
t
e
6
= e
6
+ e
6d
= 0 lim
t
e
6d
= 0 lim
t
( e
3

1d
) =
e
3
() lim
t

1d
= 0.
If lim
t

1d
= 0, then e
3
() = 0. Else if
lim
t

1d
= 0, then lim
t
u
d
= 0 from
1d
= c u
d
+ du
d
.
By verifying ( u
d
, u
(3)
d
) L

, we deduce
lim
t
( u
d
, u
d
) = 0. Combining the facts of lim
t
u
d
=
lim
t

k
5
u
d
k
6
u
d
+
f ( e
3
)
e
3

e
3
cos(k
7
t) k
7
f ( e
3
) sin(k
7
t)

=
0, lim
t

e
3
= 0, lim
t
e
3
= e(), lim
t
( u
d
, u
d
) = 0, we
conclude lim
t
f ( e
3
()) sin(k
7
t) = 0 e
3
() = 0. It is
therefore that e
3
() must be zero, so that lim
t
(x
d
, u
d
) = 0
referring to (31). From lim
t
( e
3
, e
4
) = 0, e
3
= (e
3
+ e
4
u
d
),
lim
t
u
d
= lim
t
(cx
d
+ du
d
) = 0, one concludes lim
t
e
3
= 0.
Since lim
t
(e
3
, e
4
, e
5
, e
6
) = 0, lim
t
(x
d
, y
d
,
d
, u
d
, v
d
, r
d
) =
0, one gets lim
t
(E
1
, E
2
) = 0 from (21). Referring to

V
1e
=
1
2
c
1e

V
1e
+
1
2
c
2e
(t), lim
t
c
2e
(t) = 0, one deduces
lim
t
(e
1
, e
2
) = 0. We nally conclude lim
t
(x, y, , u, v, r) =
0 from lim
t
(x
d
, y
d
,
d
, u
d
, v
d
, r
d
) = 0 and lim
t
e = 0.
Ma Bao-Li and Xie Wen-Jing: Global Asymptotic Trajectory Tracking and Point Stabilization
of Asymmetric Underactuated Ships with Non-Diagonal Inertia/Damping Matrices
5
www.intechopen.com
200 0 200
0
1
2
3
y
(
m
)
,

y
d

(
m
)
x(m), x
d
(m)
0 500
2
0
2
x

x
d

(
m
)
t(sec)
0 500
0
1
2
3
y

y
d

(
m
)
t(sec)
0 500
0.2
0.1
0

d

(
r
a
d
)
t(sec)
0 500
0.5
0
0.5
u

u
d

(
m
/
s
)
t(sec)
0 500
10
5
0
5
x 10
3
v

v
d

(
m
/
s
)
t(sec)
0 500
0.1
0
0.1
r

r
d

(
r
a
d
/
s
)
t(sec)
0 500
2
0
2

u

(
N
)
t(sec)
0 500
0.4
0.2
0
0.2

r

(
N
m
)
t(sec)
Figure 1. Plots of geometric paths of actual/reference ships, time history of state tracking errors and control inputs for straight-line
trajectory tracking with an initial state (x, y, , u, v, r)
0
= (0, 2, 0, 0, 0, 0).
Remark 4. The basic idea of the proposed stabilization
scheme can be explained as follows: the real ship is
steered to track the reference trajectory which is designed
oscillating around the origin along the straight line y
d
= 0
until the real one converges to the neighborhood of the
reference one, and then they both converge to the origin.

Remark 5. The point stabilization control law (26)(30) for

system (3)-(4) is dynamic smooth time-varying, and thus
not contradicting the well-known Brocketts necessary
condition for nonholonomic systems [29].
5. Simulations
In this section, the effectiveness of the proposed control
laws is illustrated via simulation examples. Consider an
underactuated surface vessel with model parameters as
[20]
M=

25.8 0 0
0 33.8 1.0115
0 1.0115 2.76

, D=

0.9257 0 0
0 2.8909 0.2601
0 0.2601 0.5

.
The maximum magnitudes of the actuated forces and
moments are 2N in surge and 1.5Nm in yaw, i.e., |
u
|
2N, |
r
| 1.5Nm. Generally speaking, if a control
law makes the origin of a system globally uniformly
asymptotically stable, then the same control law with
magnitude saturation makes the origin of the same system
locally uniformly asymptotically stable due to the fact
that there always exists a neighbourhood of origin such
that the control law is not saturated. Therefore, we
can conclude that the proposed control law (26) with
a saturation constraint|
u
| 2N, |
r
| 1.5Nm still
makes the origin of the closed-loop tracking error system
locally uniformly asymptotically stable in the sense that
the tracking errors uniformly asymptotically tend to zero
for small initial tracking errors and small reference signals
(u
d
, v
d
, r
d
,
1d
,
2d
). To enlarge the attractive basin of the
closed-loop tracking error system, the control parameters
should be selected such that the linearization system (28)
has a slow transient response.
The proposed control laws are veried by three simulation
examples: straight-line trajectory tracking, circular
trajectory tracking and x-point stabilization.
The straight-line reference trajectory is generated via the
reference model (13)-(14) by setting
1d
=
2d
= 0,
(x
d
, y
d
,
d
, u
d
, v
d
, r
d
)
0
= (0, 0, 0, 0.2, 0, 0). The
controller parameters are selected as k
1
= 205.2, k
2
=
0.5, k
3
= 0.2, k
4
= 0.3, which assign poles of the
linearization system (28) to (0.015, 0.3925 +
1.0218j, 0.3925 1.0218j, 0.2). Simulation results
for an initial state (x, y, , u, v, r)
0
= (0, 2, 0, 0, 0, 0)
are shown in Fig.1. The circular reference trajectory
Int. j. adv. robot. syst., 2013, Vol. 10, 336:2013 6
www.intechopen.com
20 10 0 10
30
20
10
0
10
20
y
(
m
)
,

y
d

(
m
)
x(m), x
d
(m)
0 200 400
15
10
5
0
5
x

x
d

(
m
)
t(sec)
0 200 400
20
15
10
5
0
5
y

y
d

(
m
)
t(sec)
0 200 400
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
0.05

d

(
r
a
d
)
t(sec)
0 200 400
1
0.5
0
0.5
1
u

u
d

(
m
/
s
)
t(sec)
0 200 400
0.2
0.1
0
0.1
0.2
v

v
d

(
m
/
s
)
t(sec)
0 200 400
0.05
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
r

r
d

(
r
a
d
/
s
)
t(sec)
0 200 400
2
1
0
1
2

u

(
N
)
t(sec)
0 200 400
1.5
1
0.5
0
0.5
1

r

(
N
m
)
t(sec)
Figure 2. Plots of geometric paths of actual/reference ships, time history of state tracking errors and control inputs for circular trajectory
tracking with an initial state (x, y, , u, v, r)
0
= (0, 25, 0, 0, 0, 0).
is generated via the reference model (13)-(14) by
setting
1d
=
2d
= 0, (x
d
, y
d
,
d
, u
d
, v
d
, r
d
)
0
=
(0, 10, 0.1703, 0.2, 0.0344, 0.0203). The controller
parameters are selected as k
1
= 26.71, k
2
= 1, k
3
=
0.21, k
4
= 1, which assign poles of the linearization system
(28) to (0.1, 0.11, 1 + j, 1 j). Simulation results
for an initial state (x, y, , u, v, r)
0
= (0, 25, 0, 0, 0, 0) are
shown in Fig.2.
For point stabilization, we chose control parameters
k
i
(i = 1, 2, , 7) and control function f () as k
1
=
5, k
2
= 1, k
3
= 0.02,k
4
= 1, k
5
= 0.01, k
6
= 0.2, k
7
= 0.2,
f () = 5, where the control parameters (k
2
, k
3
, k
4
) assign
the poles of the last three equations of (28) (ignoring
the terms r
d
e
3
and
1d
e
3
) to (1 + j, 1 j, 0.02),
and the control parameters (k
1
, k
5
, k
6
, k
7
) are selected by
several trials to obtain a better performance and a large
attractive basin. Simulation results for an initial state
(x, y, , u, v, r)
0
= (0, 2, 0, 0, 0, 0) are shown in Fig.3.
It is observed from Fig.1-Fig.3 that, considering the limited
magnitudes of control inputs, the proposed control laws
are saturated during an initial short time period of
transient response, but at last still successfully steer the
states to the desired reference trajectories and the desired
set point respectively for quite large initial tracking errors.
It is also worth mentioning that the produced trajectories
(Fig.3) for xed-point stabilization is quite signicantly
oscillating and slowly convergent to the desired state due
to the sinusoid time function introduced in the designed
desired trajectory (30) and the constraint imposed on the
magnitude of surge force and yaw torque.
6. Conclusion
In this work, we have developed a trajectory tracking
controller for asymmetric underactuated surface ships
with non-diagonal inertia and damping matrices. The
proposed control scheme is the rst one able to achieve
global exponential convergence of state to the desired
reference trajectory with simple and mild PE conditions
suitable for a large class of reference trajectories. By
properly assigning the reference trajectory, the obtained
tracking control law is also generalized to achieve
global uniform asymptotic point stabilization, and thus
providing a unied framework for solving both the
trajectory tracking and the point stabilization problems of
surface ships with non-diagonal system matrices.
It is worth mentioning that the construction of control
laws relies on an exact ship model with no parameter
uncertainties and no external disturbances. Our future
research topics will focus on designing robust tracking
and stabilizing controllers for underactuated ships with
unknown non-diagonal inertia/damping matrices and
unknown external disturbances.
Ma Bao-Li and Xie Wen-Jing: Global Asymptotic Trajectory Tracking and Point Stabilization
of Asymmetric Underactuated Ships with Non-Diagonal Inertia/Damping Matrices
7
www.intechopen.com
Accordingly, this step can only be carried out if the
matching procedure was already performed for the rst
error image. Therefore, only areas that were not removed
during the rst matching procedure are extended by
corresponding areas of the subsequent error images.
Otherwise, the noise (falsely detected areas) would cause
an enlargement of incorrectly detected areas. The red short
dashed rectangles in Figure 8 mark 2 examples of such
corresponding areas. Resulting areas that are too large
are removed from the error images I
n
and I
n+1
. This is
indicated by the areas in the right lower corner of error
image I
n
in Figure 8. As can be seen, the resulting error
image I
n
from Figure 8 is used as input (error image I
n
) in
Figure 7. Without the extension of the areas, the midmost
candidate in Figure 7 would have been rejected.
As some real moving objects are sometimes not detected
in an error image as a result of an inaccurate optical ow
calculation or (radial) distortion, the temporal matching
would fail. This could already be the case if only one
area in one error image is missing. Thus, candidates that
were detected once in 3 temporal succeeding error images
and 4 greyscale images (original images), respectively, are
stored for a sequence of 3 error images subsequent to the
image where the matching was successful, cf. Figure 9(a).
Their coordinates are updated for the succeeding error
images by using the optical ow data. As a consequence,
they can be seen as candidates for moving objects in
the succeeding images, but they are not used within the
matching procedure as input. If within this sequence
of images a corresponding area is found again, it is
stored for a larger sequence of images (more than 3) and
its coordinates are updated for every succeeding error
image. The number of sequences depends on the following
condition:
=

c+ c
c c
| c = c
2 c | c = c,
(13)
where c is the number of found corresponding areas and
c is the number of missing corresponding areas for one
candidate starting with the image where the candidate
was found again. If < 0 > 10, the candidate is
rejected. Moreover, the candidate is no longer stored if it
was detected again in 3 temporal succeeding images. In
this case, it is detected during the matching procedure.
An example concerning to this procedure is shown in
Figure 9(b). As one can imagine, error image I
n
in
Figure 9(a) is equivalent (except area-extension) to I
n+1
in Figure 7, whereas error image I
n
in Figure 9(b) is
equivalent to I
n+2
in Figure 9(a).
For a further processing of the data, only the position
(shown as small black crosses in the left lower corners of
the rectangles in Figures 7 and 9) and size of the rectangles
marking the candidates are of relevance. Thus, for every
error image the afore mentioned information is stored
for candidates that were detected during the matching
procedure, for candidates that were detected up to 3 error
images before and for candidates that were found again
(see above). On the basis of this data, candidates that are
very close to each other are combined and candidates that
are too large are rejected.
Using Actual
Optical Flow F
n
Using Subsequent
Optical Flow F
n+1
Actual Error mage
n
Subsequent Error mage
n+1
y
x
Error mage
n+2
(a)
Using Actual
Optical Flow F
n
Using Subsequent
Optical Flow F
n+1
Actual Error mage
n
Subsequent Error mage
n+1
y
x
Error mage
n+2
(b)
Figure 9. Preventing rejection of candidates for moving objects that were detected only in a few sequences. (a) Storage of candidates
for which a further matching fails. These candidates are marked by a blue dotdashed rectangle. The green dashed rectangle marks a
candidate for which a corresponding area was found again and the red short-dashed rectangle marks a candidate with successful matching.
(b) Storage of candidates for which a corresponding area was found again. The 2 areas drawn with transparency in error image I
n
indicate
the position of the candidates, but they are not part of the error image.
5 0 5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
y

(
m
)
x(m)
0 500 1000 1500
6
4
2
0
2
x

(
m
)
t(sec)
0 500 1000 1500
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
y

(
m
)
t(sec)
0 500 1000 1500
1
0.5
0
0.5

(
r
a
d
)
t(sec)
0 500 1000 1500
1
0.5
0
0.5
1
u

(
m
/
s
)
t(sec)
0 500 1000 1500
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
0.05
v

(
m
/
s
)
t(sec)
0 500 1000 1500
1
0.5
0
0.5
1
r

(
r
a
d
/
s
)
t(sec)
0 500 1000 1500
4
2
0
2
4

u

(
N
)
t(sec)
0 500 1000 1500
2
1
0
1
2

r

(
N
m
)
t(sec)
Figure 3. Plots of geometric path, time trajectories of states and control inputs for point stabilization with an initial state (x, y, , u, v, r)
0
=
(0, 2, 0, 0, 0, 0).
7. Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the National Science and
Technology Major Project (no. 2012CB821202), the Beijing
Natural Science Foundation (no. 4122043), and the
National Nature Science Foundation (no. 60874012, no.
61174057).
8. References
[1] T.I.Fossen, Marine Control Systems, Trondheim
Norway: Marine Cybernetics, 2002.
[2] K.Y.Pettersen and O.Egeland, Exponential
stabilization of an underactuated surface vessels,
Proc. 35
th
IEEE Conference on Decision and Control,
Kobe, Japan, December 1996, pp. 967-972.
[3] M.Reyhanoglu, Exponential stabilization of
an underactuated autonomous surface vessel,
Automatica, 1997, 33(12): 2249-2254.
[4] F.Mazenc, K.Y.Pettersen H.Nijmeijer, Global uniform
asymptotic stabilization of an underactuated surface
vessel, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 2002,
47(10):1759-1762.
[5] W.Dong and Y.Guo, Global time-varying stabilization
of underactuated surface vessel, IEEE Transactions on
Automatic Control, 2005, 50(6):859-864.
[6] B.L.Ma, Global -exponential asymptotic
stabilization of underactuated surface vessels,
Systems and Control Letters, 2009, 58(3): 194-201.
[7] B.L.Ma, W.Huo, Smooth time-varying uniform
asymptotic stabilization of underactuated surface
vessels, Joint 48
th
IEEE Conference on Decision
and Control, Shanghai, P.R.China, Dec.16-18, 2009,
pp.3137-3141.
[8] J.Ghommam, F.Mnif, N.Derbel, Global stabilization
and tracking control of underactuated surface vessels,
IET Control Theory and Applications, 2010, 4(1):
71-78.
[9] Z.P.Jiang, Global tracking control of underactuated
ships by Lyapunovs direct methods, Automatica,
38(2): 301-309, 2002.
[10] K.Y.Pettersen and H.Nijmeijer, Underactuated
ship tracking control: theory and experiments,
International Journal of Control, 2001, 74(14):
1435-1446.
[11] K.D.Do, Z.P.Jiang, and J.Pan, Underactuated ship
global tracking under relaxed conditions, IEEE
Transactions on Automatic Control, 2002, 47(9):
1529-1536.
[12] E.Lefeber, K.Y.Pettersen, and H.Nijmeijer, Tracking
control of an underactuated ship, IEEE Transactions
on Control Systems Technology, 2003, 11(1): 52-61.
[13] T.C.Lee and Z.P.Jiang, New cascade approach for
global k-exponential tracking of underactuated ships,
IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 2004,
49(12): 2297-2203.
Int. j. adv. robot. syst., 2013, Vol. 10, 336:2013 8
www.intechopen.com
[14] K.D.Do, Z.P.Jiang, J.Pan, Universal controllers for
stabilization and tracking of underactuated ships,
Systems and Control Letters, 2002, 47(4): 299-317.
[15] A.Behal, D.M.Dawson, W.E.Dixon, and Y.Fang,
Tracking and regulation control of an underactuated
surface vessel with nonintegrable dynamics, IEEE
Transactions on Automatic Control, 2002, 47(3):
495-500.
[16] A.P.Aguiar, A.M.Pascoal, Dynamic positioning and
way-point tracking of underactuated AUVs in the
presence of ocean currents, International Journal of
Control, 2007, 80(7): 1092-1108.
[17] K.D.Do, Z.P.Jiang and J.Pan, Robust global
stabilization of underactuated ships on a linear
course: state and output feedback, International
Journal of Control, 2003, 76(1):1-17.
[18] K.D.Do, J.Pan, State- and output-feedback robust
path-following controllers for underactuated ships
using Serret-Frenet frame, Ocean Engineering, 2004,
31(16): 1967-1997.
[19] K.D.Do, J.Pan, Global robust adaptive path following
of underactuated ships, Automatica, 2006, 42(10):
1713-1722.
[20] E.Fredriksen and K.Y.Pettersen, Global
exponential way-point maneuvering of ships:
Theory and Experiments, Automatica, 2006,
42(4):677-687.
[21] K.D.Do, J.Pan, Global tracking control of
underactuated ships with nonzero off-diagonal
terms in their system matrices, Automatica, 2005,
41(1): 87-95.
[22] K.D.Do, J.Pan, Underactuated ships follow smooth
paths with integral actions and without velocity
measurements for feedback: theory and experiments.
IEEE Transactions on Control Systems technology,
2006, 14(2): 308-322.
[23] J.H.Li, P.M.Lee, Bong-Huan Jun,Yong-Kon Lim,
Point-to-point navigation of underactuated ships,
Automatica, 2008, 44(12): 3201-3205.
[24] K.D. Do, Practical control of underactuated ships,
Ocean Engineering, 2010, 37(13): 1111-1119.
[25] E. Brhaug, A. Pavlov, E.Panteley, K.Y. Pettersen,
Straight line path following for formations of
underactuated marine surface vessels, IEEE
Transactions on Control Systems Technology, 2011,
19(3): 493-506.
[26] L. Consolini, M. Tosques, A minimum phase output
in the exact tracking problem for the nonminimum
phase underactuated surface ship. IEEE Transactions
on Automatic Control, 2012, 57(12): 3174-3180.
[27] H.K.Khalil, Nonlinear Systems (Second-Edition),
Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, USA,
1996.
[28] A.A.J.Lefeber, Tracking control of nonlinear
mechanical systems, Ph.D. Dissertation, Dept.
Mech. Eng., University of Twente, , Twente, The
Netherlands, 2000.
[29] R.W.Brockett, Asymptotic stability and feedback
stabilization, in: R.W.Brockett, R.S.Millman, and
S.J.Sussmann (Eds.) Differential Geometric Control
Theory, Birkhauser, Boston, MA, 1983, pp.181-191.
Ma Bao-Li and Xie Wen-Jing: Global Asymptotic Trajectory Tracking and Point Stabilization
of Asymmetric Underactuated Ships with Non-Diagonal Inertia/Damping Matrices
9
www.intechopen.com