Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-npj9w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T05:05:52.654Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A Feasibility Study of Applying Laser Line Scanning to AUV Hydrodynamic Parameter Identification

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 April 2018

Yu-Cheng Chou*
Affiliation:
(Institute of Undersea Technology, National Sun Yat-sen University, 70 Lienhai Rd., Kaohsiung 80424, Taiwan)
Madoka Nakajima
Affiliation:
(Institute of Undersea Technology, National Sun Yat-sen University, 70 Lienhai Rd., Kaohsiung 80424, Taiwan)
Hsin-Hung Chen
Affiliation:
(Institute of Undersea Technology, National Sun Yat-sen University, 70 Lienhai Rd., Kaohsiung 80424, Taiwan)
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Precise control is a key factor in enabling Unmanned Underwater Vehicles (UUVs) to complete various underwater activities. The development of UUV control rules is mostly based on UUV dynamic models. However, such dynamic models contain unknown hydrodynamic parameters that need to be identified. This paper presents a new method, Laser Line Scanning for Hydrodynamic Parameter Identification (LSHPI), which integrates laser line scanning, decoupled dynamics, and evolutionary optimisation to identify the hydrodynamic parameters of an Autonomous Underwater Vehicle (AUV). In this research, laser images, seen from an on board camera's perspective and created using Open Graphics Library (OpenGL), were used to validate LSHPI's feasibility. The accuracy of the AUV positions and Euler angles obtained by the laser image-based methods were investigated for each decoupled One-Dimensional (1D) motion and the influence of other motion disturbances on the accuracy of the obtained AUV positions or Euler angles was also evaluated. In addition, the accuracy of the surge-related hydrodynamic parameters obtained by LSHPI was investigated under different motion disturbances. Based on the hydrodynamic parameter identification results under different motion disturbances, LSHPI's feasibility was successfully validated.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Institute of Navigation 2018 
Figure 0

Figure 1. Earth-fixed and body-fixed coordinate systems.

Figure 1

Table 1. Relations between hydrodynamic parameters and 1D motions.

Figure 2

Figure 2. Assumed geometrical relations among the CG, video camera, and laser module of the AUV.

Figure 3

Figure 3. Laser image-based AUV position calculation for surge motion.

Figure 4

Figure 4. Laser image-based AUV position calculation for sway motion.

Figure 5

Figure 5. Laser image-based AUV position calculation for heave motion.

Figure 6

Figure 6. Laser image-based AUV attitude calculation for roll motion.

Figure 7

Figure 7. Laser image-based AUV attitude calculation for pitch motion.

Figure 8

Figure 8. Laser image-based AUV attitude calculation for yaw motion.

Figure 9

Figure 9. (a) An elevation view of the AUV; (b) a laser image seen from the AUV camera.

Figure 10

Figure 10. Viewing volume of the camera for creating laser images.

Figure 11

Figure 11. Dimensions (in metres) of the scanned object for the surge and yaw motions.

Figure 12

Table 2. Lengths and angle used in Figure 2.

Figure 13

Table 3. Accuracy for laser image-based postion and atttiude calculations in decoupled AUV motions.

Figure 14

Table 4. Influence of motion disturbances on the accuracy for calculated AUV positions.

Figure 15

Table 5. Influence of motion disturbances on the accuracy for calculated AUV Euler angles.

Figure 16

Figure 12. Relations between actual and calculated pitch angles with different heave disturbances.

Figure 17

Figure 13. Relations between pitch angle and laser line position on the laser scanning plane without disturbances.

Figure 18

Table 6. Physical properties and surge-related hydrodynamic parameters of an AUV.

Figure 19

Figure 14. Actual position datasets for a 1-metre surge motion at X = 4 N and X = 8 N.

Figure 20

Figure 15. Artificial pitch and yaw disturbances for surge motion at X = 4 N.

Figure 21

Figure 16. Artificial pitch and yaw disturbances for surge motion at X = 8 N.

Figure 22

Figure 17. $\psi_{S_{i}}\lpar i =1\comma \; 2\comma \; \ldots$) obtained from laser images.

Figure 23

Figure 18. AUV actual positions and positions obtained from laser line images.

Figure 24

Table 7. ψS and maximum absolute position error for each of the six surge motions.

Figure 25

Table 8. Settings of the GA's parameters.

Figure 26

Table 9. Search range of each hydrodynamic parameter in the GA.

Figure 27

Table 10. Hydrodynamic parameters identified for three disturbance conditions.

Figure 28

Table 11. Max. absolute errors between actual and identified-parameter-based positions for 5-m surge motions.