A Maneuvering Model for an Underwater Vehicle Near a Free Surface—Part III: Simulation and Control Under Waves

Valentinis, Francis; Battista, Thomas; Woolsey, Craig A.

doi:10.1109/joe.2023.3234811

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In particular, energy-shaping has been shown to be an effective method of control for nonlinear motions where small-perturbation models are no longer valid. For example, energy-based control design has had previous success in applications such as the nearsurface depth-keeping of submarines [2], attitude and speed tracking of underactuated AUVs [3], and cross-track control using potential shaping [4]. Additionally, the LNMS model can be used in model-based estimation to predict dynamically feasible trajectories of near-surface vessels undergoing aggressive maneuvers or to run near real-time simulations for the health monitoring of a vehicle.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Effect of a Linear Free Surface Boundary Condition on the Steady-State Wave-Making of Shallowly Submerged Underwater Vehicles

Lambert

Brizzolara

Woolsey

2023

JMSE

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Near-surface simulation methods for shallowly submerged underwater vehicles are necessary for the population of a variety of free-surface-affected, coefficient-based maneuvering and seakeeping models. Simulations vary in complexity and computational costs, often sacrificing accuracy for simplicity and speed. One particular simplifying assumption, the linearization of the free surface boundary conditions, is explored in this study by comparing the steady-state wave-making characteristics of a shallowly submerged prolate spheroid using two different simulation methods at several submergence depths and forward speeds. Hydrodynamic responses are compared between a time-domain boundary element method that makes use of a linearized free surface boundary condition and an inviscid, volume of fluid Reynolds-Averaged Navier–Stokes computational fluid dynamics code that imposes no explicit free surface boundary condition. Differences of up to 22.6%, 32.5%, and 33.3% are found in the prediction of steady state surge force, heave force, and pitch moment, respectively. The largest differences between the two simulation methods arise for motions occurring at small submergences and large wave-making velocities where linear free-surface assumptions become less valid. Nonlinearities that occur in such cases are revealed through physical artifacts such as wave steepening, wave breaking, and high-energy waves. A further examination of near-surface viscous forces reveals that the viscous drag on the vessel is depth dependent due to the changing velocity profile around the body.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A framework for the LNMS model was developed from first-principle energy considerations by Battista et al using potential flow formulations [2,5,6]. The model was further reformulated to allow for parameter computation using a three-dimensional boundary element method (BEM) [7,8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%