BULETINUL INSTITUTULUI POLITEHNIC DIN IAI

Publicat de
Universitatea Tehnic Gheorghe Asachi din Iai
Tomul LVIII (LXII), Fasc. 1, 2012
Secia
AUTOMATIC i CALCULATOARE

SHIP ROLL STABILIZATION VIA SLIDING MODE CONTROL

AND GYROSTABILIZER
BY

HAMED HAGHIGHI and MOHAMMAD REZA JAHED-MOTLAGH

Electrical Engineering Department,
Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran

Received: December 6, 2011

Accepted for publication: January 3, 2012

Abstract. Gyrostabilizers were introduced for reducing roll motion of ships

many years ago. However, the very large size of traditional gyro stabilizers
reduced their application. Todays enhancements in mechanical design and
digital control systems brought back the gyrostabilizers into attention. This paper
improves the performances of twin wheel gyro by nonlinear sliding mode control
(SMC) method. The control strategy is robust and archives a stable system,
opposing to wave perturbations. A comparison of the SM controller and a
primary PD controller is realized. Simulation results are given to demonstrate the
performances of the proposed controller.
Key words: sliding mode control, gyrostabilizer, roll motion
2000 Mathematics Subject Classification: 93C10

1. Introduction
Reduction of roll motion is important for safety on-board ships. In
addition, rolling motion reduction is sought in order to prevent damage to cargo,
to allow the crew to work efficiently and to provide comfort for the passengers

Corresponding author; e-mail: hd.haghighi@gmail.com

52

Hamed Haghighi and Mohammad Reza Jahed-Motlagh

(Koshkouei et al., 2007). The systems that have been developed to control
unwanted movements of a ship can be classified as either external or internal
systems. In addition, they can react either actively or simply passively to reduce
ship movements. External motion control systems generate forces and torques
outside the hull of the ship and usually rely on hydrodynamic interactions.
Internal systems are most often used to generate forces and moments in the
whole body, so as to stabilize mass moving moments (Townsend et al., 2007).
There are several active devices for ship roll reduction, including finroll and rudder-roll stabilizers, gyroscopes, moving mass and activated tanks
(Koshkouei et al., 2007).
The main disadvantage of external systems such as fin-roll is their
ineffectiveness at low speeds. For low speed or zero speed state, internal
devices such as gyros are best used. A gyrostabilizer uses the property of a
rotating flywheel are slow moments on a vehicle. These moments change the
amplitude of the oscillating motion when a vehicle suffers from an external
stimulus (e.g. wave excitation of a ship) (Townsend et al., 2007).
Gyroscopic stabilization has also been used successfully to marine
vehicles to stabilize the free surface. The earliest proposals for ship-gyro
stabilization used passive devices. Dr. Otto Schlick proposed such a device for
roll reduction in 1904 (Townsend et al., 2007). The American company Sperry
then developed a system that the problem of Schlick gyroscope with an electric
motor and a brake to control the precession of the gyroscope. The motor was of
switches that respond to the feedback offered by a small measuring the
gyroscope. In this arrangement, the rate of precession made proportional to the
rate of roll of the ship. Further development involved considerations cancel twin
gyros with precession in opposite directions around the process irrelevant crosstorque that can be generated by a single gyro in manoeuvres or pitching. The
use of gear motors twin roundabout was proposed by Sperry.
Today, developments in materials, bearings, mechanical design
techniques and digital control systems have revived the interest in the gyrostabilizers. In fact, these provide improved bearing materials and custom
electric motors rotating higher prices and the use of smaller gyrostabilizers to
roll to produce moments of high reduction. Moreover, the use of digital
controls in a compact, reliable, embedded hardware, the adaptation of the
dynamic properties of the precession maximize control, to improve the
performance in sailing and changing environmental conditions. Therefore, the
time for the advancement of technology Gyrostabilizer is cheaper. This is
reinforced by the current trends toward reduced occupation of marine
operations and the increased attractiveness of small and medium size vessels.
In addition, provide gyro-stabilizers to stabilize at zero and forward speed.
Therefore, they are a very attractive option for vessels conducting operations
that need to hang around, like the Coast Guard patrol craft and fishing vessels
(Perez and Steinmann, 2009).

Bul. Inst. Polit. Iai, t. LVIII (LXII), f. 1, 2012

53

This paper discusses the model of the coupled vessel gyrostabilizer and
enquires into the associated gyrostabilizer nonlinear control design. It is also
compared sliding mode controller design method with the preceding PD
controller. To demonstrate the efficiency of the designing method, a simulation
study on the model of the Navy patrol vessel is on display base.

Fig. 1 Example of Halcyon's twin gyro stabilizer (Perez and Steinmann, 2009).

2. System Description
The gyro torque produced by a gyrostabilizer rejects the role of torque
generated by ocean waves. This centrifugal torque is generated by angular
momentum conservation. The wave pressure forces on the hull roll motion and
a moving excitation torque on the gyroscope, which is proportional to the roll.
This excitation torque changes the angular momentum, so that to develop the
spin precession wheels.-see Fig. 1 (Perez and Steinmann, 2009).
To remove the effects of the gyrostabilizer the moments about the unwanted
rotation axis of the ship, it is necessary, the flywheels rotate in opposite
directions, while also reeling the spinner in opposite directions (Townsend et
al., 2007).
The linearized model for motion of the ship in roll together with a
spinning-wheel gyrostabilizer can then be expressed as follows (Perez and
Steinmann, 2009):
I 44 + B44 + C4 4 = nK g

(1)

I g + Bg + C g = K g + p

(2)

Eq. (1) represents the ship roll dynamics, while Eq. (2) represents the
dynamics of the gyro about the precession axis. The variables and parameters of
the model are:

54

Hamed Haghighi and Mohammad Reza Jahed-Motlagh

ship roll angle, wave-induced roll moment, precession angle, p

precession control torque, I 44 moment of inertia of the ship in roll
including hydrodynamic added inertia, B44 total equivalent roll damping
coefficient including potential and viscous effects, C44 roll restoring
coefficient, I g Inertia of the a single spinning wheel along the precession axis,

Bg damping coefficient associated with friction in the precession bearings,

C g restoring coefficient associated with the mass distribution of the spinning
wheel, K g spinning angular momentum ( K g = spin I spin ), n number of
spinning wheels.
The condition that the model be accurate is:

(3)

3. Preceding PD Controller and Limitations

Fig. 2 Ship with gyro stabilizer block diagram (Perez and Steinmann, 2009).

Fig. 2 shows a simplified block diagram of model (1) (2). The

preceding state controller proposed by (Perez and Steinmann, 2009) has the
following form:

p = K K r

(4)

This is a full precession state regulator but there are some limitations
for this controller. The roll reduction is defined as:

55

Bul. Inst. Polit. Iai, t. LVIII (LXII), f. 1, 2012

H ( j )
,
RR ( ) = 1 cl

H
j

(
)
ol

(5)

where the definitions for open loop and close loop response from wave-induced
moment to roll angle are

cl ( s )
,
( s)

H cl ( s ) = ol ( s ) .
( s)

H ol ( s ) =

(6)
(7)

The reproduced RR( ) curve in Fig. 3 shows that in some sea state the
PD controller works extremely. Thus the controller in not robust and cannot be
used for different sailing conditions.
Roll reduction for different PD controllers
100
RR for = 10
RR for = 5
RR for = 2

80

RR(j )[%]

60

40

20

-20

-40
0

[rad/s]

Fig. 3 Roll reduction of PD controllers.

Consider that a negative roll reduction indicates roll amplification. This

behaviour is typical for ship roll stabilization systems with a fixed gain control.
For preventing this inconvenience, a nonlinear sliding mode controller
recommended. In the following section the design of a SMC controller is
explained.
4. SMC Controller Design
Substituting (2) into (1) leads to the following state space form of
system

56

Hamed Haghighi and Mohammad Reza Jahed-Motlagh

X = f x, d , d , d + bU ,

(8)

where x = [ x1, x 2, x3, x 4] with

x1 = , x 2 = , x3 = , x 4 =

(9)

d = and U = p . Function f (.) contains linear and nonlinear terms. The

linear term is a function of system states and the nonlinear term is a function of
sea wave disturbance. Thus we can write

f x, d , d , d = f ( x ) + f d , d , d

(10)

To ensure the asymptotical stability of the sliding mode (Slotine, 1991),

a switching surface S(t) is defined as
d

S = +
dt

n 1

x, > 0, x = x xd .

(11)

Thus control input as

U = b 1 U K sgn( S )

(12)

That equivalent control is in following form

i

U = f + g ( x )

(13)

g(x) is terms containing state variables. And considering that

f + f max
f = min
2

(14)

Then f consist of linear term of f (.) .

And finally K is in this form

K F + , > 0

(15)

F is the maximum absolute value of f d , d , d ,

57

Bul. Inst. Polit. Iai, t. LVIII (LXII), f. 1, 2012

f d,d,d F

(16)

In order to eliminate the chattering, the controller (12) can be modified

as (Boroujeni and Momeni, 2008).

sgn (S ) =

S
where 0 <
S +

(17)

Note that to apply the control signal to the system, we must use the
integral form of it.
5. Simulation Results

In order to demonstrate performance of controller the following

simulations based on a JONSWAP wave spectrum (Perez and Fossen, 2007) in
irregular beam seas by GNC toolbox (Perez and Fossen, 2010) see Fig. 4.
JONSWAP Spectrum
0.7
gamma =3.3 Hs =2 [m], w0=0.8976 [rad/s]
0.6

S( ) [m 2 s]

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0

0.5

1.5

2.5

[rad/s]

Fig. 4 JONSWAP sea wave spectrum (Perez, 2005).

Fig. 5 shows the roll time series for the two types of controllers. As
exhibited, performance of sliding mode controller is higher from PD controller
about 16% in the sea condition. The gyro precession angle curves for both
design methods are shown in Fig. 6. Control signals of controllers are shown in
Fig. 7. Fig. 8 shows roll reduction performance for different sea wave periods, in
other words, this figure says that the PD controller dos not work for various sea
conditions and thus is not robust oppose of sea perturbations. However, as shown
in figure SMC controller is robust and with this controller we can use
gyrostabilizer for different seas and oceans. The trade-off is the complex controller

58

Hamed Haghighi and Mohammad Reza Jahed-Motlagh

structure. By new advanced On-board processors this problem is provided.

JONSWAP, Hs[m]=2 T0[s]=7 Speed[m/s]=0 Enc Angl[deg]=60

PD Controller
Roll[deg]

20
Unstabilised
Stabilised,RR%[rms]=76.2943

10
0
-10
-20
0

50

100

150
Time[s]

200

250

300

JONSWAP, Hs[m]=2 T0[s]=7 Speed[m/s]=0 Enc Angl[deg]=60

SMC Controller
Roll[deg]

20
Unstabilised
Stabilised,RR%[rms]=92.2516

10
0
-10
-20
0

50

100

150
Time[s]

200

250

300

Fig. 5 Roll performance in irregular beam seas at zero speed

for two PD and SMC controllers.

PD Controller
Gyro Prec.angle[deg]

JONSWAP, Hs[m]=2 T0[s]=7 Speed[m/s]=0 Enc Angl[deg]=60

40
Precession angle of gyro

20
0
-20
-40
-60
0

50

100

150
Time[s]

200

250

300

SMC Controller
Gyro Prec.angle[deg]

JONSWAP, Hs[m]=2 T0[s]=7 Speed[m/s]=0 Enc Angl[deg]=60

100
Precession angle of gyro
50

-50
0

50

100

150
Time[s]

200

250

300

Fig. 6 Gyro precession angle performance in irregular beam seas

at zero speed for two controllers.

59

SMC Controller
Gyro Control Moment[Nm]

PD Controller
Gyro Control Moment[Nm]

Bul. Inst. Polit. Iai, t. LVIII (LXII), f. 1, 2012

2

x 10

JONSWAP
Control signal

1
0
-1
-2
0

x 10

50
4

100

150
Time[s]

200

250

300

Hs[m]=2 T0[s]=7 Speed[m/s]=0 Enc Angl[deg]=60

Control signal

0.5
0
-0.5
-1
0

50

100

150
Time[s]

200

250

300

Fig. 7 Control signals performance in irregular beam seas at

zero speed for two controllers.
Roll reduction
100
PD Controller
SMC Controller
90

RR[%]

80

70

60

50

40

30
3

7
8
Wave period[s]

10

11

12

Fig. 8 Roll reduction [%] in different sea states.

6. Conclusions

The application of traditional gyrostabilizers fell into doubt because of

their large size and weight. Todays enhancements in technology make
gyrostabilizers useful for ship motion control.
In this paper, we have presented a nonlinear sliding mode controller
with improved performance of roll reduction. The presented design method is
robust and provided stable system reducing roll motion. The designed
controller prevented chattering in the system.

60

Hamed Haghighi and Mohammad Reza Jahed-Motlagh

A comparison between the SMC controller and a simple PD controller

was also realized. The simulation results demonstrated that the gyrostabilizer
with SMC controller can be used for different sea states.
APPENDIX
Ship data and twin wheel gyrostabilizer parameters are given here.
Table 1
Data of Naval Patrol Vessel (Perez and Steinmann, 2009)
Quantity
Length between
perpendiculars
Displacement mass
Transverse
metacentric height
(GMt)
Roll radius of
gyration about CG
Non-dim. roll
damping (from model
test)
Roll natural period

Value

Units

51.5

364000

Kg

3.05

0.114

6.76

Table 2
Data of Gyrostabilizer (Perez and Steinmann, 2009)
Quantity
Value
Units
Total Unit Mass
Angular Momentum

13.6
33.7

tonne
K Nm s

REFERENCES
Boroujeni, E.A., Momeni, H.R., Adaptive Sliding Mode Control for Roll Motions of
Ships. Int. Conf. on Control, Automation and Systems ICCAS 2008, Seoul,
Korea, 2008, pp. 1622 - 1625.
Koshkouei, A.J., Burnham, K.J., Law, Y., A Comparative Study between Sliding Mode
and Proportional Integrative Derivative Controllers for Ship Roll
Stabilisation. IET Control Theory & Applications, 1 (5), pp. 1266 - 1275,
2007.
Perez, T., Steinmann, P., Analysis of Ship Roll Gyrostabiliser Control. 8th IFAC Int.
Conf. on Manoeuvring and Control of Marine Craft, Guaruj, Brazil, 2009.

Bul. Inst. Polit. Iai, t. LVIII (LXII), f. 1, 2012

61

Perez, T., Fossen, T.I., Tutorial on Modelling and Simulation of Marine System
Dynamics. IFAC Conf. on Control Applications in Marine Systems (CAMS),
Bol, Croaia, 2007.
Perez, T., Fossen, T.I., MSS - Marine Systems Simulator, 2010, www.marinecontrol.org.
Perez T., Ship Motion Control: Course Keeping and Roll Stabilisation Using Rudder
and Fins. Springer, 2005.
Slotine J., Applied Nonlinear Control. Prentice-Hall, 1991.
Townsend N.C., Murphy, A.J., Shenoi, R.A., A New Active Gyrostabiliser System for
Ride Control of Marine Vehicles. Ocean Engineering, 34 (11-12), pp.
16071617, 2007.

STABILIZAREA RULIULUI NAVELOR PRIN GIROSTABILIZATOARE I

CONTROL DE TIP SLIDING MODE
(Rezumat)
Girostabilizatoarele au fost introduse pentru reducerea micrii de ruliu a
navelor acum muli ani. Datorit dimensiunilor foarte mari ale girostabilizatoarelor
tradiionale, utilizarea acestora s-a redus semnificativ. n prezent, datorit progreselor
nregistrate pe de o parte n mecanic i pe de alta parte n controlul digital,
girostabilizatoarele au revenit n atenia cercettorilor. Lucrarea de fa propune
mbuntirea performanelor unui girostabilizator prin metoda controlului de tip Sliding
Mode (SM). Strategia de control dezvoltat este robust i permite stabilizarea
sistemului n prezena valurilor. De asemenea, este prezentat o comparaie ntre
performanele sistemelor dotate cu regulatoare de tip SM i, respectiv, PD
(proporional-derivativ). Rezultatele obinute n urma simulrii demonstreaz utilitatea
regulatorului propus.