68 research outputs found

    Controlling a cargo ship without human experience based on deep Q-network

    Get PDF
    Human experience is regarded as an indispensable part of artificial intelligence in the process of controlling or decision making for autonomous cargo ships. In this paper, a novel Deep Q-Network-based (DQN) approach is proposed, which performs satisfactorily in controlling a cargo ship automatically without any human experience. At the very beginning, we use the model of KRISO Very Large Crude Carrier (KVLCC2) to describe a cargo ship. To manipulate this ship has to conquer great inertia and relatively insufficient driving force. Subsequently, customary waterways, regulations, conventions are described with Artificial Potential Field and value-functions in DQN. Based on this, the artificial intelligence of planning and controlling a cargo ship can be obtained by undertaking sufficient training, which can control the ship directly, while avoiding collisions, keeping its position in the middle of the route as much as possible. In simulation experiments, it is demonstrated that such an approach performs better than manual works and other traditional methods in most conditions, which makes the proposed method a promising solution in improving the autonomy level of cargo ships

    COLREG-Compliant Collision Avoidance for Unmanned Surface Vehicle using Deep Reinforcement Learning

    Full text link
    Path Following and Collision Avoidance, be it for unmanned surface vessels or other autonomous vehicles, are two fundamental guidance problems in robotics. For many decades, they have been subject to academic study, leading to a vast number of proposed approaches. However, they have mostly been treated as separate problems, and have typically relied on non-linear first-principles models with parameters that can only be determined experimentally. The rise of Deep Reinforcement Learning (DRL) in recent years suggests an alternative approach: end-to-end learning of the optimal guidance policy from scratch by means of a trial-and-error based approach. In this article, we explore the potential of Proximal Policy Optimization (PPO), a DRL algorithm with demonstrated state-of-the-art performance on Continuous Control tasks, when applied to the dual-objective problem of controlling an underactuated Autonomous Surface Vehicle in a COLREGs compliant manner such that it follows an a priori known desired path while avoiding collisions with other vessels along the way. Based on high-fidelity elevation and AIS tracking data from the Trondheim Fjord, an inlet of the Norwegian sea, we evaluate the trained agent's performance in challenging, dynamic real-world scenarios where the ultimate success of the agent rests upon its ability to navigate non-uniform marine terrain while handling challenging, but realistic vessel encounters

    Experimental Validation Of An Integrated Guidance And Control System For Marine Surface Vessels

    Get PDF
    Autonomous operation of marine surface vessels is vital for minimizing human errors and providing efficient operations of ships under varying sea states and environmental conditions which is complicated by the highly nonlinear dynamics of marine surface vessels. To deal with modelling imprecision and unpredictable disturbances, the sliding mode methodology has been employed to devise a heading and a surge displacement controller. The implementation of such a controller necessitates the availability of all state variables of the vessel. However, the measured signals in the current study are limited to the global X and Y positioning coordinates of the boat that are generated by a GPS system. Thus, a nonlinear observer, based on the sliding mode methodology, has been implemented to yield accurate estimates of the state variables in the presence of both structured and unstructured uncertainties. Successful autonomous operation of a marine surface vessel requires a holistic approach encompassing a navigation system, robust nonlinear controllers and observers. Since the overwhelming majority of the experimental work on autonomous marine surface vessels was not conducted in truly uncontrolled real-world environments. The first goal of this work was to experimentally validate a fully-integrated LOS guidance system with a sliding mode controller and observer using a 16โ€™ Tracker Pro Guide V-16 aluminium boat with a 60 hp. Mercury outboard motor operating in the uncontrolled open-water environment of Lake St. Clair, Michigan. The fully integrated guidance and controller-observer system was tested in a model-less configuration, whereby all information provided from the vesselโ€™s nominal model have been ignored. The experimental data serves to demonstrate the robustness and good tracking characteristics of the fully-integrated guidance and controller/observer system by overcoming the large errors induced at the beginning of each segment and converging the boat to the desired trajectory in spite of the presence of environmental disturbances. The second focus of this work was to combine a collision avoidance method with the guidance system that accounted for โ€œInternational Regulations for Prevention of Collisions at Seaโ€ abbreviated as COLREGS. This new system then needed to be added into the existing architecture. The velocity obstacles method was selected as the base to build upon and additional restrictions were incorporated to account for these additional rules. This completed system was then validated with a software in the loop simulation

    A Survey of Recent Machine Learning Solutions for Ship Collision Avoidance and Mission Planning

    Get PDF
    Machine Learning (ML) techniques have gained significant traction as a means of improving the autonomy of marine vehicles over the last few years. This article surveys the recent ML approaches utilised for ship collision avoidance (COLAV) and mission planning. Following an overview of the ever-expanding ML exploitation for maritime vehicles, key topics in the mission planning of ships are outlined. Notable papers with direct and indirect applications to the COLAV subject are technically reviewed and compared. Critiques, challenges, and future directions are also identified. The outcome clearly demonstrates the thriving research in this field, even though commercial marine ships incorporating machine intelligence able to perform autonomously under all operating conditions are still a long way off

    A Survey of Recent Machine Learning Solutions for Ship Collision Avoidance and Mission Planning

    Get PDF
    Machine Learning (ML) techniques have gained significant traction as a means of improving the autonomy of marine vehicles over the last few years. This article surveys the recent ML approaches utilised for ship collision avoidance (COLAV) and mission planning. Following an overview of the ever-expanding ML exploitation for maritime vehicles, key topics in the mission planning of ships are outlined. Notable papers with direct and indirect applications to the COLAV subject are technically reviewed and compared. Critiques, challenges, and future directions are also identified. The outcome clearly demonstrates the thriving research in this field, even though commercial marine ships incorporating machine intelligence able to perform autonomously under all operating conditions are still a long way off.Peer reviewe

    Collision Avoidance for Autonomous Surface Vessels using Novel Artificial Potential Fields

    Full text link
    As the demand for transportation through waterways continues to rise, the number of vessels plying the waters has correspondingly increased. This has resulted in a greater number of accidents and collisions between ships, some of which lead to significant loss of life and financial losses. Research has shown that human error is a major factor responsible for such incidents. The maritime industry is constantly exploring newer approaches to autonomy to mitigate this issue. This study presents the use of novel Artificial Potential Fields (APFs) to perform obstacle and collision avoidance in marine environments. This study highlights the advantage of harmonic functions over traditional functions in modeling potential fields. With a modification, the method is extended to effectively avoid dynamic obstacles while adhering to COLREGs. Improved performance is observed as compared to the traditional potential fields and also against the popular velocity obstacle approach. A comprehensive statistical analysis is also performed through Monte Carlo simulations in different congested environments that emulate real traffic conditions to demonstrate robustness of the approach.Comment: 28 pages, 30 figure

    aColor: Mechatronics, Machine Learning, and Communications in an Unmanned Surface Vehicle

    Full text link
    The aim of this work is to offer an overview of the research questions, solutions, and challenges faced by the project aColor ("Autonomous and Collaborative Offshore Robotics"). This initiative incorporates three different research areas, namely, mechatronics, machine learning, and communications. It is implemented in an autonomous offshore multicomponent robotic system having an Unmanned Surface Vehicle (USV) as its main subsystem. Our results across the three areas of work are systematically outlined in this paper by demonstrating the advantages and capabilities of the proposed system for different Guidance, Navigation, and Control missions, as well as for the high-speed and long-range bidirectional connectivity purposes across all autonomous subsystems. Challenges for the future are also identified by this study, thus offering an outline for the next steps of the aColor project.Comment: Paper was originally submitted to and presented in the 8th Transport Research Arena TRA 2020, April 27-30, 2020, Helsinki, Finlan

    Robust trajectory tracking control for unmanned surface vessels under motion constraints and environmental disturbances

    Get PDF
    To achieve a fully autonomous navigation for unmanned surface vessels (USVs), a robust control capability is essential. The control of USVs in complex maritime environments is rather challenging as numerous system uncertainties and environmental influences affect the control performance. This paper therefore investigates the trajectory tracking control problem for USVs with motion constraints and environmental disturbances. Two different controllers are proposed to achieve the task. The first approach is mainly based on the backstepping technique augmented by a virtual system to compensate for the disturbance and an auxiliary system to bound the input in the saturation limit. The second control scheme is mainly based on the normalisation technique, with which the bound of the input can be limited in the constraints by tuning the control parameters. The stability of the two control schemes is demonstrated by the Lyapunov theory. Finally, simulations are conducted to verify the effectiveness of the proposed controllers. The introduced solutions enable USVs to follow complex trajectories in an adverse environment with varying ocean currents

    ํ•ด์–‘ ์ž‘์—… ์ง€์›์„ ์˜ ์ž์œจ ์šดํ•ญ ๋ฐ ์„ค์น˜ ์ž‘์—… ์ง€์›์„ ์œ„ํ•œ ์‹œ๋ฎฌ๋ ˆ์ด์…˜ ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•

    Get PDF
    ํ•™์œ„๋…ผ๋ฌธ (๋ฐ•์‚ฌ)-- ์„œ์šธ๋Œ€ํ•™๊ต ๋Œ€ํ•™์› : ๊ณต๊ณผ๋Œ€ํ•™ ์กฐ์„ ํ•ด์–‘๊ณตํ•™๊ณผ, 2019. 2. ๋…ธ๋ช…์ผ.Autonomous ships have gained a huge amount of interest in recent years, like their counterparts on land{autonomous cars, because of their potential to significantly lower the cost of operation, attract seagoing professionals and increase transportation safety. Technologies developed for the autonomous ships have potential to notably reduce maritime accidents where 75% cases can be attributed to human error and a significant proportion of these are caused by fatigue and attention deficit. However, developing a high-level autonomous system which can operate in an unstructured and unpredictable environment is still a challenging task. When the autonomous ships are operating in the congested waterway with other manned or unmanned vessels, the collision avoidance algorithm is the crucial point in keeping the safety of both the own ship and any encountered ships. Instead of developing new traffic rules for the autonomous ships to avoid collisions with each other, autonomous ships are expected to follow the existing guidelines based on the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea (COLREGs). Furthermore, when using the crane on the autonomous ship to transfer and install subsea equipment to the seabed, the heave and swaying phenomenon of the subsea equipment at the end of flexible wire ropes makes its positioning at an exact position is very difficult. As a result, an Anti-Motion Control (AMC) system for the crane is necessary to ensure the successful installation operation. The autonomous ship is highly relying on the effectiveness of autonomous systems such as autonomous path following system, collision avoidance system, crane control system and so on. During the previous two decades, considerable attention has been paid to develop robust autonomous systems. However, several are facing challenges and it is worthwhile devoting much effort to this. First of all, the development and testing of the proposed control algorithms should be adapted across a variety of environmental conditions including wave, wind, and current. This is one of the challenges of this work aimed at creating an autonomous path following and collision avoidance system in the ship. Secondly, the collision avoidance system has to comply with the regulations and rules in developing an autonomous ship. Thirdly, AMC system with anti-sway abilities for a knuckle boom crane remains problems regarding its under-actuated mechanism. At last, the performance of the control system should be evaluated in advance of the operation to perform its function successfully. In particular, such performance analysis is often very costly and time-consuming, and realistic conditions are typically impossible to establish in a testing environment. Consequently, to address these issues, we proposed a simulation framework with the following scenarios, which including the autonomous navigation scenario and crane operation scenario. The research object of this study is an autonomous offshore support vessel (OSV), which provides support services to offshore oil and gas field development such as offshore drilling, pipe laying, and oil producing assets (production platforms and FPSOs) utilized in EP (Exploration Production) activities. Assume that the autonomous OSV confronts an urgent mission under the harsh environmental conditions: on the way to an imperative offshore construction site, the autonomous OSV has to avoid target ships while following a predefined path. When arriving at the construction site, it starts to install a piece of subsea equipment on the seabed. So what technologies are needed, what should be invested for ensuring the autonomous OSV could robustly kilometers from shore, and how can an autonomous OSV be made at least as safe as the conventional ship. In this dissertation, we focus on the above critical activities for answering the above questions. In the general context of the autonomous navigation and crane control problem, the objective of this dissertation is thus fivefold: โ€ข Developing a COLREGs-compliant collision avoidance system. โ€ข Building a robust path following and collision avoidance system which can handle the unknown and complicated environment. โ€ข Investigating an efficient multi-ship collision avoidance method enable it easy to extend. โ€ข Proposing a hardware-in-the-loop simulation environment for the AHC system. โ€ข Solving the anti-sway problem of the knuckle boom crane on an autonomous OSV. First of all, we propose a novel deep reinforcement learning (RL) algorithm to achieve effective and efficient capabilities of the path following and collision avoidance system. To perform and verify the proposed algorithm, we conducted simulations for an autonomous ship under unknown environmental disturbance iiito adjust its heading in real-time. A three-degree-of-freedom dynamic model of the autonomous ship was developed, and the Line-of-sight (LOS) guidance system was used to converge the autonomous ship to follow the predefined path. Then, a proximal policy optimization (PPO) algorithm was implemented on the problem. By applying the advanced deep RL method, in which the autonomous OSV learns the best behavior through repeated trials to determine a safe and economical avoidance behavior in various circumstances. The simulation results showed that the proposed algorithm has the capabilities to guarantee collision avoidance of moving encountered ships while ensuring following a predefined path. Also, the algorithm demonstrated that it could manage complex scenarios with various encountered ships in compliance with COLREGs and have the excellent adaptability to the unknown, sophisticated environment. Next, the AMC system includes Anti-Heave Control (AHC) and Anti-Sway Control (ASC), which is applied to install subsea equipment in regular and irregular for performance analysis. We used the proportional-integral-derivative (PID) control method and the sliding mode control method respectively to achieve the control objective. The simulation results show that heave and sway motion could be significantly reduced by the proposed control methods during the construction. Moreover, to evaluate the proposed control system, we have constructed the HILS environment for the AHC system, then conducted a performance analysis of it. The simulation results show the AHC system could be evaluated effectively within the HILS environment. We can conclude that the proposed or adopted methods solve the problems issued in autonomous system design.ํ•ด์–‘ ์ž‘์—… ์ง€์›์„  (Offshore Support Vessel: OSV)์˜ ๊ฒฝ์šฐ ๊ทนํ•œ์˜ ํ™˜๊ฒฝ์—๋„ ๋ถˆ๊ตฌํ•˜๊ณ  ์ถœํ•ญํ•˜์—ฌ ํ•ด์ƒ์—์„œ ์ž‘์—…์„ ์ˆ˜ํ–‰ํ•ด์•ผ ํ•˜๋Š” ๊ฒฝ์šฐ๊ฐ€ ์žˆ๋‹ค. ์ด๋Ÿฌํ•œ ์œ„ํ—˜์—์˜ ๋…ธ์ถœ์„ ์ตœ์†Œํ™”ํ•˜๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•ด ์ž์œจ ์šดํ•ญ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์š”๊ตฌ๊ฐ€ ์ฆ๊ฐ€ํ•˜๊ณ  ์žˆ๋‹ค. ์—ฌ๊ธฐ์„œ์˜ ์ž์œจ ์šดํ•ญ์€ ์„ ๋ฐ•์ด ์ถœ๋ฐœ์ง€์—์„œ ๋ชฉ์ ์ง€๊นŒ์ง€ ์‚ฌ๋žŒ์˜ ๋„์›€ ์—†์ด ์ด๋™ํ•จ์„ ์˜๋ฏธํ•œ๋‹ค. ์ž์œจ ์šดํ•ญ ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•์€ ๊ฒฝ๋กœ ์ถ”์ข… ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•๊ณผ ์ถฉ๋Œ ํšŒํ”ผ ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•์„ ํฌํ•จํ•œ๋‹ค. ์šฐ์„ , ์šดํ•ญ ๋ฐ ์ž‘์—… ์ค‘ ํ™˜๊ฒฝ ํ•˜์ค‘ (๋ฐ”๋žŒ, ํŒŒ๋„, ์กฐ๋ฅ˜ ๋“ฑ)์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ๊ณ ๋ ค๋ฅผ ํ•ด์•ผ ํ•˜๊ณ , ๊ตญ์ œ ํ•ด์ƒ ์ถฉ๋Œ ์˜ˆ๋ฐฉ ๊ทœ์น™ (Convention of the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, COLREGs)์— ์˜ํ•œ ์„ ๋ฐ•๊ฐ„์˜ ํ•ญ๋ฒ• ๊ทœ์ •์„ ๊ณ ๋ คํ•˜์—ฌ ์ถฉ๋Œ ํšŒํ”ผ ๊ทœ์น™์„ ์ค€์ˆ˜ํ•ด์•ผ ํ•œ๋‹ค. ํŠนํžˆ ์—ฐ๊ทผํ•ด์˜ ๋ณต์žกํ•œ ํ•ด์—ญ์—์„œ๋Š” ๋งŽ์€ ์„ ๋ฐ•์„ ์ž๋™์œผ๋กœ ํšŒํ”ผํ•  ํ•„์š”๊ฐ€ ์žˆ๋‹ค. ๊ธฐ์กด์˜ ํ•ด์„์ ์ธ ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•์„ ์‚ฌ์šฉํ•˜๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•ด์„œ๋Š” ์„ ๋ฐ•๋“ค์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์ •ํ™•ํ•œ ์‹œ์Šคํ…œ ๋ชจ๋ธ๋ง์ด ๋˜์–ด์•ผ ํ•˜๋ฉฐ, ๊ทธ ๊ณผ์ •์—์„œ ๊ฒฝํ—˜ (experience)์— ์˜์กดํ•˜๋Š” ํŒŒ๋ผ๋ฏธํ„ฐ ํŠœ๋‹์ด ํ•„์ˆ˜์ ์ด๋‹ค. ๋˜ํ•œ, ํšŒํ”ผํ•ด์•ผ ํ•  ์„ ๋ฐ• ์ˆ˜๊ฐ€ ๋งŽ์•„์งˆ ๊ฒฝ์šฐ ์‹œ์Šคํ…œ ๋ชจ๋ธ์ด ์ปค์ง€๊ฒŒ ๋˜๊ณ  ๊ณ„์‚ฐ ์–‘๊ณผ ๊ณ„์‚ฐ ์‹œ๊ฐ„์ด ๋Š˜์–ด๋‚˜ ์‹ค์‹œ๊ฐ„ ์ ์šฉ์ด ์–ด๋ ต๋‹ค๋Š” ๋‹จ์ ์ด ์žˆ๋‹ค. ๋˜ํ•œ, ๊ฒฝ๋กœ ์ถ”์ข… ๋ฐ ์ถฉ๋Œ ํšŒํ”ผ๋ฅผ ํฌํ•จํ•˜์—ฌ ์ž์œจ ์šดํ•ญ ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•์„ ์ ์šฉํ•˜๊ธฐ๊ฐ€ ์–ด๋ ต๋‹ค. ๋”ฐ๋ผ์„œ ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์—์„œ๋Š” ๊ฐ•ํ™” ํ•™์Šต (Reinforcement Learning: RL) ๊ธฐ๋ฒ•์„ ์ด์šฉํ•˜์—ฌ ๊ธฐ์กด ํ•ด์„์ ์ธ ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•์˜ ๋ฌธ์ œ์ ์„ ๊ทน๋ณตํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋Š” ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•์„ ์ œ์•ˆํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ๊ฒฝ๋กœ๋ฅผ ์ถ”์ข…ํ•˜๋Š” ์„ ๋ฐ• (agent)์€ ์™ธ๋ถ€ ํ™˜๊ฒฝ (environment)๊ณผ ์ƒํ˜ธ์ž‘์šฉํ•˜๋ฉด์„œ ํ•™์Šต์„ ์ง„ํ–‰ํ•œ๋‹ค. State S_0 (์„ ๋ฐ•์˜ ์›€์ง์ž„๊ณผ ๊ด€๋ จ๋œ ๊ฐ์ข… ์ƒํƒœ) ๊ฐ€์ง€๋Š” agent๋Š” policy (ํ˜„์žฌ ์œ„์น˜์—์„œ ์–ด๋–ค ์›€์ง์ž„์„ ์„ ํƒํ•  ๊ฒƒ์ธ๊ฐ€)์— ๋”ฐ๋ผ action A_0 (์›€์ง์ผ ๋ฐฉํ–ฅ) ์ทจํ•œ๋‹ค. ์ด์— environment๋Š” agent์˜ ๋‹ค์Œ state S_1 ์„ ๊ณ„์‚ฐํ•˜๊ณ , ๊ทธ์— ๋”ฐ๋ฅธ ๋ณด์ƒ R_0 (ํ•ด๋‹น ์›€์ง์ž„์˜ ์ ํ•ฉ์„ฑ)์„ ๊ฒฐ์ •ํ•˜์—ฌ agent์—๊ฒŒ ์ „๋‹ฌํ•œ๋‹ค. ์ด๋Ÿฌํ•œ ์ž‘์—…์„ ๋ฐ˜๋ณตํ•˜๋ฉด์„œ ๋ณด์ƒ์ด ์ตœ๋Œ€๊ฐ€ ๋˜๋„๋ก policy๋ฅผ ํ•™์Šตํ•˜๊ฒŒ ๋œ๋‹ค. ํ•œํŽธ, ํ•ด์ƒ์—์„œ ํฌ๋ ˆ์ธ์„ ์ด์šฉํ•œ ์žฅ๋น„์˜ ์ด๋™์ด๋‚˜ ์„ค์น˜ ์ž‘์—… ์‹œ ์œ„ํ—˜์„ ์ค„์ด๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•ด ํฌ๋ ˆ์ธ์˜ ๊ฑฐ๋™ ์ œ์–ด์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์š”๊ตฌ๊ฐ€ ์ฆ๊ฐ€ํ•˜๊ณ  ์žˆ๋‹ค. ํŠนํžˆ ํ•ด์ƒ์—์„œ๋Š” ์„ ๋ฐ•์˜ ์šด๋™์— ์˜ํ•ด ํฌ๋ ˆ์ธ์— ๋งค๋‹ฌ๋ฆฐ ๋ฌผ์ฒด๊ฐ€ ์ƒํ•˜ ๋™์š” (heave)์™€ ํฌ๋ ˆ์ธ์„ ๊ธฐ์ค€์œผ๋กœ ์ขŒ์šฐ ๋™์š” (sway)๊ฐ€ ๋ฐœ์ƒํ•˜๋Š”๋ฐ, ์ด๋Ÿฌํ•œ ์šด๋™์€ ์ž‘์—…์„ ์ง€์—ฐ์‹œํ‚ค๊ณ , ์ •ํ™•ํ•œ ์œ„์น˜์— ๋ฌผ์ฒด๋ฅผ ๋†“์ง€ ๋ชปํ•˜๊ฒŒ ํ•˜๋ฉฐ, ์ž์นซ ์ฃผ๋ณ€ ๊ตฌ์กฐ๋ฌผ๊ณผ์˜ ์ถฉ๋Œ์„ ์•ผ๊ธฐํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋‹ค. ์ด์™€ ๊ฐ™์€ ๋™์š”๋ฅผ ์ตœ์†Œํ™”ํ•˜๋Š” Anti-Motion Control (AMC) ์‹œ์Šคํ…œ์€ Anti-Heave Control (AHC)๊ณผ Anti-Sway Control (ASC)์„ ํฌํ•จํ•œ๋‹ค. ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์—์„œ๋Š” ํ•ด์–‘ ์ž‘์—… ์ง€์›์„ ์— ์ ํ•ฉํ•œ AMC ์‹œ์Šคํ…œ์˜ ์„ค๊ณ„ ๋ฐ ๊ฒ€์ฆ ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•์„ ์—ฐ๊ตฌํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ๋จผ์ € ์ƒํ•˜ ๋™์š”๋ฅผ ์ตœ์†Œํ™”ํ•˜๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•ด ํฌ๋ ˆ์ธ์˜ ์™€์ด์–ด ๊ธธ์ด๋ฅผ ๋Šฅ๋™์ ์œผ๋กœ ์กฐ์ •ํ•˜๋Š” AHC ์‹œ์Šคํ…œ์„ ์„ค๊ณ„ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ๋˜ํ•œ, ๊ธฐ์กด์˜ ์ œ์–ด ์‹œ์Šคํ…œ์˜ ๊ฒ€์ฆ ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•์€ ์‹ค์ œ ์„ ๋ฐ•์ด๋‚˜ ํ•ด์–‘ ๊ตฌ์กฐ๋ฌผ์— ํ•ด๋‹น ์ œ์–ด ์‹œ์Šคํ…œ์„ ์ง์ ‘ ์„ค์น˜ํ•˜๊ธฐ ์ „์—๋Š” ๊ทธ ์„ฑ๋Šฅ์„ ํ…Œ์ŠคํŠธํ•˜๊ธฐ๊ฐ€ ํž˜๋“ค์—ˆ๋‹ค. ์ด๋ฅผ ํ•ด๊ฒฐํ•˜๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•ด ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์—์„œ๋Š” Hardware-In-the-Loop Simulation (HILS) ๊ธฐ๋ฒ•์„ ํ™œ์šฉํ•˜์—ฌ AHC ์‹œ์Šคํ…œ์˜ ๊ฒ€์ฆ ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•์„ ์—ฐ๊ตฌํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ๋˜ํ•œ, ASC ์‹œ์Šคํ…œ์„ ์„ค๊ณ„ํ•  ๋•Œ ์ œ์–ด ๋Œ€์ƒ์ด under-actuated ์‹œ์Šคํ…œ์ด๊ธฐ ๋•Œ๋ฌธ์— ์ œ์–ดํ•˜๊ธฐ๊ฐ€ ๋งค์šฐ ์–ด๋ ต๋‹ค. ๋”ฐ๋ผ์„œ ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์—์„œ๋Š” sliding mode control ์•Œ๊ณ ๋ฆฌ์ฆ˜์„ ์ด์šฉํ•˜๋ฉฐ ๋‹ค๊ด€์ ˆ ํฌ๋ ˆ์ธ (knuckle boom crane)์˜ ๊ด€์ ˆ (joint) ๊ฐ๋„๋ฅผ ์ œ์–ดํ•˜์—ฌ ์ขŒ์šฐ ๋™์š”๋ฅผ ์ค„์ผ ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋Š” ASC ์‹œ์Šคํ…œ์„ ์„ค๊ณ„ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค.Chapter 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Background and Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1.2 Requirements for Autonomous Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 1.2.1 Path Following for Autonomous Ship . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 1.2.2 Collision Avoidance for Autonomous Ship . . . . . . . . . 5 1.2.3 Anti-Motion Control System for Autonomous Ship . . . . 6 1.3 Related Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 1.3.1 Related Work for Path Following System . . . . . . . . . 9 1.3.2 Related Work for Collision Avoidance System . . . . . . . 9 1.3.3 Related Work for Anti-Heave Control System . . . . . . . 13 1.3.4 Related Work for Anti-Sway Control System . . . . . . . 14 1.4 Configuration of Simulation Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 1.4.1 Application Layer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 1.4.2 Autonomous Ship Design Layer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 1.4.3 General Technique Layer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 1.5 Contributions (Originality) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Chapter 2 Theoretical Backgrounds 20 2.1 Maneuvering Model for Autonomous Ship . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 2.1.1 Kinematic Equation for Autonomous Ship . . . . . . . . . 20 2.1.2 Kinetic Equation for Autonomous Ship . . . . . . . . . . 21 2.2 Multibody Dynamics Model for Knuckle Boom Crane of Autonomous Ship. . . 25 2.2.1 Embedding Techniques . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 2.3 Control System Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 2.3.1 Proportional-Integral-Derivative (PID) Control . . . . . . 31 2.3.2 Sliding Mode Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 2.4 Deep Reinforcement Learning Algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 2.4.1 Value Based Learning Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 2.4.2 Policy Based Learning Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 2.4.3 Actor-Critic Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 2.5 Hardware-in-the-Loop Simulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 2.5.1 Integrated Simulation Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 Chapter 3 Path Following Method for Autonomous OSV 46 3.1 Guidance System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 3.1.1 Line-of-sight Guidance System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 3.2 Deep Reinforcement Learning for Path Following System . . . . . 50 3.2.1 Deep Reinforcement Learning Setup . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 3.2.2 Neural Network Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 3.2.3 Training Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 3.3 Implementation and Simulation Result . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 3.3.1 Implementation for Path Following System . . . . . . . . 62 3.3.2 Simulation Result . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 3.4 Comparison Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 3.4.1 Comparison Result of PPO with PID . . . . . . . . . . . 83 3.4.2 Comparison Result of PPO with Deep Q-Network (DQN) 87 Chapter 4 Collision Avoidance Method for Autonomous OSV 89 4.1 Deep Reinforcement Learning for Collision Avoidance System . . 89 4.1.1 Deep Reinforcement Learning Setup . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 4.1.2 Neural Network Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 4.1.3 Training Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94 4.2 Implementation and Simulation Result . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 4.2.1 Implementation for Collision Avoidance System . . . . . . 95 4.2.2 Simulation Result . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 4.3 Implementation and Simulation Result for Multi-ship Collision Avoidance Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 4.3.1 Limitations of Multi-ship Collision Avoidance Method - 1 107 4.3.2 Limitations of Multi-ship Collision Avoidance Method - 2 108 4.3.3 Implementation of Multi-ship Collision Avoidance Method 110 4.3.4 Simulation Result of Multi-ship Collision Avoidance Method 118 Chapter 5 Anti-Motion Control Method for Knuckle Boom Crane 129 5.1 Configuration of HILS for Anti-Heave Control System . . . . . . 129 5.1.1 Virtual Mechanical System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132 5.1.2 Virtual Sensor and Actuator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138 5.1.3 Control System Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141 5.1.4 Integrated Simulation Interface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142 5.2 Implementation and Simulation Result of HILS for Anti-Heave Control System . . . . . . . . 145 5.2.1 Implementation of HILS for Anti-Heave Control System . 145 5.2.2 Simulation Result of HILS for Anti-Heave Control System 146 5.3 Validation of HILS for Anti-Heave Control System . . . . . . . . 159 5.3.1 Hardware Setup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159 5.3.2 Comparison Result . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161 5.4 Configuration of Anti-Sway Control System . . . . . . . . . . . . 162 5.4.1 Mechanical System for Knuckle Boom Crane . . . . . . . 162 5.4.2 Anti-Sway Control System Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165 5.4.3 Implementation and Simulation Result of Anti-Sway Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168 Chapter 6 Conclusions and Future Works 176 Bibliography 178 Chapter A Appendix 186 ๊ตญ๋ฌธ์ดˆ๋ก 188Docto

    Path planning and collision avoidance for autonomous surface vehicles I: a review

    Get PDF
    Autonomous surface vehicles are gaining increasing attention worldwide due to the potential benefits of improving safety and efficiency. This has raised the interest in developing methods for path planning that can reduce the risk of collisions, groundings, and stranding accidents at sea, as well as costs and time expenditure. In this paper, we review guidance, and more specifically, path planning algorithms of autonomous surface vehicles and their classification. In particular, we highlight vessel autonomy, regulatory framework, guidance, navigation and control components, advances in the industry, and previous reviews in the field. In addition, we analyse the terminology used in the literature and attempt to clarify ambiguities in commonly used terms related to path planning. Finally, we summarise and discuss our findings and highlight the potential need for new regulations for autonomous surface vehicles
    • โ€ฆ
    corecore