2000
DOI: 10.1109/48.838986
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Modeling and identification of open-frame variable configuration unmanned underwater vehicles

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
112
0
4

Year Published

2007
2007
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 211 publications
(123 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
1
112
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…Besides, every element of these matrices may split into a pair of relatively close values regarding positive and negative velocities for each DoF, and may yet vary about the nominal values (Caccia et al, 2000;Lewandowski, 2004). The factors affecting M naturally affect C(ν).…”
Section: Control Plant Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Besides, every element of these matrices may split into a pair of relatively close values regarding positive and negative velocities for each DoF, and may yet vary about the nominal values (Caccia et al, 2000;Lewandowski, 2004). The factors affecting M naturally affect C(ν).…”
Section: Control Plant Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The nominal matrices C(ν) and D Q may differ from their actual counterparts, as C(ν) and D Q have fixed entries, whereas both actual matrices may vary during operation, see Section 2. The nominal matrices often have diagonal structures, because it is difficult to obtain accurate estimates of their nondiagonal elements (Caccia et al, 2000;Fossen, 2011;Lewandowski, 2004;Sørensen, 2013). The vector g may also slightly differ from the actual g. The vector u LIN represents the best endeavour towards linearising the dynamics of the CPM.…”
Section: Linearisation Of the Dynamics Of The Cpmmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Another approach uses system identification way such as adaptive and least-square-based estimation to estimate the parameters of the ROV. It was applied to the following ROVs namely: ROV Hylas [19], ROMEO [2], Johns Hopkins University ROV (JHUROV) [20], C-SCOUT AUV [21] and VideoRay ROV [22]. The results showed the adaptive method was able to predict the ROV motion better than the least-square method.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A dynamics model of an ROV for designing the GNC [1] is required. Unfortunately, the six degrees of freedom (DoF) dynamics model of the ROV [2][3][4][5] is harder to model than the streamlined autonomous underwater vehicle (AUV) [6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15] which exists an analytical solution for the hydrodynamics parameters.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Often, smaller vehicles are modelled, and the common approach is to apply least-squares estimation of a coupled or uncoupled model to a pre-recorded data set. Identification of a decoupled model for an ROV is found in [13]. Comparison of ordinary least-squares (OLS) and total least-squares for a coupled 3D parameter identification is reported in [14].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%