Automatic Heading Control for Dyygnamic Positioning in Ice · 2015-01-07 · Automatic Heading...

Return to Session Menu

DYNAMIC POSITIONING CONFERENCEOctober 15-16 2013October 15-16, 2013

DESIGN AND CONTROL SESSION II

Automatic Heading Control for Dynamic Positioning in Icey g

Sofien KerkeniSIREHNA

Ivan MetrikinNorwegian University of Science and Technology

© Tous Droits Réservés. Ce document dans son contenu et dans sa forme est la propriété de SIREHNA

Sofien Kerkeni DCNS Research/Sirehna

AUTOMATIC HEADING CONTROL FOR DYNAMIC POSITIONING IN ICE

Ivan Metrikin

Norwegian University of Science and Technology

Statoil ASA

Contents Introduction, motivation The need for automatic heading control with DP in ice Proposed structure of the control system Numerical simulation tool and setup Simulation results Discussion

3/31 Kerkeni and Metrikin MTS DYNAMIC POSITIONING CONFERENCE 2013

Introduction, motivation

Considerable amount of resources • 25% of undiscovered gas • 16% of undiscovered oil

• M. Naseri and M. Barabady, 2013

USGS 2012



Decrease of the arctic ice cover • Even more important in 2012

Hajime Yamaguchi, “Sea ice prediction and construction of an ice navigation support system for the Arctic sea routes”, POAC 2013



Stationkeeping is required • Dynamic Positioning Systems are considered as a possible solution

DYPIC project (dypic.eu) • European collaborative research program • Development of a model DP system for the HSVA large ice tank

(presented in Houston in 2012)

http://dypic.eu/


Contents Introduction, motivation The need for automatic heading control with DP in ice Proposed control structure of the control system Numerical simulation tool and setup Simulation results Discussion


State of the art – general learnings • Deficiencies of open water DPS in ice conditions • Ice loads very different from open water efforts • Ice Management crucial for success

The need for automatic heading control with DP in ice

1991/6 Int. Arctic Ocean

Exp.

1999 ”First” DP operation

2004 ACEX IODP

2005/6 SHALDRIL

I/II

2008 Kanumas


Recents technological progress • Demonstration of feasibility of stationkeeping in certain ice

conditions • Extensive model testing campaigns in 2011 and 2012 at HSVA


-0.2 -0.15 -0.1 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2

-0.15

-0.1

-0.05

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

X(m

)

Ship position in the plane

Y(m)

ShipSet PointsCircle of 5m full scale radius


Projection to operations • Maximal abilities expected when aligned with the ice drift

• Demonstrated by the first capability plots in ice


0°30°

60°

90°

120°

150°180°

210°

240°

270°

300°

330°

0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0

0.25kt0.5kt

Kerkeni, Metrikin and Jochmann, “Capability plots of dynamic positioning in Ice”, OMAE 2013

Zhou, Riska and Moan, “Station Keeping Capacity of a Moored Structure with Heading Control in

Level Ice”, IAHR 2012


Ice drift direction estimation? • Complex and non-trivial (sudden changes, loops, etc.) • Task of the IM

• Drifting buoys data => not real time!


Marchenko et al., “Characteristics of ice drift in the western Barents sea reconstructed by the data of Ice trackers deployed on drifting ice of the Barents sea in 2008 and 2010”, POAC 2011


Ice drift direction estimation? • Significant on-going research

• Aerial observations with unmanned technologies


Haugen, Grotli and Imsland, “State Estimation of Ice Thickness Distribution Using Mobile Sensors”, CCA2012



• Aerial observations with unmanned technologies • Underwater observations


Jørgensen and Skjetne, “Dynamic estimation of drifting ice topography over a 2D area using mobile underwater

measurements”, POAC2013



• Aerial observations with unmanned technologies • Underwater observations

• => Current technologies not effective Possible function proposed by DPS? • Keeping the vessel aligned with the ice drift • Reduce ice loads • Improve performances



Based on successful algorithms tested in DYPIC Enhancement with a new block called «Automatic Heading Controller»

Proposed structure of the control system



DP Vessel



Positions

Positions

Heading

Thrusters Feedback

Wind

Estimator Controller Thrust allocation

Thrusters command

Automatic Heading

Controller


NTNU simulator • Non-smooth Discrete Element Method • Based on NVIDIA PhysX engine • Level and managed ice conditions • Collision detection • Contact dynamics

Numerical Model


Use of a conceptual Arctic drillship

Numerical Model

Illustration: Statoil

- 3 azimuths bow

- 3 azimuths stern

Propulsion: 5 MN

Froude scaling with a factor of 30

Metrikin, Løset, Jenssen and Kerkeni, “Numerical Simulation of Dynamic Positioning in Ice”, MTS Journal 2013


Scenario • Simulation of stationkeeping

Numerical simulation tool and setup

Fixed Heading (FDPS) Automatic Heading (ADPS)


Simulated scenarios

Simulation results

Drift angle (°) Ice drift velocity model scale (m/s)

Ice drift velocity full scale (knots)

Scenario 1 10 0.047 0.5 Scenario 2 30 0.094 1 Scenario 3 50 0.094 1


Scenario 1 (10°, 0.5kt)

Simulation results

-8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8-8

-6

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

Pos East [m]

Pos

North

[m]

1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 70002

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

[s]

ψ [d

eg]


Scenario 2 (30°, 1kt)

Simulation results

-8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8-8

-6

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

Pos East [m]

Pos

North

[m]

1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 70000

5

10

15

20

25

30

[s]

ψ [d

eg]

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

x 104

[s]

[kW

]

1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000-4000

-2000

[s]

[kN

]

1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 70000

2000

4000

6000

[s]

[kN

]

1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000-2000

0

2000

[s]

[kN

m]


Scenario 3 (50°,1kt)

Simulation results

-5 0 5 10 15 20-20

-15

-10

-5

0

5

Pos East [m]

Pos

North

[m]

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500

10

20

30

40

50

60

[s]

ψ [d

eg]

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

x 104

[s]

[kW

]

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500

-6000

-4000

-2000

[s]

[kN

]

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 35000

2000

4000

6000

8000

[s]

[kN

]

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500

-10000

-5000

0

[s]

[kN

m]


Results summary

Simulation results

Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 FDPS ADPS Ratio FDPS ADPS Ratio FDPS ADPS Ratio

Median of the transversal force [kN]

567.4 323.2 43% 3625.8 491.1 86% 6478.7 889.6 86%

Median of the power consumption [kW]

4371 3913 10% 16599 3139 81% 34200 8012 77%


Validation of the behaviour of the automatic heading controller

Enhancement of stationkeeping performances and abilities Only tested in simulation • Model limitations • Constant ice drift

New asset for the development of DP in Ice technology

Discussion


Discussion


Thank you for your attention

-5 0 5 10 15 20-20

-15

-10

-5

0

5

Pos East [m]

Pos

North

[m]

Automatic Heading Control for Dyygnamic Positioning in Ice · 2015-01-07 · Automatic Heading...

Documents

Transcript of Automatic Heading Control for Dyygnamic Positioning in Ice · 2015-01-07 · Automatic Heading...