Ocean Engineering 206 (2020) 107245

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Ocean Engineering
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/oceaneng

Adaptive sliding mode output feedback control for dynamic positioning

ships with input saturation
Kun Liang a, *, Xiaogong Lin b, Yu Chen a, Juan Li b, Fuguang Ding b
a
School of Intelligent Engineering, Zhengzhou University of Aeronautics, No. 15 Wenyuan West Road, Zhengzhou City, Henan Province, China
b
College of Automation, Harbin Engineering University, No. 145 Nantong Street, Nangang District, Harbin City, Heilongjiang Province, China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: In this paper, a finite-time observer-based adaptive sliding mode output feedback controller is developed for
Dynamic positioning system dynamic positioning ship while the Coriolis matrix, hydrodynamic nonlinear damping matrix, input saturation,
Input saturation unmeasured states, unknown time-varying environment disturbances and transient performance are considered
Continuous finite-time observer
simultaneously. A continue finite-time state observer is proposed to estimate the unmeasured states of dynamic
Adaptive sliding mode control
Unmeasured state
positioning ship in finite time and an auxiliary system is constructed to handle with the control saturation. A
terminal sliding mode surface with the signal generated by the auxiliary system is designed while the good
transient performance is achieved under multiple constraints and the nominal output feedback controller pro­
posed in this paper is chatter-free guaranteeing the steady performance. In additional, an adaptive update law is
introduced that the prior knowledge of disturbance is no need and the finite-time convergence of loop-system is
proved strictly. Finally, simulations are given to illustrate the effectiveness and advantages of the proposed
control scheme.

1. Introduction
With the increasing reliance on oceans exploitation in a spectrum of
human activities, the research for advance marine mechatronic systems
is attracting more and more attention. Dynamic positioning (DP) system
is a sort of typical marine mechatronic system from a control perspective
for surface vessels and is essential for many marine applications, such as
drilling, pipe-laying, and diving support(Shi et al., 2017). With the ad­
vances of the nonlinear control, the DP nonlinear control has gradually
gained much attention and various approaches have been used for DP
systems to achieve better performance, such as robust control (Wang
et al., 2018), hybrid control (Nguyen et al., 2007), fault-tolerant control
(Chen M et al., 2016), etc.(Hu et al., 2015; Hu and Du, 2018; Do, 2011;
Veksler et al., 2016; Værnø et al., 2019; Zhang et al., 2018b). However,
highly coupled control channels, unknown time-varying disturbances
and strong nonlinearity increase the design difficulty of the robust
control for DP systems which makes it still an open topic (Sørensen,
2011).
Input saturation, giving rise to degraded performance and even
instability of the DP control system, is a potential problem for the DP
system due to the fact that the commanded control inputs calculated by
the DP controller are possibly constrained by the maximum forces and
moment that the propulsion system can produce. In (Du et al., 2016), Du
Jialu et al. proposed a robust dynamic surface control strategy where an
auxiliary dynamic system to handle input saturation. Perez and Donaire
proposed DP proportional-integral control, where disturbances and
input saturation were handled by the integral action with anti-windup
scheme(Perez and Donaire, 2009).
Considering the constraint of sensors in accuracy and cost, only the
positions of ships can be measured in practice while the positions and
velocities of ships are necessary in the control design for dynamic
positioning ship (Fossen and Strand, 1999). Considering the dynamic
positioning in the presence of unknown dynamic parameters of the ship,
unmeasured velocities and unknown time-varying disturbances, an
adaptive robust output feedback controller(Du et al., 2015) was devel­
oped for the DP system by merging adaptive RBF neural networks and
high-gain observer into the vectorial backstepping method. But
high-gain observer can only guarantee the boundedness of estimation
error and can’t be analyzed in the frame of Lyapunov theory which is not
good to analysis the stability of closed-loop systems. In addition, if the
Coriolis matrix and the nonlinear damping term are considered, the
error system of observer will contain the nonlinear term related to the

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: drliangkun@126.com (K. Liang), 2541070@sina.com (X. Lin), chenyu@zua.edu.cn (Y. Chen), Lijuan041@163.com (J. Li), dingfuguang@hrbeu.
edu.cn (F. Ding).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2020.107245
Received 22 August 2019; Received in revised form 9 March 2020; Accepted 10 March 2020
Available online 15 April 2020
0029-8018/© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
K. Liang et al.
Fig. 1. The desired trajectory and actual trajectory in Scenario 1.
estimated state, which makes the Proof of the convergence of the esti­
mated error system very complicated. In (Wondergem et al., 2011), a
state observer is proposed to estimate the velocities for ship with highly
nonlinearity and semi-globally uniformly stable is guaranteed for
closed-loop system.
Based on the above discussions, it should be pointed out that all the
aforementioned formation controllers can only obtain asymptotic
convergence at best, which implies that exact convergence cannot be
guaranteed in finite time. By virtue of adding a power integrator (Wang
et al., 2016a,b), an adaptive robust finite-time tracking control scheme
for trajectory tracking of a fully actuated marine surface vehicle with
unknown disturbances is proposed whereas the unmeasured state and
input saturation are ignored. In (Zhang et al., 2018a), a finite-time
controller is developed for dynamic positioning ship with input con­
strained, but it’s still based on the Assumption that all states are
available.
It should be pointed out that, almost all the research, even up to now,
deals with dynamic positioning control design either in the presence of
unknown time-varying disturbance, or without angular velocity mea­
surements, or with actuator saturation only. The integrated design to
deal with those issues all together still needs further research. Inspired
by the aforementioned discussion, a continuous finite-time observer-
Fig. 2. The time response of trajectory tracking errors in Scenario 1.
2
Ocean Engineering 206 (2020) 107245
Table 1
I Paremeters of CyberShip II
Xu 0.7225 Yv_ 10.0000
Yv 0.8612 Nr_ 1.0000
Yr 0.1079 Iz 1.7600
Nr 0.5000 Xu_ 2.0000
Nv 0.1052 Yr_ 0.0000
based constrained adaptive sliding output feedback controller is devel­
oped for dynamic positioning ship while the Coriolis matrix, hydrody­
namic nonlinear damping matrix, input saturation, unmeasured states,
unknown time-varying environment disturbances and transient perfor­
mance are considered simultaneously. A continue finite-time state
observer is proposed to estimate the unmeasured states of dynamic
positioning ship in finite time. An auxiliary system is constructed to
handle with the control saturation and the signal generated by the
auxiliary system is introduced to design a terminal sliding mode surface
while the fast convergence is achieved under multiple constraints. In
addition, an adaptive update law is introduced and the prior knowledge
of disturbance is no need. The finite-time convergence of loop-system is
proved strictly. Finally, simulations are given to illustrate the effec­
tiveness of the proposed control scheme.
The main contributions lie in the following three aspects:
(1) A finite-time state observer-based adaptive sliding mode output
feedback controller is developed for dynamic positioning ship
with the Coriolis matrix and hydrodynamic nonlinear damping
matrix while the problems of input saturation, unmeasured states
and unknown time-varying environment disturbances are solved
simultaneously when the finite-time convergence is achieved.
(2) A continues finite-time state observer is proposed for dynamic
positioning ship considering the Coriolis matrix and hydrody­
namic nonlinear damping matrix which is seldom to be studied.
Without requirement for prior knowledge of disturbance, the rate
of convergence is improved and chattering is avoided.
(3) The chatter-free nominal output controller is proposed while the
steady performance is guaranteed since the input saturation lasts
short time.
K. Liang et al. Ocean Engineering 206 (2020) 107245

Fig. 3. The time response of velocity tracking errors in Scenario 1.

Fig. 4. The control input signal without constraint in Scenario 1.

The remainder of the paper is organized as follows: In Section 2, the

problem formulation of control is detailed for vessels and several pre­
liminaries are given. Following in Section 3, the control strategy is
proposed. The vessel dynamics and the proposed control schemes are
simulated in Section 4, and concluding remarks are made in Section 5.
2. Problem formulation
The nonlinear motion mathematical model of a dynamic positioning
ship with Coriolis matrix and nonlinear hydrodynamic damping matrix
(Fossen, 2012.) can be expressed as
η_ ¼ Jðψ Þυ
υ_ ¼ M 1 CðυÞυ M 1 DðυÞυ þ M 1 satðτÞ þ M 1 τd
Where η ¼ ½x; y; ψ �T is the position vector in the earth-fixed frame, con­
sisting of the surge positionx, the sway positiony, and the yaw angle
ψ 2 ½0; 2π�of the ship. υ ¼ ½u; v; r�T is the velocity vector in the body-fixed
frame, consisting of the surge velocityu, the sway velocity v, the yaw rate
rof the ship. Jðψ Þ is the rotation matrix given by
0 1
cosðψ Þ sinðψ Þ 0
Jðψ Þ ¼ sinðψ Þ cosðψ Þ 0 A
@ (3)
0 0 1
Here, M denotes inertia matrix and is positive defining.CðυÞ denotes
Coriolis matrix and DðυÞ is hydrodynamic damping matrix including
(1) linear terms and nonlinear terms. τd represents the lumped disturbance.
satðτÞ ¼ ½satðτ1 Þ; satðτ2 Þ; satðτ3 Þ�T represents the constrained control
(2) input vector produced by propeller and thruster system, consisting of
force τ1 in surge, forceτ2 in sway and moment τ3 in yaw. In particular,

3
K. Liang et al. Ocean Engineering 206 (2020) 107245

Fig. 5. The estimation errors of positions in Scenario 1.

the constrained input can be described as follows. Let us define as follows:

8 �
< τimax if τi � τimax FC ðx1 ; x2 Þ ¼ SðrÞ JM 1 C J T x2 J T (7)
satðτi Þ ¼ τi if τimin � τi � τimax (4)
: �
τimin if if τi � τimin FD ðx1 ; x2 Þ ¼ JM 1 D J T x2 J T x2 (8)

Where τmax i denotes the maximum control forces or moments that the Fðx1 ; x2 Þ ¼ FC ðx1 ; x2 Þx2 þ FD ðx1 ; x2 Þ (9)
ship’s propulsion system can produce, respectively. Let defining x1 ¼ η,
x2 ¼ Jυ, J ¼ Jðψ Þ and the Equations (1) and (2) can be rewritten as Without loss of generality, some assumptions are introduced first:

x_1 ¼ x2 (5) Assumption 1. (Wondergem et al., 2011). Considering the nonlinear

functions (7) and (8), the following inequalities are achieved:
x_2 ¼ Fðx1 ; x2 Þ þ JM 1 satðτÞ þ dðtÞ (6) kFD ðx1 ; x2 Þ FD ðx1 ; yÞk � ðdM1 þ dM2 kx2 ykÞkx2 yk

Where Fðx1 ; x2 Þ ¼ ðSðrÞ JM 1 ðCðJT x2 Þ þ DðJT x2 ÞÞJT Þx2 dðtÞ ¼ FC ðx1 ; x2 Þy ¼ FC ðx1 ; yÞx2 and kFC ðx1 ; x2 Þk � FCM kx2 k
JM 1 τd , Here, k⋅k stands for the determinant of a matrix. dM1 ,dM2 and FCM are

Fig. 6. The estimation errors of velocities in Scenario 1.

4
K. Liang et al. Ocean Engineering 206 (2020) 107245

unknown constants.
Assumption 2. Defining dðtÞ ¼ JM 1 τd and it’s unknown time-varying
yet bounded, that is, there exists unknown positive constants dj such that

kdðtÞk � dM

Where dM is unknown constant.

Assumption 3. For the Δτ, it is assumed to satisfy the following
condition:
kΔτk ¼ kτ SatðτÞk � σ

Where σ is known constant.

Remark 1. From the view of a practical control system, the difference
Δτ between the desired control input τ and the actual control input satðτÞ
cannot be large. The reason is that the system controllability should be
satisfied when control input saturation occurs. Due to the disturbance
Fig. 7. The desired trajectory and actual trajectory in Scenario 2.

Fig. 8. The time response of trajectory tracking errors in Scenario 2.

Fig. 9. The control input signal in Scenario 2.

5
K. Liang et al. Ocean Engineering 206 (2020) 107245

Fig. 10. States of Auxiliary system in Scenario 2.

Fig. 11. The estimation errors of positions in Scenario 2.

and system states are bounded, the control input needed is bounded. unique in forward time for t 2 ½0; Tx ðx0 ÞÞ and lim xðt; x0 Þ ¼ 0. Here
t→Tx ðx0 Þ
Thus, the Assumption is bounded is reasonable. To satisfy this assump­
Tx ðx0 Þ is called the convergence time (of the initial state x0 ). The equi­
tion, the parameter σ can be large.
librium of (10) is finite-time stable if it is Lyapunov stable and finite-
The following lemmas and definition are given here to express the
time convergent. If U ¼ D ¼ <n , the origin is a globally finite-time
approaches to design finite-time controller and observer for dynamic
stable equilibrium.
positioning ship.
Lemma 1. (Bhat and Bernstein, 2000). Considering system (10), suppose
Definition 1. (Hong et al., 2002). Consider the following system
there exists a continuous function VðxÞ such that the following conditions
xðtÞ
_ ¼ f ðxðtÞÞ (10) hold:

Where f : D →<n is non-Lipschitz continuous on a neighborhood D of (i) is positive definite;

the origin x ¼ 0 in <n . The equilibrium x ¼ 0 of (10) is finite-time (ii) There exist real numbers c,α 2 ð0; 1Þand an open neighborhood D 0 ⊂
convergent if there are an open neighborhood U of the origin and a D of the origin such that
function Tx : Unf0g→ð0; ∞Þ, such that every solution trajectory xðt; x0 Þ
of (10) starting from the initial point x0 2 Unf0g is well-defined and Then the origin is a finite-time stable equilibrium of system(10).

6
K. Liang et al. Ocean Engineering 206 (2020) 107245

Fig. 12. The estimation errors of velocities in Scenario 2.

If U ¼ U0 ¼ <n , the origin is a globally finite-time stable equilibrium of

system (10). In addition, the finite convergence time

Vðx0 Þ1 α
T�
cð1 αÞ

Lemma 2. (Shen and Xia, 2008). Suppose there is a Lyapunov function

VðxÞ defined on a neighborhood of the origin D ⊂<n such that the following
conditions hold:

(i) is positive definite;

(ii) There exist real numbers b, c,α 2 ð0; 1Þand an open neighborhood
D 0 ⊂D of the origin such that
_ þ bVðxÞ þ cVðxÞα � 0
VðxÞ
Then, the origin of (10) is locally finite-time stable. In addition, the finite
convergence time
Fig. 13. The desired trajectory and actual trajectory in Scenario 3.
1 Vðx0 Þ1 α þ c
T� ln
bð1 αÞ c

Fig. 14. The desired trajectory and actual trajectory between Scenario 4 and
Scenario 2.
Lemma 3. (Zhu et al., 2010). Consider system (10), and suppose that
there exist continuous function VðxÞ, scalars c、α 2 ð0; 1Þ and 0 < η < ∞
such that
_ �
VðxÞ cVðxÞα þ η
Then, the trajectory of system (10) is practical finite-time stable. In
addition, the time needed to reach such a neighborhood is bounded as.where
Vðx0 Þ is the initial value of VðxÞ.
Remark 2. It is clear from Lemma 3 that any asymptotically stable system
is practically finite-time stable. However, for some systems with absolutely
unknown disturbance such as system (1)~(2) in the presence of unknown
external disturbance, the asymptotical stability cannot be obtained easily.
Since the sysytem states can be only forced to converge into a neighborhood of
the sliding surface in finite time, so the finite-time convergeness is called
practical finite-time stablity.

7
K. Liang et al. Ocean Engineering 206 (2020) 107245

Fig. 15. The comparison of trajectory errors between Scenario 4 and Scenario 2.

Fig. 16. Comparison of positions’ estimation errors between Scenario 4 and Scenario 2.

Lemma 4. (Hu and Jiang, 2018). Consider the system (10). Suppose there 3. Main results
is a Lyapunov function VðxÞ, positive constants p1 2 ð0; 1Þp2 < p1 ,α >
0、β > 0 and γ > 0. Let V0 be the initial value of VðxÞ. Then, the following In this subsection, a finite-time observer-based adaptive sliding mode
statements hold. output feedback controller is designed to achieve the control object
aforementioned. In particular, the controller designed here can be
_ <
VðxÞ αVðxÞp1 þ βVðxÞp2 divided into four parts: an auxiliary is introduced to handle with input
Then the trajectory of the system (10) is finite-time uniformly ultimately saturation, an adaptive state feedback controller is designed assuming
bounded.The settling time is bounded as follows. all the states are known, a continuous finite-time state observer is con­
. structed to estimate the state in finite time and an adaptive sliding mode
T � V01 p1 ½ðα θÞð1 p1 Þ� output feedback controller is integrated based the previous steps.

Where θ 2 ð0; αÞ is arbitrary positive constant.

The control objective in our context is to design a finite-time control
law τc for dynamic positioning vehicle in the absence of velocity mea­
surements and subject to input saturation and disturbances, to track
exactly the desired trajectoryðxd ; yd ; ψ d ÞT
3.1. Auxiliary system design
Firstly, an auxiliary system is designed to deal with the influence of
input saturation under Assumption 3 and the Lemma 5 is provided
here.

8
K. Liang et al. Ocean Engineering 206 (2020) 107245

Fig. 17. Comparison of velocities’ estimation errors between Scenario 4 and Scenario 2.

(i ¼ 1; 2; 3). In addition, sgnðξÞ ¼ ðsgnðξ1 Þ; sgnðξ2 Þ; sgnðξ3 ÞÞT , G ¼

� �
diagf�gi �g3�3 where gi is the i th row of the control gain matrix JM 1 and
r0 2 ð0; 1Þ. The auxiliary state converges to zero in finite time
Proof. The proof of Lemma 5 is shown in the Appendix.

3.2. Adaptive sliding mode state feedback controller design

Considering the signal generated by auxiliary system provided in

Lemma 5 and a state feedback controller is constructed in forms of three
Theorems.
Firstly, defining the error surface vectors.
z1 ¼ x 1 x1d (12)

z2 ¼ x 2 x2d ξ (13)

Where x1d and x2d are desired trajectory and velcoties. In this paper, the
Fig. 18. The desired trajectory and actual trajectory in Scenario 5. sliding mode surface (Shao et al., 2017) is designed as following.

Lemma 5. (Chen et al., 2015).An auxiliary system is constructed as s ¼ z2 þ kβðz1 Þ (14)

following.
Where z1 ¼ ðz11 ; z12 ; z13 ÞT 、z2 ¼ ðz21 ; z22 ; z23 ÞT 、s ¼ ðs1 ; s2 ; s3 ÞT 、
ξ_ ¼ Aξ Bξr0 σ GsgnðξÞ JM 1 Δτ (11) βðz1 Þ ¼ ðβðz11 Þ; βðz12 Þ; βðz13 ÞÞT ,
� r
sig 1 ðz1i Þ if si ¼ 0 or si 6¼ 0; z1i � Θ
Where ξ ¼ ðξ1 ; ξ2 ; ξ3 ÞT is the state of the auxiliary system. A ¼ βðz1i Þ ¼ ,
l11 z1i þ l12 sig2 ðz1i Þ if si 6¼ 0; z1i � Θ
diagfai g3�3 and B ¼ diagfbi g3�3 are design matrix while ai > 0 and bi > 0, r1
k is a design matrix. si ¼ z2i þ k⋅sig ðz1i Þ,

Fig. 19. Comparison of velocities’ estimation errors between Scenario 4 and Theorem 2.

9
K. Liang et al. Ocean Engineering 206 (2020) 107245

sigr1 ðz1i Þ ¼ jz1i jr1 signðz1i Þ; 0 < r1 < 1, l11 ¼ ð2 rÞΘr1 1

,l12 ¼ ðr locally fast-finite-time uniformly ultimately bounded.
1ÞΘr1 2 . Therefore, the differential of βðz1 Þ is. Proof. The proof of Theorem 2 is shown in the Appendix.
�
Remark 3. Corsidering the relationship of x1 ¼ η and x2 ¼ Jðψ Þυ,
r1 1
_ 1i Þ ¼ r1 jz1i j z_1i if si ¼ 0 or si 6¼ 0; z1i � Θ
βðz (15)
l11 z_1i þ 2l12 jz1i jz_1i if si 6¼ 0; z1i � Θ x 2 is achieved, the estimation velocities can be
when the estimation state b
Based on the sliding mode surface (14), auxiliary system (11) and υ ¼ J 1 ðψ Þ b
obtained based on b x 2 since the ψ is known.
Assumption 2, an adaptive sliding mode controller is designed as. Remark 4. According Theorem 2, the finite-time convergent observer we
τ ¼ MJ T ðτ1 þ τ2 þ τ3 Þ (16) designed is continuous and does not create the “chattering” phenomenon (Hu
et al., 2018; Wang et al., 2016a,b) which improve the performance
τ1 ¼ Fðx1 ; x2 Þ _ 1Þ
kβðz k1 s k2 sigr1 ðsÞ þ x_2d (17) comparing with the existing resluts. In addition, the disturbance information
is not required (Fu and Yu, 2018) which means our approach is more robust
τ2 ¼ Aξ Bξr0 σGsgnðξÞ (18) and the properties of the multiple-input-multiple-output nonlinear system
have been considered(Liu et al., 2016) which means the process of Proof is
τ3 ¼
s b
dM (19) more rigorous.
ksk

_ 3.4. Adaptive sliding mode output feedback controller design

b
d M ¼ kd ð εd b
d M ðtÞ þ kskÞ (20)

Where τ1 is a feedback term, τ2 is a compensated term for saturation and In this section, combing with the auxiliary system (11), adaptive
τ3 is an robust adaptive compensated term. k1 , k2 are design matrix and sliding mode state feedback controller(16)~(20), continuous finite-time
kd ,εd are design parameters. τ3 can compensate the unknown time- observer (21) and (22), an adaptive sliding mode controller is proposed
varying external disturbance and the upper bound information of here. Firstly, the modified sliding mode surface can be construted as.
disturbance is not required, which not only reduces the conservative bs ¼ bz 2 þ b
kβðbz 1 Þ (25)
problem caused by designing too high upper bound, but also can
effectively weaken the chattering. Where the state x1 , x2 in sliding mode surface (14) are replaced by
In order to prove the finite-time convergence of controller we x1 , b
estimation b x 2 in (21) and (22). At this point, the adaptive sliding
designed, three steps are provided here in Theorem 1: Firstly, the uni­ mode output feedback controller and adaptive law are designed as.
formly ultimate bounded of closed-loop system is proved so that the
boundedness of adaptive estimated error is garanteed; the finite-time bτ ¼ MJ T ðbτ 1 þ bτ 2 þ bτ 3 Þ (26)
convergence of sliding mode surface is achieved; finally, we will prove
that the position of dynamic positioning ship can be converged into the bτ 1 ¼ Fðx1 ; b
x2Þ _ z1Þ
kβðb k1 bs k2 sigr1 ðbs Þ þ x_2d (27)
small region around the desired trajectory.
bτ 2 ¼ Aξ Bξr0 σGsgnðξÞ (28)
Theorem 1. Considering the dynamic positioning ship model (5) and (6),
the proposed controller (16)~(19) and adaptive law (20) guarantees that x1 bs b
and x2 converge to small regions around the equilibrium points in finite time. bτ 3 ¼ dM (29)
kbs k
Proof. The proof of Theorem 1 is shown in the Appendix.
_
b
d M ¼ kd ð εd b
d M ðtÞ þ kbs kÞ (30)
3.3. Continuous finite-time state observer design In order to prove the finite-time ability, Theorem 3 is provided here.
Theorem 3. Under Assumption 1~Assumption 3, considering the dy­
In most cases, measurements of the ship’s velocities are not avail­
namic positioning ship (5) and (6) with unmeasured state, input saturation
able. Therefore, estimations of the velocities must be computed from
and unknown time-varying external disturbance, the proposed adaptive
noisy position and heading measurements through a state observer (Hu
sliding mode output feedback controller (26)~(29), finite-time observer (21)
et al., 2018; Hu and Niu, 2017; Liu et al., 2016). In the sequel, a
,(22) , auxiliary system (11) and adaptive law (30) can guarantee that x1
continuous finite-time observer is designed for dynamic positioning ship
and x2 converge to small regions around the equilibrium points in finite time.
to eatimate the velocities based on the position in finite time and the
following conclusion can be given. Proof. The proof of Theorem 3 is shown in the Appendix.
Theorem 2. Considering the dynamic positioning ship (5) and (6), the Remark 5. When auxiliary systems or anti-windup control is introduced to
finite-time observer is proposed. handle with the input saturation, a nominal controller is constructed without
r2 þ1
considering the input constraint. Since the time of saturation is short, it’s
x_ 1 ¼ bx 2
b L1 sigðb
x1 x1 Þ 2
(21) important to establish a nominal control approach such that good steady-
performance can be achieved. In this paper, a nominal adaptive sliding
x_ 2 ¼ Fðx1 ; b
b x 2 Þ þ Jðψ ÞM 1 τ L2 sigðb
x1 x1 Þr2 (22) mode output feedback controller is designed as.

Where 0 < r2 < 1 is a design parameter. L1 ¼ diagfli g and L2 ¼ bτ ¼ MJ T ðbτ 1 þ bτ 3 Þ (31)

diagfli gi ¼ 1; 2; 3 are the design observer matrix. Based on the dynamic
positioning ship, the error dynamic system of observer we designed can be bτ 1 ¼ Fðx1 ; b
x2Þ _ z1Þ
kβðb k1 bs k2 sigr1 ðbs Þ þ x_2d (32)
expressed as.
bs b
r2 þ1 bτ 3 ¼ dM (33)
~x_ 1 ¼ ~x2 L1 sigð~x1 Þ 2
(23) kbs k

_
~x_ 2 ¼ Fðx1 ; b
x 2 Þb
x2 Fðx1 ; x2 Þx2 dðtÞ L2 sigð~x1 Þr2 (24) b
d M ¼ kd ð εd b
d M ðtÞ þ kbs kÞ (34)

Where estimation errors are defined as x x 1 x1 and x

~1 ¼ b ~2 ¼ bx2 x2 . Where the input saturation is not occurred and the ξ ¼ 0 which means
Then the origin of the observation errors dynamic system (23) and (24) is the error vector is z2 ¼ x2 x2d . The other parameters are just as what they

10
K. Liang et al.
are defined in (26)~(30). In addition, the estimation states are measured by
finite-time observer design in Theorem 2.
Remark 6. It should point out that the nominal adaptive sliding mode
output feedback controller consisting the controller (31)~(34) and the
observer (21), (22) is inherently continuous which means that it’s chatter–­
free. The sign function is replaced by continuous function sig and the adaptive
update law is introduced to estimate the upper bound of lumped disturbance,
which means the chattering caused by the discontinuous function and the
unknown disturbance is effectively reduced.
Remark 7. In this paper, the finite-time output feedback controller is
designed for dynamic positioning with input constraint and unknown
disturbance. For further work, it will be interesting to consider the finite-
time control with dynamic uncertainties and state constraint (Maryam,
2018; He et al., 2017, 2019; Xiao and Yin, 2016; Li et al., 2019).
4. Simulations
In order to present the proposed control strategy in the previous
section work effectively, numerical simulations tested on a supply vessel
called CyberShip II(Skjetne et al., 2005), which is a 1:70 scale-replica of
a supply ship whose main parameters is shown in Table 1, are performed
and the results are shown in this section.
The actuator input limitation is set as jτimax j ¼ 50. The unknown
external disturbances (Yu et al., 2018) τd with significantly large
magnitude and high frequency, which can be roughly considered as
complex environment including ocean winds, waves, and currents, are
governed by
0
2 cosð0:5tÞcosðtÞ þ 0:3cosð0:5tÞsinð0:5tÞ 3
1 mance is achieved. In addition, the tracking error in other stages can be
τd ¼ @ 0:01 sinð0:1tÞ A guaranteed even if the gradient of desired trajectory changes signifi­
0:6 sinð1:1tÞcosð0:3tÞ
The initial state of dynamic positioning ship is ηð0Þ ¼ ð0m0m0:5radÞT
and the desired trajectory is designed as.
�
xd ¼ 0:2t
yd ¼ 10 sinð0:1tÞ
This simulation contain three parts: the simulation for nominal
controller, the simulation for controller considering the input saturation
and the contrasting case which shows the superiority of our scheme
comparing with the existing results.
Scenario 1. Nominal controller in Remark 5.
Based on the controller proposed in Remark 5 and the parameters
can be chosen as L1 ¼ diagf10; 20; 20g,L2 ¼ diagf150; 50; 100g,r2 ¼
0:6,r1 ¼ 0:7Θ ¼ 0:2k ¼ diagf1:5; 0:8; 0:8gk1 ¼ diagf8; 9; 2g,k2 ¼
diagf7; 7; 2g.
Scenario 2. Adaptive sliding mode output feedback controller in
Theorem 3.
Choosing the parameters for controller developed in Theorem 3 as
following L1 ¼ diagf10; 20; 20gL2 ¼ diagf150; 50; 100gr2 ¼ 0:6r1 ¼
0:7r0 ¼ 0:6,Θ ¼ 0:5 k ¼ diag f30; 30; 30gk1 ¼ diagf8; 9; 2gk2 ¼
diagf7; 7; 2gA ¼ diagf5; 3; 5g,B ¼ diagf2; 2; 5g.
Scenario 3. Adaptive sliding mode output feedback controller in
Theorem 3 with worse ocean environment.
To prove the capability of anti-disturbance, the disturbance is
enhanced as large as 10 times without regulating the parameters of
controller and observer in Scenario 2.That is to say, the disturbance can
be designed as τ d ¼ 10*τd
_
Scenario 4. Adaptive sliding mode output feedback controller based
on a traditional observer in (Wondergem et al., 2011).
To illustrate the superiority of our approach, a controller based on a
conventional observer proposed in (Wondergem et al., 2011) is pro­
vided. Due to the input constraint and the rate of convergence aren’t
considered in (Wondergem et al., 2011), the controller is based on the
Theorem 3 while the observer is established as in (Wondergem et al.,
11
Ocean Engineering 206 (2020) 107245
2011) and the observer can be designed as.
x_ 1 ¼ b
b x2 x1
L1 ðb x1 Þ (35)
x_ 2 ¼ Fðx1 ; b
b x 2 Þ þ Jðψ ÞM 1 τ L2 ðb
x1 x1 Þ (36)
The parameters of controller and observer are chosen as
L1 ¼ diagf1:5; 1:5; 1:5g, L2 ¼ diagf200;200;200gr1 ¼ 0:7Θ ¼ 0:5k ¼
diagf30;30;30g,k1 ¼ diagf8;9;2g ,k2 ¼ diagf7;7;2g ,A ¼ diagf5;3;5g ,B ¼
diagf2;2;5g.
Scenario 5. Adaptive sliding mode output feedback controller in
Theorem 3 and Scenario 4 with model uncertainties.
To prove the robust of the controller we designed, the disturbance of
model uncertainties (Fu et al., 2018) is introduced without adjusting the
parameters of controller and observer in Scenario 2 and Scenario 4
where the lumped disturbance can be design as:
0 1
2 cosð0:5tÞcosðtÞ þ 0:3cosð0:5tÞsinð0:5tÞ 3
τd ¼ @ 0:01 sinð0:1tÞ A
0:6 sinð1:1tÞcosð0:3tÞ
0 3 1
ν þ 0:6u þ 0:1 sinðtÞ
þ @ 10ur þ u þ 0:1 sinðtÞ A
4ur þ 10v2 þ 0:1 sinðtÞ
Figs. 1-6 show the performance of nominal controller in Scenario 1
for dynamic positioning ship without input saturation. The actual tra­
jectory and desired trajectory are showed in Fig. 1. During the initial
stage, the nominal adaptive sliding mode controller we designed can
ensure that the dynamic positioning ship track to the desired trajectory
quickly with small overshoot which means that good transient perfor­
cantly. The track errors of trajectory and velocities are showed in Figs. 2
and 3, respectively. It can be found that the trajectory error of the dy­
namic positioning ship can be maintained within 5 � 10 3 m while the
heading angle can track the desired value quickly and the error can
converge into 0:02radwithout any chattering phenomenon. The veloc­
ities errors can be maintained smoothly within 0:02m=s,0:01m=s and
0:02rad=s, respectively. Fig. 4 shows the control input without
constraint. Figs. 5 and 6 show the observer error of finite-time observer
we proposed. It shows that the observer errors fall into zero approxi­
mately in a short time period. It can also be observed that x~1 converge to
the acceptable accuracy of 1 � 10 4 mðradÞ within 1 s while the esti­
mation error in velocities can be maintained within 5 �
10 3 m=s、5 � 10 3 m=s and 8 � 10 3 rad=s, respectively. In addition, no
knowledge of external disturbance is required while only the bound­
edness is requested to be guaranteed for the observer we designed.
From Figs. 7–12, the performance of nominal controller in Scenario
2 for dynamic positioning ship in the present of input saturation are
showed. The actual trajectories under controller in Theorem 3 are shown
in Fig. 7, from which we can see that the proposed controller can achieve
fast transient response and high steady-state accuracy despite the pres­
ence of external disturbances and input saturation, and lack of velocity
measurements. In particular, Fig. 8 shows the track errors in surge, sway
and yaw direction, respectively, where the steady performance can be
seen. Figs. 9 and 10 show the input signal with constraint and signal
generated by auxiliary system. Due to the fact that the disturbance is
non-zero whereas the control input is zero at the initial moment, the
saturation is activated and the auxiliary system handle with the effect
caused by input saturation timely. When control input jτi j � 50NðN:mÞ ,
the nominal controller proposed in Remark 5 which guarantees the good
performance can be achieved. Figs. 11 and 12 show the observer error
considering the input constraint, from which we can find that it doesn’t
affect the estimation of observer and the observer still maintains accu­
rate estimation performance while the estimation error converge into
2 � 10 3 m=s, 1 � 10 3 m=s and 1 � 10 2 rad=s, respectively.
From Fig. 13, anti-disturbance performance of controller we
K. Liang et al.
designed is showed. Compared with the Scenario 2, the disturbance in
this simulation is enhanced as larger as 10 times than that in Scenario 2
while the parameters of controller and observer are not changed. As
shown in Fig. 13, since the initial disturbance is very large while the
control input is constrained so that the overshoot is more obvious than
Fig. 7. Then, the auxiliary system is activated and the controller we
designed can make the ship following the desired trajectory within short
time. It’s illustrated that the controller provided in Theorem 3 can
withstand worse environment while the parameters adjusting aren’t
required.
From Figs. 14-17, a comparison simulation is provided to better show
the convergence speed and robustness of the proposed controller and
observer comparing with the existing works in (Wondergem et al.,
2011). It can be found in Fig. 14 that the actual trajectory in Scenario 4
has a significant oscilation in the initial stage and the convergence time
is longer than the resluts in Scenario 2 which is more obvious in Fig. 15.
In the case that the controllers are the same and the steady performance
are similar, the transient porformance is based on the observer. From
Fig. 16 and Fig. 17 we can find that a better trasient proformance is
achieved by the observer we designed in which the overshoot is less and
the converbence time is shorter. Summarizing all the cases considered,
the fast convergence rate of the proposed controller and observer have
been verified.
From Fig. 18 and Fig. 19, a comparison with model uncertanties
while the parameters aren’t adjusted between controller in Scenario 2
and controller based on traditional observer in Scenario 4 is showed. It
can be found from Fig. 18 that the actual trajectory based on traditional
observer has a significant oscilation in the initial stage while the tra­
jectory based on the Theorem 3 is more smooth. It’s obvious that the
controller and observer we designed have better robustness against to
uncertainties. In addition, the estimation errors comparsion between
two observers with uncertainties is provided from Fig. 19. We can find
that the observer we designed can estimate the accurate state within
shorter time more smoothly. In this thesis, the controller and observer
we desinged have good robustness.
In conclusion, when the input saturation isn’t activated, the nominal
adaptive sliding mode controller we designed can ensure the good
control performance of the dynamic positioning ship. When the control
input of the dynamic positioning ship exceeds the input constraint, the
designed auxiliary system can quickly compensate for the control per­
formance degradation caused by the saturation constraint. Even in the
worese environment, the ship can maintain good steady performance
and parameters adujsting is not required. At the same time, compared
with the conventional state observer, the control method designed in
Appendix
A. Proof of Lemma 5
Proof. We choose the following Lyapunov function candidate
1
V1 ¼ ξ T ξ
2
From (11), the first-order derivative of V1 is calculated as.
V_ 1 ¼ ξT ξ_
X
3 X
3
¼ ξT Aξ bi ξir0 þ1 ξT σ gi sgnðξi Þ ξT JM 1 Δτ
i¼1 i¼1
X
3
� λmin ðAÞkξk2 λmin ðBÞkξkr0 þ1 σ gi jξi j
i¼1
r0 þ1 r0 þ1
� 2λmin ðAÞV1 2 2 λmin ðBÞV1 2
Ocean Engineering 206 (2020) 107245
this paper has a better trasient performance. In addition, the controller
and observer provded in Theorem 3 have robust against the uncertainty
while there is no need to change the parameters.
5. Conclusion
In this paper, an adaptive sliding mode output feedback controller is
investigated for dynamic positioning ship considering the Coriolis ma­
trix, hydrodynamic nonlinear damping matrix, input saturation, un­
measured states, unknown time-varying environment disturbances and
transient performance simultaneously. A continue finite-time state
observer is proposed to estimate the unmeasured states of dynamic
positioning ship in finite time and an auxiliary system is constructed to
handle with the control saturation. A terminal sliding mode surface
consisting the signal generated by the auxiliary system is designed while
the fast convergence is achieved under multiple constraints. In addition,
an adaptive update law is introduced that the prior knowledge of
disturbance is no need. Fast convergence rate of the closed-loop system
is ensured by analyzing system stability in light of finite-time control
theory. Numerical simulation results and comparison have shown the
advantages and improvements of the proposed control scheme. Further
work includes low computational complexity algorithm to adjust pa­
rameters and finite-time control design for the dynamic positioning with
state constraints and dynamic uncertainties.
Declaration of competing interest
We declare that we do not have any commercial or associative in­
terest that represents a conflict of interest in connection with the work
submitted.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Kun Liang: Conceptualization. Xiaogong Lin: Resources. Yu Chen:
Software. Juan Li: Data curation. Fuguang Ding: Investigation.
Acknowledgements
This research was partially supported by the Science and Technology
Project of Henan Province (Project nos. 202102210137,
192102210109), the Aeronautical Science Fund (Project nos.
20170155001) and the National Science Technology Support Program
of China (Project nos. 51609046).
(37)
(38)
ξT JM 1 Δτ
12
K. Liang et al. Ocean Engineering 206 (2020) 107245

Where ξ0 is the initial state of ξ. From Lemma 1, the finite-time convergence of V1 and ξ can be guaranteed. Besides, the convergence time ta is
estimated by.
1 r0 r0 þ1
1 2λmin ðAÞV1 2 ðξ0 Þ þ 2 λmin ðBÞ
(39)
2
ta � ln r0 þ1
λmin ðAÞð1 r1 Þ 2 2 λmin ðBÞ
Thus this Proof is complete.

B. Proof of Theorem 1

Proof. Choose the Lyapunov function candidate

1 1 ~2
V2 ¼ s T s þ d (40)
2 2kd M

Where d
~ M ¼ dM d M . Taking the time derivative for V2 .
b

1
V_ 2 ¼ sT s_ þ d~M d~_ M
kd
_
_ 1 ÞÞ
¼ sT ðz_2 þ k⋅βðz d~M b
dM (41)
X
3
¼ sT ðFðx1 ; x2 Þ þ τi þ dðtÞ _ 1 ÞÞ
x_2d þ Aξ þ Bξr0 þ σ GsgnðξÞ þ k⋅βðz kskd~M þ εd b
d M d~M
i¼1

Substituting (16) into V_ 2 .

X
3
V_ 2 � λmin ðk1 Þksk2 λmin ðk2 Þ jsi jr1 þ1 þ εd b
d M d~M
i¼1 (42)
� λmin ðk1 Þksk2 þ εd d~M ðdM d~M Þ
According the Young’s inequality.
1 1
(43)
2
εd d~M dM � εd d~M þ εd dM2
2 2
Therefore, the V_ 2 can be rewritten as.
1 ~ 2 þ 1εd d2
V_ 2 � λmin ðk1 Þksk2 kd εd d2
(44)
M
2kd 2 M
� α1 V2 þ β1

Where α1 ¼ minf2λmin ðk1 Þ; kd εd g,β1 ¼ 12εd d2M . According to boundedness theorem (Zhou and Yang, 2015), s and d
~M are uniformly ultimate bounded.
Therefore, there exists a positive constant dM such that dM � dM holds.
~
Then, in order to prove the finite-time stability, we define a new Lyanupov function candidate.
1
V3 ¼ s T s (45)
2
The corresponding time derivative is
X
3
V3 � λmin ðk1 Þksk2 λmin ðk2 Þ jsi jr1 þ1 þ kskdM _
i¼1

X
3
r þ1 1 1 2
� λmin ðk1 Þksk2 λmin ðk2 Þ jsi j 1 þ ksk2 þ dM
i¼1
2 2
0 1
� � B r1 þ1 dM C
2
1 B 2 C r12þ1
� λmin ðk1 Þ ksk2 B2 λmin ðk2 Þ r1 þ1 CV3 (46)
2 @ 2 A
2V3

� �� !r 2þ1
2 1
dM
From Lemma 2, when the parameter satisfies λmin ðk1 Þ 1
2
0, V3 will converge to V3 � 12 2λmin ðk2 Þ
, so the sliding manifold will converge to
!r 1þ1
2 1
dM
ksk � 2λmin ðk2 Þ
in finite time.

Finally, combining with the Lemma 5, the finite-time stability for dynamic positioning ship in the present of input saturation can be guaranteed.
The Lyapunov function is chosen as V4 ¼ V1 þ V2 and the corresponding time derivative is.

13
K. Liang et al. Ocean Engineering 206 (2020) 107245

X
3
r þ1
V_ 4 � λmin ðk1 Þksk2 λmin ðk2 Þ jsi j 1 þ εd b
d M d~M
i¼1
(47)
λmin ðAÞkξk2 λmin ðBÞkξk r0 þ1

Setting a constant δd > 12 and the following inequality holds.

εd d~M b
d M ¼ εd d~M ðdM d~M Þ
� �
2 1 ~2 δd
� εd d~M þ d þ d2
2δd M 2 M (48)

εd ð2δd 1Þ~2 εd δd 2
¼ dM þ d
2δd 2 M
Hence, the inequality of (47) can be rewritten as.
X
3
V_ 4 � λmin ðk2 Þ jsi jr1 þ1 λmin ðBÞkξkr0 þ1
(49)
i¼1

εd ð2δd 1Þ~2 ε d δd 2
dM þ d
2δd 2 M

Defining rc ¼ minfr0 ; r1 g,σmin ¼ fλmin ðk2 Þ; λmin ðBÞg and V_ 4 can be rewritten as.
X
3
V_ 4 � λmin ðk2 Þ jsi jrc þ1 λmin ðBÞkξkrc þ1 þ εd b
d M d~M
i¼1

X
3 � �rc2þ1
εd ð2δd 1Þ~2
� λmin ðk2 Þ jsi jrc þ1 λmin ðBÞkξkrc þ1 dM
i¼1
2δd
(50)
� �rc2þ1
εd ð2δd 1Þ~2
þ dM þ εd b
d M d~M
2δd
� �rc2þ1
rc þ1 εd ð2δd 1Þ~2
� γ0 V4 2 þ dM þ εd b
d M d~M
2δd

2
rc þ1 rc þ1
Where kd ¼ εdδð2δ
dγ
d 1Þ,γ 0 ¼2 2 σ min .
εd ð2δd 1Þ~2
If 2δd dM > 1, we have.
� �rc2þ1
rc þ1 εd ð2δd 1Þ~2
V_ 4 � γ 0 V4 2 þ d M þ εd b
d M d~M
2δd

�
rc þ1
γ0 V4 2 þ
εd ð2δd 1Þ~2
d M þ εd b
d M d~M (51)
2δd
rc þ1 εd δd 2
� γ0 V4 2 þ dM
2
εd ð2δd 1Þ~2
If 2δd
dM � 1, we obtain.
�
� �rc þ1 �
εd ð2δd 1Þ~2 2 ��
dM �
2δd �
�εd ð2δd 1Þ~2
2δd dM �1
�
� �rc þ1 �
εd ð2δd 1Þ~2 2 ��
� dM � (52)
2δd �
�εd ð2δd 1Þ 2
2δd d~M >1

Therefore, combining (51) and (52) yields

rc þ1 εd δd
V_ 4 � γ 0 V4 2 þ 2
dM (53)
2
From Lemma 3, x1 and x2 converge to small regions around the equilibrium points in finite time while Theorem 1 has been proven.

C. Proof of Theorem 2

Proof. Firstly, based on Assumption 1 we have

14
K. Liang et al. Ocean Engineering 206 (2020) 107245

FC ðx1 ; x2 Þx2 FC ðx1 ; bx 2 Þb

x 2 ¼ FC ðx1 ; x2 Þx2 FC ðx1 ; x2 Þb x2
þFC ðx1 ; x2 Þb
x 2 FC ðx1 ; b
x 2 Þb
x2 (54)
¼ 2FC ðx1 ; x2 Þ~x2 FC ðx1 ; ~x2 Þ~x2
Then, combining the Assumption 1 and reference(Fu and Yu, 2018), the following inequality holds.

kFC ðx1 ; x2 Þx2 FC ðx1 ; b x 2 k � 2FCM1 k~x2 k þ FCM2 k~x2 k2

x 2 Þb (55)

Where FCM1 and FCM2 are unknown constants. According the Assumption 1 we obtain.
kFD ðx1 ; x2 Þ FD ðx1 ; b
x 2 Þk � ðdM1 þ dM2 kx2 b x 2 kÞkx2 x2k
b
(56)
¼ dM1 k~x2 k þ dM2 k~x2 k2
Substituting (55) and (56) into (54) we have.
x2k
kFðx1 ; x2 Þx2 Fðx1 ; bx 2 Þb
� kFC ðx1 ; x2 Þx2 FC ðx1 ; bx 2 Þb
x 2 k þ kFD ðx1 ; x2 Þ FD ðx1 ; b
x 2 Þk
� 2FCM1 k~x2 k þ FCM2 k~x2 k2 þ dM1 k~x2 k þ dM2 k~x2 k2
¼ dM1 k~x2 k þ dM2 k~x2 k2 (57)

Where dM1 ¼ 2FCM1 þ dM1 ,dM2 ¼ FCM2 þ dM2 are unknown constants.
In order to analysis the stability of the observer error system, the following Lyapunov candidate function is constructed.
V5 ¼ X T PX (58)

00 1T 1T
� �
B r2 þ1
T p11 � I3 p12 � I3
Where error bector is X
~ ¼ @@sigðx
~1 Þ 2 A ; x ~2 C
A and P ¼ is a positive define matrix which means p11 > 0 and p11 p22 p212 > 0
p12 � I3 p22 � I3

hold. Taking the time derivative for V5 .

0 1T 0 1
r2 þ1 r2 þ 1 r22 1 _
B sigð~x1 Þ 2 C B 2 j~x1 j ~x1 C
V_ 5 ¼ B
@
C PB
A @
C
A
~x2 ~x_ 2
0 1T (59)
r2 þ1 !
B sigð~x1 Þ 2
C p11 � I3 p12 � I3
¼B
@
C
A
p12 � I3 p22 � I3
~x2

0 0 10 1 1
r2 þ 1 @
r2 1
2 A@~
r2 þ1
A C
B diag j~x1 j x2 L1 sigð~x1 Þ 2

⋅B
@ 2 C
A
Fðx1 ; b
x 2 Þb
x2 Fðx1 ; x2 Þx2 dðtÞ L2 sigð~x1 Þr2

0 1
B r2 1 C
B jx
1 B 0 0
0 ~11 j 2 C
C
r2 1 B C
~1 j 2 A ¼ B C
r2 1
Where diag@jx B 0 x12 j
j~ 2 0 C .λmin ðL1 Þ, λmin ðL2 Þ are the minimal eigenvalues of L1 and L2 . Based on the defination of sigð ⋅Þ,
B C
B r2 1
C
B C
@ 0 0 jx
~13 j 2 A

we have.
r2 1 r2 þ1
sigð~x1 Þr2 ¼ j~x1 jr2 sgnð~x1 Þ ¼ j~x1 j 2
j~x1 j 2
sgnð~x1 Þ
r2 1 r2 þ1
(60)
¼ j~x1 j 2
sigð~x1 Þ 2

Therefore, V_ 5 can be rewritten as.

0 1
0 1T r2 þ1

X3 r2 1 r2 þ1 B sigð~
x 1i Þ 2
C �
V_ 5 � j~x1i j 2 @sigð~x1i Þ 2 ~x2i A QB
@
C
A
~ dM1 k~x2 k þ dM2 k~x2 k2 þ dM pM kXk
þ pM kXk ~ (61)
i¼1
~x2i

Where pM ¼ maxðp12 ; p22 ÞQ11 ¼ r22þ1λmin ðL1 Þp11 þ λmin ðL2 Þp12 , Q22 ¼ r2 þ1
2 p12 , Q12 ¼ Q21 ¼ r24þ1λmin ðL1 Þp12 þ 12λmin ðL2 Þp22 r2 þ1
4 p11 ,

15
K. Liang et al. Ocean Engineering 206 (2020) 107245

� � � �
Q11 � I3 Q12 � I3 Q11 Q12
Q ¼ ,Q ¼ .
Q21 � I3 Q22 � I3 Q21 Q22
Then, the following inequalities hold.
1 ~ 2 � V5 � 1λmax ðPÞkXk
λmin ðPÞkXk ~ 2 (62)
2 2
1 1
V2 ~ � pffiffiffiffiffiV
2

pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi5ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi � kXk ffiffiffi5ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi (63)

λmax ðPÞ=2 λmin ðPÞ=2

According 0 < r2 < 1 we have.

pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 1
(64)
1
k~x1 k2 � 2=λmin ðPÞV52
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 1
k~x2 k � 2=λmin ðPÞV52 (65)

r2 1 r2 1 r2 1
k~x1 k 2
� ð2=λmin ðPÞÞ 2
V5 2 (66)

Thus, from (61)–(66), the time derivative of the Lyapunov function (61) becomes.
r2 1 r2 1
V_ 5 � ð2=λmin ðPÞÞV5 2 λmin ðQÞkXk ~ 2 þ dM2 pM kXk
~ 2 þ dM1 pM kXk2 ~ 3 þ dM pM kXk
~
� � 1 � � 3 � �1
r2 þ1 r2 þ1
λmin ðPÞ λmin ðPÞ 2 32 λmin ðPÞ 2 12
� λmin ðQÞð2=λmin ðPÞÞ 2 V5 2 þ dM1 pM V5 þ dM2 pM V5 þ dM2 pM V5
2 2 2
r2 þ1
(67)
3 1
� γ1 V5 2 þ γ2 V5 þ γ3 V52 þ γ 4 V52

� � 1 � � 3
2
� � 1
2
r2 þ1
Where γ 1 ¼ λmin ðQÞð2=λmin ðPÞÞ 2 , γ 2 ¼ dM 1 p M λmin ðPÞ
2 , γ3 ¼ dM2 pM λmin ðPÞ
2 , γ4 ¼ dM pM λmin ðPÞ
2 . Since 0 < r2 < 1,we have r2 þ 1 < 2, that is to
1 r2 þ1
say < 2 2 < 1. According Lemma 1 and Lemma 4, one further obtains.
0 1
1
r2 þ1 B r2 γ 2 V52 þ γ 3 V5 þ γ 4 C
B C
(68)
1
V_ 5 � ðγ 1 θÞV5 2 θV52 BV52 C
@ θ A

1
r2 þ1
γ V 2 þγ V þγ
Here, let us define that X 2 Ω1 when V5 2 2 5 3 5
θ
4
> 0 and V5 ð0Þ is the initial value of V5 . In the light of Lemma 1 and Lemma 5, it implies that
when X 2 Ω1 , the erro system (23) and (24) is locally fast-finite-time uniformly ultimately bounded and the setting time is.
1 r2
V5 ð0Þ 2
To ¼ � � (69)
ðγ1 θÞ 1 2r2

Hence the Proof is completed.

D. Proof of Theorem 3

Proof. In order to analysis the stability of the observer error system, we define a Lyanupov function candidate V6 ¼ V4 þ V5 and the corresponding
time derivative is.
0 1
rc þ1 εd δd r2 þ1
B C 1
(70)
1
V_ 6 � γ 0 V4 2 þ 2
dM γ1 V5 2 þ @γ2 V52 þ γ 3 V5 þ γ 4 AV52
2

When X 2 Ω1 holds and choosing an arbitrary constant θ belonging to ð0; αÞ, the inequality (70) can be rewritten as.
rc þ1 εd δd r2 þ1
V_ 6 � γ 0 V4 2 þ 2
dM ðγ1 θÞV5 2 (71)
2
� �
rc þ1 r2 þ1
Defining γ 5 ¼ minfγ0 ; γ 1 θg,r3 ¼ min 2
; 2 and Δ ¼ 2
dM , so the following inequality holds.
εd δd 2

V_ 6 � γ4 V6r3 þ Δ (72)
According Lemma 3, the Theorem 3 is thus proved. This completes the Proof.□

Appendix A. Supplementary data

Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2020.107245.

16
K. Liang et al. Ocean Engineering 206 (2020) 107245

References Maryam, S.K., 2018. Anti-disturbance dynamic surface control scheme for a class of
uncertain nonlinear systems with asymmetric dead-zone nonlinearity. ISA (Instrum.
Soc. Am.) Trans. 81, 86–95.
Bhat, S.P., Bernstein, D.S., 2000. Finite-time stability of continuous autonomous systems.
Nguyen, T.D., Sørensen, A.J., Quek, S.T., 2007. Design of hybrid controller for dynamic
SIAM J. Contr. Optim. 38 (3), 751–766.
positioning from calm to extreme sea conditions. Automatica 43 (5), 768–785.
Chen, M., Ren, B.B., Wu, Q.X., et al., 2015. Anti-disturbance control of hypersonic flight
Perez, T., Donaire, A., 2009. Constrained control design for dynamic positioning of
vehicles with input saturation using disturbance observer. Sci. China Inf. Sci. 58 (7),
marine vehicles with control allocation. Model. Ident. Contr. 30 (2), 57–70.
1–12.
Sørensen, A.J., 2011. A survey of dynamic positioning control systems. Annu. Rev. Contr.
Chen, M., Jiang, B., Cui, R.X., 2016. Actuator fault-tolerant control of ocean surface
35 (1), 123–136.
vessels with input saturation. Int. J. Robust Nonlinear Control 26 (3), 542–564.
Shao, S., Zong, Q., Tian, B., et al., 2017. Finite-time sliding mode attitude control for
Do, K.D., 2011. Global robust and adaptive output feedback dynamic positioning of
rigid spacecraft without angular velocity measurement. J. Franklin Inst. 354,
surface ships. J. Mar. Sci. Appl. 10, 325–332.
4656–4674.
Du, J.L., Hu, X., Liu, H., Chen, C.L.P., 2015. Adaptive robust output feedback control for
Shen, Y.J., Xia, X.H., 2008. Semi-global finite-time observer for nonlinear systems.
a marine dynamic positioning system based on a high-gain observer. IEEE Trans.
Automatica 44 (12), 3125–3156.
Neural Netw. Learn. Syst. 26 (11), 2775–2786.
Shi, Y., Shen, C., Fang, H.Z., Li, H.P., 2017. Advanced control in marine mechatronic
Du, J.L., Hu, X., Krsti�c, M., Sun, Y., 2016. Robust dynamic positioning of ships with
systems: a survey. IEEE/ASME Trans. Mech. 22 (3), 1121–1131.
disturbances under input saturation. Automatica 73, 207–214.
Skjetne, R., Fossen, T.I., Petar, V., Kokotovi�c, 2005. Adaptive maneuvering, with
Fossen, T.I., Strand, J.P., 1999. Passive nonlinear observer design for ships using
experiments, for a model ship in a marine control laboratory. Automatica 41 (2),
Lyapunov methods: full-scale experiments with a supply vessel. Automatica 35 (1),
289–298.
3–16.
Veksler, A.V., Johansen, T.A., Borrelli, F., et al., 2016. Dynamic positioning with model
Fossen, T.I., 2012. Handbook of Marine Craft Hydrodynamics and Motion Control. Wiley,
predictive control. IEEE Trans. Contr. Syst. Technol. 24 (4), 1340–1353.
Hoboken, NJ, USA.
Værnø, Svenn, A., Brodtkorb, A.H., et al., 2019. Compensation of bias loads in dynamic
Fu, M.Y., Yu, L.L., 2018. Finite-time extended state observer-based distributed formation
positioning of marine surface vessels. Ocean Eng. 178, 484–492.
control for marine surface vehicles with input saturation and disturbances. Ocean
Wang, N., Qian, C., Sun, J.C., et al., 2016a. Adaptive robust finite-time trajectory
Eng. 159, 219–227.
tracking control of fully actuated marine surface vehicles. IEEE Trans. Contr. Syst.
He, W., Yin, Z., Sun, C., 2017. Adaptive neural network control of a marine vessel with
Technol. 24 (4), 1454–1462.
constraints using the asymmetric barrier Lyapunov function. IEEE Trans. Cybernetics
Wang, Y., Tuo, Y., Yang, S.X., et al., 2018. Reliability-based robust dynamic positioning
47 (1), 1641–1651.
for a turret-moored floating production storage and offloading vessel with unknown
He, W., Kong, L., Dong, Y., et al., 2019. Fuzzy tracking control for a class of uncertain
time-varying disturbances and input saturation. ISA (Instrum. Soc. Am.) Trans. 78,
MIMO nonlinear systems with state constraints. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybernetics:
66–79.
Systems 49 (3), 543–554.
Wang, Y.Y., Gu, L., Gao, M., et al., 2016b. Multivariable output feedback adaptive
Hong, Y.G., Xu, Y.S., Huang, J., 2002. Finite-time control for robot manipulators. Syst.
terminal sliding mode control for underwater vehicles. Asian J. Contr. 18 (1),
Contr. Lett. 46 (4), 243–253.
247–265.
Hu, Q.L., Niu, G.L., 2017. Attitude output feedback control for rigid spacecraft with
Wondergem, M., Lefeber, E., Pettersen, K.Y., Nijmeijer, H., 2011. Output feedback
finite-time convergence. ISA Trans. 70, 173–186.
tracking of ships. IEEE Trans. Contr. Syst. Technol. 19 (2), 442–448.
Hu, Q., Jiang, B., 2018. Continuous finite-time attitude control for rigid spacecraft based
Xiao, B., Yin, S., 2016. Velocity-free fault-tolerant and uncertainty attenuation control
on angular velocity observer. IEEE Trans. Aero. Electron. Syst. 54 (3), 1082–1092.
for a class of nonlinear systems. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 63 (7), 4400–4411.
Hu, Q., Zhang, J., Zhang, Y., 2018. Velocity-free attitude coordinated tracking control for
Yu, L., Guoqing, Z., Zhijian, S., et al., 2018. Adaptive cooperative formation control of
spacecraft formation flying. ISA (Instrum. Soc. Am.) Trans. 73, 54–65.
autonomous surface vessels with uncertain dynamics and external disturbances.
Hu, X., Du, J.L., Shi, J., 2015. Adaptive fuzzy controller design for dynamic positioning
Ocean Eng. 167, 36–44.
system of vessels. Appl. Ocean Res. 53, 46–53.
Zhang, G.Q., Huang, C.F., Wu, X.X., Zhang, X.K., 2018. Adaptive finite-time dynamic
Hu, X., Du, J.L., 2018. Robust nonlinear control design for dynamic positioning of marine
positioning control of full-actuated ship with servo system uncertainties. Acta
vessels with thruster system dynamics. Nonlinear Dynam. 94, 365–376.
Autom. Sin. 44 (10), 181–186.
Li, Hongyi, Zhao, Shiyi, He, Wei, Lu, Renquan, 2019. Adaptive finite-time tracking
Zhang, G., Huang, C., Zhang, X., et al., 2018. Practical constrained dynamic positioning
control of full state constrained nonlinear systems with dead-zone. Automatica 100,
control for uncertain ship through the minimal learning parameter technique. IET
99–107.
Control Theory & Appl. 12 (18), 2526–2533.
Liu, H., Zhang, T., Tian, X., 2016. Continuous output-feedback finite-time control for a
Zhou, J., Yang, J., 2015. Smooth sliding mode control for missile interception with finite-
class of second-order nonlinear systems with disturbances. Int. J. Robust Nonlinear
time convergence. J. Guid. Contr. Dynam. 38 (7), 1311–1318.
Control 26 (2), 218–234.
Zhu, Z., Xia, Y.Q., Fu, M.Y., 2010. Attitude stabilization of rigid spacecraft with finite-
time convergence. Int. J. Robust Nonlinear Control 21 (6), 686–702.

17