Engineering Structures 211 (2020) 110267

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Engineering Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/engstruct

Stability, performance and power flow of active U-tube anti-roll tank T

a,⁎
N. Alujević , I. Ćatipović , Š. Malenica , I. Senjanović , N. Vladimir
a b a a

a
University of Zagreb, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and Naval Architecture, Department of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, Ivana Lučića 5, 10 000
Zagreb, Croatia
b
Bureau Veritas Group, Marine and Offshore Division, Research Department, Le Triangle de l'Arche, 8 Cours du Triangle - CS 50101, 92937 Paris La Defense Cedex,
France

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Active control of ship roll using a U-tube anti-roll tank (ART) is considered. A linearized model of the ship and
Active control of ship roll active ART with two degrees of freedom is formulated. The two degrees of freedom are the ART fluid free surface
Anti-roll tanks angle and the ship roll angle. The active control approach is based on the absolute roll-rate feedback assuming an
U-tube tanks idealized pump located in the connecting conduit of the U-tube. The pump generates a pressure difference
Stability of control systems
proportional to the roll rate via a negative feedback gain. First, the stability of the feedback loop is analysed
Performance of control systems
Power flow in control systems
using the Nyquist criterion. The stability analysis indicates that the ART natural frequency should be set well
below the ship roll natural frequency. The performance analysis is carried out in terms of the reductions of the
frequency response function between the wave slope exciting the ship roll and the roll angle. It is found that also
the active control performance improves with reducing the natural frequency of the ART. Finally, the analysis of
the power flow through the system indicates that the pump power can be reduced with the reduction of the ART
natural frequency. Also, it is shown that it is possible to reduce the wave power input into the ship plus ART
system by engaging the active control.

1. Introduction
Two principal forms of passive anti-roll tanks (ART) can be dis-
tinguished: the free-surface (“flume”) tanks and the U-tube tanks [1–3].
The “flume” tanks are those with the tank fluid free surface spanning
from portside to starboard of the tank [4,5]. Such tanks can be used to
impede the ship roll motion through forces generated by sloshing of the
fluid against the tank walls. The natural period of the sloshing motion
must be carefully tuned with reference to the ship roll natural period.
This is normally achieved by varying the level of filling of the tank [6].
In addition, flooded baffles are typically installed in the tanks in order
to control the damping ratio of the sloshing motion [7].
The alternative type of ARTs follows the layout of a U-tube, whose
vertical portside and starboard reservoirs are connected by a horizontal
duct [8–12]. The period of natural oscillation of the tank water flowing
from portside to starboard reservoir and backward can be tuned by
choosing the principal dimensions of the U-tube. The widths of the
water free surface in the two reservoirs and the height of the connecting
conduit are geometrical parameters that influence natural period the
most. Damping of the fluid flow can be controlled by opening or closing
a valve in the connecting channel. Either fundamental type of the de-
sign, the U-tube or the free-surface, can have various modifications and
enhancements. For example, U-tube tanks can have additional pipes for
air flow control, or openings below the waterline for a free-flooding
design [13]. Furthermore, U-tube anti-roll tanks represent the so-called
structural tanks, meaning that their structure is a part of ship hull
structure. Therefore, their structure is designed according to rules and
regulations of Classification Societies and results either from the em-
pirical formulae or from direct strength calculations, depending on the
ship type. Since anti-roll tanks alter ship motions in waves, their in-
fluence onto ship strength is indirect and is taken into account through
accelerations that are imposed in on the finite element models in the
global strength assessments of ships.
If properly tuned, ARTs can reduce the roll motion of a ship, in-
cluding the parametric roll [14,15]. The tuning usually aims at mini-
mizing the amplitude of the ship roll angle at wave excitation fre-
quencies where maxima of the roll response occur. The roll of a ship
without the ART installation is characterized by one such frequency,
approximately corresponding to the roll natural frequency. However,
the roll of a ship equipped with a lightly damped ART is characterized
by two resonance frequencies, separated by an anti-resonance, due to
the additional degree of freedom of the liquid in the tank. As a result, it
is necessary to trade-off between the roll reduction at the ART natural
frequency (the anti-resonance) and the roll increase at resonance

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: neven.alujevic@fsb.hr (N. Alujević).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2020.110267
Received 26 April 2019; Received in revised form 13 December 2019; Accepted 20 January 2020
Available online 14 March 2020
0141-0296/ © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
N. Alujević, et al.
frequencies immediately below and above it. This is achieved by tuning
the tank water natural frequency and damping ratio. The tuning of
passive U-tube ARTs has been covered in the literature to a reasonable
extent, so it is known that their natural frequency should be very si-
milar to the ship roll natural frequency. Additionally, the ART damping
ratio can be optimized in the view of the desired frequency response
spectrum of the ship roll. There is a certain level of analogy between the
roll control of a ship using ARTs and the use of tuned vibration ab-
sorbers (TVA) to control mechanical vibrations of structures, but the
analogy is not complete. For example, a passive ship + ART system can
be represented by equivalent mechanical system with lumped para-
meters, [16], which is quite different from the classical scheme of a
primary structure equipped with a TVA.
Normally, free-surface ARTs are entirely passive roll control de-
vices. In contrast, U-tube ARTs can be made active. Active U-tube ARTs
have been reported in a number of theoretical studies [17–23] and one
experimental study [24]. With the active approach, the water can be
transported from one side reservoir to the other by a pump located in
the connecting conduit between the two reservoirs, according to a
controller command. This could potentially enable generating a more
effective anti-roll moment than that produced by passive ARTs. It may
be possible to decrease the ship roll response around the principal ship
roll natural frequency without inducing an increased roll response at
other frequencies. It is intuitive to relate this kind of ship roll control
method with the control of mechanical vibrations using active vibration
absorbers (i.e. inertial actuators attached to the primary structure op-
erated in a control loop). In order to achieve a significant performance
increase over a passive ART, a controller that delivers the command to
the pump must be carefully designed. There are two principal kinds of
controllers that can be considered for this purpose: feedforward and
feedback.
In the feedforward control framework it is necessary that reference
signals are available. Reference signals must be well correlated to the
primary disturbance that causes the oscillations. If the disturbance is
deterministic at a single frequency, or at multiple discrete frequencies,
then feed-forward control methods are more easily applied [25]. This is
because in such a case the primary task of the controller is to adjust
amplitude and phase of a secondary forcing at the same frequency as
the primary disturbance so as to cancel the effects of the primary dis-
turbance. A number of efficient algorithms for carrying out this task
have been developed, in particular the so-called steepest descend al-
gorithm [26]. In order to apply the steepest descent algorithm it is
necessary to model the frequency response between the primary dis-
turbance and the error signal and between the secondary (control)
forcing and the error signal. This task is typically accomplished using
digital finite impulse response filters. In the case of ship roll control, a
slowly time-varying plant and secondary path digital models would
have to be envisaged in order to account for variation of the ship dy-
namic properties as the position and quantity of cargo varies. The
control system would also have to be robust with respect to the un-
modelled nonlinearities that are inherent to ship motions at sea.
However, sea waves are typically irregular and can be considered as
a stochastic disturbance that excites ship motions in a broad band of
frequencies. This does not necessarily preclude the use of feedforward
control. Nevertheless, the performance of feedforward control systems
significantly depends on the squared coherence between the reference
signals and the disturbance signal [26]. With coherence equal to one,
perfect cancellation could be expected. However, practical coherences
squared can be well below one, and the coherence of zero would mean
no reductions of the error signal. Additionally, reference sensors should
measure the incoming disturbance events in advance, before the an-
ticipated disturbance waves reach the object under control [26–28]. In
order to obtain the necessary time-advance, there must be some phy-
sical distance between locations at which reference sensors measure the
disturbance, and the locations at which the excitation waves interfere
with the ship. Practical coherences tend to decay with increasing this
2
Engineering Structures 211 (2020) 110267
distance. Therefore, a good balance between the coherence and the
causality margin is essential for successful feedforward control. In view
of ship motion control it would be necessary to measure the profiles of
incoming waves in the vicinity of a sailing ship. Although it has been
suggested that this kind of measurements are nowadays possible to
devise [23], a very sophisticated instrumentation especially dedicated
to this purpose would be essential [29].
In the feedback control framework, the reference signals are not
necessary. Therefore the use of feedback control is appealing for ship
roll control purposes. Instead, error signals from sensors that measure
the ship motions should be used, which are normally passed through
analogue or digital filters, amplified and fed back to the actuating
members. Feedback control techniques that have been considered in the
literature for ship roll control purposes include the feedback of the roll
angular velocity [17] and the combination of the feedback of the roll
angular velocity and the roll angle itself [17,30]. Roll acceleration
signals have also been discussed in the framework of a full PID con-
troller [2,17].
One drawback of feedback control is that stability of the system can
become an issue. It is necessary to carefully design the feedback control
system in order to guarantee its stability, robustness, and fail-safe op-
eration [31,32]. The early full-scale experimental campaign, although
successful in terms of using the U-tube ART as a roll exciter, was un-
successful when the active control loop was closed [24]. It was reported
that violent water hammer occurred in the blade shifting mechanism of
the pump and that vibrations produced were picked up by the error
accelerometer. This had the effect of altering the phase of the water
transfer, thus preventing adequate stabilization [33]. Additionally, with
the control of motions of objects as large as ships, the power required to
drive the pump may become a serious limitation [19,22,30]. Finally,
the inherent time-delay of the pump has been identified as a possible
origin of the instability [3,17]. In [30] a PD control law is used with a
constraint on the pump power. The authors chose the two feedback
gains by trial and error. The physical meaning of the proportional part
of the feedback loop in the work is not entirely clear. No stability
analysis has been carried out and no investigation on how to reduce the
pump power. In general, the literature on active ARTs lacks clear
guidelines on how active ARTs should be designed for good stability
and high control performance.
In this paper feedback control of ship roll using an active U-tube
tank is considered. Roll-rate feedback in used as the error signal which
is amplified and fed as a command to the pump. It is assumed that the
pump generates a pressure difference between the portside and star-
board of the connecting conduit which is made proportional to the roll
rate. Stability and performance of the described control approach are
systematically analysed in this paper with reference to how the active
ART should be tuned in terms of its natural frequency and damping
ratio. The results of the present study suggest that an active ART tuned
according to the passive ART tuning laws performs rather poorly and
exhibit severe stability problems. In contrast, good stability margins are
obtained if the natural frequency of the ART is tuned well below the
ship roll natural frequency.
The purpose of the work presented in this paper is therefore to (a)
shed some light onto how active ARTs generate control effects, (b) to
understand what the principal factors that influence the stability and
control performance of the active control system are, (c) to investigate
how the power demand on the pump can be reduced, and (d) to ex-
amine how the power input into the ship plus ART system is affected
through engaging the active control.
The paper is divided into 5 sections. In Section 2 the mathematical
model is given and the frequency response of the active system is for-
mulated using the frequency response of the passive system. In Section
3 the stability and performance of the active control is analysed. Power
flow through the system is covered in Section 4 assuming an example
ship excited by pure beam seas.
N. Alujević, et al. Engineering Structures 211 (2020) 110267

Fig. 1. The schematic representation of the ship and a passive U-tube ART system.

2. Mathematical model The equations of motion (3) and (4) can be written in the matrix
form as:
2.1. Frequency response of the passive system Mx¨ + Cẋ + Kx = F, (5)

The schematic representation of the ship equipped with a passive where M is the generalized inertia matrix, K is the generalized restoring
anti-roll tank is shown in Fig. 1. According to Stigter’s linearized model moment matrix, C is the damping matrix, x(t ) , ẋ (t ), ẍ(t ) are the angular
of a ship plus tank, [9], equations of motion can be written as: displacement, velocity and acceleration column vectors respectively,
and F(t) is the generalized excitation moment column vector. These
a1 φ¨ + a2 φ̇ + a3 φ + c1 ψ¨ + c3 ψ = m1, (1) matrices/vectors are given by the following expressions:
c1 φ¨ + c3 φ + b1 ψ¨ + b2 ψ̇ + b3 ψ = m2 , (2) a1 − c1 c1 a2 0 ⎤ a3 − c3 b3 ⎤
M=⎡ ⎤, C=⎡ , K=⎡ ,
where φ is the ship roll angle, and ψ is the tank fluid angle measured ⎣ c1 − b1 b1⎦ ⎣ b2 b2 ⎥
⎢− ⎦ ⎢
⎣ 0 b3 ⎥
⎦ (6a–c)
relative to the ship (Fig. 1). m1 is an external moment that acts on the
φ (t ) ⎤ m1 (t ) ⎤
ship, and m2 is an external moment that acts on the tank water. x=⎡ , F=⎡ .
⎣ α (t ) ⎥
⎢ ⎦ ⎢
⎣ m2 (t ) ⎥
⎦ (7a,b)
The coefficients ai , bi , and ci are:
Assuming a simple harmonic oscillation of the external ship and
a1= the moment of inertia of the ship + ART system, assuming a tank moments, m1 (t ) = R {M1̂ e−iωt } and m2 (t ) = R {M2̂ e−iωt } , the steady
“frozen” tank fluid (kgm2 ), state forced response of the ship and the tank are also simple harmonic,
a2= the linear roll damping coefficient of the hull (Nms/rad), φ (t ) = R {Φê −iωt } , and α (t ) = R {Aê −iωt } , where i= −1 and R stands for
a3= the righting moment of the ship + ART system assuming a the real part. Therefore Eq. (5) can be written as:
“frozen” tank fluid (Nm/rad),
b1= the moment of inertia of the tank fluid assuming a motionless S (iω) x (iω) = F (iω), (8)
ship (kgm2 ) where S(iω) is a dynamic stiffness matrix with the following form:
b2= the total linear angular damping coefficient between the tank
fluid and the tank walls (Nms/rad) S (iω) = −ω2 M + iωC + K. (9)
b3= the restoring moment of the tank fluid assuming a motionless The solution of Eq. (8) can be obtained by inversion of the dynamic
ship (Nm/rad) stiffness matrix S(iω) as
c1= the moment of inertia of the “frozen” tank fluid (kgm2 )
c3 = b3 . x (iω) = S−1 (iω) F (iω). (10)
Differentiating Eq. (10) in order to obtain ship roll and tank fluid
All moments of inertia, damping moments, restoring moments and angular velocities results in the following expression:
the excitation moment are calculated assuming that the ship rotates
about the centre of gravity of the ship plus ART system (Fig. 1). Full ẋ (iω) = Y (iω) F (iω), (11)
details on how to calculate all model coefficients for a given ship can be where ẋ (iω) = iω x (iω) is a vector containing ship and tank free surface
found in [9]. A discussion on the assumptions required to derive the angular velocities and Y (iω) = iωS−1 (iω) is the angular mobility matrix
linearized model and its experimental validation can also be found in (2 × 2) containing frequency response functions (FRFs) between an-
the reference. gular velocities and excitation moments:
If written in terms of the absolute tank fluid angle, Eqs. (1) and (2)
take the form: Yφ,̇ m1 Yφ,̇ m2 ⎤
Y(iω) = ⎡ .
⎢Yα̇, m1 Yα̇, m2 ⎥ (12)
(a1 − c1 ) φ¨ (t ) + c1 α¨ (t ) + a2 φ̇ (t ) + (a3 − b3 ) φ (t ) + b3 α (t ) = m1 (t ), (3) ⎣ ⎦
Yφ,̇ m1 is the FRF between the ship roll rate and a moment acting on the
(c1 − b1 ) φ¨ (t ) − b2 φ̇ (t ) + b1 α¨ (t ) + b2 α̇ (t ) + b3 α (t ) = m2 (t ), (4)
ship, Yφ,̇ m2 is the FRF between the ship roll rate and a moment acting on
where α = φ + ψ is the absolute tank fluid angle, Fig. 1. the tank water. Furthermore, Yα̇, m1 is the FRF between the angular

3
N. Alujević, et al. Engineering Structures 211 (2020) 110267

Fig. 2. The schematic representation of the ship equipped with an active U-tube ART.

velocity of the tank free surface and a moment acting on the ship. Fi- moment equal in amplitude but with opposite sign:
nally, Yα̇, m2 is the FRF between the angular velocity of the tank free ms2 = Gφ̇ (15)
surface and a moment acting on the tank water.
which reacts against the tank water. It cannot be guaranteed that it
2.2. Frequency response of the active system extracts the roll oscillation power, as discussed in Section 4 of the
paper.
The ship equipped with the active ART is shown schematically in The steady-state angular velocity responses of the ship and tank
Fig. 2. The pump in the connecting conduit is assumed to generate a system to the primary wave disturbance moment exciting the ship roll,
pressure difference, Δp, which is made proportional to the roll angular with the active control engaged, is considered next. With reference to
velocity (roll rate), φ̇, via a negative feedback loop, Fig. 1: Eq. (12), the roll angular velocity of the ship can be calculated as a sum
of contributions from the primary disturbance moment m1 = mp and the
Δp = −gf φ̇ , (13) two secondary (control) moments, ms1 and ms2 as follows:
where gf is a feedback amplification factor and its dimension is Pa⋅s. φ̇ = Yφ,̇ m1 mp + Yφ,̇ m1 ms1 + Yφ,̇ m2 ms2 . (16)
The roll rate can be measured by an angular accelerometer sensor
with a time-integrated output. A scheme of the angular accelerometer Similarly, the angular velocity of the tank water free surface can be
sensor is shown in Fig. 2 in which two linear accelerometer sensors are calculated as:
offset from the ship centreline towards portside and starboard with α̇ = Yα̇, m1 mp + Yα̇, m1 ms1 + Yα̇, ms ms2 . (17)
their sensitive axes aligned with the ship vertical axis. Their outputs, z̈P ,
and z̈ S can be subtracted in order to compensate for the sensitivity to By substituting for the active and reactive component of the sec-
vertical ship accelerations. The cut-off frequency of the integration ondary moment from Eqs. (14) and (15) into Eq. (16) the closed-loop
circuit should be set significantly below the frequency range of interest. FRF between the primary disturbance (sea wave roll moment) and the
In this study an idealized roll-rate sensor is assumed in order to isolate ship roll rate is obtained:
stability and performance properties that do not depend on the sensor Yφ,̇ m1
dynamics so as to obtain a benchmark set of results. Qφ,̇ mp = .
1 + G (Yφ,̇ m1 − Yφ,̇ m2 ) (18)
The pressure difference working on the cross-section area of the
duct hl , where h is the height of the duct, Fig. 2, and l is the tank length By substituting for the active and reactive component of the sec-
(in the direction of the ship length), generates a lateral force Δphl on ondary moment from Eqs. (14) and (15) into Eqs. (16) and (17), and
the ship and tank structure. It also generates a reaction force compo- eliminating φ̇, the closed-loop FRF between the primary roll moment
nent on the tank water − Δphl that accelerates the tank water along the and the tank water free surface angular velocity is obtained:
duct and up the outboard reservoirs. As a result, a secondary (control) Yα̇, m1 + G (Yα̇, m2 Yφ,̇ m1 − Yα̇, m1 Yφ,̇ m2 )
moment is generated on the ship which equals: Qα̇, mp = .
1 + G (Yφ,̇ m1 − Yφ,̇ m2 ) (19)
ms1 = −Gφ̇ (14)
Finally, the FRF between the control moment ms1 and the primary
where G = gf hl (R − h/2) is the feedback gain. R − h/2 is the distance disturbance moment is obtained using Eqs. (14) and (18):
between the centre of gravity of the ship plus tank system and the
−GYφ,̇ m1
centreline of the connecting duct (Fig. 2). The dimension of the feed- Qms1, mp = .
back gain G is Nms/rad. Therefore G has the same dimension as a ro- 1 + G (Yφ,̇ m1 − Yφ,̇ m2 ) (20)
tational damping coefficient, like for example the coefficient a2 in Eq. The wave excitation moment mp can be represented in terms of the
(3). As a result, the feedback loop generates a sort of active damping wave slope θ , as:
moment, ms1, that opposes the roll angular velocity and extracts the roll
oscillation power. The reaction force component generates a secondary mp = a3 θ, (21)

4
N. Alujević, et al. Engineering Structures 211 (2020) 110267

Table 1 the tank fluid angle and the wave slope angle can be calculated by time-
Nominal dimensions and masses of the ship and tank. integration of the corresponding angular velocity FRFs. This task is in
Ship the frequency domain performed by dividing the corresponding angular
mass, P, (kg) 4700·103 velocity FRF with iω :
overall length, LOA, (m) 103.5
Qφ,̇ θ
waterline length, LWL, (m) 93.6 R φ, θ = ,
beam, B, (m) 18.8 iω (31)
draught, D, (m) 3.9
Q α̇ , θ
Tank R α, θ = .
iω (32)
water mass, Q, (kg) 22.8·103
length, l, (m) 1 Finally, using Eqs. (6), (12) and (26) the sensor-actuator open-loop
reservoir spacing, w (m) 12.04 FRF is given by:
reservoir width, w1 (m) 2.58
conduit height, h (m) 0.66 iω ((b1 + c1 )(iω)2 + iωb2 + 2 b3 )
QS, A = ,
vertical walls slope, α (rad) 0.05 D2 (ω) (33)
water filling level, y (m) 2.7
where

where θ is the wave slope, Fig. 2, so that the three closed-loop FRFs D2 = (a1 b1 − c12)(iω) 4 + (b1 a2 + a1 b2 )(iω)3
expressed with reference to the wave slope are: + ((a1 − 2c1 ) b3 + b2 a2 + a3 b1 )(iω)2 + (a3 b2 + b3 a2 )iω
Qφ,̇ θ = a3 Qφ,̇ mp, (22) + b3 (a3 − b3) (34)

Qα̇, θ = a3 Qα̇, mp, (23)

3. Stability and performance analysis
Qms1, θ = a3 Qms1, mp. (24)
In this section an example ship equipped with an active ART is
In order to discuss the stability of the feedback control system, considered. The overall dimensions and weights of the ship and the ART
Nyquist stability criterion is used. Nyquist criterion is applied by ana- are given in Table 1.
lyzing the so-called sensor-actuator open-loop frequency response The nominal dynamic parameters of the ship and the ART, ai , bi , ci ,
function (OL-FRF). The sensor-actuator OL-FRF is a frequency response the natural frequency of the ship roll, ωS , and the natural frequency of
function between the error sensor output and the excitation by the the ART fluid oscillation, ωT ,are given in Table 2.
control actuator input in absence of the primary excitation. In the The two natural frequencies can be calculated as:
present control scheme this corresponds to calculating a FRF between
the error angular velocity φ̇ due to the simultaneous excitation of the a3
ωS = ,
system by both the action and reaction control moment ms1 and a1 (35)
ms2 = −ms1. This is equivalent to using the ART as a roll exciter and where ωS is the natural frequency of the ship roll assuming a “frozen”
measuring the FRF between the roll-rate and the torque in the pump tank liquid, and
shaft. At this point, it must be stated that detailed dynamic model of the
pump is omitted in this study. By assuming idealized sensor, actuator b3
ωT =
and controller a clear and a physically transparent benchmark set of b1 (36)
results can be obtained. Further limitations to the control performance
is the natural frequency of the tank fluid free oscillation in an otherwise
and stability can be expected with including the dynamics of the pump,
motionless ship. The natural frequency, ωT , and the damping coeffi-
the roll rate sensor, and the controller.
cient, b2 , of the tank fluid oscillation, that are listed in Table 2, are
By adopting ms = ms1 = −ms2 the sensor-actuator OL-FRF follows
determined using the H∞ criterion by employing the so-called “fixed
from substituting mp = 0 into Eq. (16):
point theory”, originally introduced by [34] for the control of me-
φ̇ = Yφ,̇ m1 ms − Yφ,̇ m2 ms , (25) chanical vibrations, and adapted to the problem of tuning a U-tube ART
for ship roll control by [9]. Using this criterion minimizes (and
or
equalizes) roll response at the two resonance frequencies.
QS, A = Yφ,̇ m1 − Yφ,̇ m2. (26)
By taking M, K and C matrices from Eq. (6a–c), and noting that 3.1. On-resonance tuning ωT ≈ ωS
c3 = b3 , the three closed-loop FRFs in Eqs. (18)–(20) can be calculated
as: Assuming that the ART is tuned according to the values in Table 2,
the FRF between the wave slope and the ship roll angle, R φ, θ , is
iωa1 ((iω)2b1 + iωb2 + b3 )
Qφ,̇ θ = ,
D1 (ω) (27) Table 2
Nominal dynamic parameters of the ship plus
a1 (iω)2 ((b1 − c1 )iω + G + b2 ) tank system.
Q α̇ , θ = ,
D1 (ω) (28)
a1 (kgm2) 2.67·108
−iωGa1 ((iω)2b1 + iωb2 + b3 ) a2 (Nms−1) 2.16·107
Qms1, θ = ,
D1 (ω) (29) a3 (Nm) 7.75·107
b1 (kgm2) 9.84·106
where b2 (Nms−1) 1.06·106
b3 (Nm) 2.97·106
D1 = (a1 b1 − c12)(iω) 4 + ((a2 + G ) b1 + a1 b2 + Gc1 )(iω)3
c1 (kgm2) 2.47·106
+ ((a1 − 2c1 ) b3 + a3 b1 + b2 (a2 + G ))(iω)2 c3 (Nm) 2.97·106
+ ((2G + a2 ) b3 + a3 b2 )iω + b3 (a3 − b3) ωS (s−1) 0.538
(30)
ωT (s−1) 0.549
The FRFs between the roll angle and the wave slope angle, as well as

5
N. Alujević, et al.
Fig. 3. The FRF between the wave slope and the ship roll angle without ART (faint black line), with an optimally tuned passive ART (solid blue line) and with an
active ART implementing roll rate feedback with gain G = 107 Nms/rad (dashed red line). Plot a) is with the ART damping coefficient, b2 as in Table 2, and plot b) is
with b2 half of that in Table 2. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
calculated using Eq. (31) and its modulus is shown in Fig. 3 for three
cases. The first is the case of the ship not equipped by an ART, shown by
the faint black line. It can be seen that the response at low frequencies is
such that the ship roll angle follows the wave slope, indicating that the
response is dominated by the hydrostatic righting moment of the ship.
Therefore the amplitude of the FRF at low frequencies is near unity.
Around the ship roll natural frequency roll amplification occurs, and
the FRF is characterized by a large resonant response of about 6.7 rad of
the ship roll angle per radian of the wave slope. At higher frequencies,
above the roll resonance, the roll angle decreases with increasing fre-
quency, since the response becomes dominated by the rotary moment of
inertia of the hull.
The second case is that of the ship equipped with an optimally tuned
passive ART. It is indicated in Fig. 3 by the blue solid line. It can be seen
that the original resonant response is now significantly decreased to
about 4.3 rad/rad. The FRF is characterized by two resonances sepa-
rated by an antiresonance. Due to the (relatively large) optimal ART
passive damping coefficient, b2 , and the natural frequency of the ART
fluid oscillation tuned to the natural frequency of the ship roll, ωT ≈ ωS ,
the passive ART absorbs the roll motion well.
The third case is with the ship equipped by an active ART im-
plementing roll rate feedback with the gain G = 107 Nms/rad indicated
by the dashed red line (the example ship has 47,000 tons, Table 1). In
this case the response becomes significantly reduced at the first re-
sonance frequency, at about 0.45 rad/s. However, the response at the
second resonance remains unaltered.
Furthermore, above the second resonance there is a significant in-
crease of the FRF amplitude. Thus the active ART does not outperform
its passive counterpart. Instead, increasing the feedback gain causes an
increase in the response above the second resonance frequency of the
system. In fact, this increase due to the active control is only inhibited
by the significant passive damping coefficient of the ART, b2 . This is
illustrated in Fig. 3b where the same feedback gain is used as in Fig. 3a,
but the ART passive damping coefficient, b2 , is reduced by a factor of
two. It can be seen that now the “overshot” due to the active control is
more than doubled.
Such behaviour indicates that the feedback loop may become un-
stable with a further increase in the feedback gain. The stability of
control systems cannot be directly seen from the closed-loop frequency
response function. In other words, it is possible to calculate such FRFs
using Eq. (31), but they would be meaningless for unstable systems. For
this reason, the Nyquist stability criterion is used in order to assess the
system stability. The open-loop sensor-actuator FRF is calculated using
Eq. (33) and shown as a Nyquist plot in Fig. 4. The OL-FRF is multiplied
by the feedback gain of G = 107 Nms/rad. It can be seen in plot a) that
as the frequency increases from zero in the clockwise direction, the
Nyquist locus is in the two positive quadrants of the R − I plane. This
6
Engineering Structures 211 (2020) 110267
indicates that reductions of the closed-loop roll response can be ex-
pected, in particular at frequencies near the first resonance of the
system where the locus crosses the positive real axis, indicated by the
red pentagon marker. However, as the frequency further increases, the
locus enters the two quadrants with negative real parts. In particular, at
the frequency indicated by a red circle marker, the locus enters the unit
circle with a centre at the Nyquist point (0,−1i). The locus inside the
Nyquist circle (at frequencies above about 0.57 rad/s) indicates that the
active control increases the ship roll response, which is in agreement
with the results shown in Fig. 3(a). If the ART passive damping coef-
ficient, b2 , is reduced by a factor of two, the Nyquist plot is as shown in
Fig. 4(b). It can be seen that the locus is magnified by the reduction of
the passive damping coefficient. As a result, it produces higher active
reductions of the ship roll, near the frequency indicated by the red
pentagon marker, using the same feedback gain. However, the locus is
also magnified in the two negative quadrants, and its shape is affected
in such a way that the locus crosses the negative real axis. This means
that the feedback loop is conditionally stable. The condition is that the
feedback gain G must be less than the reciprocal real part of the locus at
the frequency where the locus crosses the negative real axis, (the red
diamond marker in Fig. 4(b) and the text above it). As a result, feedback
gain can be increased to a maximum of about G = 1.8·107 Nms/rad
before the instability occurs.
In conclusion, it can be stated that the active ART tuned according
to the passive ART tuning theory suffers from stability problems. These
stability issues occur even though idealized roll-rate sensor, power
drive, and pump have been assumed. The active ART does not reduce
roll oscillations in a broad frequency band.
3.2. Off-resonance tuning with ωT < ωS
In the following example the natural frequency of the ART is tuned
to 70.7% of the ship roll natural frequency. This can be achieved by
reducing the restoring moment of the tank fluid b3 by a factor of two,
see Eq. (36). This requires re-dimensioning of the ART by, for example
increasing the widths of the U-tube portside and starboard reservoirs
and/or by increasing the height of the connecting conduit.
Fig. 5 shows Nyquist plots of the sensor-actuator open-loop FRF for
decreasing values of the ART passive damping coefficient, b2 . The b2
values are < 1.06, 0.53, 0.106 0.053 > ·106 Nms/rad. It can be seen in
Fig. 5(a) that with the heavily damped ART fluid, the locus is located
entirely in the two positive quadrants of the R − I plane. Therefore the
system is theoretically unconditionally stable. However, these results
must be interpreted with care. This is because of the idealizations as-
sumed throughout this study regarding the dynamics of the pump, the
roll rate sensor, and the controller. Nevertheless, those stability pro-
blems that are intrinsic to the modelled dynamics appear to be
N. Alujević, et al. Engineering Structures 211 (2020) 110267

Fig. 4. Nyquist plot of the sensor-actuator open-loop FRF with ωT ≈ ωS . Plot (a) is with the ART damping coefficient, b2 , as in Table 2, and plot (b) is with b2 half of
that in Table 2.

mitigated by tuning the natural frequency of the ART below the ship
natural frequency. However, as shown in Fig. 5(b) and (c), as the pas-
sive ART damping coefficient is decreased, the locus begins to enter the
two negative real quadrants and it enters the unit circle with its centre
in the Nyquist point. This indicates that small amplifications of the roll
can occur if a very lightly damped ART is used.
Fig. 6 shows the performance of the active ART in terms of the re-
ductions of the roll angle. The results in plots (a)–(d) correspond to the
results in plots (a)–(d) of Fig. 5. It can be seen in all plots that as the
feedback gain is increased, the roll angle decreases at the primary re-
sonance frequency of the ship roll, in comparison with the roll of a ship
having no ART. With the relatively large feedback gains of G = 5·107
Nms/rad (magenta dash-dotted line) the active ART is able to outper-
form the optimally tuned passive ART (blue solid line).
It can also be seen that the decreased passive damping coefficient, b2
is detrimental for the active ART performance interpreted in terms of

Fig. 5. Nyquist plot of the sensor-actuator open-loop FRF with ωT = 0.71ωS . Plot (a) is with the ART damping coefficient, b2 as in Table 2, and plot (b) is with b2 half
of that in Table 2, plot (c) is with b2 one tenth of that in Table 2, and plot (d) is with b2 five percent of that in Table 2.

7
N. Alujević, et al. Engineering Structures 211 (2020) 110267

Fig. 6. The FRF between the wave slope and the ship roll angle without ART (faint black line), with an optimally tuned passive ART (solid blue line) and with an
active ART implementing roll rate feedback with increasing gains (dashed/dotted/dash-dotted lines), ωT = 0.71ωS . Plot (a) is with the ART damping coefficient, b2 as
in Table 2, and plot (b) is with b2 half of that in Table 2, plot (c) is with b2 one tenth of that in Table 2, and plot (d) is with b2 five percent of that in Table 2. (For
interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

the maximum roll angle, as shown by the plots (b)–(d). The small in-
crease in the response which is anticipated by the analysis of the locus
in the Nyquist plots in Fig. 5(c) and (d), can be seen in Fig. 6(c) and (d)
at low frequencies of about 0.1 rad/s or less. At these frequencies the
magenta dash-dotted line (active ART with G = 5·107 Nms/rad) is very
slightly above the faint black line (no ART).
It can be thus concluded that the decreased ART natural frequency
is important factor to achieve successful roll control using the active
ART. A situation in which the ART fluid natural frequency is further
decreased to 50% of the ship roll natural frequency is illustrated in
Fig. 7. Fig. 7 follows the same layout as Fig. 6, and the variation of the
passive damping coefficient and the feedback gain are the same as in
Fig. 6. It can be seen that now even the feedback gain of G = 2·107
Nms/rad (green dotted line) outperforms the optimally tuned passive
ART. If the feedback gain is increased to G = 5·107 Nms/rad (magenta
dash-sotted line) the active control system exhibits remarkable perfor-
mance and the ship roll is decreased significantly at all frequencies. By
comparing plots (a)–(c) in Fig. 7 it can no longer be stated that the
reduction of the ART passive damping coefficient, b2 , is detrimental for
the performance of the active control like the case is in Fig. 6.
One drawback of tuning the ART natural frequency below the ship
natural frequency is that the passive roll control functionality is lost.
For example, the black faint line in Fig. 7a) perfectly overlaps with a
line that corresponds to the active ART with G = 0 (control switched
off) and in which the ART passive damping coefficient is as in Table 2.
In order to preserve the functionality of the ART as a passive roll control
device, a design could be envisaged with two connection conduits, one
above the other, of which one can be opened if the active control is to
be engaged in order to lower the ART natural frequency. This second
conduit could be closed when the active control is switched off in order
to increase the passive ART natural frequency back to the value equal to
the ship roll natural frequency.
3.3. Off-resonance tuning with ωT > ωS
For completeness, a situation in which the ART natural frequency is
tuned to about 141% of the ship roll natural frequency is considered
next. The corresponding Nyquist plots are shown in Fig. 8. Plot (a) is
with the nominal value of the passive ART damping coefficient and plot
(b) is with one half of it. A feedback gain of G = 107 Nms/rad is as-
sumed. It can be immediately seen that this type of tuning would not
result in efficient active control. This is because the loci in either plot
enter the negative real quadrants, and the inside of the Nyquist circle,
with large amplitudes.
4. Power flow
The mean time-averaged power input into the ship + ART system
due to the primary excitation by the wave-induced roll moment mp can
be expressed as:
P¯in = P¯a2 + P¯b2 + P¯G , (37)
where P̄in is the mean input power, P̄a2 is the mean power dissipated be
the linear damping coefficient of the ship roll, a2 , P̄b2 is the mean power
dissipated by the linear tank fluid damping coefficient b2 , and P̄G is the
mean power that is either absorbed or injected into the system by the
pump through the feedback loop working with the gain G. The power
dissipated by the ship roll can be expressed as:

8
N. Alujević, et al. Engineering Structures 211 (2020) 110267

Fig. 7. The FRF between the wave slope and the ship roll angle without ART (faint black line), with an optimally tuned passive ART (solid blue line) and with an
active ART implementing roll rate feedback with increasing gains (dashed/dotted/dash-dotted lines), ωT = 0.5ωS . Plot (a) is with the ART damping coefficient, b2 as
in Table 2, and plot (b) is with b2 half of that in Table 2, plot (c) is with b2 one tenth of that in Table 2, and plot (d) is with b2 five percent of that in Table 2. (For
interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

1 so that using Eq. (38) the power dissipated by the ship roll equals:
Pa2 (iω) = R {ma∗2 (iω) φ̇ (iω)},
2 (38)
1
where R and (⋅)* denote the real part and the complex conjugate, re- Pa2 (iω) = a2 |φ̇ (iω)|2 .
2 (40)
spectively. The moment ma2 is the moment produced by the damping of
the ship roll, which is given by: If the wave slope, θ , is represented by its spectrum, Sθ, θ , the mean
squared value of the angular velocity of the ship roll (i.e. the expecta-
ma2 (iω) = a2 φ̇ (iω) (39) tion value of the squared velocity) can be calculated as [35]:

Fig. 8. Nyquist plot of the sensor-actuator open-loop FRF with ωT > ωS . Plot (a) is with the ART damping coefficient, b2 as in Table 2, and plot (b) is with b2 half of
that in Table 2.

9
N. Alujević, et al. Engineering Structures 211 (2020) 110267

∞
Table 3
E [|φ̇|2 ] = ∫ |Qφ,̇ θ (iω)|2 Sθ,θ dω, The properties of the wave spectrum.
−∞ (41)
Sea state Mean value of the significant wave Most probable modal wave
where E [ ] denotes the expectation value. The mean power dissipated height ξ w,1/3 (m) period T0 (s)
by the ship roll damping is thus:
∞ 1 0.06 0
a a
P¯a2 = 2 E [|φ̇|2 ] = 2
2 2
∫ |Qφ,̇ θ (iω)|2 Sθ,θ dω. 2
3
0.3
0.88
5.3
7.5
−∞ (42)
4 1.88 8.8
On the other hand, the power absorbed by the tank water motion is 5 3.25 9.7
equal to that absorbed through the total coefficient of the linear 6 5 12.4
7 7.5 15
damping of the tank, b2 , which can be written as:
8 11.5 16.4
1 9 14 20
Pb2 (iω) = R {mb∗2 (iω)(α̇ (iω) − φ̇ (iω))},
2 (43)
where mb2 is the moment produced by the damping of the tank fluid − B4
motion given by: Sξ , ξ = Aω−5e ω , (53)

mb2 (iω) = b2 (α̇ (iω) − φ̇ (iω)) (44) where

2
and α̇ − φ̇ is the angular velocity of the tank free surface relative to the 483.5ξ w,1/3
A= T04
,
tank structure. Therefore the power absorbed by the ART passive
damping equals: 1944.5
B= T04
.
(54)
1
Pb2 (iω) = b2 |α̇ (iω) − φ̇ (iω)|2 .
2 (45) The spectrum of the wave slope can be calculated as:
The expectation value of the squared angular velocity of the tank ω 2 2
fluid relative to the ship is: Sθ, θ = ⎜⎛ ⎟⎞ Sξ , ξ ,
⎝ g ⎠ (55)
∞
E [|α̇ − φ̇|2 ] = ∫ |Qα̇,θ (iω) − Qφ,̇ θ (iω)|2 Sθ,θ dω. where g is the gravity constant. Fig. 9 shows the spectra of the wave
−∞ (46) slope calculated using Eq. (55) for sea states increasing from 3 to 9. The
The mean power dissipated by the tank damping coefficient is: figure also shows the modulus of the FRF between the roll angle and the
wave slope angle, R φ, θ of the ship without an ART.
∞
b b It can be seen that with lower sea states peaks of the spectra occur at
P¯b2 = 2 E [|α̇ − φ̇|2 ] = 2
2 2
∫ |Qα̇,θ (iω) − Qφ,̇ θ (iω)|2 Sθ,θ dω. frequencies above the ship roll natural frequency. However, as the sea
−∞ (47)
state increases towards 7 and 8 the frequency ranges of maximum
Finally, the power absorbed/injected by the pump operated in the spectral energy begin to overlap with the resonant frequency range of
feedback loop with the gain G can be expressed as: the ship roll. Note, however, that for the most severe sea state 9, the
1 peak energy drops below that of the sea state 8 and the frequency of the
PG (iω) = R {ms∗1 (iω) φ̇ (iω) + ms∗2 (iω) α̇ (iω)}.
2 (48) peak goes below the ship roll resonance frequency.
The four mean power terms P¯in, P¯a2, P¯b2, and P¯G are calculated using
Expressing the two secondary (control) moments according to Eqs.
the methodology described above for the example ship with properties
(14) and (15) yields:
as in Tables 1 and 2. It is assumed that the ship rolls due to pure beam
1 1 waves at sea state 5. First, a situation is considered where the ART
PG (iω) = G |φ̇ (iω)|2 − G·R {α̇ (iω)∗φ̇ (iω)}.
2 2 (49) natural frequency is tuned to 70.7% of the ship natural frequency. This
After some mathematical operations Eq. (49) can be written as [36]: corresponds to results discussed in Section 3.2, Figs. 5 and 6. Fig. 10
shows the four mean powers plotted against the feedback gain. Plots a)-
G
PG (iω) = (|φ̇ (iω)|2 + |α̇ (iω) − φ̇ (iω)|2 − |α̇ (iω)|2 ). d) are for decreasing values of the ART damping coefficient b2 (see
4 (50)
The mean power absorbed/injected by the active damping coeffi-
cient G is:
G G G
P¯G = E [|φ̇|2 ] + E [|α̇ − φ̇|2 ] − E [|α|̇ 2 ],
4 4 4 (51)
or after calculating the expectation values:

P¯G
∞ ∞
G⎛
=
4 ⎜−∞
∫|Qφ,̇ θ (iω)|2 Sθ, θ dω + ∫ |Qα̇,θ (iω) − Qφ,̇ θ (iω)|2 Sθ,θ dω
⎝ −∞
∞
⎞
− ∫ |Qα̇, θ (iω)|2 Sθ, θ dω⎟.
−∞ ⎠ (52)
The properties of the wave spectrum, Sξ , ξ , are listed in Table 3 as
function of the sea state according to the WMO Sea State Code in terms
of the mean wave height (trough to crest) of the highest third of the Fig. 9. The spectra of the wave slope, Sθ, θ for the sea states increasing from 3 to
waves, ξ w,1/3 , and the mean wave period, T0 . 9 (solid blue lines), and the FRF between the wave slope and the ship roll angle,
The wave spectrum is calculated according to the following ex- R φ, θ , solid orange line. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this
pression [37]: figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

10
N. Alujević, et al. Engineering Structures 211 (2020) 110267

Fig. 10. The input power (black faint line), the power dissipated by the ship roll damping coefficient (red dashed line), the power dissipated by the ART damping
coefficient (blue solid line), and the power injected/dissipated by the pump (green dotted line), with ωT = 0.71ωS , for sea state 5. Plot (a) is with the ART damping
coefficient, b2 as in Table 2, and plot (b) is with b2 half of that in Table 2, plot (c) is with b2 one tenth of that in Table 2, and plot (d) is with b2 five percent of that in
Table 2. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

caption). Considering first plot a), the red dashed line indicates that the
mean power dissipated by the ship roll monotonically decreases with
increasing the feedback gain. Given that this power is proportional to
the mean squared roll angular velocity, Eq. (40), this is a good in-
dication that the active control produces the desired effects in the broad
frequency band (a reduction of the expected value of the roll angular
velocity). Furthermore, the mean power input, indicated with the black
faint line, decreases with the increase in the feedback gain. Therefore
the mean power input is affected by the active control, and the waves
are not able to supply power into the system under active control as
effectively as in the case with no control. With the increase in feedback
gain from 0 to 5·107 Nms/rad, the mean power input drops from 48 kW
to 21 kW. This is in contrast with results obtained with control of
mechanical vibrations of a primary structure using inertial actuators
operated inside a direct velocity feedback loop. In such a situation it has
been shown that the mean input power cannot be affected by engaging
the active control [36,38]. This is due to the fact that (a) white noise
excitation was assumed in [36,38], whereas in the present study the
PSD of the wave slope is frequency dependent, and (b) linear motions
are considered in [36], whereas rotational motions are considered in
the present study where the gravity field is responsible for generating
the restoring moment on the ART fluid.
Considering now the mean pump power, with the increase in the
feedback gain the pump on average injects the power into the system
reaching about 133 kW at the maximum feedback gain, as shown by the
green dotted line. This in effect substantially increases the mean power
dissipated by the passive ART damping, b2 , which partially compensates
for the mean injected power by dissipating up to about 130 kW, as
shown by the blue solid line. The reason why the power is supplied into
the system by the pump is in that although the active part of the anti-
roll moment is always opposite to the roll angular velocity, Eq. (14), the
other part of the anti-roll moment that reacts against the tank fluid, is
not necessarily opposite to the tank fluid free surface angular velocity.
The net effect therefore can be mean power input, provided that the
reactive part of the secondary (control) moment, ms2 , on average inputs
more power than the active part of the secondary moment, ms1, dis-
sipates. This has an effect of a very large average demand of 133 kW of
the mean pump power.
However, as shown in plots (b)–(d), which are for decreasing pas-
sive ART damping coefficient, it appears that both the mean power
dissipated by the ART passive damping coefficient and the mean power
injected by the pump substantially decrease by decreasing the passive
damping coefficient of the ART, b2 . For example, as shown in Fig. 10b),
if the passive ART damping coefficient can be reduced to 50% of the
nominal, the mean pump power would reduce to 80 kW. Moreover, the
decreased passive ART damping coefficient does not decrease the
control performance. This is because, as shown by the red dashed lines,
the mean power dissipated by the ship roll remains unaltered
throughout all plots. This indicates that the same reduction of the mean
squared angular velocity of the ship roll is achieved under the active
control with the same gain, despite the variation of the ART damping
coefficient. Also the mean input power virtually does not vary with the

11
N. Alujević, et al.
Fig. 11. The input power (black faint line), the power dissipated by the ship roll damping coefficient (red dashed line), the power dissipated by the ART damping
coefficient (blue solid line), and the power injected/dissipated by the pump (green dotted line), with ωT = 0.5ωS , for sea state 5. Plot (a) is with the ART damping
coefficient, b2 as in Table 2, and plot (b) is with b2 half of that in Table 2, plot (c) is with b2 one tenth of that in Table 2, and plot (d) is with b2 five percent of that in
Table 2. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
ART passive damping coefficient (black faint line).
A more effective way to decrease the mean pump power is to further
reduce the ratio of the natural frequency of the ART fluid and the ship
roll natural frequency. Fig. 11 shows the four power diagrams, fol-
lowing the same layout as Fig. 10, but this time with ωT = 0.5ωS . It can
be seen that now the maximum mean pump power input is reduced to
50 kW, as shown by the green dotted line in the plot (a), which is for the
largest passive ART damping. The mean power dissipated by the ship
roll is at the maximum feedback gain is about 21 kW. This is the same as
in Fig. 10a) indicating that the active control is equally effective as with
the higher ART natural frequency. However, Fig. 11(b)–(d) indicate
that with reducing the passive ART damping coefficient, further re-
ductions of the mean pump power can be expected. In fact, if b2 can be
decreased below 10% of its nominal value, then the feedback loop
becomes dissipative and the pump begins to, on average, extract power
from the system. This does not mean that the pump needs no power to
operate. This is because, as mentioned earlier, the net pump power
consists of two terms: the one from the active part of the control mo-
ment, ms1, and the other one from the reaction part of the control
moment, ms2 . It can be seen from the first term in Eq. (49) that the
power due to the active part is always positive (note that G > 0), but
the sign of power due to the reaction part depends on the sign of
R {α̇ (iω)∗φ̇ (iω)} , which, in general, is frequency dependent, and its in-
tegral over all frequencies is not necessarily positive.
In the view of the effectiveness of the active control and the power
12
Engineering Structures 211 (2020) 110267
flow through the system, it seems that an O-shaped ART with zero
natural frequency, filled entirely with water, may be an interesting
option for ship active roll control. In such a design multiple smaller
pumps could be applied along the tank circumference in order to dis-
tribute the reaction forces more evenly and to enable a more uniform
water flow. In such a way the sloshing of the tank water free surface
may be entirely avoided. Also the loss of the ship metacentric height
due to the free surface effect could be mitigated. The reaction moment
could be generated against the fluid rotating in the O-shaped tank in a
manner similar to reacting against a large reaction wheel. The net
passive+active effect of the ART with the pump providing a pressure
difference proportional to the ship roll rate would in such a case be fully
dissipative and provide roll reduction at all frequencies. However, the
passive roll control effect would be entirely lost.
An example with an O-shaped tank is illustrated in the final Fig. 12.
In this figure the mean pump power is split into the two parts, the one
due to the action part of the control moment:
∞
1
P¯G1 = G
2 −∞
∫
|φ̇ (iω)|2 dω
(56)
and the other one due to the reaction part of the control moment:
∞
1
P¯G2 = − G
2 −∞
∫
R {α̇ (iω)∗φ̇ (iω)}dω.
(57)
All powers are now plotted as a function of the sea state from 1 to 9,
N. Alujević, et al.
Fig. 12. The power flow in the ship plus ART system as a function of the sea state. Plot (a) is for the feedback gain G = 2·107 Nms/rad and plot (b) is for the feedback
gain G = 5·107 Nms/rad. The ART water passive damping ratio, b2 , is assumed to be 25% of that in Table 2, and an O-shaped ART is assumed, filled entirely with
water so that the term b3 equals zero.
where in plot (a) a feedback gain of 2·107 Nms/rad is assumed and in
plot (b) a feedback gain of 5·107 Nms/rad is assumed. The ART water
passive damping ratio, b2 , is assumed to be 25% of that in Table 2, and
an O-shaped ART is assumed so that the term b3 equals zero. Note that
at the sea state 9, which is more severe that the sea state 8, all the mean
power terms reduce. This can be explained by the manner in which the
spectrum of the wave slope overlaps with the frequency response
function, R φ, θ .
5. Conclusions
In this paper stability, performance and power flow of an active U-
tube ART are studied. A feedback control scheme is considered in which
the pump, located in the connecting channel of the ART, generates a
pressure difference proportional to the ship roll rate via a constant
feedback gain. The stability analysis indicates that the ART tuned in a
classical way does not perform well, and suffers from severe stability
limitations. By reducing the ART natural frequency below the ship roll
natural frequency, the feedback loop stability margins significantly
improve. This also results in improved active control performance. The
analysis of the power flow indicates that by reducing the ART natural
frequency it is possible to mitigate unnecessary large power being in-
jected into the system by the pump, only to be subsequently dissipated
by the ART water damping. The combined reduction of the ART passive
damping coefficient and the natural frequency reduces the mean power
injected by the pump to the point that it begins to dissipate power. The
power dissipated by the ship roll can be reduced by increasing the
feedback gain. However, it remains unaltered by the variation of the
ART damping coefficient and the natural frequency assuming that the
same feedback gain is implemented. Therefore the same roll control
performance can be achieved with a lightly damped, low natural fre-
quency ART as with the heavily damped ART having its natural fre-
quency slightly below that of the natural frequency of the ship. The
former design is however characterized by a much more reasonable
power flow in the system. Finally, it is found possible to reduce the
mean wave input power into the ship plus ART system by engaging the
active control.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
N. Alujević: Conceptualization, Methodology, Investigation,
Writing - original draft, Funding acquisition. I. Ćatipović: Supervision,
Methodology, Investigation. Š. Malenica: Supervision, Methodology,
13
Engineering Structures 211 (2020) 110267
Investigation. I. Senjanović: Supervision, Conceptualization,
Methodology, Writing - review & editing, Funding acquisition. N.
Vladimir: Writing - review & editing, Investigation, Resources.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influ-
ence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgements
This project has received funding from the European Union's
Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie
Sklodowska-Curie grant agreement no. 657539. This work has been
supported by Croatian Science Foundation under the projects lP-2019-
04-5402, IP-2016-06-2017, and UIP-2017-05-1253. The support from a
National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the
Korean Government (MSIP) through GCRC-SOP (Grant No. 2011-
0030013) is acknowledged.
References
[1] Lloyd ARJM. Seakeeping: ship behaviour in rough weather. E. Horwood; 1989.
[2] Lewis EV. Principles of naval architecture. Society of Naval Architects and Marine
Engineers; 1989.
[3] Moaleji R, Greig AR. On the development of ship anti-roll tanks. Ocean Eng
2007;34:103–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2005.12.013.
[4] Froude W. Considerations respecting the rolling of ships at sea. INA Trans
1874;14:96–116.
[5] Watts P. The use of water chambers for reducing the rolling of ships at sea. Trans
Institut Naval Archit 1885;26.
[6] Field SB, Martin JP. Comparative effects of U-tube and free surface type passive roll
stabilisation systems. Naval Architect 1976.
[7] Armenio V, Francescutto A, La Rocca M. On the roll motion of a ship with partially
filled unbaffled and baffled tanks – Part 1: Mathematical model and experimental
setup. Int J Offshore Polar Eng 1996;6:275–82.
[8] Frahm H. Results of trials of the anti-rolling tanks at sea. J Am Soc Naval Engineers
1911;23:571–97. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-3584.1911.tb04595.x.
[9] Stigter C. The performance of U-tanks as a passive anti-rolling device. Int Shipbuild
Prog 1966;13:249–75. https://doi.org/10.3233/ISP-1966-1314401.
[10] Holden C, Fossen TI. A nonlinear 7-DOF model for U-tanks of arbitrary shape.
Ocean Eng 2012;45:22–37.
[11] Gawad AFAA, Ragab SA, Nayfeh AH, Mook DT. Roll stabilization by anti-roll pas-
sive tanks. Ocean Eng 2001;28:457–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0029-8018(00)
00015-9.
[12] Youssef KS, Ragab SA, Nayfeh AH, Mook DT. Design of passive anti-roll tanks for
roll stabilization in the nonlinear range. Ocean Eng 2002;29:177–92.
[13] Vasta J, et al. Roll stabilization by means of passive tanks. SNAME Trans
N. Alujević, et al.
1961;69:411–60.
[14] Neves MAS, Merino JA, Rodríguez CA. A nonlinear model of parametric rolling
stabilization by anti-roll tanks. Ocean Eng 2009;36:1048–59.
[15] Umeda N, Hashimoto H, Minegaki S, Matsuda A. An investigation of different
methods for the prevention of parametric rolling. J Mar Sci Technol 2008;13:16–23.
[16] Alujević N, Ćatipović I, Malenica Š, Senjanović I, Vladimir N. Ship roll control and
power absorption using a U-tube anti-roll tank. Ocean Eng 2019;172:857–70.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2018.12.007.
[17] Minorsky N. Problems of anti-rolling stabilization of ships by the activated tank
method. J Am Soc Naval Engineers 1935;47:87–119. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.
1559-3584.1935.tb04304.x.
[18] Chadwick JH. On the stabilization of roll. Trans Soc Naval Archit Mar Engineers
1955;63:237.
[19] Webster W. Analysis of the control of activated antiroll tanks. Defense Technical
Information Center; 1966.
[20] Roberts G. Analysis of warship roll stabilisation by controlled anti-roll tanks with
the aid of digital simulation. Int Conf Control 1988:672–6.
[21] Chen S-L, Shaw SW, Khalil HK, Troesch AW. Robust stabilization of large amplitude
ship rolling in beam seas. J Dyn Syst Meas Control Trans ASME 2000;122:108.
https://doi.org/10.1115/1.482434.
[22] Hsueh WJ, Lee YJ. A design for ship stabilization by activated antiroll tanks. J Mar
Sci Technol 1997;2:77–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02491522.
[23] Moaleji R, Greig AR. Inverse control for roll stabilization of ships using active tanks.
Proceedings of 7th conference on maneuvering and control of marine craft. 2006.
[24] Minorsky N. Ship stabilization by activated tank: An experimental investigation.
The Engineer 1934;158:154.
[25] Elliott SJ, Stothers IM, Nelson PA. A multiple error lms algorithm and its application
to the active control of sound and vibration. IEEE Trans Acoust Speech Signal
Process 1987;35:1423–34. https://doi.org/10.1109/TASSP.1987.1165044.
[26] Elliott S. Signal processing for active control. Elsevier Science; 2000.
14
Engineering Structures 211 (2020) 110267
[27] Misol M, Haase T, Monner HP, Sinapius M. Causal feedforward control of a sto-
chastically excited fuselage structure with active sidewall panel. J Acoust Soc Am
2014;136:1610–8. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.4895710.
[28] Rohlfing J, Gardonio P. Ventilation duct with concurrent acoustic feed-forward and
decentralised structural feedback active control. J Sound Vib 2014;333:630–45.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsv.2013.09.022.
[29] Liu J, Allen R, Yi H. Ship motion stabilizing control using a combination of model
predictive control and an adaptive input disturbance predictor. Proc Instit Mech
Engineers, Part I: J Syst Control Eng 2011;225(5):591–602. https://doi.org/10.
1177/2041304110394569.
[30] Marzouk OA, Nayfeh AH. Control of ship roll using passive and active anti-roll
tanks. Ocean Eng 2009;36:661–71.
[31] Chesné S, Collette C. Experimental validation of fail-safe hybrid mass damper. JVC/
J Vib Control 2018;24:4395–406. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077546317724949.
[32] Collette C, Chesné S. Robust hybrid mass damper. J Sound Vib 2016;375:19–27.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsv.2016.04.030.
[33] Bennett S. Ship stabilization: history. In: Papageorgiou M, editor. Concise en-
cyclopedia of traffic and transportation systems. New York: Pergamon; 1991.
[34] Den Hartog JP, Jacob P. Mechanical vibrations. McGraw-Hill; 1956.
[35] Newland DE. An introduction to random vibrations, spectral and wavelet analysis.
Dover Publications; 2005.
[36] Zilletti M, Gardonio P, Elliott SJ. Optimisation of a velocity feedback controller to
minimise kinetic energy and maximise power dissipation. J Sound Vib
2014;333:4405–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsv.2014.04.036.
[37] Bales SL, Lee WT, Voelker JM. Standardized wave and wind environments for NATO
operational areas; 1981.
[38] Camperi S, Ghandchi Tehrani M, Elliott SJ. Local tuning and power requirements of
a multi-input multi-output decentralised velocity feedback with inertial actuators.
Mech Syst Sig Process 2019;117:689–708. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymssp.2018.
08.002.