Commissioning strategy

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 12214850
  • Patent Number
    12,214,850
  • Date Filed
    Friday, August 19, 2022
    2 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, February 4, 2025
    15 days ago
  • CPC
    • B63B79/40
    • B63B79/10
    • B63B79/30
  • Field of Search
    • US
    • 701 021000
    • CPC
    • B63B79/40
    • B63B79/10
    • B63B79/30
    • B63B39/06
  • International Classifications
    • B63B79/40
    • B63B79/10
    • B63B79/30
    • Term Extension
      237
Abstract
A software-based commissioning strategy for customization of a new marine vessel having a newly installed stability/dynamic active control system. The commissioning strategy will be implemented by using a proprietary customer-facing software embedded within a software module of a newly installed dynamic active control system for a new marine vessel (and a new hull type). The software-controlled commissioning strategy is configured to automatically determine the appropriate feedback gains for the marine vessel by controlling the deployment of the water engagement devices while simultaneously measuring and capturing the data generated from the resulting list angle, roll angle, roll rate, and yaw rate changes associated with the deployment. The software driven commissioning strategy is further configured for auto-calibrating the following functional parameters of the new marine vessel: (1) Speed-Based Bias Adjustments (SBBAs), (2) Roll Overall Gain (ROG), (3) Pitch Overall Gain (POG) and (4) Yaw Rate Gain (YRG) of the marine vessel.
Description
FIELD OF THE DISCLOSURE

The present disclosure generally relates to a commissioning strategy for providing optimum stability performance and control of dynamic active motions of a marine vessel. More specifically, the present disclosure is directed to a software-based commissioning strategy to automatically determine the appropriate feedback gains for a dynamic active control system integrated within a new marine vessel by deploying water engagement devices and measuring the resulting list, roll angle, roll rate and yaw rate changes associated with such deployment.


BACKGROUND

The following terms and related definitions are used in the marine stabilization industry. “Trim Control” means the control of the average angle about the lateral or pitch axis of a marine vessel, averaged over one second or more. “List Control” or “Roll Control” means the control of the average angle about the longitudinal or roll axis of a marine vessel, averaged over one second or more. “Yaw Control” means the control of the average angle about the yaw axis of a marine vessel, averaged over one second or more.


A “Water Engagement Device” or “WED” means a mechanical or electromechanical device configured to generate a variable amount of lift in a marine vessel by selective engagement of the device with or into the water flow under or adjacent to a transom surface of the marine vessel when the marine vessel is underway in a certain (or forward) direction or by changing the angle of attack of the device relative to the water flow during operation of a marine vessel in a forward direction. A WED delta position is defined as the difference between port and starboard WED deployments. “Deployment” means selective engagement of the WED with or into the water flow or a change in the WED angle of attack. A “Roll Moment” in a marine vessel is the result of a force applied to the vessel that causes the vessel to rotate about its longitudinal or roll axis. A “Pitch Moment” in a marine vessel is the result of a force applied to the vessel that causes the vessel to rotate about its lateral or pitch axis. A “Yaw Moment” in a marine vessel is the result of a force applied to the vessel that causes the vessel to rotate about its vertical or yaw axis. For instance, (1) a Roll Moment can be generated if the port and starboard WEDs are deployed asymmetrically in a marine vessel that may cause the vessel to roll; (2) a Yaw Moment can be generated when port and starboard WEDs are deployed asymmetrically which may cause a heading change; and (3) a Pitch Moment can be generated if the port and starboard WEDs are deployed symmetrically or if a single WED is deployed about the center of the marine vessel which may cause the vessel to pitch.


Conventional marine stabilization techniques for when a vessel is underway in a forward direction include proportional deployment of WEDs to generate a continuous lift at the transom of the vessel for trim control while allowing adjustment of the angles (e.g., along the roll, pitch yaw axis) of the marine vessel. A few examples of commercially available WEDs—not to be considered exhaustive by any means—are interceptors, trim tabs, and fins and other similar devices that can engage the water flow in similar fashion and provide similar functionality.


Marine stabilization technologies are key to experiencing the joy of cruising over waters without the attendant random environmentally induced disturbances of the boat. These disturbances—for example, a sudden unexpected roll—can be annoying and disruptive to boaters. In the existing prior art systems, WEDs are designed and configured to control list and trim—to get the marine vessel to an average angle in the roll and pitch axis. Smaller marine vessels used in the recreational market generally have manually actuated WEDs, while larger vessels operating in the commercial space use automatic actuated systems to stabilize the motion. However, such prior art systems do not user specific customization of marine stability control systems for complete vessel stabilization.


There are no currently available prior art recreational or commercial user-specific customizable stability/dynamic active control systems for marine vessels that combine the fast deployment of water engagement devices with engine trim adjustments and engine steering angle adjustment. More specifically, prior art systems lack the combination of fast deployment of WEDs with adjustment of the engine steering angle of the marine vessel to counter changes in drag due to asymmetric deployment, gyroscopic stabilization, yaw moment and/or adjustment of the engine trim for dynamic control in the pitch axis.


In view of the foregoing problems and issues in the relevant field of marine stabilization, there is clearly a market need for an improved stability control system of a marine vessel—a dynamic active control system—configured to simultaneously control accelerations, rates and angles in the roll, pitch and yaw axes of the marine vessel. As discussed above, one of the largest challenges associated with any stability or dynamic active control system is the adaptation or customization of the system for different types of marine vessels (and different types of hulls). Further, in that context, there is clearly a need within the industry for a commissioning strategy for customization and implementation of new stability/dynamic active control systems in different marine vessels. As further disclosed below, to adapt a stability control or dynamic active control system to a new hull type (of a marine vessel), any software-based strategy will need to determine at least (a) the relationship between asymmetric deployment of the water engagement devices and the resulting roll and yaw motion of the marine vessel and (b) the relationship between symmetric deployment of the water engagement devices and the resulting pitch motion of the marine vessel. Prior art and conventional marine stabilization systems do not provide such automatic means of characterizing these functional relationships as will be disclosed herein.


The present disclosure is directed to a software-based commissioning strategy used during review of a newly installed a stability/dynamic active control system for a new marine vessel. The commissioning strategy is directed to automatically capture, store, interpret and analyze data regarding the relationship between the deployment of water engagement devices and parameters associated with the various vessel motions. The system as part of the commissioning strategy is configured to provide feedback gains from the data derived from the relationship between deployment and parameters related to vessel motions and provide customization option to an operator of the new marine vessel. The commissioning strategy disclosed herein provides significant technological advantages from conventional marine stability control systems while overcoming the disadvantages of any prior art systems, as further discussed below.


BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The present disclosure is directed to a software-based commissioning strategy for customization of a new marine vessel having a newly installed stability/dynamic active control system. The commissioning strategy will be implemented by using a proprietary customer-facing software embedded within a software module of a newly installed dynamic active control system for a new marine vessel (and a new hull type). The commissioning strategy is configured to measure the relationship between deployment of the water engagement devices (differential or symmetrical) and the resulting motions of the marine vessel in order to determine the optimum overall gain (e.g., roll overall gain, pitch overall gain, yaw rate gain) based on that transfer function relationship between the deployment and the marine vessel motion, as further described below. A water engagement device is not necessarily limited to any particular device such as an interceptor, trim tab and/or a fin but can include other similar devices that can engage the water flow in a similar fashion and provide similar functionality during operation of the marine vessel.


In an aspect of the present disclosure, a commissioning method for a new marine vessel comprises the steps of (1) installing a dynamic active control system having an user-interface connected to a software module having an embedded microprocessor, wherein the software module is communicatively and operatively connected to at least one pair of water engagement devices, (2) prompting a user to activate the system to asymmetrically deploy the at least one pair of water engagement devices; (3) processing a first set of data related to the roll motion of the vessel generated from the asymmetrical deployment of the at least one pair of water engagement devices, wherein the first set of data includes parameters of the functional relationship between the asymmetrical deployment of the at least one pair of water engagement devices and the roll motion the marine vessel; (4) analyzing the processed first set of data to automatically generate a vessel-specific Roll Overall Gain parameter derived from the first set of data; (5) processing a second set of data related to the yaw motion of the vessel generated from the asymmetrical deployment of the at least one pair of water engagement devices, wherein the second set of data includes parameters of the functional relationship between the asymmetrical deployment of the at least one pair of water engagement devices and the yaw motion of the marine vessel; (6) analyzing the processed second set of data to generate a vessel-specific Yaw Rate Gain parameter derived the second set of data; and (7) storing the vessel-specific Roll Overall Gain parameter and the vessel-specific Yaw Rate Gain parameter within the dynamic active control system of the marine vessel.


In another aspect of the present disclosure, a commissioning method for a new marine vessel comprises the steps of (1) installing a dynamic active control system having an user-interface connected to a software module having an embedded microprocessor, wherein the software module is communicatively and operatively connected to at least one pair of water engagement devices; (2) prompting a user to activate and instruct the system to symmetrically deploy the at least one pair of water engagement devices; (3) processing data related to the roll motion of the vessel generated from the symmetrical deployment of the at least one pair of water engagement devices, wherein the data includes parameters of the functional relationship between the symmetrical deployment of the at least one pair of water engagement devices and the pitch axis motion of the marine vessel; (4) analyzing the processed data to generate a vessel-specific Pitch Overall Gain parameter derived from the data; and (5) storing the vessel-specific Pitch Overall Gain parameter within the dynamic active control system of the marine vessel.


In other aspects of the present disclosure, a software-controlled commissioning strategy is configured to automatically determine the appropriate feedback gains for the marine vessel by controlling the deployment of the water engagement devices while simultaneously measuring and capturing the data generated from the resulting list angle, roll angle, roll rate and yaw rate changes associated with the deployment. The commissioning strategy is further configured for auto-calibrating the following functional parameters of the new marine vessel: (1) Speed-Based Bias Adjustments (SBBAs), (2) Roll Overall Gain (ROG), (3) Pitch Overall Gain (POG) and (4) Yaw Rate Gain (YRG) of the marine vessel.


Certain embodiments are shown in the drawings. However, it is understood that the present disclosure is not limited to the arrangements and instrumentality shown in the attached drawings.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The accompanying drawings incorporated in and forming a part of the specification illustrate several aspects of the present disclosure and, together with the description, serve to explain the principles of the embodiments:



FIG. 1 illustrates a graph depicting the speed-based bias adjustments for a marine vessel according to one aspect of the present disclosure.



FIG. 2 illustrates the relationship between differential deployment of at least one pair of the water engagement devices and resulting list angle for three different marine vessel hulls.



FIG. 3 illustrate an embodiment of the Commissioning Strategy in order to auto-calibrate a dynamic active control system for optimization of roll reduction performance (RRP) according to one aspect of the present disclosure.



FIG. 4 illustrates the relationship between the symmetric deployment of at least one pair of the water engagement devices and the resulting trim angle for three different marine vessel hulls.



FIG. 5 illustrates an embodiment of the Commissioning Strategy in order to auto-calibrate a dynamic active control system for optimization of pitch reduction performance (PRP) according to one aspect of the present disclosure.



FIG. 6 illustrates the relationship between asymmetric deployment at least one pair of the water engagement devices and the resulting yaw rate/heading change for two different marine vessel hulls according to one aspect of the present disclosure.



FIG. 7 illustrates an embodiment of the Commissioning Strategy in order to auto-calibrate a dynamic active control system for optimization of yaw reduction performance (YRP) according to one aspect of the present disclosure.





DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE DISCLOSURE

For the purposes of promoting and understanding the principles disclosed herein, reference is now made to the preferred embodiments illustrated in the drawings, and specific language is used to describe the same. Embodiments disclosed in the present disclosure provide a novel and improved commissioning strategy for a new marine vessel.


A software-based commissioning strategy—for customization of the marine vessel—comprises the steps of tuning and scaling a new marine vessel (with a new hull type) having a newly installed stability/dynamic active control system. A stability/dynamic active control system for a marine vessel generally comprises a software module communicatively and operatively connected to a plurality of water engagement devices attached to the marine vessel. The plurality of water engagement device actuators comprises at least one pair of water engagement devices configured for both symmetrical (both in the up and down positions) and asymmetrical (differentially deployed—one in the up and one in the down position) deployment. The software module running proprietary program instructions drives the commissioning strategy via the series of short and timed tests on the system, as further explained below.


In an aspect of the present disclosure, the first step in the commissioning strategy is for the user to activate the stability/dynamic active control system in order to deploy the at least one pair of the water engagement devices asymmetrically. Once the at least one pair of the water engagement devices are deployed asymmetrically, the system is configured to measure and process a first set of data related to the roll motion and a second set of data related to the yaw motion generated from the asymmetrical deployment of the water engagement devices. The system is further configured to process the first set of data—the first set of data further comprising parameters of the functional relationship between the asymmetrical deployment of the at least one pair of water engagement devices and the roll motion the marine vessel. The system next analyzes the processed first set of data to automatically generate a vessel-specific ROG parameter derived from the first set of data. The system next processes the second set of data related to the yaw motion of the vessel generated from the asymmetrical deployment of the at least one pair of water engagement devices—the second set of data further comprising parameters of the functional relationship between the asymmetrical deployment of the at least one pair of water engagement devices and the yaw motion of the marine vessel. The system next analyzes the processed second set of data to generate a vessel-specific Yaw Rate Gain parameter derived the second set of data. Once the vessel-specific ROG and YRG are generated by the system—the vessel-specific Roll Overall Gain parameter and the vessel-specific Yaw Rate Gain parameter are stored within the dynamic active control system of the marine vessel.


In another aspect of the present disclosure, the first step in the commissioning strategy is for a user to activate and instruct the system to symmetrically deploy the at least one pair of water engagement devices. Once the at least one pair of the water engagement devices are deployed symmetrically, the system is configured to measure and process data related to the roll motion of the vessel generated from the symmetrical deployment of the at least one pair of water engagement devices—the data further comprising parameters of the functional relationship between the symmetrical deployment of the at least one pair of water engagement devices and the pitch axis motion of the marine vessel. The system as part of the commissioning strategy next analyzes the processed data to generate a vessel-specific POG parameter derived from the data. Once the vessel-specific POG is generated by the system—the vessel-specific Pitch Overall Gain parameter is stored within the dynamic active control system of the marine vessel.


In another aspect of the present disclosure, the software-driven commissioning strategy is further configured for auto-calibrating the Speed-Based Bias Adjustments (SBBAs) of the new marine vessel. FIG. 1 illustrates a graph depicting the SBBAs for a marine vessel according to one aspect of the present disclosure. Data from the marine vessel will be used to initially define the graph which can then be customized by the user. As illustrated in FIG. 1, the SBBAs are configured to generate a default bias at higher speeds of the marine vessel while assisting the marine vessel with getting on plane during operation of the vessel. During the commissioning process, a default SBBA curve will be derived using the marine vessel data provided by the operator. The default SBBA is stored within the software module giving an operator the flexibility to manually adjust the SBBA curve after it is calculated as part of the operator or user specific commissioning strategy for customization of the marine vessel.



FIG. 2 illustrates the relationship between asymmetrical (or differentially) deployed water engagement devices and the resulting list angle generated for three different types of marine vessel hulls. As shown in FIG. 2, BW25 refers to a 25 foot Center Console Boat, BW28 refers to a 28 foot Center Console Boat and CON35 refers to a 35 foot Center Console Boat. The slope of each line in FIG. 2 is functionally related to the desired ROG and the desired YRG for each type of marine vessel. The ROG measures and mitigates any aggressive feedback data related to measurement of the list angle, roll angle and roll rate of the marine vessel. During the commissioning process for a new marine vessel, an appropriate functional relationship is determined between the list angle and the generated asymmetric deployment slope (each line in FIG. 2 representing a specific type of marine vessel hull). The proprietary algorithm controlling the commissioning strategy—the commissioning algorithm—is programmed to define and provide a suggested or recommended Roll Overall Gain parameter for the marine vessel. Next, after such determination, the commissioning process is designed to provide an option to the operator of the marine vessel to have the control of the system and perform a series of static tests to determine the transfer function relationship between differential deployment of the at least one pair of the water engagement devices and the output list angle feedback provided by the system. Based on the determination, a vessel-specific ROG parameter will be assigned as part of the customized user-specific commissioning strategy for the new marine vessel.



FIG. 3 illustrate an embodiment of the commissioning strategy in order to auto-calibrate the system for optimization of RRP according to one aspect of the present disclosure. As shown in FIG. 3, the commissioning strategy comprises a series of short timed tests configured to provide step by step instruction to the user to auto-calibrate the system and optimize the RRP of the marine vessel.



FIG. 4 illustrates the relationship between the symmetric deployment of at least one pair of the water engagement devices and the resulting trim angle for three different marine vessel hulls. As shown in FIG. 4, BW25 refers to a 25 foot Center Console Boat, BW28 refers to a 28 foot Center Console Boat and CON35 refers to a 35 foot Center Console Boat. The slope of each line in FIG. 4 is functionally related to the desired POG for each type of marine vessel. As illustrated in FIG. 4, the software-controlled commissioning strategy provides a POG similar to the ROG discussed above—the POG measures and mitigates any aggressive feedback data related to the pitch angle and pitch rate for the marine vessel. During the commissioning process for a new marine vessel, an appropriate functional relationship is determined between the trim angle and the generated symmetric deployment slope (each line in the FIG. 4 representing a specific type of marine vessel hull). The proprietary algorithm controlling the commissioning strategy—the commissioning algorithm—is programmed to define and provide a suggested or recommended Pitch Overall Gain parameter for the marine vessel. Next, after such determination, the commissioning process is designed to provide an option to the operator of the marine vessel to have the control of the system and perform a series of static tests to determine the transfer function relationship between the symmetrical deployment of at least one pair of the water engagement devices and the output trim angle (both in degrees and inches). Based on the determination, a vessel-specific POG parameter will be assigned as part of the customized user-specific commissioning strategy for the new marine vessel.



FIG. 5 illustrates an embodiment of the Commissioning Strategy in order to auto-calibrate a dynamic active control system for optimization of pitch reduction performance (PRP) according to one aspect of the present disclosure. As shown in FIG. 5, the commissioning strategy comprises a series of short timed test configured to provide step by step instruction to the user to auto-calibrate the system and RRP of the marine vessel.



FIG. 6 illustrates the relationship between asymmetric deployment at least one pair of the water engagement devices and the resulting yaw rate/heading change for two different marine vessel hulls according to one aspect of the present disclosure. As shown in FIG. 6, ASBW28 refers to a 28 foot Center Console Boat and PIO22 refers to a 22 foot Center Console Boat. The slope of each line in FIG. 6 is functionally related to the desired YRG for each type of marine vessel. As illustrated in FIG. 6, the software-controlled commissioning strategy provides a vessel-specific YRG similar to the vessel-specific ROG and POG parameters. The YRG measures and mitigates any aggressive feedback data related to measurement of the yaw rate of the marine vessel. During the commissioning process for a new marine vessel, an appropriate functional relationship is determined between the yaw rate and the generated asymmetric deployment slope (each line in the FIG. 6 representing a specific type of marine vessel hull). The proprietary algorithm controlling the commissioning strategy—the commissioning algorithm—is programmed to define and provide a suggested or recommended Yaw Rate Gain for the marine vessel. Next, after such determination, the commissioning process is designed to provide an option to the operator of the marine vessel to have the control of the system and perform a series of static tests to determine the transfer function relationship between the asymmetric deployment of at least one pair of the water engagement devices and the output yaw rate (both in degrees and inches). Based on the determination, a vessel-specific YRG parameter will be assigned as part of the customized user-specific commissioning strategy for the new marine vessel.



FIG. 7 illustrates an embodiment of the Commissioning Strategy in order to auto-calibrate a dynamic active control system for optimization of YRP according to one aspect of the present disclosure. As shown in FIG. 5, the commissioning strategy comprises a series of short timed test configured to provide step by step instruction to the user to auto-calibrate the system and optimize the YRP of the marine vessel.


The commissioning strategy disclosed herein do not require the steps of the algorithm flows described in the FIGS. 3, 5 and 7 flowcharts to be followed in its entirety. For instance, an operator can use or follow the algorithm flowchart in part or in whole as part of the commissioning strategy. The algorithm is configured to generate a transfer function relationship between differential deployment of the water engagement devices and roll/yaw rate and a transfer function relationship between symmetric deployment of the water engagement devices and the pitch for the marine vessel. The flowcharts illustrated in FIGS. 3, 5 and 7 describe one such workflow for accomplishing the objective of the commissioning strategy according to one aspect of the present disclosure. In alternative embodiments or other aspects of the present disclosure, other workflows or methods can be used by the operator or the user to achieve the same commissioning objective for a marine vessel.


It is understood that the preceding is merely a detailed description of some examples and embodiments of the present disclosure, and that numerous changes to the disclosed embodiments may be made in accordance with the disclosure made herein without departing from the spirit or scope of the disclosure. The preceding description, therefore, is not meant to limit the scope of the disclosure, but to provide sufficient disclosure to allow one of ordinary skill in the art to practice the disclosure without undue burden. It is further understood that the scope of the present disclosure fully encompasses other embodiments that may become obvious to those skilled in the art.


Differential and differentially are defined within this document as unequal, off center and/or involving differences in angle, speed, rate, direction, direction of motion, output, force, moment, inertia, mass, balance, application of comparable things, etc. The terms Dynamic and/or Dynamic Active Control may mean the immediate action that takes place at the moment they are needed. Any use of the term “immediate,” in this application, means that the control action occurs in a manner that is responsive to the extent that it prevents or mitigates vessel motions and attitudes before they would otherwise occur in the uncontrolled situation. A person of ordinary skill in the art understands the relationship between sensed motion parameters and required response in terms of the maximum overall delay that can exist while still achieving the control objectives. “Dynamic” and/or “Dynamic Active Control” may be used in describing interactive hardware and software systems involving differing forces and may be characterized by continuous change and/or activity. Dynamic may also be used when describing the interaction between a vessel and the environment. As stated above, marine vessels may be subject to various dynamic forces generated by its propulsion system as well as the environment in which it operates. Any reference to “vessel attitude” may be defined as relative to three rotational axes including pitch attitude or rotation about the Y, transverse or sway axis, roll attitude or rotation about the X, longitudinal or surge axis, and yaw attitude or rotation about the Z, vertical or heave axis.


Various features of the example embodiments described herein may be implemented using hardware, software or a combination thereof and may be implemented in one or more computer systems or other processing systems. However, the manipulations performed in these embodiments were often referred to in terms, such as “determining,” which are commonly associated with mental operations performed by a human operator. No such capability of a human operator is necessary in any of the operations described herein. Rather, the operations may be completely implemented with machine operations. Useful machines for performing the operation of the exemplary embodiments presented herein include general purpose digital computers or similar devices. With respect to hardware, a CPU typically includes one or more components, such as one or more microprocessors for performing the arithmetic and/or logical operations required for program execution, and storage media, such as one or more disk drives or memory cards (e.g., flash memory) for program and data storage, and a random access memory for temporary data and program instruction storage. With respect to software, a CPU typically includes software resident on a storage media (e.g., a disk drive or memory card), which, when executed, directs the CPU in performing transmission and reception functions.


The software (or software running on a CPU) may run on an operating system stored on the storage media, such as UNIX or Windows (e.g., NT, XP, Vista), Linux and the like, and can adhere to various protocols such as the Ethernet, ATM, TCP/IP, CAN, LIN protocols and/or other connection or connectionless protocols. As is known in the art, CPUs can run different operating systems, and can contain different types of software, each type devoted to a different function, such as handling and managing data/information from a particular source, or transforming data/information from one format into another format. It should thus be clear that the embodiments described herein are not to be construed as being limited for use with any particular type of server computer, and that any other suitable type of device for facilitating the exchange and storage of information may be employed instead.


A CPU may be a single CPU, or may include multiple separate CPUs, wherein each is dedicated to a separate application, such as a data application, a voice application and a video application. Software embodiments of the example embodiments presented herein may be provided as a computer program product, or software, that may include an article of manufacture on a machine-accessible or non-transitory computer-readable medium (i.e., also referred to as “machine readable medium”) having instructions. The instructions on the machine-accessible or machine-readable medium may be used to program a computer system or other electronic device. The machine-readable medium may include, but is not limited to, floppy diskette, optical disk, CD-ROM, magneto-optical disk, USB thumb drive, and SD card or other type of media/machine-readable medium suitable for storing or transmitting electronic instructions. The techniques described herein are not limited to any particular software configuration. They may find applicability in any computing or processing environment. The terms “machine-accessible medium,” “machine-readable medium” and “computer-readable medium” used herein shall include any non-transitory medium that is capable of storing, encoding or transmitting a sequence of instructions for execution by the machine (e.g., a CPU or other type of processing device) and that cause the machine to perform any one of the methods described herein. It is to be noted that it is common—as a person skilled in the art can contemplate—in the art to speak of software, in one form or another (e.g., program, procedure, process, application, module, unit, logic, and so on) as taking an action or causing a result. Such expressions are merely a shorthand way of stating that the execution of the software by a processing system causes the processor to perform an action to produce a result.


The use of the terms “a” and “an” and “the” and similar referents in the context of describing the invention (especially in the context of the following claims) is to be construed to cover both the singular and the plural, unless otherwise indicated herein or clearly contradicted by context. The terms “comprising,” “having,” “including” and “containing” are to be construed as open-ended terms (i.e., meaning “including, but not limited to,”) unless otherwise noted. Recitation of ranges of values herein are merely intended to serve as a shorthand method of referring individually to each separate value falling within the range, unless otherwise indicated herein, and each separate value is incorporated into the specification as if it were individually recited herein. All methods described herein can be performed in any suitable order unless otherwise indicated herein or otherwise clearly contradicted by context.


The use of any and all examples, or exemplary language (e.g., “such as”) provided herein, is intended merely to better illuminate the invention and does not pose a limitation on the scope of the invention unless otherwise claimed. It is understood that the preceding is merely a detailed description of some examples and embodiments of the present disclosure, and that numerous changes to the disclosed embodiments may be made in accordance with the disclosure made herein without departing from the spirit or scope of the disclosure. The preceding description, therefore, is not meant to limit the scope of the disclosure, but to provide sufficient disclosure to allow one of ordinary skill in the art to practice the disclosure without undue burden.


It is further understood that the scope of the present disclosure fully encompasses other embodiments that may become obvious to those skilled in the art. Features illustrated or described as part of one embodiment can be used in another embodiment to yield a still further embodiment. Thus, it is intended that the present disclosure cover such modifications and variations as come within the scope of the appended claims and their equivalents. It is to be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art that the present discussion is a description of exemplary embodiments only, and is not intended as limiting the broader aspects of the present disclosure, which broader aspects are embodied in the exemplary constructions.

Claims
  • 1. A software-based commissioning method to automatically determine a plurality of feedback gain parameters for a new marine vessel, comprising: installing a dynamic active control system having an user-interface connected to a software module; wherein the software module is communicatively and operatively connected to at least one pair of water engagement devices;prompting a user to activate and instruct the system to asymmetrically and symmetrically deploy the at least one pair of water engagement devices;measuring and processing data related to the motion of the vessel generated from the asymmetric and symmetric deployment of the at least one pair of water engagement devices;analyzing the processed data for: automatically characterizing a functional relationship between the asymmetric deployment of the at least one pair of water engagement devices and a list angle generated for a certain vessel speed,automatically characterizing a functional relationship between the asymmetric deployment of the at least one pair of water engagement devices and a yaw rate generated for a certain vessel speed, andautomatically characterizing a functional relationship between the symmetric deployment at least one pair of water engagement devices and a trim angle generated for a certain vessel speed;automatically converting the functional relationships to a plurality of vessel-specific first feedback gains; andstoring the plurality of vessel-specific first feedback gains within the system of the marine vessel.
  • 2. The software-based commissioning method of claim 1, further comprising the steps of performing a series of static tests to determine; (a) the functional relationship between the asymmetric deployment of the at least one pair of the water engagement devices and the list angle feedback provided by the system;(b) the functional relationship between asymmetric deployment of the at least one pair of the water engagement devices and the yaw rate feedback provided by the system; and(c) the functional relationship between symmetric deployment of at least one pair of the water engagement devices and the trim angle feedback provided by the system.
  • 3. The software-based commissioning method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of the vessel-specific feedback gains includes a Roll Overall Gain (ROG), a Yaw Rate Gain (YRG), a Pitch Overall Gain (POG), a List Angle Gain (LAG), a Roll Rate Gain (RRG) and a Roll Angle Gain (RAG) of the marine vessel.
  • 4. The software-based commissioning method of claim 3, wherein the Roll Overall Gain configured to mitigate any aggressive feedback data related to list angle, roll angle and roll rate of the marine vessel;the Yaw Rate Gain is configured to mitigate any aggressive feedback data related to yaw rate of the marine vessel; andthe Pitch Overall Gain is configured to mitigate any aggressive feedback data related to pitch axis motion of the marine vessel.
  • 5. The software-based commissioning method of claim 3, further comprising the steps of performing a series of static tests to determine: (a) the functional relationship between the asymmetric deployment of the at least one pair of the water engagement devices and the list angle feedback provided by the system;(b) the functional relationship between asymmetric deployment of the at least one pair of the water engagement devices and the yaw rate feedback provided by the system; and(c) the functional relationship between symmetric deployment of at least one pair of the water engagement devices and the trim angle feedback provided by the system.
  • 6. The software-based commissioning method of claim 5, wherein the steps of performing a series of static tests further comprise: generating the Roll Overall Gain based on the functional relationship determined within step (a).
  • 7. The software-based commissioning method of claim 5, wherein the steps of performing a series of static tests further comprise: generating the Yaw Rate Gain based on the functional relationship determined within step (b).
  • 8. The software-based commissioning method of claim 5, wherein the steps of performing a series of static tests further comprise: generating the Pitch Overall Gain based on the functional relationship determined within step (c).
  • 9. The software-based commissioning method of claim 1, further comprising the steps of auto-calibrating the system for optimization of roll reduction performance of the marine vessel.
  • 10. The software-based commissioning method of claim 1, further comprising the steps of auto-calibrating the system for optimization of yaw reduction performance of the marine vessel.
  • 11. The software-based commissioning method of claim 1, further comprising the steps of auto-calibrating the system for optimization of pitch reduction performance of the marine vessel.
  • 12. The software-based commissioning method of claim 1, further comprising the steps of automatically calibrating and generating at least one speed-based bias curve for the marine vessel based on the vessel motion feedback data provided by the system.
CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATION

This Application claims the benefit of and priority to U.S. Provisional Application No. 63/234,894, filed Aug. 19, 2021, the content of which is hereby incorporated by reference.

US Referenced Citations (202)
Number Name Date Kind
4524942 Kueny Jun 1985 A
4749926 Ontolchik Jun 1988 A
5142497 Warrow Aug 1992 A
5263432 Davis Nov 1993 A
5385110 Bennett et al. Jan 1995 A
D362841 Roza Oct 1995 S
5474012 Yamada et al. Dec 1995 A
6041730 Oliverio et al. Mar 2000 A
6268053 Woiszwillo et al. Jul 2001 B1
6273771 Buckley et al. Aug 2001 B1
6354237 Gaynor et al. Mar 2002 B1
6417469 Tamura Jul 2002 B1
6579072 Trousil et al. Jun 2003 B2
6592412 Geil et al. Jul 2003 B1
6651574 Ellens et al. Nov 2003 B1
6659816 Fuse Dec 2003 B2
6766962 Paul et al. Jul 2004 B2
6874441 Pigeon Apr 2005 B2
D507543 Ishii et al. Jul 2005 S
6928948 Shannon Aug 2005 B1
7025026 Young et al. Apr 2006 B2
7040937 Scott et al. May 2006 B2
7059347 Schwartzman Jun 2006 B2
7128014 Berthiaume et al. Oct 2006 B2
7128626 Dundra et al. Oct 2006 B2
7128627 Ferguson Oct 2006 B2
7137347 Wong et al. Nov 2006 B2
7140315 Okuyama Nov 2006 B2
7156708 Dudra Jan 2007 B2
7171982 Dudra Feb 2007 B2
7258072 Wong et al. Aug 2007 B2
7278367 Gonring et al. Oct 2007 B1
7285738 Lavigne et al. Oct 2007 B2
7311058 Brooks et al. Dec 2007 B1
7318386 Dudra et al. Jan 2008 B2
D562753 Wall et al. Feb 2008 S
D562754 Wall et al. Feb 2008 S
7364482 Wong et al. Apr 2008 B1
7407420 Fetchko et al. Aug 2008 B1
7479607 Sack et al. Jan 2009 B2
7497183 Dudra et al. Mar 2009 B2
7597552 Young et al. Oct 2009 B2
7601040 Morvillo Oct 2009 B2
7631610 Wolske Dec 2009 B1
7641525 Morvillo Jan 2010 B2
7717462 Liu et al. May 2010 B2
7722418 Ellens et al. May 2010 B2
7743721 Barrett et al. Jun 2010 B2
7806142 Baros et al. Oct 2010 B2
7905156 Scott et al. Mar 2011 B2
7958837 Fraleigh Jun 2011 B1
7975638 Harris et al. Jul 2011 B1
8007330 Wong et al. Aug 2011 B2
8025006 Baros Sep 2011 B2
8028510 Scott et al. Oct 2011 B2
8042480 Simons Oct 2011 B2
8062010 Paramonoff et al. Nov 2011 B2
D654880 Iam Feb 2012 S
8113892 Gable et al. Feb 2012 B1
8141789 Schwartzman et al. Mar 2012 B2
8145371 Rae et al. Mar 2012 B2
8151723 Winiski et al. Apr 2012 B2
8170734 Kaji May 2012 B2
8182396 Martin et al. May 2012 B2
8261682 DeVito Sep 2012 B1
8264338 Leon Sep 2012 B2
8347859 Garon et al. Jan 2013 B2
8387589 Wong et al. Mar 2013 B2
8406944 Garon et al. Mar 2013 B2
8435088 Morettin et al. Mar 2013 B2
8425270 Dudra et al. Apr 2013 B2
8430702 Davidson et al. Apr 2013 B2
8457820 Gonring Jun 2013 B1
8516916 Scott et al. Aug 2013 B2
8550023 Quail Oct 2013 B1
8578838 Davidson Nov 2013 B2
8578873 Gasper et al. Nov 2013 B2
8583300 Oehlgrien et al. Nov 2013 B2
8610013 Schmidt et al. Dec 2013 B2
8612072 Garon et al. Dec 2013 B2
D698304 Dubois et al. Jan 2014 S
D698357 Mainville et al. Jan 2014 S
8626962 Wong et al. Jan 2014 B2
8631753 Morvillo Jan 2014 B2
8672086 Wong et al. Mar 2014 B2
8683300 Stek et al. Mar 2014 B2
8751015 Frewin et al. Jun 2014 B2
8769944 Redfern Jul 2014 B2
8845490 Chan et al. Sep 2014 B2
D720305 Wenji Dec 2014 S
8901443 Baker et al. Dec 2014 B2
8930050 Garon et al. Jan 2015 B2
8931707 Wilnechenko et al. Jan 2015 B2
8957338 Li Feb 2015 B2
D725050 Tsugawa et al. Mar 2015 S
D725612 Schlegel et al. Mar 2015 S
8992273 Winiski et al. Mar 2015 B2
D727190 Higgs Apr 2015 S
8997628 Sall et al. Apr 2015 B2
9032898 Widmark May 2015 B2
9068855 Guglielmo Jun 2015 B1
9104227 Clarke et al. Aug 2015 B2
9233740 Morvillo Jan 2016 B2
9260161 Gasper et al. Feb 2016 B2
9278740 Andrasko et al. Mar 2016 B1
9334022 Gasper et al. May 2016 B2
9340257 Ulgen May 2016 B2
D758325 Cook et al. Jun 2016 S
D758975 Hunter et al. Jun 2016 S
9377780 Arbuckle et al. Jun 2016 B1
9423894 Olsson et al. Aug 2016 B2
9459787 Kulczycki et al. Oct 2016 B2
9522723 Andrasko et al. Dec 2016 B1
9559649 Noh et al. Jan 2017 B2
D782987 Gassner Apr 2017 S
9631753 Wood et al. Apr 2017 B2
9745020 Snow Apr 2017 B2
9689395 Hartman Jun 2017 B2
9710077 Okazaki Jul 2017 B2
9834293 Wood et al. Dec 2017 B2
D807309 Johnson et al. Jan 2018 S
9857794 Jarrell et al. Jan 2018 B1
9896173 Baros et al. Feb 2018 B2
9911556 Lee et al. Mar 2018 B2
9944377 Davidson et al. Apr 2018 B2
9950771 Hartman et al. Apr 2018 B1
D818973 Tang et al. May 2018 S
9978540 Tanaka et al. May 2018 B2
9988126 Wood Jun 2018 B2
9994291 Scott Jun 2018 B2
10000268 Poirier et al. Jun 2018 B1
10040522 Hartman et al. Aug 2018 B1
10112692 Anschuetz Oct 2018 B1
10202179 Wong et al. Feb 2019 B2
10281928 Behling et al. May 2019 B2
10358189 Sheedy et al. Jul 2019 B2
10370070 Fetchko et al. Aug 2019 B2
10386834 Green et al. Aug 2019 B2
D858465 Desbiens Sep 2019 S
10431099 Stewart et al. Oct 2019 B2
10457371 Hara et al. Oct 2019 B2
D884856 Jones et al. May 2020 S
10647399 Davidson et al. May 2020 B2
10671073 Arbuckle et al. Jun 2020 B2
10683073 Redfern et al. Jun 2020 B2
10683074 Davidson et al. Jun 2020 B2
10696368 Mizutani et al. Jun 2020 B2
10696369 Takase et al. Jun 2020 B2
10766590 Nanjo et al. Sep 2020 B2
10781947 Fetchko et al. Sep 2020 B2
10829191 Wong et al. Nov 2020 B2
10889358 Wong et al. Jan 2021 B2
10906623 Chan et al. Feb 2021 B2
10940927 Chan et al. Mar 2021 B2
11000268 Poucher et al. May 2021 B2
11040757 Huyge et al. Jun 2021 B2
11155322 Baros Oct 2021 B2
11319916 Strang et al. May 2022 B2
11433981 Chan et al. Sep 2022 B2
11465726 Nakatani Oct 2022 B2
11467583 Mizutani Oct 2022 B2
11530022 Andrasko et al. Dec 2022 B1
11679853 Wong et al. Jun 2023 B2
20030082964 Simner May 2003 A1
20050233655 Maselter Oct 2005 A1
20070006101 Michaels Jan 2007 A1
20070238370 Morvillo Oct 2007 A1
20070276563 Kaji Nov 2007 A1
20090076671 Mizutani Mar 2009 A1
20090165694 Beamer Jul 2009 A1
20100094491 Oehlgrien et al. Apr 2010 A1
20100102173 Everett et al. Apr 2010 A1
20100198435 Cansiani et al. Aug 2010 A1
20110000268 Schaafsma et al. Jan 2011 A1
20110120364 Mueller May 2011 A1
20110143608 Chiecchi Jun 2011 A1
20110151732 Chiecchi Jun 2011 A1
20110320072 Morvillo Dec 2011 A1
20120103774 Jun May 2012 A1
20120247934 Schmidt et al. Oct 2012 A1
20130213293 Gasper et al. Aug 2013 A1
20140043303 Baker et al. Feb 2014 A1
20140183011 Park et al. Jul 2014 A1
20140224166 Morvillo Aug 2014 A1
20140348207 Wilnechenko et al. Nov 2014 A1
20140365050 Morvillo Dec 2014 A1
20160097393 Hartman Apr 2016 A1
20170250037 Tanaka et al. Aug 2017 A1
20170313386 Snow Nov 2017 A1
20170349257 Hara et al. Dec 2017 A1
20180201342 Huyge et al. Jul 2018 A1
20190017900 Converse Jan 2019 A1
20200303235 Miyadate et al. Sep 2020 A1
20200354030 Bowie Nov 2020 A1
20210107617 Nakatani Apr 2021 A1
20220004125 Mitsumata et al. Jan 2022 A1
20220334596 Chan et al. Oct 2022 A1
20220355913 Davidson et al. Nov 2022 A1
20230073225 Chan et al. Mar 2023 A1
20230166823 Wood et al. Jun 2023 A1
20230257096 Wong et al. Aug 2023 A1
20230303235 Wong et al. Sep 2023 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (49)
Number Date Country
783746 Jan 2003 AU
2795437 Apr 1928 CA
304073 Sep 1930 CA
2236483 May 1998 CA
2372402 Feb 2002 CA
3048271 Jun 2019 CA
3048276 Jun 2019 CA
3048282 Dec 2020 CA
109110073 Jan 2019 CN
112124548 Dec 2020 CN
19837888 Aug 1998 DE
0928739 Jul 1999 EP
H0350087 Mar 1991 JP
H0382697 Apr 1991 JP
H03114996 May 1991 JP
H06255577 Sep 1994 JP
H09286390 Nov 1997 JP
H09315384 Dec 1997 JP
2001294197 Oct 2001 JP
2002-284087 Oct 2002 JP
2003341589 Dec 2003 JP
2004224103 Aug 2004 JP
2005-280550 Oct 2005 JP
2005324716 Nov 2005 JP
2009037287 Apr 2009 JP
2012-035786 Feb 2012 JP
2013035351 Feb 2013 JP
2013100102 May 2013 JP
2014196091 Oct 2014 JP
2018030573 Mar 2018 JP
10-2011-0078767 Jul 2011 KR
10-2011-0139800 Dec 2011 KR
10-2012-0019280 Mar 2012 KR
10-1259134 Apr 2013 KR
10-1297596 Aug 2013 KR
10-2013-0119071 Oct 2013 KR
10-1491661 Feb 2015 KR
10-2017-0143039 Dec 2017 KR
10-2275079 Jul 2021 KR
2003068590 Aug 2003 WO
2006058232 Jun 2006 WO
2008100903 Aug 2008 WO
2009134153 May 2009 WO
2010003905 Jan 2010 WO
2011099931 Aug 2011 WO
2011142870 Nov 2011 WO
2016036616 Mar 2016 WO
2016209401 Dec 2016 WO
2023092228 Jan 2023 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (15)
Entry
US 11,198,496 B2, 12/2021, Wong et al. (withdrawn)
International Search Report and Written Opinion, filed in PCT/US2022/038964 dated Nov. 28, 2022; 8 pgs.
International Search Report and Written Opinion, filed in PCT/US2022/040944 dated Dec. 2, 2022; 7 pgs.
Volvo Penta; Boat Trim System; Mar. 2017; 4 pgs.
Australian Boat Magazine; The Intriguing Zipwake Trim; May 2015; 6 pgs.
Interceptors/Trim Tabs/Force Producers for Ship Motion Control—Maritime Dynamics, Inc.
International Search Report and Written Opinion, filed in PCT/US2022/038962 dated Nov. 16, 2022; 7 pgs.
International Search Report and Written Opinion, filed in PCT/US2022/038102 dated Nov. 15, 2022; 9 pgs.
AutoTrimPro Electric Owner Install Guide; 48 pgs.
Trygve Lauvdal and Thor I. Fossen; Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Department of Engineering Cybernetics, n-7034 Trondheim, Norway; Nonlinear Non-Minimum Phase Rudder-Roll Damping System for Ships Using Sliding Mode Control; 6 pgs.
Asgei J. Sorenson; Department of Marine Technology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology ; 2013 Department of Marine Technology, NTNU; Marine Control Systems, Propolsion and Motion Control of Ships and Ocean Sructures Lecture Notes; 536 pgs.
European Patent Office Extended European Search Report mailed Aug. 26, 2022 from corresponding European Patent Application No. 19869718.7; 7 pages.
WIPO, Canadian International Searching Authority, International Search Report mailed Dec. 13, 2019 in corresponding International Patent Application No. PCT/CA2019/051410, 3 pages.
WIPO, Canadian International Searching Authority, Written Opinion mailed Dec. 4, 2019 in corresponding International Patent Application No. PCT/CA2019/051410, 6 pages.
LENCO—We Make The Best Boats Better !; The World Leader In Trim Tab Systems & Hatch Lift Innovation Owner's Manual; May 21, 2019; 28 pgs.
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20230057840 A1 Feb 2023 US
Provisional Applications (1)
Number Date Country
63234894 Aug 2021 US