Content area

Abstract

This article addresses the problem of singularity-free fixed-time tracking control for multiple unmanned surface vehicles (USVs) with model uncertainties. To compensate for the uncertain nonlinearities in the multi-USV systems, fuzzy logic approximators are employed to estimate unknown hydrodynamic parameters. By integrating adaptive fixed-time control theory with backstepping methodology, a novel singularity-free fixed-time consensus control scheme is developed, incorporating a error switching mechanism to prevent singularities arising from the differentiation of speed control laws. Through rigorous analysis via fixed-time stability theory, the proposed control scheme guarantees that consensus tracking errors reach a small region around zero within fixed-time. Numerical simulations demonstrate the efficacy of the presented method.

Full text

Turn on search term navigation

1. Introduction

Distributed cooperative control of unmanned surface vehicles (USVs) has attracted considerable research attention in recent years, owing to its diverse applications in marine engineering [1,2,3]. These include marine environmental monitoring, maritime patrol, and hydrographic surveys. Formation control serves as a foundational framework for enabling coordinated motion in multi-USV systems, where the relative positions and orientations of the vehicle group are regulated through localized inter-agent communication [4]. Formation control of USVs has been extensively studied, yielding diverse methodological frameworks. The leader-follower framework operates on a fundamental principle wherein the followers synchronize their states with the given leader’s motion trajectory [5]. This architecture effectively transforms the formation problem into a consensus-based coordination task. Owing to its critical role in distributed cooperative control, numerous consensus algorithms have been devised for multi-USV systems. For example, for USVs with disturbances, the work in [6] develops an event-triggered cooperative consensus control method. The authors in [7] present an obstacle avoidance-based leader-follower consensus control for multi-USV systems. A formation collision avoidance control algorithm is proposed for leader-follower USV systems [8]. A distributed consensus sliding mode control algorithm is proposed for heterogeneous USVs in [9]. The authors in [10] give the secure leader-following consensus tracking control protocol for USVs subject to actuator faults and cyber attacks.

Despite considerable improvements have been realized in consensus control of multi-USV systems, it is crucial to emphasize that existing approaches [6,7,8,9,10] addressing distributed consensus problems rely heavily on precise knowledge of dynamic parameters. However, obtaining accurate USV model parameters remains challenging due to unpredictable disturbances induced by ocean currents and wave forces. Consequently, known model-dependent control schemes become impractical when the system contains uncertain hydrodynamic nonlinearities. Notably, approximation-based methods, including neural networks [11] and fuzzy logic systems [12], offer the robust adaptive control framework to address diverse uncertainties such as unknown nonlinearities and external disturbances. The work in [13] proposes a leader–follower neural network control strategy of USVs considering performance constraint and collision avoidance. A distributed cooperative intelligent tracking control protocol is designed for underactuated USVs with input quantization [14]. The authors in [15] propose a fuzzy anti-saturation formation controller of multiple USVs with model uncertainty. A neural networks-based guaranteed performance formation tracking control scheme is developed for USVs in the presence of unknown dynamic nonlinearities in [16]. The authors in [17] design a fuzzy logic system-based formation sliding mode controller for leader-follower USV systems. Nevertheless, the abovementioned works primarily achieve asymptotic stability of closed-loop systems, where stabilization is achieved only as time approaches infinity.

In practice, the rate of convergence represents a critical control metric in distributed cooperative control. The fixed-time control strategy ensures not only rapid convergence but also eliminates dependence on initial conditions [18]. The concept of fixed-time stability is originally introduced to address stabilization problems in uncertain linear systems [19]. The authors in [20,21] pioneer two innovative fixed-time consensus protocols for first-order multi-agent systems. However, immediate extension to double-integrating multi-agent systems introduced a singularity issue in the control law. To resolve this limitation, the work [22] subsequently develops a fixed-time cooperative control algorithm for a class of multi-agent systems. The authors in [23] subsequently propose a fixed-time consensus scheme that achieves optimal convergence within a specified time interval, irrespective of initial conditions. A fixed-time formation sliding mode control problem is solved for multi-USV systems successfully [24]. The authors in [25] propose an event-triggered fixed-time cooperative scheme for USVs with faults using a disturbance observer. Backstepping-based control is a reliable method, which can decompose a complex nonlinear USV system into kinematic and kinetic subsystems. It then begins the design from the kinematic level and progressively works inward towards the dynamic level. As noted in [26], the inherent singularity problem arising from exponential power terms in fixed-time control schemes remains a fundamental challenge. For USV systems, the singularity problem may be produced when the fixed-time speed control laws with the exponential power errors is differentiated. A critical examination of current research reveals that the development of a backstepping-based fixed-time consensus protocol with singularity avoidance capabilities for multi-USV systems subject to model uncertainties remains an open challenge with significant theoretical and practical implications.

Building upon these research insights, this paper investigates the backstepping-based fuzzy adaptive fixed-time cooperative control problem for USV systems considering dynamic uncertainties. The principal contributions of this study are summarized as follows.

(1) Unlike existing cooperative tracking control methods for USV systems [13,14,15,16,17] that only guarantee slow convergence, the proposed distributed fixed-time controller constructed via the backstepping framework, enables the USV systems’ outputs to rapidly converge to the desired leader signal within a fixed time.

(2) A novel error switching mechanism is designed for multi-USV controller design, enabling automatic transition of tracking errors with exponential terms between two operational intervals, which directly circumvents singularity issues within the backstepping framework.

(3) Fuzzy logic systems are utilized to handle the unknown hydrodynamic nonlinearities of the USV systems. Moreover, in order to broaden the practical applicability of the proposed scheme, the collision avoidance requirement is considered by designing the consensus tracking errors with the safe distance.

The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. Section 2 proposes the system model and problem statement. The controller design and stability analysis are elaborated in Section 3. Simulation results are shown in Section 4. Conclusions are given in Section 5.

2. Modeling and Problem Statement

2.1. Communication Network

The communication topology among K USVs is modeled by a directed graph Gj=(Hj,Bj,Aj) for (j=x,y,ψ), where Hj={1,2,K} represents the set of nodes, BjHj×Hj denotes the edge set defining inter-agent communication links, and Aj=[aijc]RK×K is the weighted adjacency matrix with aijc>0 if node i receives information from node c and aijc=0 otherwise [27]. The neighborhood of node i is defined as Nij={c|(c,i)Bj, ci}. The degree matrix Dj=diag(d1j,,dKj) is constructed with dij=c=1Kaijc, and the graph Laplacian is given by Lj=DjAj, which encodes the connectivity structure of the network.

2.2. System Formulation

For each USV (iHl), the dynamic model follows [28]:

(1)μ˙i=R(i)(ψi)νiMiν˙i=Ci(νi)νiDi(νi)νi+Ti

in which μi=xi,yi,ψiT is the i-th USV’s position vector; νi=ui,vi,riT is the speed vector; The rotation matrix of each USV is

R(i)(ψi)=R11(i)R12(i)R13(i)R21(i)R22(i)R23(i)R31(i)R32(i)R33(i)=cosψisinψi0sinψicosψi0001

where Mi=diag(Mix,Miy,Miψ), Ci(νi)=diag(Cix,Ciy,Ciψ), and Di(νi)=diag(Dix,Diy,Diψ) are the inertia matrix, Coriolis matrix, and damping matrix, respectively. Ti=[Tix,Tiy,Tiψ]T is the i-th USV’s control input vector.

Control Objective: This paper focuses on developing a backstepping-based fixed-time cooperative control scheme for USVs, ensuring that their position vectors μi=xi,yi,ψiT tracks the given leader signal vector y0=[x0,y0,ψ0]T. The proposed controllers aim to achieve consensus tracking in multi-USV systems, as shown in Figure 1.

The consensus error of the kinematic level is given by si1=[six1,siy1,siψ1]T, and the speed tracking error of the kinetic level si2=[six2,siy2,siψ2]T=νiαi=uiαix,viαiy,riαiψT, where αij (iHl, j=x,y,ψ) denote the virtual speed controls in surge, sway and yaw, respectively, and

(2)six1=Kc=1aixc(xi+ξixxcξcx)+aix0(xi+ξixx0)siy1=Kc=1aiyc(yi+ξiyycξcy)+aiy0(yi+ξiyy0)siψ1=Kc=1aiψc(ψiψc)+aiψ0(ψiψ0)

where ξix>0, ξiy>0, ξcx>0, and ξcy>0 represent the demanding distances.

Lemma 1

([29]). A directed graph Gj admits a spanning tree rooted at node 0 if and only if there exists a directed path from node 0 to every other node in the graph. Let Fj=diag(a1j0,,aKj0) be a diagonal matrix where the entries aij0 represent the connection weights from node 0 to each node i. Under this condition, the composite matrix Lj+Fj formed by summing the weighted Laplacian Lj of Gj and the root-coupling matrix Fj is guaranteed to be nonsingular.

Lemma 2

([30]). For the i-th USV (1), if there exists a positive definite function which is also radially unbounded E(z):s+, such that

(3)Q1(z)E(z)Q2(z)E˙(z)χ2Ep(z)χ3Eq(z)+σ2,t0

in which Q1(z) and Q2(z) denote κ functions: χ2>0, χ3>0, 0<p<1 and q>1 represent adjustable constants meeting σ2<min{χ2(1ω), χ3(1ω)} (0<ω<1), thus the system (1) is practically fixed-time stable and the convergence time S is calculated as

(4)SSmax=1χ2ω(1p)+1χ3ω(q1).

Lemma 3

([31,32]). Letting a continuous function f(Z) defined on a compact set Ω there exists the fuzzy logic system ΘTπ(Z) such that

(5)supZΩf(Z)ΘTπ(Z)ϕ*

with ϕ*>0.

Remark 1.

The fuzzy logic system is a nonlinear framework capable of inferring unknown nonlinear relationships between input and output variables. Mathematically, it can be expressed as a linear combination of fuzzy basis functions. Using empirical data collected from the USV system, these fuzzy basis functions can be constructed and subsequently transformed into IF-THEN rule representations. In the backstepping control strategy developed in this study, an fuzzy logic system-based approximator is employed to estimate the inherently uncertain hydrodynamic damping components within the kinetics of the USV under control.

To illustrate the construction of fuzzy rules, consider a simple example of approximating an unknown nonlinear function f(Z), where Z is the input variable. First, we define linguistic labels for Z (e.g., “Negative,” “Zero,” “Positive”) using Gaussian membership functions. A basic fuzzy rule base can then be constructed as follows: Rule 1: IF Z is Negative, THEN f^(Z) is Θ1; Rule 2: IF Z is Zero, THEN f^(Z) is Θ2; Θ1; Rule 2: IF Z is Positive, THEN f^(Z) is Θ3; The output of the fuzzy logic system, f^(Z), is computed as a weighted average of the consequent parameters (Θ1,Θ2,Θ3), where the weights are the normalized firing strengths of each rule.

3. Control Design

This section proposes a backstepping-based fixed-time cooperative control scheme for USVs, with stability guaranteed via Lyapunov analysis. The control block diagram is described in Figure 2.

3.1. Distributed Fixed-Time Kinematics and Kinetics Controller Design

Initially, a distributed kinematic controller generates virtual speed signals to drive the consensus position and orientation error to a small region around zero within a fixed time.

Based on (1), we have

(6)s˙ix1=(dix+aix0)uicosψivisinψiKc=1aixcuccosψcvcsinψcaix0x˙0s˙iy1=(diy+aiy0)uisinψi+vicosψiKc=1aiycucsinψc+vccosψcaiy0y˙0s˙iψ1=(diψ+aiψ0)riKc=1aiψcrcaiψ0ψ˙0.

Chose the Lyapunov function as

(7)E1=i=1Ksix122+siy122+siψ122+θ˜ix122aix1+θ˜iy122aiy1+θ˜iψ122aiψ1

in which ail1>0 are the design parameters; θ˜ij1=θij1θ^ij1(i=1,...K, j=x,y,ψ); θij1=||Θij1||2 is the unknown constant, where Θij1=[Θij11,...,Θij1n]T is the unknown weight vector with the number of fuzzy rules n; The unknown constant θij1 can be estimated as θ^ij1.

From (6), the derivative of E1 is obtained as

(8)E˙1=i=1Ksix1(dix+aix0)cosψi(six2+αix+fix1(Qix1))sinψi(siy2+αiy+fiy1(Qiy1))+siy1(diy+aiy0)sinψi(siy2+αix+fix1(Qix1))+cosψi(siy2+αiy+fiy1(Qiy1))+siψ1(diψ+aiψ0)siψ2+αiψ+fiψ1(Qiψ1)+gix1κix1six14+giy1κiy1siy14+giψ1κiψ1siψ14six12(dix+aix0)(cosψi+sinψ)/2siy12(diy+aiy0)(sinψi+cosψ)/2siψ12(diψ+aiψ0)/2θ˜ix1θ^˙ix1aix1θ˜iy1θ^˙iy1aiy1θ˜iψ1θ^˙iψ1aiψ1

where gij1>0(j=x,y,ψ) are design parameters; κij1=(p1)εij12p4 with εij1>0 and p=2n1/2n+1 n2, nN; θ^ij1 is the estimate of the unknown constant θij1;

And

(9)fix1(Qix1)=cosψidix+aix0[aix0x˙0+Kc=1aixccosψcucsinψcvc(dix+aix0)cosψi+sinψi2six1+gix1κix1six13]sinψidiy+aiy0[aiy0y˙0+Kc=1aiycsinψcuc+cosψcvc(diy+aiy0)cosψi+sinψi2siy1+giy1κiy1siy13]fiy1(Qiy1)=sinψidix+aix0[aix0x˙0+Kc=1aixccosψcucsinψcvc(dix+aix0)cosψi+sinψi2six1+gix1κix1six13]cosψidiy+aiy0[aiy0y˙0+Kc=1aiycsinψcuc+cosψcvc(diy+aiy0)cosψi+sinψi2siy1+giy1κiy1siy13]fiψ1(Qiψ1)=1diψ+aiψ0aiψ0ψ˙0+Kc=1aiψcr(diψ+aiψ0)12siψ1+giψ1κiψ1siψ13.

Utilizing the fuzzy logic systems in Lemma 3, for ϕil1>0 and bil1>0, we have

(10)six1(dix+aix0)cosψifix1(Qix1)(dix+aix0)cosψisix12θix1πix1Tπix12bix12+bix122+six122+ϕix122six1(dix+aix0)sinψifiy1(Qiy1)(dix+aix0)sinψisix12θiy1πiy1Tπiy12biy12+biy122+six122+ϕiy122siy1(diy+aiy0)sinψifix1(Qix1)(diy+aiy0)sinψisiy12θix1πix1Tπix12bix12+bix122+siy122+ϕix122siy1(diy+aiy0)cosψifiy1(Qiy1)(diy+aiy0)cosψisiy12θiy1πiy1Tπiy12biy12+biy122+siy122+ϕiy122siψ1(diψ+aiψ0)fiψ1(Qiψ1)(diψ+aiψ0)siψ12θiψ1πiψ1Tπiψ12biψ12+biψ122+siψ122+ϕiψ122.

Establish the distributed kinematic controller as

(11)αix=cosψidix+aix0[gix1βix1(six1)gix1six12q1(dix+aix0)six1(cosψiθ^ix1πix1Tπix12bix12+sinψiθ^iy1πiy1Tπiy12biy12)]+sinψidiy+aiy0[giy1βiy1(siy1)giy1siy12q1(diy+aiy0)siy1sinψiθ^ix1πix1Tπix12bix12+cosψiθ^iy1πiy1Tπiy12biy12]αiy=sinψidix+aix0[gix1βix1(six1)gix1six12q1(dix+aix0)six(cosψiθ^ix1πix1Tπix12bix12+sinψiθ^iy1πiy1Tπiy12biy12)]+cosψidiy+aiy0[giy1βiy1(siy1)giy1siy12q1(diy+aiy0)siy1sinψiθ^ix1πix1Tπix12bix12+cosψiθ^iy1πiy1Tπiy12biy12]αiψ1=1diψ+aiψ0giψ1βiψ1(siψ1)giψ1siψ12q1(diψ+aiψ0)siψ1θ^iψ1πiψ1Tπiψ12biψ12

where q>1, gix1>0, giy1>0, giψ1>0, gix1>0, giy1>0, and giψ1>0 are design parameters, and

(12)βix1(six1)=six12p1,six1εix1,ςix1six1+κix1six13,six1<εix1,βiy1(siy1)=siy12p1,siy1εiy1,ςiy1siy1+κiy1siy13,siy1<εiy1,βiψ1(siψ1)=siψ12p1,siψ1εiψ1,ςiψ1siψ1+κiψ1siψ13,siψ1<εiψ1,

where p=2n1/2n+1 n2,nN, ςij1=(2p)εij12p2 and κij1=(p1)εij12p4 with εij1>0.

Invoking (10)–(12) into (8), it follows that

(13)E˙1i=1Kj=xψgij1βij1sij1gij1sij12q+θ˜ij1aij1[aij1(dix+aix0)R1j(i)six12πij1Tπij12bij12+aij1(diy+aiy0)R2j(i)siy12πij1Tπij12bij12+aij1(diψ+aiψ0)R3j(i)siψ12πij1Tπij12bij12θ^˙ij1]+(dij+aij0)Rj1(i)(bix12+ϕix12)2+Rj2(i)(biy12+ϕiy12)2+Rj3(i)(biψ12+ϕiψ12)2+(dij+aij0)sij1Rj1(i)six2+Rj2(i)siy2+Rj3(i)siψ2+gij1cij1sij14.

Remark 2.

Based on (12), we have that if sij1>0, βij1(εij1+)=limsij1εij1+sij12p1=εij12p1 and βij1(εij1)=limsij1εij1ςij1sij1+κij1sij13=εij12p1, then we have βij1(εij1+)=βij1(εij1). Conversely, βij1(εij1+)=βij1(εij1) when sij1<0. Likewise, β˙ij1(εij1+)=limsij1εij1+(2p1)sij12p2=(2p1)εij12p2 and β˙ij1(εij1)=limsij1εij1ςij1+3κij1sij12=(2p1)εij12p2 when sij1>0, and β˙ij1(εij1+)=β˙ij1(εij1) when sij1<0. Then, the proposing function βij1(sij1) can be continuous differentiable, which ensures that the control laws (11) can also be continuous differentiable.

Remark 3.

Notice that sij12p1 and its differentiation (2p1)sij12p2 may lead to the control singularity issue, that means 2p1<0 and 2p2<0. For avoiding the singularity problem, a novel function βij1(sij1) is designed. Clearly, when sij1<εij1, βij1(sij1)=ςij1sij1+κij1sij13, the singularity issue is settled.

Next, a distributed kinetics controller leverages the virtual speed signals to compute the surge force, sway force, and yaw moment, ensuring fixed-time stability of the closed-loop system.

Using si2=[six2,siy2,siψ2]T=uiαix,viαiy,riαiψT, the derivatives of sij2 are

(14)s˙ix2=Tiu+fix2(Qix2)/Mixs˙iy2=Tiv+fiy2(Qiy2)/Miys˙iψ2=Tir+fiψ2(Qiψ2)/Miψ

where

fix2(Qix2)=CixuDixuMixα˙ix+six22+(dix+aix0)R1j(i)six1+(diy+aiy0)R2j(i)siy1+(diψ+aiψ0)R3j(i)siψ1gix2κix2six23fiy2(Qiy2)=CiyvDiyvMiyα˙iy+ziy22+(dix+aix0)R1j(i)six1+(diy+aiy0)R2j(i)siy1+(diψ+aiψ0)R3j(i)siψ1giy2κiy2siy23fiψ2(Qiψ2)=CiψrDiψrMiψα˙iψ+siψ22+(dix+aix0)R1j(i)six1+(diy+aiy0)R2j(i)siy1+(diψ+aiψ0)R3j(i)siψ1giψ2κiψ2siψ23.

Select the Lyapunov function as

(15)E2=E1+i=1Kj=xψMijsij222+θ˜ij222aij2.

where θ˜ij2=θij2θ^ij2(i=1,...K,j=x,y,ψ); θij2=||Θij2||2 is the unknown constant, where Θij2=[Θij21,...,Θij2n] is the unknown weight vector; The unknown constant θij2 can be estimated as θ^ij2.

Invoking (14) into (15), one obtains that

(16)E˙2=E˙1+i=1Kj=xψsij2Tij+fij2(Qij2)sij222(dij+aij0)sij1(Rj1(i)×six2+Rj2(i)siy2+Rj3(i)siψ2)+gij2κij2sij24θ˜ij2θ^˙ij2aij2.

Akin to (10), we have

(17)sij2fij2(Qij2)sij22θij2πij2Tπij22bij22+bij222+sij222+ϕij222.

Propose the kinetic controller as

(18)Tij=gij2βij2gij2sij22q1sij2θ^ij2πij2Tπij22bij22

where gij2>0, gij2>0 and bij2>0 are design parameters, and

(19)βij2(sij2)=sij22p1,sij2εij2,ςij2sij2+κij2sij23,sij2<εij2,

where ςij2=(2p)εij22p2 and κij2=(p1)εij22p4 with εij2>0.

Invoking (17) and (18) into (16) results in

(20)E˙2i=1Kj=xψ+o=12gijoβijosijogijosijo2q+(dij+aij0)×Rjx(i)(bix12+ϕix12)2+Rj2(i)(biy12+ϕiy12)2+Rj3(i)(biψ12+ϕiψ12)2+bij222+ϕij222+θ˜ij1aij1[aij1(dix+aix0)R1j(i)six12πij1Tπij12bij12+aij1(diy+aiy0)R2j(i)siy12πij1Tpiij12bij12+sij1(diψ+aiψ0)R3j(i)siψ12πij1Tπij12bij12θ^˙ij1]+θ˜ij2aij2aij2sij22piij2Tπij22bij22θ^˙ij2+o=12gijoκijosijo4.

Design the updating laws as

(21)θ^˙ij1=aij1R1j(i)(dix+aix0)six12πij1Tπij12bij12+aij1R2j(i)(diy+aiy0)siy12πij1Tπij12bij12+aij1R3j(i)(diψ+aiψ0)siψ12πij1Tπij12bij12λij1θ^ij1λij1θ^ij12q1θ^˙ij2=aij2sij22πij2Tπij22bij22λij2θ^ij2λij2θ^ij22q1.

Remark 4.

In the conventional adaptive control, the parameter update law is commonly developed as θ^˙ij1=aij1R1j(i)(dix+aix0)six12πij1Tπij12bij12+aij1R2j(i)(diy+aiy0)siy12πij1Tπij12bij12+aij1R3j(i)(diψ+aiψ0)siψ12πij1Tπij12bij12λij1θ^ij1 and θ^˙ij2=aij2sij22πij2Tπij22bij22λij2θ^ij2. The conventional approach, which relies on the linear differential equation method, fails to meet the fixed-time stability criterion stipulated in Lemma 2. Consequently, this limitation necessitates the development of a novel parameter adaptation law, given by (21). The incorporation of the nonlinear terms λij1θ^ij12q1 and λij2θ^ij22q1 in (21) guarantees that the fixed-time system performance will be established in the subsequent stability analysis.

3.2. Stability Analysis

Theorem 1.

Based on the kinematic controller (11), the kinetic controller (18), and the updating laws (21), the following results hold: (1) the designed strategy guarantees that consensus tracking errors reach a small region around zero within fixed-time, and the convergence time is limited as SSmax=1χ2ω(1p)+1χ3(18K)1qω(q1)(0<ω<1); and (2) the closed-loop system ensures boundedness of all its signals.

Proof. 

Invoking (21) into (20) gives

(22)E˙2i=1Kj=xψo=12gijoβijosijogijosijo2p+λijoθ˜ijoθ^ijoaijo+λijoθ˜ijrθ^ijo2q1aijo+aij222+(dij+aij0)Rj1(i)(aix12+ϕix12)2+Rj2(i)(aiy12+ϕiy12)2+Rj3(i)(aiψ12+ϕiψ12)2+ϕij222+λijoθ˜ijoθ^ijoaijo+λijoθ˜ijoθ^ijo2q1aijo+o=12gijocijosijo4.

From the Young’s inequality [33,34,35], one has

λijoθ˜ijoθ^ijrsijoλijo2aijoθ˜ijo2+λijo2aijoθijo2.

From Lemmas 3–4 in [36], one has

(23)λijoθ˜ijoθ^ijo2q1aijoλijoqaijoθijo2qλijo2qaijoθ˜ijo2q.

Case 1: If sijo<εijo, it yields that

(24)E˙2i=1Kj=xψ2gij1ςij1sij1222gij2ςij2MijMijsij222+(o=12λijoθ˜ijo22aijo+λijoqaijoθijo2q+λijo2aijoθijo2)+bij222+ϕij222+(dij+aij0)[Rj1(i)(aix12+ϕix12)2+Rj2(i)(aiy12+ϕiy12)2+Rj3(i)(aiψ12+ϕiψ12)2]χ1V2+σ1

where χ1=min{2gij1ςij1, 2gij2ςij2Mij, λijo, and σ1=i=1Kj=xψλijoqaijrθijo2q+λijo2aijoθijo2+(dij+aij0)Rj1(i)(bix12+ϕix12)+Rj2(i)(biy12+ϕiy12)+Rj3(i)(aiψ12+πiψ12)2+aij222+ϕij222.

Applying the integrating factor expχ1t to (24) results in

(25)d(expχ1tE2)/dtexpχ1tσ1.

Figuring (25) gives

(26)E2(t)E2(0)+σ1χ1.

Hence, for sijo<εijr, the closed-loop signals achieve semi-global uniform ultimate bounded.

Case 2: If sijoεijo. According to Lemma 2 in [37], we have

(27)λijo2aijoθ˜ijo2λijo2aijoθ˜ijo2p+(1p)pp1p.

Invoking (27) into (22), one has

(28)E˙2i=1Kj=xψ2pgij1sij122p2Mijpgij2Mijsij222po=12σijopθ˜ijr22aijop2qgij1sij122p2Mijqgij2Mijsij222qo=122qaijoq1λijo2qθ˜ijo22aijoq+σ2χ2E2pχ3(18K)1qE2q+σ2,

where σ2=σ1+3(1p)pp1p,χ2=min{2pgij1,2Mijpgij2, λijop}, and χ3=min{2qgij1,2Mijqgij2,2qaijoq1λijo2q}.

Based on the Lemma 2, we get that

(29)SSmax=1χ2ω(1p)+1χ3(18K)1qω(q1).

Furthermore, all error signals remain bounded within the range

(30)sij12σ2(1ω)χ212psij22Mijσ2(1ω)χ212p|θ˜ij1|2aij1σ2(1ω)χ212p|θ˜ij2|2aij2σ2(1ω)χ212p.

According to (30), the boundedness of θ^ijo is ensured, thus we have that αij and Tij are bounded. From the definition of E2 and Lemma 3 in [38], for tS, one obtains

(31)||x+ξxx¯0||||sx1||λminx{Lx+Fx}||y+ξyy¯0||||sy1||λminy{Ly+Fy}||ψψ¯0||||sψ1||λminψ{Lψ+Fψ}

where x¯0=[x0,...,x0]T, y¯0=[y0,...,y0]T, ψ¯0=[ψ0,...,ψ0]T, sx1=[s1x1,...,sKx1]T, sy1=[s1y1,...,sKy1]T, sψ1=[s1ψ1,...,sKψ1]T, x=[x1,...,xK]T, y=[y1,...,yK]T, ψ=[ψ1,...,ψK]T, ξx=[ξ1x,...,ξKx]T, and ξy=[ξ1y,...,ξKy]T; λminj{Lj+Fj} is the minimum singular value of Lj+Fj. That is, the consensus error remains in a small neighborhood of origin after the fixed time. □

4. Simulation Validation

The multi-USV systems operate under the directed communication topology illustrated in Figure 3, with five USVs maintaining bidirectional information exchange. The leader signal is given as

x0y0ψ0=10cos0.1t10sin0.1t+10atan2(y˙0x˙0).

The control parameters are selected in Table 1. The initial states are selected in Table 2. The fuzzy sets of fuzzy logic systems ΘijlTπijl(Qijl)(l=1,2) are selected over the interval [112,112]. For n=1,...,12, define Qij1=[xi,yi,ψi]T and Qij2=[ui,vi,ri]T,

Qij10=13/2+n,13/2+nT,...,13/2+n,13/2+nT3TQij20=13/2+n,13/2+nT,...,13/2+n,13/2+nT3T.

Hence, the fuzzy membership functions of fuzzy logic systems are selected as μijln(Qijl)=exp((QijlQijl0)T(QijlQijl0)/2). Then, the fuzzy basis function vectors are given as πijl(Qijl)=[πijl,1(Qijl),πijl,2(Qijl),...,πijl,12(Qijl)] with πijl,n(Qijl)=μijlnn=112μijln.

Figure 4 shows that the actual position of four USVs agrees on the leader position with obstacle avoidance strategy. Figure 5 exhibits the yaw angles of four USVs can track the given reference yaw angle to realize the orientation consensus. Figure 6 describes the bounded speed curves in surge, sway, and yaw. The actual surge force, sway force, and yaw moment of four USVs are shown in Figure 7, which are acceptable.

To evaluate the resilience of the proposed control method under practical marine conditions, a robustness testing is developed, where the influence of waves, wind, and currents is emulated. In the simulations, environmental disturbances are represented as Gaussian random noise. Following the approach in [39], high-frequency wave-induced motions are generated via a second-order bandstop filter, whereas low-frequency perturbations resulting from wave drift, currents, and wind in the yaw direction are modeled using a first-order transfer function. Thus, we consider the disturbances as τuD=sin(ψ)P¯(s), τvD=cos(ψ)P¯(s), and τrD=P(s), in which P¯(s) and P(s) denote the high-frequency wave motion and the slow-varying environmental disturbances, respectively. Chose reference leader as [x0,y0,ψ0]T=[10sin0.1t+10,t,atan2(y˙0x˙0)]T. The configuration parameters remain consistent with those used in the earlier simulation. The cooperative tracking performance can be realized under real-world marine disturbances using the strategy of this paper, showing Figure 8 and Figure 9. To demonstrate the superiority of the proposed fixed-time control method, the comparisons of consensus error convergence between our control strategy and the traditional consensus tracking strategy in [15] are shown in Figure 10 and Table 3. It is evident that the proposed fixed-time method in this paper can achieve faster and lower convergence of the consensus errors.

5. Conclusions

This article has addressed the fixed-time cooperative tracking control problem for USVs with model uncertainties. By integrating the approaches of fixed-time control and fuzzy approximation-based adaptive backstepping control under a directed topology, we have developed a distributed fuzzy adaptive fixed-time control algorithm. A novel switching function has been designed in the distributed fixed-time controllers to avoid the singularity problem in the backstepping design framework. Based on the fixed-time stability theory, the proposed control scheme guarantees that consensus tracking errors reach a small region around zero within a fixed time. Finally, simulation results have demonstrated the effectiveness of the developed approach. Future work will focus on addressing actuator thrust/torque saturation in practical applications. We will explore integrating anti-windup compensation mechanisms such as auxiliary dynamic systems or disturbance observer-based techniques into the proposed fixed-time control framework to ensure both stability and consensus performance under input constraints.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, Y.S. and R.Y.; methodology, Y.S. and R.Y.; software, Y.S. and P.Y.; validation, Y.S. and P.Y.; formal analysis, T.L. and P.Y.; investigation, T.L. and R.Y.; resources, T.L. and R.Y.; data curation, R.Y. and P.Y.; writing—original draft preparation, Y.S. and P.Y.; writing—review and editing, Y.S. and P.Y.; visualization, Y.S. and P.Y.; supervision, R.Y.; project administration, T.L. and R.Y.; funding acquisition, R.Y. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in this study are included in the article material. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Footnotes

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Figures and Tables

Figure 1 Geometrical illustration of cooperative tracking (note: XEOEYE and XBOBYB denote the earth and body frames, respectively).

View Image -

Figure 2 Block diagram of the developed control algorithm.

View Image -

Figure 3 Communication network of multi-USV systems.

View Image -

Figure 4 Position consensus control performance of multiple USVs.

View Image -

Figure 5 Orientation consensus control performance multiple USVs.

View Image -

Figure 6 Linear speed and yaw rate of follower USVs.

View Image -

Figure 7 Control inputs.

View Image -

Figure 8 Position consensus control performance under real-world marine disturbances.

View Image -

Figure 9 Orientation consensus control performance under real-world marine disturbances.

View Image -

Figure 10 Comparisons of consensus errors of the USV 1. (a) In surge. (b) In sway. (c) In yaw.

View Image -

Control parameters.

Symbol Interpretation
gi11, gi12, gi21,gi22, gi31,gi32 2, 2.5, 15, 13, 5, 34
gi11, gi12,gi21, gi22, gi31, gi32 0.5, 0.3, 1.3, 4, 0.15, 3.4
q, p 197/101, 97/99
λij1, λij2 0.4, 0.4
bij1, bij2 3, 3

Initial states.

Symbol Interpretation
x1(0), x2(0), x3(0), x4(0) − 2, −3, 0, −1
y1(0), y2(0), y3(0), y4(0) 0, −2, 0.1, 0.1
ψ1(0), ψ2(0), ψ3(0), ψ4(0) 0.1, 0.1, 0.1, 0.1
ui(0), vi(0), ri(0) 0, 0, 0

Comparation of consensus errors.

Metric Under Our Control Method Under the Control Method [15]
Average consensus error of USV 1 in surge s1x1 −0.0124/m −0.0925/m
Average consensus error of USV 1 in sway s1y1 −0.3206/m −1.0781/m
Average consensus error of USV 1 in yaw s1ψ1 −0.320/rad −3.8166/rad

References

1. Shan, Q.; Liu, W.; Li, T.; Zhang, H. A topology reconfiguration strategy for containment control of the multi-USV system based on algebraic connectivity. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron.; 2025; 72, pp. 5322-5332. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TIE.2024.3472272]

2. Chang, Z.; Zong, G.; Wang, W.; Yue, M.; Zhao, X. Formation control and obstacle avoidance design for networked USV swarm with exogenous disturbance under intermittent communication. IEEE Trans. Netw. Sci. Eng.; 2025; 12, pp. 3234-3243. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/tnse.2025.3558548]

3. Wang, W.; Shan, Q.; Li, T.; Chen, C.L.P.; Wang, Y. Finite-time-prescribed performance-based platoon formation control for unmanned surface vehicles using event-triggered extended state observer. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol.; 2024; 73, pp. 18460-18471.

4. Xue, J.; Song, Y.; Hu, H. Formation control of a multi-unmanned surface vessel system: A bibliometric analysis. J. Mar. Sci. Eng.; 2024; 12, 1484.

5. Wang, S.; Wen, G.; Shen, H.; Wang, L. A LOS-based path-following control of underactuated autonomous surface vessels for time-varying formations: Theory and experiment. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron.; 2025; 72, pp. 10804-10813. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TIE.2025.3555021]

6. Li, J.; Zhang, G.; Zhang, W.; Shan, Q.; Zhang, W. Cooperative path following control of USV-UAVs considering low design complexity and command transmission requirements. IEEE Trans. Intell. Veh.; 2024; 9, pp. 715-724.

7. Yuan, P.; Zhang, Z.; Li, Y.; Cui, J. Leader-follower control and APF for Multi-USV coordination and obstacle avoidance. Ocean Eng.; 2024; 313, 119487.

8. Sun, X.; Wang, G.; Fan, Y.; Mu, D.; Qiu, B. A formation collision avoidance system for unmanned surface vehicles with leader-follower structure. IEEE Access; 2019; 7, pp. 24691-24702. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2900280]

9. Xue, K.; Wu, T. Distributed Consensus of USVs under Heterogeneous UAV-USV multi-agent systems cooperative control scheme. J. Mar. Sci. Eng.; 2021; 9, 1314.

10. Liu, C.; Xia, Z.; Tian, Y.; Patton, R. Defense and tolerance technique against attacks and faults on leader-following multi-USVs. IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst.; 2021; 25, pp. 5450-5461. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2023.3330570]

11. Chen, L.; Dai, S.; Dong, C. Adaptive optimal tracking control of an underactuated surface vessel using actor–critic reinforcement learning. IEEE Trans. Neural Netw. Learn. Syst.; 2024; 35, pp. 7520-7533. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TNNLS.2022.3214681]

12. Song, W.; Zuo, Y.; Tong, S. Fuzzy optimal event-triggered control for dynamic positioning of unmanned surface vehicle. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Syst.; 2025; 55, pp. 2302-2311. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TSMC.2024.3520600]

13. He, S.; Wang, M.; Dai, S.; Luo, F. Leader–follower formation control of USVs with prescribed performance and collision avoidance. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform.; 2019; 15, pp. 572-581. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TII.2018.2839739]

14. He, S.; Wang, M.; Dai, S.; Luo, F. Distributed formation maneuvering quantized control of underactuated unmanned surface vehicles with collision and velocity constraints. J. Mar. Sci. Eng.; 2024; 12, 848. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jmse12050848]

15. Zhou, W.; Wang, Y.; Ahn, C.; Cheng, J.; Chen, C. Adaptive fuzzy backstepping-based formation control of unmanned surface vehicles with unknown model nonlinearity and actuator saturation. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol.; 2020; 69, pp. 14749-14764. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TVT.2020.3039220]

16. Ghommam, J.; Saad, M.; Mnif, F.; Zhu, Q. Guaranteed performance design for formation tracking and collision avoidance of multiple USVs with disturbances and unmodeled dynamics. IEEE Syst. J.; 2021; 15, pp. 4346-4357. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/JSYST.2020.3019169]

17. Wu, T.; Xue, K.; Wang, P. Leader-follower formation control of USVs using APF-based adaptive fuzzy logic nonsingular terminal sliding mode control method. J. Mech. Sci. Technol.; 2022; 36, pp. 2007-2018. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12206-022-0336-y]

18. Liu, Y.; Li, H.; Lu, R.; Zuo, Z.; Li, X. An overview of finite/fixed-time control and its application in engineering systems. IEEE/CAA J. Autom. Sin.; 2022; 9, pp. 2106-2120. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/JAS.2022.105413]

19. Polyakov, A. Nonlinear feedback design for fixed-time stabilization of linear control systems. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control.; 2011; 57, pp. 2106-2110. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TAC.2011.2179869]

20. Zuo, Z.; Tie, L. A new class of finite-time nonlinear consensus protocols for multi-agent systems. Int. Control.; 2014; 87, pp. 363-370. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00207179.2013.834484]

21. Zuo, Z.; Tie, L. Distributed robust finite-time nonlinear consensus protocols for multi-agent systems. Int. Syst. Sci.; 2016; 47, pp. 1366-1375. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00207721.2014.925608]

22. Zuo, Z. Nonsingular fixed-time consensus tracking for second-order multi-agent networks. Automatica; 2015; 54, pp. 305-309. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.automatica.2015.01.021]

23. Chen, G.; Li, Z. A fixed-time convergent algorithm for distributed convex optimization in multi-agent systems. Automatica; 2018; 95, pp. 539-543. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.automatica.2018.05.032]

24. Shen, H.; Yin, Y.; Qian, X. Fixed-time formation control for unmanned surface vehicles with parametric uncertainties and complex disturbance. J. Mar. Sci. Eng.; 2022; 10, 1246. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jmse10091246]

25. Li, J.; Fan, Y. Fixed-time event-triggered fault-tolerant formation-containment control for underactuated USVs with uncertain dynamics. Nonlinear Dyn.; 2025; 113, pp. 21435-21454. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11071-025-11231-y]

26. Pan, Y.; Du, P.; Xue, H.; Lam, H.K. Singularity-free fixed-time fuzzy control for robotic systems with user-defined performance. IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst.; 2021; 29, pp. 2388-2398. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TFUZZ.2020.2999746]

27. Liu, G.; Liang, H.; Wang, R.; Sun, Z.; Sui, Q. Adaptive event-triggered output feedback control for nonlinear multiagent systems using output information only. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man, Cybern. Syst.; 2025; pp. 1-12. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TSMC.2025.3597016]

28. He, S.; Dai, S.; Zhao, Z.; Zou, T. UDE-based distributed formation control for MSVs with collision avoidance and connectivity preservation. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform.; 2024; 20, pp. 1476-1487. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TII.2023.3274234]

29. Zhang, H.; Lewis, F.; Qu, Z. Lyapunov, adaptive, and optimal design techniques for cooperative systems on directed communication graphs. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron.; 2012; 59, pp. 3026-3041. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TIE.2011.2160140]

30. Wang, F.; Lai, G. Fixed-time control design for nonlinear uncertain systems via adaptive method. Syst. Control. Lett.; 2020; 140, 104704. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sysconle.2020.104704]

31. Wu, W.; Tong, S. Adaptive fuzzy distributed optimal FTC for nonlinear multiagent systems based multiplayer differential game. IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst.; 2025; 33, pp. 657-668. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TFUZZ.2024.3488015]

32. Su, Y.; Teng, F.; Li, T.; Liang, H. Fuzzy-based optimal control for an underactuated surface vessel with user-specified performance. IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst.; 2025; 26, pp. 7036-7050.

33. Chen, G.; Zhou, Q.; Ren, H.; Li, H. Sensor-fusion-based event-triggered following control for nonlinear autonomous vehicles under sensor attacks. IEEE Trans. Autom. Sci. Eng.; 2025; 22, pp. 17411-17420. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TASE.2023.3337073]

34. Chen, G.; Zhou, Q.; Li, H.; Yao, D.; Ahn, C.K. Event-triggered state estimation and control for networked nonlinear systems under dynamic sparse attacks. IEEE Trans. Netw. Sci. Eng.; 2024; 11, pp. 1947-1958. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TNSE.2023.3335129]

35. Yang, W.; Jiang, Y.; Zhu, Y.; Wang, S.; Rubio, J. Fuzzy adaptive prescribed-time secure control for constrained human–robot cotransportation: A novel self-triggered quantized control strategy. IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst.; 2024; 32, pp. 4724-4734. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TFUZZ.2024.3411018]

36. Ni, J.; Wu, Z.; Liu, L.; Liu, C. Fixed-time adaptive neural network control for nonstrict-feedback nonlinear systems with deadzone and output constraint. ISA Trans.; 2020; 97, pp. 458-473.

37. Su, Y.; Xue, H.; Liang, H.; Chen, D. Singularity avoidance adaptive output-feedback fixed-time consensus control for multiple autonomous underwater vehicles subject to nonlinearities. Int. J. Robust Nonlinear Control.; 2022; 32, pp. 4401-4421.

38. Liang, H.; Du, Z.; Huang, T.; Pan, Y. Neuroadaptive performance guaranteed control for multiagent systems with power integrators and unknown measurement sensitivity. IEEE Trans. Neural Netw. Learn. Syst.; 2023; 34, pp. 9771-9782. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TNNLS.2022.3160532]

39. Zhang, J.; Yang, G. Fault-tolerant leader-follower formation control of marine surface vessels with unknown dynamics and actuator faults. Int. J. Robust Nonlinear Control; 2018; 28, pp. 4188-4208. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/rnc.4228]

© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.