Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-pftt2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-17T13:20:24.415Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Dynamic gain-scheduled control of the ICE 101-TV

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 February 2016

C. D. C. Jones ,
T. S. Richardson  and
M. H. Lowenberg
C. D. C. Jones
Affiliation:
Department of Aerospace Engineering, University of Bristol, UK
T. S. Richardson
Affiliation:
Department of Aerospace Engineering, University of Bristol, UK
M. H. Lowenberg
Affiliation:
Department of Aerospace Engineering, University of Bristol, UK
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper shows the theoretical development and application of dynamic gain scheduled control – a novel method for the control of nonlinear systems – to an aircraft model. The idea behind this method is to schedule the control law gains with a fast varying state variable rather than with a slow varying state or an input parameter. This is advantageous as it is then possible to schedule the gains with a state variable that is dominant in the mode that we are most interested in controlling. The use of this type of gain scheduling is shown to improve the transient response of the aircraft model when stepping between trim conditions and to overcome some of the problems associated with conventional gain scheduled controllers (such as control surface position limit saturation). ‘Hidden coupling terms’ that introduce unwanted dynamics when scheduling gains with a fast state (rather than the input design parameter) are eliminated directly by applying a transformation to the classical parameter-scheduled gain distributions which are calculated using eigenstructure assignment. A second order longitudinal model and a 5th order longitudinal/lateral model of the ICE 101-TV tailless delta-wing aircraft configuration are used to demonstrate the design process.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 109 , Issue 1102 , December 2005 , pp. 593 - 607
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2005 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Richardson, T.S., Davison, P.M., Lowenberg, M.H. and di Bernardo, M.. Control of nonlinear aircraft models using dynamic state-feedback gain scheduling, Proceedings of the AIAA Atmospheric Flight Mechanics Conference, AIAA 2003-5503.Google Scholar
2. Reichert, R.T.. Dynamic scheduling of modern-robust-control autopilot designs for missiles, IEEE Control Systems Magazine, 1992, 12, (5), pp 35–42.Google Scholar
3. Reichert, R.T.. h Gain scheduling for infinity controllers: A flight control example 1992, Technical report, John Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD.Google Scholar
4. Shahruz, S.M. and Behtash, S.. Design of controllers for linear parameter-varying systems by the gain-scheduling technique, J Math Analysis and Applications, 1992, 168, (1), pp 195–217.Google Scholar
5. Rugh, W.J. and Shamma, J.S.. Research on gain scheduling, Automatica, 2000, 36, (10), pp 1401–1425.Google Scholar
6. Shamma, J.S.. Special issue on gain scheduling, Int J Robust and Nonlinear Control, 2002, 12, (9).Google Scholar
7. Shamma, J.S. and Athans, M.. Analysis of gain-scheduled control for nonlinear plants, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 1998, 35, (8), pp 898–907.Google Scholar
8. Stilwell, D.J. and Rugh, W.J.. Stability preserving interpolation methods for the synthesis of gain scheduled controllers, Automatica, 2000, 36, pp 665–671.Google Scholar
9. Leith, D.J. and Leithead, W.E.. Survey of gain-scheduling analysis & design, Int J of Control, 2000, 73, (11), pp 1001–1025.Google Scholar
10. Dorsett, K.M. and Mehl, D.R.. Innovative control effectors (ICE), January 1996, Wright Laboratories, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH, WL-TR-96-3043.Google Scholar
11. Dorsett, K.M. Et Al Innovative control effectors (ICE) Phase II, July 1997, Wright Laboratories, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH, WL-TR-97-3059.Google Scholar
12. Masey, J., Unmanned Vehicles Handbook 2005, 2004, The Shephard Press.Google Scholar
13. Lowenberg, M.H. and Richardson, T.S.. The continuation design framework for nonlinear aircraft control, 2001, Proceedings of AIAA Guidance, Navigation and Control Conference, AIAA-2001-4100.Google Scholar
14. Jones, C.D.C., Richardson, T.S. and Lowenberg, M.H.. Dynamic state-feedback gain scheduled control of the ICE 101-TV, 2004, Proceedings of AIAA Guidance, Navigation and Control Conference, AIAA 2004-4754.Google Scholar
15. Andry, A.N., Shapiro, E.Y. and Chung, J.C.. Eigenstructure assignment for linear systems, September 1983, IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, AES, 19, (5), pp 711–728.Google Scholar
16. Sobel, K.M., Shapiro, E.Y. and Andry, A.N.. Eigenstructure assignment, Int J of Control, 1994, 59, (1), pp 13–37.Google Scholar
17. Gibson, L., NIchols, N.K. and Littleboy, D.M.. Closed loop design for a simple nonlinear aircraft model using eigenstructure assignment, 1997, Proceedings of AIAA Guidance, Navigation and Control Conference, AIAA-97-3779.Google Scholar
18. Richardson, T.S.. Continuation Methods Applied to Nonlinear Flight Dynamics and Control, 2002, PhD thesis, University of Bristol.Google Scholar
19. Hyde, R.A.. The Application of Robust Control to VSTOL Aircraft, August 1991, PhD Thesis, University of Cambridge.Google Scholar
20. Tischler, M.B., Lee, J.A. and Colbourne, J.D.. Optimisation and comparison of alternative flight control system design methods using a common set of handling-qualities criteria, 2001, Proceedings of the AIAA Guidance, Navigation and Control Conference, AIAA 2001-4266.Google Scholar
21. Nelson, R.C., Flight Stability and Automatic Control, 1998, McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
22. Doedel, E.J., AUTO 97 – Continuation and Bifurcation Software for Ordinary Differential Equations, 1998.Google Scholar
23. Carrol, J.V. and Mehra, R.K.. Bifurcation analysis of nonlinear aircraft dynamics, J Guidance, Control and Dynamics, September-October 1982, 5, (5), pp 529–536.Google Scholar
24. Avanzini, G. and De Matteis, G.. Bifurcation analysis of a highly augmented aircraft model, 1996, Proceedings of the AIAA Atmospheric Flight Mechanics Conference, AIAA-96-3367-CP.Google Scholar
25. Jahnke, C.C. and Culick, F.F.C.. Application of bifurcation theory to the high-angle-of-attack dynamics of the F-14, J Aircr, January-February 1994, 31, (1), pp 26–34.Google Scholar
26. Lowenberg, M.H.. Application of Bifurcation Analysis to Multiple Attractor Flight Dynamics, August 1998, PhD Thesis, University of Bristol.Google Scholar
27. Hodgkinson, J., Aircraft Handling Qualities, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Press.Google Scholar
28. Smith, P.R.. Functional control law design using exact nonlinear dynamic inversion, 1994, AIAA Atmospheric Flight Mechanics Conference Technical Papers, AIAA-94-3516-CP, pp 481–489.Google Scholar
29. Schumacher, C. and Khargonekar, P.P.. Missile autopilot designs using H8 control with gain scheduling and dynamic inversion, J Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, March-April 1998, 21, (2).Google Scholar