Skip to main content Accessibility help

A hybrid fuzzy logic proportional-integral-derivative and conventional on-off controller for morphing wing actuation using shape memory alloy Part 2: Controller implementation and validation

  • T. L. Grigorie (a1), R. M. Botez (a1), A. V. Popov (a1), M. Mamou (a2) and Y. Mébarki (a2)...


The paper presents the numerical and experimental validation of a hybrid actuation control concept – fuzzy logic proportional-integral-derivative (PID) plus conventional on-off – for a new morphing wing mechanism, using smart materials made of shape memory alloy (SMA) as actuators. After a presentation of the hybrid controller architecture that was adopted in the Part 1, this paper focuses on its implementation, simulation and validation.

The PID on-off controller was numerically and experimentally implemented using the Matlab/Simulink software. Following preliminary numerical simulations which were conducted to tune the controller, an experimental validation was performed. To implement the controller on the physical model, two programmable switching power supplies (AMREL SPS100-33) and a Quanser Q8 data acquisition card were used. The data acquisition inputs were two signals from linear variable differential transformer potentiometers, indicating the positions of the actuators, and six signals from thermocouples installed on the SMA wires. The acquisition board’s output channels were used to control power supplies in order to obtain the desired skin deflections. The experimental validation utilised an experimental bench test in laboratory conditions in the absence of aerodynamic forces, and a wind-tunnel test for different actuation commands. Simultaneously, the optimised aerofoils were experimentally validated with the theoretically-determined aerofoils obtained earlier. Both the transition point real time position detection and visualisation were realised in wind tunnel tests.



Hide All
1. Shellabarger, N. National Forecast Overview 2008-2025, 2008, Director Aviation Policy and Plans, Federal Aviation Administration.
2. Barrett, R. Improvements to commercial and general aviation via adaptive aerostructures, 2007, Paper AIAA-2007-7873, Seventh AIAA Aviation Technology, Integration and Operations Conference (ATIO), pp 19, 18-20 September, 2007.
3. Bye, D.R. and Mcclure, P.D. Design of a morphing vehicle, 2007, Paper AIAA-2007-1728, pp 321336.
4. Jacob, J.D. Aerodynamic flow control using shape adaptive surfaces, 1999, ASME Paper No. DETC99/VIB-8323, ASME 17th Biennial Conference on Mechanical Vibration and Noise, Symposium on Structronics, Mechatronics, and Smart Materials, September 1999, Las Vegas, NV.
5. Martins, A.L. and Catalano, F.M. Viscous drag optimization for a transport aircraft mission adaptive wing, 1998, ICAS-98-31499, Melbourne, Australia.
6. Munday, D., Jacob, J.D. and Huang, G. Active flow control of separation on a wing with oscillatory camber, 2002,, Paper AIAA-2002-0413, 40th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Reno, NV.
7. Namgoong, H., Crossley, W. and Lyrintzis, A.S. Morphing airfoil design for minimum aerodynamic drag and actuation energy including aerodynamic work, 2006, AIAA Paper 2006-2041, pp 54075421.
8. Neal, D. A., Farmer, J. and Inman, D. Development of a morphing aircraft model for wind tunnel experimentation, 2006, Paper AIAA-2006-2141, pp 64436456.
9. Pinkerton, J.L. and Moses, R.W. A feasibility study to control airfoil shape using THUNDER, 1997, NASA Technical Memorandum 4767, Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA, USA.
10. Rodriguez, A.R., Morphing aircraft technology survey, 2007, Paper AIAA-2007-1258.
11. Sanders, B., Eastep, F. and Foster, E. Aerodynamic and aeroelastic characteristics of wings with conformal control surfaces for morphing aircraft, J Aircr, 2003, 40, (1), pp 9499.
12. Skillen, M.D. and Crossley, W.A., Developing response surface based wing weight equations for conceptual morphing aircraft sizing, 2005, Paper AIAA-2005-1960, pp 20072019.
13. Sobieczky, H. and Geissler, W. Active flow control based on transonic design concepts, 1999, DLR German Aerospace Research Establishment, AIAA Paper 99-3127.
14. Vos, R., De Breuker, R., Barrett, R. and Tiso, P. Morphing wing flight control via postbuckled precompressed piezoelectric actuators, J Aircr, 2007, 44, (4), pp 10601067.
15. Kirianaki, N.V., Yurish, S.Y., Shpak, N.O. and Deynega, V.P. Data Acquisition and Signal Processing for Smart Sensors, 2002, John Wiley & Sons.
16. Park, J. and Mackay, S. Practical data acquisition for instrumentation and control systems, 2003, Elsevier, UK.
17. Austerlitz, H. Data acquisition Techniques Using PCs, 2003, Elsevier, USA.
18. Mébarki, Y., Mamou, M. and Genest, M. Infrared measurements of transition location on the CRIAQ project morphing wing model, 2009, NRC LTR- AL-2009-0075.
19. Mamou, M., Mébarki, Y., Khalid, M., Genest, M., Coutu, D., Popov, A.V., Sainmont, C., Georges, T., Grigorie, L., Botez, R.M., Brailovski, V., Terriault, P., Paraschivoiu, I. and Laurendeau, E. Aerodynamic performance optimization of a wind tunnel morphing wing model Ssubject to various cruise flow conditions, 2010, 27th International Congress of the Aeronautical Sciences (ICAS), 19-24 September 2010, Nice, France.

Related content

Powered by UNSILO

A hybrid fuzzy logic proportional-integral-derivative and conventional on-off controller for morphing wing actuation using shape memory alloy Part 2: Controller implementation and validation

  • T. L. Grigorie (a1), R. M. Botez (a1), A. V. Popov (a1), M. Mamou (a2) and Y. Mébarki (a2)...


Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed.