Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-9pm4c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-28T15:19:11.128Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Output constrained neural adaptive control for a class of KKVs with non-affine inputs and unmodeled dynamics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 July 2023

X. Ning ,
J. Liu ,
Z. Wang Open the ORCID record for Z. Wang [Opens in a new window]  and
C. Luo Open the ORCID record for C. Luo [Opens in a new window]
X. Ning
Affiliation:
National Key Laboratory of Aerospace Flight Dynamics, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi’an Xian Institute of Modern Control Technology, Xi’an, China School of Astronautics, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi’an, China
J. Liu
Affiliation:
National Key Laboratory of Aerospace Flight Dynamics, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi’an Xian Institute of Modern Control Technology, Xi’an, China
Z. Wang*
Affiliation:
National Key Laboratory of Aerospace Flight Dynamics, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi’an Research Center for Unmanned System Strategy Development, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi’an, China
C. Luo
Affiliation:
National Key Laboratory of Aerospace Flight Dynamics, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi’an School of Astronautics, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi’an, China
*
Corresponding author: Z. Wang; Email: wz_nwpu@126.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this paper, an adaptive neural output-constrained control algorithm is proposed for a class of non-affine kinetic kill vehicle (KKV) systems. The key point is that the non-affine control law can be designed and the output of the KKV system conform to the output limit with the aid of the proposed method. Due to the aerodynamic moments, the actual control torque is non-affine, which can be addressed by introducing an integral process to the design of the controller. Besides, in order to improve the control precision, a nonlinear mapping is put forward so that the output constraint can be transformed to the constraint of the introduced dynamic signal that can be simply achieved. From the simulation results it can be concluded that the states of the KKV system can track the desired trajectories in spite of different working conditions and the control precision is higher compared with other control methods.

Keywords

Kinetic kill vehicleAttitude controlNon-affine dynamicsNeural adaptive controlOutput constraint
Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 128 , Issue 1319 , January 2024 , pp. 134 - 151
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Royal Aeronautical Society

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

Krstic, M., Kokotovic, P.V. and Kanellakopoulos, I. Nonlinear and adaptive control design. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, NJ, 1995.Google Scholar
Song, Y., Huang, X. and Wen, C. Tracking control for a class of unknown nonsquare MIMO nonaffine systems: A deep-rooted information based robust adaptive approach, IEEE Trans. Automat. Control, 2015, 61, (10), pp 3227–3233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marino, R. and Tomei, P. Nonlinear control design: geometric, adaptive and robust. 1996. Cité en, 27.Google Scholar
Ron, A. and Shen, Z. Affine systems inL2 (Rd): the analysis of the analysis operator, J. Funct. Anal., 1997, 148, (2), pp 408–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deaecto, G.S., Geromel, J.C., Garcia, F.S. and Pomilio, J. A. Switched affine systems control design with application to DC–DC converters, IET Control Theory Appl., 2010, 4, (7), pp 1201–1210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunt, L.R. and Meyer, G. Stable inversion for nonlinear systems, Automatica, 1997, 33, (8), pp 1549–1554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lightbody, G. and Irwin, G.W. Direct neural model reference adaptive control, IEE Proc. Control Theory Appl., 1995, 142, (1), pp 31–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meng, W., Yang, Q., Ying, Y., Sun, Y., Yang, Z. and Sun, Y. Adaptive power capture control of variable-speed wind energy conversion systems with guaranteed transient and steady-state performance, IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., 2013, 28, (3), pp 716–725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hovakimyan, N., Calise, A.J. and Kim, N. Adaptive output feedback control of a class of multi-input multi-output systems using neural networks, Int. J. Control, 2004, 77, (15), pp 1318–1329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhou, W.D., Liao, C.Y., Zheng, L. and Liu, M. M. Adaptive fuzzy output feedback control for a class of nonaffine nonlinear systems with unknown dead-zone input, Nonlinear Dyn., 2015, 79, (4), pp 2609–2621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, B.J. and Calise, A.J. Adaptive control of a class of nonaffine systems using neural networks, IEEE Trans. Neural Netw., 2007, 18, (4), pp 1149–1159.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zhang, T.P. and Ge, S.S. Adaptive dynamic surface control of nonlinear systems with unknown dead zone in pure feedback form, Automatica, 2008, 44, (7), pp 1895–1903.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meng, W., Yang, Q., Jagannathan, S. and Sun, Y. Adaptive neural control of high-order uncertain nonaffine systems: A transformation to affine systems approach, Automatica, 2014, 50, (5), pp 1473–1480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krstic, M. and Bement, M. Nonovershooting control of strict-feedback nonlinear systems, IEEE Trans. Automat. Control, 2006, 51, (12), pp 1938–1943.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, K., Zhu, S., Wei, C., Xu, T. and Zhang, X. Output constrained adaptive neural control for generic hypersonic vehicles suffering from non-affine aerodynamic characteristics and stochastic disturbances, Aerosp. Sci. Technol., 2021, 111, p 106469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tee, K.P., Ge, S.S., Tay, F.E.H. Adaptive control of electrostatic microactuators with bidirectional drive, IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol., 2008, 17, (2), pp 340–352.Google Scholar
Tee, K.P., Ren, B. and Ge, S.S. Control of nonlinear systems with time-varying output constraints, Automatica, 2011, 47, (11), pp 2511–2516.Google Scholar
Han, S.I. and Lee, J.M. Adaptive fuzzy backstepping dynamic surface control for output-constrained non-smooth nonlinear dynamic system, Int. J. Control Automat. Syst., 2012, 10, (4), pp 684–696.Google Scholar
Ren, B., Ge, S.S., Tee, K.P. and Lee, T. H. Adaptive neural control for output feedback nonlinear systems using a barrier Lyapunov function, IEEE Trans. Neural Netw., 2010, 21, (8), pp 1339–1345.Google ScholarPubMed
Zuo, Z. and Wang, C. Adaptive trajectory tracking control of output constrained multi-rotors systems, IET Control Theory Appl., 2014, 8, (13), pp 1163–1174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tee, K.P., Ge, S.S. and Tay, E.H. Barrier Lyapunov functions for the control of output-constrained nonlinear systems, Automatica, 2009, 45, (4), pp 918–927.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meng, W., Yang, Q. and Sun, Y. Adaptive neural control of nonlinear MIMO systems with time-varying output constraints, IEEE Trans. Neural Netw. Learn. Syst., 2014, 26, (5), pp 1074–1085.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Qiu, Y., Liang, X., Dai, Z., Cao, J. and Chen, Y. Backstepping dynamic surface control for a class of non-linear systems with time-varying output constraints, IET Control Theory Appl., 2015, 9, (15), pp 2312–2319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guichao, Y., Jianyong, Y., Guigao, L. and Dawei, M. Adaptive robust control of DC motors with time-varying output constraints[C]//2015 34th Chinese Control Conference (CCC). IEEE, 2015: 4256–4261.Google Scholar
Zhou, Q., Wang, L., Wu, C., Li, H. and Du, H. Adaptive fuzzy control for nonstrict-feedback systems with input saturation and output constraint, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Syst., 2016, 47, (1), pp 1–12.Google Scholar
Liberzon, D. Switching in systems and control, Springer Science & Business Media, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ma, Z., Tong, S. and Li, Y. Fuzzy adaptive state-feedback fault-tolerant control for switched stochastic nonlinear systems with faults, Neurocomputing, 2016, 186, pp 35–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lv, P., Wang, Y., Liu, L. and Su, M. A study on feedback linearization for kinetic kill vehicle attitude control system[C]//Proceedings of 2014 International Conference on Modelling, Identification & Control. IEEE, 2014: 231–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, B.S., Lee, J.G. and Han, H.S. Biased PNG law for impact with angular constraint, IEEE Trans. Aerosp. Electron. Syst., 1998, 34, (1), pp 277–288.Google Scholar
Felio, D.A. and Duggan, D.S. Lecture note on autonomous vehicle guidance, control, and simulation[C]//2000 Aerospace Short Course of the Univ. of Kansas Continuing Education. 2000.Google Scholar
Baba, Y., Takehira, T. and Takano, H. Guidance law for a free-flying projectile[C]//Proceedings of the Asian Control Conference. 1994: 437–440.Google Scholar
Song, T.L. and Um, T.Y. CLOS+ IRTH composite guidance, IEEE Trans. Aerosp. Electron. Syst., 1997, 33, (4), pp 1339–1344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xu, X.Y. and Cai, Y.L. Optimal guidance law and control of impact angle for the kinetic kill vehicle, Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. G J. Aerosp. Eng., 2011, 225, (9), pp 1027–1036.Google Scholar
Cui, Y.K., Fu, L., Liang, X.G. and Luo, L. Optimal sliding-mode terminal guidance law design of airborne boost-phase ballistic missile interception[C]//Applied Mechanics and Materials. Trans Tech Publications Ltd, 2011, 40: 15–20.Google Scholar
Polycarpou, M.M. and Ioannou, P.A. A robust adaptive nonlinear control design, Automatica, 1996, 32, (3), pp 423–427. doi: 10.1016/0005-1098(95)00147-6 Google Scholar
Wang, Z., Yuan, Y. and Yang, H. Adaptive fuzzy tracking control for strict-feedback Markov jumping nonlinear systems with actuator failures and unmodeled dynamics, IEEE Trans. Cybern., 2020, 50, (1), pp 126–139. doi: 10.1109/TCYB.2018.2865677 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lavretsky, E. and Wise, K.A. Robust and Adaptive Control, Springer London, 2013, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, Z. and Pan, Y. Robust adaptive fault tolerant control for a class of nonlinear systems with dynamic uncertainties, Optik (Stuttg)., 2017, 131, pp 941–952. doi: 10.1016/j.ijleo.2016.11.209 CrossRefGoogle Scholar