Zohaib Khalid 2010

Objective of Control System

The objective of a flight control system is to implement the steering commands obtained from the guidance loop and to ensure a stable flight under the presence of local and environmental disturbances.

Transfer Functions

SUM

CONTROLLER

ACTUATOR

PLANT

INS

Closed loop block diagram The transfer functions of the various components of the control loop are given as follows

Transfer Function of Plant

The transfer function of the normal axis dynamics is given as
aN DLDEs2 s2 DLDE * DMQs DLA * DMDE DLDE * DMA DLA DLA * DMQ DMQ s DMA DVBEC DVBEC

aN

= Normal Acceleration = Control surface deflection

Zohaib Khalid 2010

The transfer function of the lateral axis dynamics is given as
aL DYDRs2 s2 DYDR * DNRs DYDR * DNB DYB * DNR DYB DYB * DNR DNR s DNB DVBEC DVBEC

aL

= Normal Acceleration = Control surface deflection

The transfer function of the roll angle dynamics is given as

DLDA s s DLP
= Roll Angle = Control surface deflection

The transfer function of the roll rate dynamics is given as

DLDA s DLP

= Roll Rate = Control surface deflection

The parameters DLDE, DMQ, DLA, DMDE, DMA, DVBEC, and similarly the parameters for the lateral and roll axis dynamics are aerodynamic derivatives and are obtained from aerodynamic experiment.

Transfer Function of Actuator

The transfer function of the actuator was obtained through experiments and was found to be
Gs s 957.9s
3

7900 957.9s 7900

54.23s

Zohaib Khalid 2010

Transfer Function of INS

The transfer function of the INS (Inertial Navigation System) is given as

Gs

1 0.13s 1

Controller Structure Controller Structure for Normal and Lateral axes

The control technique employed to control the position of the vehicle is the acceleration autopilot in the pitch and yaw planes. The normal acceleration autopilot controls the normal acceleration of the aerodynamic vehicle while the lateral acceleration autopilot controls the lateral acceleration. The guidance scheme generates the commanded acceleration on the basis of position and velocity error, and the controller generates the required commands so that the aerodynamic vehicle can achieve the commanded acceleration ensuring a stable flight. PID (proportional, derivative and integral) controller is used for the control of aerodynamic vehicle. The transfer function of the PID controller is given as

u ( s) es

Kp

Kd s

Ki s

u (s) = Controller output e(s) = Input to controller (error) Kp, Kd & Ki are the proportional, derivative and integral gains respectively. Error is the difference between commanded and achieved accelerations. Error in Normal Acceleration = ANCOM ANCOMA ANCOM = Commanded Normal Acceleration ANCOMA = Achieved Normal Acceleration The error in normal acceleration is denoted by ZZD. Therefore the controller output becomes
(t) K p * ZZD K d d ZZD dt K i ZZDdt

Similarly for the lateral axis case

Zohaib Khalid 2010

Error in Lateral Acceleration = ALCOM ALCOMA ALCOM = Commanded Lateral Acceleration ALCOMA = Achieved Lateral Acceleration The error in normal acceleration is denoted by YYD. Therefore the controller output becomes
(t) K p * YYD K d d YYD dt K i YYDdt

Controller Structure for Roll axes

For roll rate controller we use PI (proportional and integral) controller. The transfer function of the PI controller is given as

u ( s) es

Kp

Ki s

u (s) = Controller output e(s) = Input to controller (error) Kp & Ki are the proportional & integral gains respectively. Error is the difference between desired roll rate and actual roll rate. Error in Roll rate = c a = Commanded or desired roll rate
c

= Actual roll rate a

Therefore the controller output becomes u(t) - K p a

Ki

Design Criterions
The design criterions for the controller are 1. Gain margin 2. Phase margin 3. Bandwidth The criterions stated above have different band or limit for different applications for our system the gain margin should be greater than 2, phase margin should be greater than 30 o and the bandwidth of the controlled system should be less than or equal to the half of the system aerodynamic frequency.

Zohaib Khalid 2010

Design Procedure Design Procedure for normal and lateral axes controller
In sisotool we load the transfer function and place the poles and zeros at the desired location to get the optimum response and select those gain values which meet our requirements.

Figure 1: SISO Design

Design Procedure for Roll axis controller

The transfer function of roll rate dynamics is given as

DLDA s DLP

By cross multiplying we get

Zohaib Khalid 2010

* s DLP DLDA* s DLP DLDA* By taking inverse Laplace of the above equation t
And we know that
t - K p a Ki
a

DLP t

DLDA t

Replacing the

t t

DLP t

DLDA K p a

Ki

DLP DLDA * K p t

DLDA * Ki

Comparing the above equation with second order equation we get

2 DLP DLDA * K p
2 n

Kp

2
2 n

DLP DLDA
n

DLDA* K d

Kd

DLDA

Since the controller gains depend on system aerodynamic parameters i.e. DLDA and DLP and also depend on n and . Therefore we need to design the controller by choosing optimum values of n and . We tune these parameters by time invariant analysis ensuring that the system has sufficient stability margins. We select the values of n and at different time instants and interpolate their values for the remaining time.

Zohaib Khalid 2010

Implementation of Controller Implementation of Normal and Lateral axes Controller
After designing the controller the issue is how to implement the controller. The PID controller is implemented as P D I (s) = Kp * error = Kd * error rate = Ki* error * sampling time = P+I+D

In our pitch and yaw acceleration autopilot as we discussed above error is ZZD and YYD, while the error rate is ZZD2 and YYD2 respectively. In pitch and yaw acceleration autopilot we dont calculate the ZZD2 and YYD2 by differentiating the ZZD and YYD, instead, we obtain these quantities from system dynamics, as is given below. The rates of normal and lateral acceleration are denoted by aN and a L and these are calculated by following equations ANCOMA aN WBECB 2 * DLA DVBEC

Similarly for lateral axis

aL
We know that

WBECB 3

ALCOMA * DYB DVBEC

Error = Reference Actual In pitch acceleration autopilot ZZD = ANCOM ANCOMA If we denote ANCOM = ac and ANCOMA= aN then above equation become

ZZD
Differentiating both side

ac aN
aN

Error rate ac

As we know that ac is constant therefore its rate becomes zero ac = 0 And

Error rate aN

Zohaib Khalid 2010

It is clear from the above equation that error rate is equal but has opposite sign to the rate of output. Therefore we can use rate of output as the error rate just we need to compensate the sign. In simulink model (Figure 3) both approaches are given and that model shows that both are same. By using the rate of output we can avoid the on board differentiation of error which, in the presence of noise can lead to unwanted response from the system. We calculate the integral part of the controller on board.

Implementation of Roll axis Controller

In roll rate controller we are using the proportion plus integral controller, therefore the controller equation become (s) = P+I And P = Kp* Error I = Ki*

Error

Stability Analysis
6

Gain Margin

2 100

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

Phase Margin

50

0 1

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

Bandwidth

0.5

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

Stability margins and bandwith of Normal and Lateral Controller

Zohaib Khalid 2010

Roll Rate Margins

Gain Margin

40 20 0 80

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

Phase Margin

60

40

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

Bandwidth (Hz)

1.5 1 0.5 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200

Stability margins of Roll rate controller

Zohaib Khalid 2010

Simulink Model
When we run the model.m it takes the time instant as the input, the model shows the response at the time instant.

KP Proportional KI s Step Integral Sum4 Actuator du/dt Derivative KD Proportional1 Plant 957.9147s+7900.4025 den(s) numg(s) deng(s) Scope4

1 0.13s+1 INS Scope2

180/pi Scope3 KP Proportional2 KI s Integral1 Sum5 Actuator1 An/delta 957.9147s+7900.4025 den(s) numg(s) deng(s) Scope1

numq(s) Gain1 KD q/delta denq(s)

DLA Gain

1 0.13s+1 INS 2

Divide

DVBEC1(n) Constant

1 0.034s+1 INS 1

Simulink model of Normal axis controller for the time invariant analysis

In the roll rate controller model simple PI controller is implemented

10

Zohaib Khalid 2010

Roll Rate Model

-KGain Step KIRR s Integral

numa(s) dena(s) Actuator

numrr(s) denrr(s) Transfer Fcn Scope2

1 .13s+1 Transfer Fcn1

Simulink model of Roll axis controller for the time invariant analysis

11

Zohaib Khalid 2010

MIL Simulation Results Disturbances Applied
ISP Thrust Misalignment Wind Canting 0% 0 mrad 0 m/ s 0.0 degree

100

Altitude [km]

40 20 0 0 50 100 Range [km] 150 200

FPA [deg]

60

Actual Reference

-100

50

100 Range [km]

150

200

0 -20 -40 0 50 100 Time [sec] 150 200

DELTVZ [m/s]

20

DELTZ [m]

-5

50

100 Time [sec]

150

200

Elevator [deg]

0.5 0 -0.5 -1 0 50 100 Time [sec] 150 200

Pitch Rate [deg/sec]

5 0 -5 -10 0 x 10
4

50

Normal Accleration [m/s 2]

100 Time [sec]

150

200

5 0 -5 -10 0 50 100 time 150 200

Gyro signals [Quants]

-5

50

100 Time [sec]

150

200

12

Zohaib Khalid 2010

Heading Angle from North [deg]

Altitude [km]

-30 -35 -40 -45 0 50

50

Actual Reference

50

100 Range [km]

150

200

100 Range [km]

150

200

0 -50

DELTVY [m/s]
0 50 100 Time [sec] 150 200

50

5 0 -5

DELTY [m]

50

100 Time [sec]

150

200

Rudder [deg]

1 0 -1

Yaw Rate [deg/sec]

0.5 0 -0.5

50

Lateral Accleration [m/s 2]

100 Time [sec]

150

200

0 x 10
4

50

100 Time [sec]

150

200

10 0 -10

Gyro signals [Quants]

5 0 -5

50

100 time

150

200

50

100 Time [sec]

150

200

13

Zohaib Khalid 2010

GammaB [deg]

1 0 -1 0 x 10
-3

20

40

60

80

100 120 Time [sec]

140

160

180

200

Roll Rate [deg/sec]

5 0 -5

0 x 10
-3

20

40

60

80

100 120 Time [sec]

140

160

180

200

Aileron [deg]

1 0.5 0

20

40

60

80

100 120 Time [sec]

140

160

180

200

*********Burnout at 28.6 sec******************** DeltZ (m) = 13.70225 DeltVZ (m/sec) = -0.956580 DeltY (m) = 0.00000 DeltVY (m/sec) = 0.020024 Alt (km) = 12.50051 FPA (deg) = 34.749603 *********Target Hit at 191.7 sec******************** DeltZ (m) = 1.93144 DeltVZ (m/sec) = -1.079039 DeltY (m) = 0.37336 DeltVY (m/sec) = -1.344414 Range (km) = 159.98344 Range Error (m) = -14.961609

14

Zohaib Khalid 2010

Disturbances Applied
ISP Thrust Misalignment Wind Canting Drag Variation 2% 7 mrad 7-124 m/ s (Trailing wind) 0.1 degree -2%

Altitude [km]

100 50

FPA [deg]

Actual Reference

0 -100

50

100 Range [km]

150

200

50

100 Range [km]

150

200

0 -5000

DELTVZ [m/s]
0 50 100 Time [sec] 150 200

5000

200 0 -200

DELTZ [m]

50

100 Time [sec]

150

200

Elevator [deg]

10 0 -10

Pitch Rate [deg/sec]

10 0 -10

50

Normal Accleration [m/s 2]

100 Time [sec]

150

200

0 x 10
4

50

100 Time [sec]

150

200

50 0 -50

Gyro signals [Quants]

5 0 -5

50

100 time

150

200

50

100 Time [sec]

150

200

15

Zohaib Khalid 2010

Heading Angle from North [deg]

Altitude [km]

-30 -35 -40 -45 0 50 100 Range [km]

50

Actual Reference

50

100 Range [km]

150

200

150

200

0 -50

DELTVY [m/s]

50
DELTY [m]

5 0 -5

50

100 Time [sec]

150

200
Yaw Rate [deg/sec]

50

100 Time [sec]

150

200

Rudder [deg]

1 0 -1

0.5 0 -0.5

50

Lateral Accleration [m/s 2]

100 Time [sec]

150

200

0 x 10
4

50

100 Time [sec]

150

200

10 0 -10

Gyro signals [Quants]

5 0 -5

50

100 time

150

200

50

100 Time [sec]

150

200

16

Zohaib Khalid 2010

0.5

GammaB [deg]

0 -0.5 -1 -1.5 -2 0 20 40 60 80 100 Time [sec] 120 140 160 180 200

0.05

Roll Rate [deg/sec]

0 -0.05 -0.1 -0.15 -0.2 0 20 40 60 80 100 Time [sec] 120 140 160 180 200

Aileron [deg]

-0.05 -0.1 -0.15 -0.2

20

40

60

80

100 Time [sec]

120

140

160

180

200

*********Burnout at 28.6 sec******************** DeltZ (m) = 68.73247 DeltVZ (m/sec) = 2.013848 DeltY (m) = 1.12658 DeltVY (m/sec) = -0.165097 Alt (km) = 12.55710 FPA (deg) = 34.564143 *********Target Hit at 187.7 sec******************** DeltZ (m) = 17.80233 DeltVZ (m/sec) = 130.310287 DeltY (m) = 0.49008 DeltVY (m/sec) = -0.874238 Range (km) = 159.95831 Range Error (m) = -40.086609

17

Zohaib Khalid 2010

Disturbances Applied
ISP Thrust Misalignment Wind Canting Drag Variation 0% 7 mrad 7-124 m/ s (Side wind) 0.1 degree +2%

Altitude [km]

100 50
FPA [deg]

Actual Reference

0 -100

50

100 Range [km]

150

200

50

100 Range [km]

150

200

0 -5000

DELTVZ [m/s]

5000
DELTZ [m]

100 0 -100

50

100 Time [sec]

150

200
Pitch Rate [deg/sec]

50

100 Time [sec]

150

200

Elevator [deg]

5 0 -5

10 0 -10

50

Normal Accleration [m/s 2]

100 Time [sec]

150

200

0 x 10
4

50

100 Time [sec]

150

200

20 0 -20

Gyro signals [Quants]

5 0 -5

50

100 time

150

200

50

100 Time [sec]

150

200

18

Zohaib Khalid 2010

Heading Angle from North [deg]

Altitude [km]

-30 -35 -40 -45 0 50 100 Range [km]

50

Actual Reference

50

100 Range [km]

150

200

150

200

0 -1000

DELTVY [m/s]
0 50 100 Time [sec] 150 200

1000

100 0 -100

DELTY [m]

50

100 Time [sec]

150

200

Rudder [deg]

10 0 -10

Yaw Rate [deg/sec]

10 0 -10

50

Lateral Accleration [m/s 2]

100 Time [sec]

150

200

0 x 10
4

50

100 Time [sec]

150

200

50 0 -50

Gyro signals [Quants]

5 0 -5

50

100 time

150

200

50

100 Time [sec]

150

200

19

Zohaib Khalid 2010

10
GammaB [deg]

-10

-20

20

40

60

80

100 Time [sec]

120

140

160

180

200

0.2
Roll Rate [deg/sec]

0.1 0 -0.1 -0.2

20

40

60

80

100 Time [sec]

120

140

160

180

200

0
Aileron [deg]

-0.05 -0.1 -0.15 -0.2

20

40

60

80

100 Time [sec]

120

140

160

180

200

*********Burnout at 28.6 sec******************** DeltZ (m) = -8.77209 DeltVZ (m/sec) = 0.103909 DeltY (m) = 65.59631 DeltVY (m/sec) = 1.438532 Alt (km) = 12.35619 FPA (deg) = 34.783550 *********Target Hit at 199.1 sec******************** DeltZ (m) = 13.36992 DeltVZ (m/sec) = -55.740292 DeltY (m) = 2.14749 DeltVY (m/sec) = -5.280540 Range (km) = 159.97164 Range Error (m) = -26.758484

20