GUI DED WEAPON

CONTROL SYSTEMS
Sec ond Edition
BY
P. GARNELL
Principal Lecturer. Royal Military College of Science.
Shrivenham. Swindon. Engl and
BRASSEY' S DEFENCE PUBLlSHERS
a Member of the Pergamon Group
LONDOi'i
TORONTO
INf\SHINGTON D.C.
SYDi'iEY . PI\RIS
NEW YORK
FRf\ i'iKFURT
CONTENTS
Preface t o tne Second Eci ti on
CHAPTER I THE ACCURACY OF TARGET TRACKERS
1. I Int roduct i On
1.2 Some objecti ves wi t h feedbac k
1.3 Some general concepts on accura cy
1.4 A tracker ser vo
1.5 Tracking acc uracy in t he abse nce of noi se
1.6 The effect of t hermal noi se
1. 7 The effect of other inputs and di sturbances
1. 8 A self opti misi ng servo
CHAPTER 2 MI SSILE SERVOS
2. I Servo requirement s
2.2 Sto red cold gas Servos
2. 3 Ho t; gas se rvos
2.4 Ramair servos
2.5 Hydra ul i c ser vos
2. 6 Ele ct r i c servos witn d.c . mot ors
2.7 Ot her elect ric servos
2. 8 Some tentat f ve concl usi ons
CHAPTER 3 MISSI LE CONTROL METHODS
3.1 Introducti on
3.2 Why not by banking?
3.3 Ro ll control
3.4 Aerodynamic late ral control
3.5 Aerodynamic pol ar cont ro l ve rs us car tes t an cont rol
3.6 Thrust vect or cont rol
3.7 ftethods of t hr ust vect or i ng
CHAPTER 4 AERODYNAMIC DERIVATIVES AND
TRA"SFER FU"CTIONS
1X
1
1
3
4
8
13
18
24
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
35
37
39
40
42
47
48
50
,
4. I
4. 2
4.3
4. 4
4. S.
4.6
4. 7
4.8
Notation and conventi ons
Euler ' s equations of mot ion f or a rigi d body
Trajectory considerati ons
Contro l surface
Aerodynami c der i vat ives
Aer odynamic transfer f unct i ons
Al titude and speed conversi on fact ors
Aerodynamic der i vat i ves wi th
v
56
58
- 0
0,
60
61
65
73
74
5.1 Int roduct i on
5.2 Elementary t heory of gyros copes
5. 3 Free Or pos i t ion gyros
5. 4 Rate or constrai ned gyros .'
5. 5 Accel eromet ers
5.6 Resolvers
5. 7 Altimet er s
vi
6. I
6 . 2
.6. 3
6. 4
. 6. 5
6. 6
6. 7
6 . 8
6. 9
6 .10
6.11
6.12
6.13
6. 14
6.15
6 .16
6 . 17
Con t ent s
CHAPTER 5 MISSILE I NSTRUMENTS
CHAPTER 6 AUTOPILOT DESIGN
Introduction
Lat eral autopi lo t des ign objectives
A late ral aut opil ot us i ng one accelerometer and one rate
A di scussion of t he "i mportant " ae rodynamic derivatives
The two- accelerometer l ate ral autop ilot
The s ingl e ra te gyro la te ral autopilot
The effe ct of canard controls on lateral autopilot des ign
A velocity cont r ol aut opil ot
Latera l autopilo t s and'dispersion at launch
Autopi lo ts for ro11 con tro1
The effe ct of rol l rate on l at er al autop ilot performance
Autopilots and a chang ing environment
Azimuth control by gyros and accelerometers
Height cont rol and sea skimming sys t ems
Vertical launch autopi lots
The effect of fin servo saturation
Digital autopilots
CHAPTER 7 LINE OF SIGHT GUIDANCE LOOPS
_ lo.... _ ~ _
76 S
76 S
80 S
83 S
86 S
87 S
87
S
S
S
S
S
92
94
qyr-c 97
110
112
114
114
118
121
126
130
134
136
138
143
146
149
7. 1 The effect of target and missil e mot ion on missil e "g" requi reme nts 152
7.2 Types of LOS sys tems 158
7.3 Kinema tic closure and stabi l ity of the guidance loop 163
7. 4 The concept of f eedforwar c te rms 166
7.5 Phas ing err or and orientation difficult ies 170
7.6 The effect of a di gi t al computer ins ide t he guidance loop 172
7.7 Some numer ical exampl es on t he esti mat ion of guida nce accura cy 174
7.8 Some general ' conclus ions on accuracy 182
CHAPTER 8 HOMING HEADS AND SOME ASSOCIATED
ST ABI LITY PROBLEMS
8.1 Int r oduct i on
8.2 Homing head requirements
8 .3 Some e1ect ro- mechani ca1 arrangements
8 .4 The eff ect of radom. aberration
8 .5 Isola ted sight line and missile compensation
185
185
188
192
196
: _ -L- J
Content s
vi '
CHAPTER 9 PROPORTIONAL NAVIGATION AND
HOMING GUIDANCE LOOPS
S-
9 . I Introduction
198 5
9 . 2
A parti cular case
198
)
9. 3
The ma the matical model
202 3
9 . 4
A summary of previous wo rk
205
;
9 . 5
The effect of "a miss i l e headi ng er ror
206
7
9. 6
Mi ss distance due to a targe t l at er al
ecce1erati on
222
7
g.
7
Mis s di s t ance due t o angular noise
229
9 . 8
Miss due to gl int
231
9 . 9
Three dime nsi onal
homin g
234
9 . 10
An
i nte grat ed form of propor t io nal
navi gat ion
235
9 . 11
Other homing guid ance l aws
237
INDE X
243
- .'
_,J
9 , 1
9 . 2
9 . 3
9. 4
9. 5
9 . 6
9 . 7
9. 8
9 . 9
9 . 10
9 . 11
INDEX
Cont ents
CHAPTER 9 PROPORTIONAL NAVIGATION AND
HOMING GUIDANCE LOOPS
Introducti on
A part i cular case
The rna the ma t i ca1 mode1
A summa ry of previous work
The effect of ' a mi ssil e headin9 er ror
Miss di st ance due to a target late ral dccel eration
Miss distance due t o angular noise
Mi ss di s t ancd due t o glint
Three dime ns iona l homin g
An integrated for m of proporti onal navi gati on
Oth er homing guidance laws
vi 1
198
198
202
205
206
222
229
231
234
235
237
243
l ~ _
CHAPTER I
THE ACCURACY OF TARGET
TRACKERS
. ,
l.l INT ROD UCTION
A guide d mts s i l e i s one wh i cn i s usuall y fired i n a Q.i re ct i on approxi ma te ly t owe ros
t he target and s ubsequently recei ves steering comman ds from t he guidance system t o
i mprove its accuracy. Inerti a1 gui dance is oft en used in me di um and l ong r ange
mi s s i l es (ove r 40 km say) when t he in tention is to hi t a gi ven map reference . The
techniques used in such sys tems are quite different from t hos e used in mos t s hort
and me dium r ange sys t ems ; mor eove r t hey have been adequate ly describe d e lsewhere
(1) , (2) , (3) . The guidance- cont ro l systems cove re d in thi s boo k a re corrmand
systems and homi ng s ystems . The re is much i n conrnon between t hes e two systems ; f or
ins t ance one has to track t he target in both systems . In cormand systems t he
t r acke r is usual ly stationary or movi ng sladl y (e . g. t he t arget tracker could be on
a ship). In homing systems the target tracker is in the mi ss il e and i n such a
ca se it i s t he relat ive movement of t ar get and mi s s i l e whi ch i s re levant . The
s pecia l t racki ng problems associated wi th homing are cons i dered in chapters 8 and 9;
.so in th is chap t er we assume that the t r acke r speed i s smal l eno ugh not to
in f l uence t he ki nematics of t he engagement serious l y .
1.2 SOME OBJECTIVES WITH FEEDBACK
Thi s book is about t he accu racy of closed-loop systems . and s ince s pace is three -
dimens i onal we have t he problem of eli minat ing t he separation of mi s s i l e and tar get
(a) down -range
(b) up- down
and (c) left -right
The propulsion systemis , of course , aesi gnec to give t he missi le suf fi ci ent range
to reach t he target and does not concern us in t his book . with t his one provi so :
the propul sion systemcan affect t he accuracy if t he m i s s i l ~ speed is not constant.
If t here is a component of acce le rati on U al ong t he mi s s i l e fore and aft axis and
1
z
Gui ded Weapun Cont rol Sys tems
+ feecback transfe r funct io n
t here is some body in ci dence it f ol l ows t hat t he re mus t be a component of
U s in a _p erp en di cular c O t he vel oci t y ve ct or and this will alte r t he
dire ction 0-1: t he missile ve locity. "!Q s hall have t o r eturn t o t his later.
Neve rthe l es s', it i s broadly correct t o s ay th at it i s the guidance and control
sy stems wh ich are designe d t o no di fy t he mi s s i l e ' s t r aj e cto ry; the s igna l s t o t he
mi s s il e a re us ually i n t he f orm of up- down and left-right conmands . For many
reasons t he guidance and control systems are i mper f ect :
(a) Due t o t he inertia of t he target tracke r t here mus t be a tendency for the
est imation of the target direction to be i n error. Moreove r due t o t he ma ss of the
mis sile t he re must always be a delay i n e f f ect i ng a chang e i n its pos ition .
(b ) Biases and disturbances such as t hrust mi salignmen ts , win ds, var i abl e fri cti on
levels , and biases in r ecei ve rs and i ns t r uments mus t i nt ro duce an elemen t of
inaccuracy .
(c) Noi s e i n t he sys tem s uch as t ne rme l noi se and gl i nt will reduce t he acc uracy.
It is bot h convenient and significant t o su b-divide items (b) and (c) above i nt o
tho s e i nput s , disturbances or bi es cs (th ey can all be. re garded as "tnput s " t o t he
sys t em) wh i ch ori gin ate at t he ta rget and t hese "inpu t s " which or iginate anywhere
e l se i n the sys t em. The si t uat i orl i s ill ust rat ed i n Fi g 1.2-1.
FI G. 1.2-1 A cloned-Loop system with mor e then one input
Mos t of t he closed l oops wh i ch He are concerned with have unity f ee dbac k -rlj t h a
fe edfoma r d trans fe r fun ct ion of G(s ) s ay . If an 6
b
enters s onewh e re in
,.
the fo rward pat h we can r egard t he feed f oma r d pat h consist ing of t HO trans fe r
f unct i ons Gl (s ) G
2
(s ) - = G(s ) . en is a noise i nput ori gi nat i ng at t he input . In
any closed-loop sys t em
output = ,-- -'- _
input
Conside rin g 8
i
as t he only input fer t he t i me bei ng
(1.2 - i )
\
The Ac cura cy of Tar get Tr ack er s 3
-+ 1 as
Pe rhaps it is mo re rreaningful if we
to make 6
e
+ O. Hence
G
l
(s) GZ (s )
de f i ne 6
e
' 6
i
- 6
0
as the error and we wis h
(1.2-3)
6
e
6
i
- a
o
6
0
_ 1
e;-' 6
i
, 1 - e;-- G
1
(s ) G
2
(s ) + I (1.2-Z )
and this clearly + 0 as G
1
(s) Gz (s ) - ee i .e . we re quire as high an open lo op gain
as possible. Now consider t he effect of a di s turbance 6
b
. Idea ll y t he va l ue of
t he output 6
0
due t o 6
b
shoul d be zero. In t his i nstance GZ (s) is the fee dforward
transfer fu nction and Gl (s ) is t he f eedback trans fer i .e.
6
0
_ 1 , G
Z
(s )
e
b
- I G ( ) + G
l
(S ) G
Z
(s )
"G2Tsi + 1 s
Wi t hout fee dback aoleb ' GZ(s ) and therefo re i t must al ways be less wi th fe edback .
The effect of 6
b
on t he out put - 0 if G
l
(s) He see t herefore th at t he
re qui rerrents to f ollow an input s i c:r. d rej e ct a dist urbance 6
b
in general do not
confl i ct ; we re qui re G
1
(s ) to be as large as pos s ible . In pract i ce we wi ll be
li mited by stabi lity and eng i nee r i ng cons iderations .
Howeve r , such is not t he case if an input 6 or igin at es at the s ane point as the
. n
t rue in put 6. . Th e t r ansfer fun ction 6 / 6 is exact l y th e s arre , as t hat fo r 6
0/6
,.
1 0 n
as given in equati on 1.2-1. For 9
0
t o - 0 for any gi ven 6
n
then G
1
(s) GZ(s ) mus t
als o - 0 and this is clearl y t ot al l y incompat i bl e wit h t he pri me tas k of fol l owi ng
t he ta rget accurat e ly . All that can be done i s to des i gn t he sys t em trans fer
fun ct ion (o r f ilte r ) so th at t he mi ss distan ce due to att empt i ng to follow both
the ta rge t and t he 'noi se i s a mi nimum.
I.3 SOME GENERAL CONCEPTS 0:-;' ACCURACY
Cons i de r t he s i mplest mode l of an angular pos i t ion se r vo, s ay a r adar tracke r ,
designed to f ol l ow an input 9
t
. It consist s of an angul ar error det ec tor of gai n
k
1
V/ r ad, an ampl ifi er of gain k
Z
V/V and a mo tor , el e ct r i c or e lect ro - hydraulic,
wh ich wi ll produce an antenna velocity of k
3
ra d/s / V as s ociated with a t i me lag
defin ed by a t ime constant T [sorre t i me s call ed a f i r s tt orde r lag or exponenti al
l ag ) . The l oop is cl os e dby implied integration s i nce vi e are defini ng t he out put
as OUtput position not velocity , see Fig 1. 3- 1.
k,
Ts+ I
FIG. 1.3-1 A simpte position servo
I
s
e,
i
i
\
l
!
,
\
r
GJided Weapcn Central Systems
It is cl ear t hat i f any coulomb f ri ct i on or exte rn al disturbance exi sts t he re
mus t be s ome mi s al ignment and t his C1r. be s r:ali if the sy stem gain is high
enough. Consi der now -a r an? i nput (i .e. a constant ve loci t y i nput ) defined by
e
t
= nt
whe r e n has t he dimensions rac/ s . In t he stea dy state the servo wi l l develop a
steady s tate e rror 6
e
just l arge enough t o dr i ve the antenna at an anqul ar- rate D.
The error i n pos i t ion wi l l nOd nei the r increas e or decreas e and is given by
n !. I, k - P 'I - n
"" et-..
1
"'? ' 3 - " ei' -
6
e
= n/K (1.3- 1)
where K ::: k
ikZk3
and i s us ual ly re ferred to as t he ve loci t y constant; it is t he
steady state out put ve locity f or unit position mi salignment , in t he absence of any
ot her loads , bias es or disturbances . The sys t em is call e d a Type 1 se rvo be cause
t here is one i ntegrati on i n t he iee<Jfor.'ard path. The cl os ed lo op transfer f uncti on
is
(1. 3-2 )
+ I a, s
I

il2
s
+
S /y.. + 1
9...
,
9-/1<
Equat i cns 1. 3-1 and 1. 3- 2 t e ll us the refore t hat f or- a r amp t nout et; a ln. The
a
2
te rm in the cl ose d- l oop t rans fe r fu nction does not affe ct_the accuracy i n chis
i ns t anc e ; ine'rt i a has no signi f i cance unl es s t he velo.ci ty_ is
Suppose nOH t he in put vel oci t y i s not cons t ant , but is acc e Ierat inq. ;'. pplying the
fina l val ue t heore m as ca r efully expla i ne d in any text book on close d-Too p control
re veal s t hat th e steady- state. er r or i s in -fini ty; This i s b CCiJ USe the nathemat 'i cs
i nte rpret s an accel e rating i nput to have i nfin ite vel oci ty i n the ste ady state .
Clearl y at any time t he i nput and output vel oci t i es mus t be f i nite . An accelera t i ng
i np ut .... i l l r es ul t i n an ever in creas ing e r r or arid t he motor i s al ways t rying to
keep with th e demand f or ri10(12 sp eed. Dl1E t o t he i nerti a of t he system howe ve r
i ts output speed al ways l ags beh ind the cemnnd. HenCE, the f oll owing error is
al ways s1i ghtly than the i ns t an: aneous vel ocity divided by t he veloc i t y
constant . Conver sely , if t he input veloci ty is decreasing the mo to r and lead
ine r t i a win ten d t o run t.hen t he demand and hen ce t he e r r or wi ll be slightly
Less t han e xpected . . w"i.""l cons i ce r a mo re realist ic model of a tracker ser-vo i n
t he next section.
1.4 A T RACKER SERVO
A t ar get t ra cke r at tempts t o al ign i ts e l ec trical null axis (or "bore s i cht " as it
i s oft en called) i n and azimuth wi t h a l ine j oi ning t he t racke r and
target caned the l ine of s ight (LOS) . a re t xo iden t i ca l se r vo sy stems to
do t hi s ) so cn ly one 1,'.'111 be cons i de red. The f i rst and essen tial req ui r eme nt i s
for a devi ce vlnich produces t wo s"is;:al::. (:.:ne up-down and t he other le ft -right)
5
::'>
--- - "' - - - -
t '.
- '

Th e Accura cy of Tar get Trackers

proport i ona l t o t he mi s al i gnmen t between the LOS and the bores ignt . The angul ar
error detecting mechanis m ass ociated with a tracker is eithe r a radar receiver or
an opt i ca l (and t his inc l udes i nfra - red ) signal process ing system (4) .
Mos t of t hes e error detect ors are ve ry non- linear for 1arge ,mi salignmen ts but are
r ega rded as es s ent i a ll y linear for small mt s a l i qrurents of about 1
0
or l es s;
t ra cki ng e rrors are rarel y as large as this . The re ceive r may well provide ra nge
and range r at e i nformat i on as we'll but since we are concerned only wit h angle
measurement we wi ll call t his particular aspect of t he rece ive r the "angl e channe l
recei ver ". A t ypica l target tracki ng servo loop is s hown in Fig 1.4-1. The angle
channe l r ecei ver produces a s i gnal propo r t ional t o between target
RATE GYRO OR
TACHO GEN ERATOR
e.

ANGl.E
CHAU..;EL
RECEiVER
PROPORTIONAL
PLUS INTEGRAL
AMPLIFIER
PCM'EA

INNER RATE ce
STABILISING LCO?
MOTOA GEARS
WIN D
TORQuES
e,
r----, 8,
I NHERENT
INTEGRATION
OUT ER TRACKING ( i,t , POSIT ION) LOOP
INHERENT POSITION FEEDBACK INTO RECEIV ER
DYNAMICS
FIG. Target t racker
and its own boresi ght , St - Sa' Since it is a li near device , and no reckonab1e ti me
lag is associated wi th it , its trans fer functi on i s a si mpl e gain k
1
volts/ r adi an
(mi sal i gnment ) . Thi s error signal is fe d to a propor t ional plus integral amplifier
whos e t ra ns fer fun ct ion i s k
2
(1 + 1/ T
1
s) = k
2
(T
1
s + 1)/T
1s
. The servo i s now
Type 2.- The usua l servo components now fo l l os : a power amp lifier, mo t or (e l ect r i c
or hydr aul i c) and a gear speed re ducer, t oget her wi th t he lumped inertia and
vi s cous frict i on, if any. Some angular rate fee dbac k is usua lly pro vi ded by a
tachogenerator or a rate gyro (det ail s i n chapter 5) , t he output from wh i ch i s
subt r act ed f rom t he outp ut fr om t he pro por t ional plus i ntegral ampl ifier . It s hould
be noted t hat i f t he r ate fe edbac k i s s ubtracted f rom the out put of the recei ver
th e servo is now only Type 1 instead of Type 2 as t he integrati ng action of the
pro port ional plus i nt egra ting ampl i fi e r i s now prevent ed by feedb ac k.
The 'pur pos e of t he rate feedback is t wofold ; f i r s t ly to improve t he stability
mar gi n i n t he Nyqui st s ens e and secondly to as s i s t in rejecti ng out s ide disturbances .
Cons ide r s t ability firs t . In t he entirely hypot het ical case of t here be i ng no
6 Gui ded Contrul Sys tems
eIe ct r o-ue cnani ce l lags rlhat e ver and no rate fee dba ck t he open loop: tran s fe r
function is k
1k2
k
3
(T
1
$ + 1) iT1S2 the sys t em now has a cl osed io ep trans fer
( 1.4 - 1)
e
a
TIS +
et ' TjSLjk,kZk 3 + T,s + 1
Since T, and k
,k
Zk 3
are under th e cont rol of t he designer the accuracy and degree
of stability (i . e . dampi ng) a re al so under his control. Howe ver , there wi ll
ce rtai nly be some el ect romachani ce l l ags in the system: inductan ces in dr ive circui ts ,
the ine rtia of the ccrrci ne d mot or and ant enna , and mechanical and structural
re siliences in the trans mission of rro t i on f r om rootor to antenna . These t ime
constants wil l all e rode stabi lity ma r gi ns , and couid ea s i ly r es ult i n the whole
system being unstable . Hi gh gain end feedba ck round t hes e dynamic l a gs wil l
r e duce t he effecti ve value of t hese ti me constant s . Second ly there wi ll always be
some noi s e and exte rnal disturbances associated "ith t hese componen ts s uch as
vari able coulomb f riction , ,. in d leads , i mperfectly cut gea rs and structura l
vibrati ons . A high g,a in rate loop tends t o is olate th e main positi on loep f rom
t hese di sJurbances.; as "e shall see t he outer or pos i ti on loop usually has a 101,
open l oop gai n and is not so " el l abl e t o re ject the se distur bances . In the
case of a rrevi ng bas e , s uch as a ship , the re wi l l be some addi t i onal di sturbar. ces
due to the r ele t ive mot ion between base and antenna. Coul omb f rict ion changes
di re ct i on when t he relat ive mot ion changes direct ion , t here will be torque s
generate d in th e servo mo to r or actuator if t he re i s any rel ati ve ve loc i ty between
rmtor and antenna , and there vJill be s ome i nert ia effect s 'due t o t he i ne rti a of
t he drive mo tor if there i s any re lative accelerat ion ; if t he base acce lerates and
t he antenna i s to rema in stat i onary t he drive mo to r must accelerate . A rate gyro
func t ion of
gi ves th e correct form of angular re te f eedb ack fer sys tems on moving bases , as i ts
ac tion is ident i cal t e a t achogene rator if the bas e is s tationary . I f howeve r the
bas e i s mo vi ng the r at e gyro does not j ust r ecor d t he relat ive motion between
antenna and base , as wou l c a t achogener at or ; i nstea d it rras ures the t otal angul ar
movement of th e ant enna and it is this quantity wh ich we wish t o control.
.An alte rnat ive method of reducing t he des t abi l i s in g effect of thes e dynamic l a gs i s
to place a phas e advance network in the f orward pat h, i mme di at e ly af t e r the
proportional plus integral amp l i f i er. This has a transfer f unct i on of t he f or m
Ts +
c l S -r
" he re a < 1. Alternati vel y , more complex compens ati ng net wo rks s uch as are
described i n section 7.3 can be used. \>Inat we are t ry ing to do is to cancel t he
e lect r o- nechani cal la gs by t he nure r ator term or terms i n t he compensat i ng networ k,
leavi ng a consi derabl y smaller t ermor terms i n t he denomi nator. This cannot be
7
r eq ui r ements aut oma ticall y f oll ow.
A si mplified r ep resent at ion of the t r ac ker wit h one in put only . the t ar get directi on
6
t
, i s s hown in Fi g 1. 4- 2: The e l ect r ome chani ca l l ags ar e shown as equi val en t to
one t i me const ant T
2
" . ':
Th e Accur acy of Target Tr acker s
exact of cou rse, as the electromechanical lags can often vary . especially if a
hydr aul ic drive is used , but a fa r mo re fundament al obj ect i on to thi s method is
t hat t he re is now no fas t - act i ng in ner loop wh i ch at t empt s t o reject out s ide
di s t urbances . Nevert heles s , whichever method of compensat ion i s used , greater
power wi ll be demanded from t he power amplifie r and motor due to changi ng in put
dema nds and i t wi 11 make no di ffe ren ce to the ext r a pewer requi red wh i ch me thod
i s used. I f a certa in mo tion of t he ant enna i s require d then certai n powe r

-.
0 -
- - - - - - - --------- -._ ---
I
I
I
I
I
e,
PROPORTlONAl
PL US lN7 EGRAL
AM?L1F1ER
\(2 (1 + _ 1_ )
T,s
I NHERENT
RATE LOOP ' I NTEGp,ATION
..
FI G. 1 . 4- 2 A si,?Ufied mode l: of a target t racker
The system transfer funct ion i s
( 1. 4- 2)
" here w
n
/ ; kl k2kiTl' and re pre s ents both the open loop gai n and t he unaamped
natur al f r equency of the system if t he rat e l oop lag i s negl i gi ble . A more
real i s t i c made1 would show t hi s i nne r loop as equi valent to two t i me cons tants ,
whi ch , wi t h high gain and f eedback coul d Hell re s ult i n t hi s loop hav ing an
os ci ll at ory ma de , i.e. with a damp i ng r at i o Vi l ess than uni t y . Thi s rrode1 i s
shown in Fi g 1.4- 3.
,
S
8
0
FIG. 1.4-3 A more reaZi stic mode L of a target t racker
The system transfer f unct i on is now
G.W.C.S--B
8
Gu i ced !,>!ea pon Cont r o1 Syst ems
s4
t. 4
c '"
no
(1 .4 -3 )
TARGET
80t h of t hese systems ar e Type 2 servos wi th two open l oop i nte gr at i ons ; such
sys t ems i nvari abl y have equal coef f i ci ents of "s I I i n t he numerat or and denomi nat or
of t hei r transfe r f unct i ons. For a const ant error in pos it i on 6
e
t he steady state
s l- ope of antenna ve lo ci t y i s now equal t o ee x gai n = 6
e
x k
1k2
k
3
/ T
1
:; a x w But t he slope of t he output ve l oci ty is t he output accel er-ati on,
e no
whi ch for a constant error mus t be equal t o t he input acce lerat io n c , Hence
2
6
e
= a/"'no But th is i s fo'r a cons t ant input acceleration . We mus t now examine
the true nature of t he i nput 8... .
t,
1.5 TRACKIl"G IN T H E ABSEr,CE OF NOISE
In pract ice one must s pecify the maxi mun, ta rget s peed and the min imum t racking
range . Us uall y t he max i rm r t angl e of e l eva t i on i s a l s o specified. Be f ore ana l y s i n q
t he mot io n as seen by an fc li owi ng a rroving t arget t he
"crcs s i n; r ange I! shoul d be def i ned. This range i s defined: on t he assumpt i on t hat
the ta. rget continues mo vin g in a s t rai ght line , as t he short est distance that it
ever can be f rom t he tracker . it i s at thi s point i t is "pass i ng" the
t racker and is at t he "poi nt of closest approach" , It is i mportant to note t hat
"crossi ng ranqe" means slant range. If t he poi nt of cl oses t approach i n ground
range is 4 km and t he ta r get heigh t is 3 km the cross i ng range is 5 km. A target
may well manoe uvre fo r a short t i re be f ore attacki ng but duri ng mos t or all of t he
,
t i me targets fl y st r ai ght wi t h const ant ve l ocity . .\' e wi ll t he refore t ake s uch a
target as the s t anda r d; su rp r i singl y enough mo de ra t e t arget manoeuvres do not ada
greatly t o t he tracking t as k. In Fig 1.5-1 the cros si ng range is d and the
corres pondi ng ground range i s ct
l
The inst an t aneous slant range i s r and t he
cor re s pondi np ground r anqe i s r ".
CROSSING
POINT
TRACKER
FI G. 1. 5- 1 .!:. ., -:gLfJ C4.""1. d die t a:Wf:3 aasoci.aze d wi "Ch
t r'acki n;; c t :::rge:: c.t :::onS7;Oit cl. z-itnaic
,
- --
The Accuracy of Target Trac kers 9
( 1.5- 4)
(1. 5-2)
i t is eas ily
is gi ven by
\
. "
In the f ol l owi ng ana Iys is -it is ass ure d that the target speed U
t
is cons tant .
A = U
t
sin A/ r' = U
t
s i n
2
A/ d' (1.5-1)
To evaluate A we can write
d dA - dA 2U
t
U
t
s i n
2
A
A =CIA (If . (If = or cos A si n A a'
U 2 u
t
2
sin 2A U 2 si n 2A
=(d: )2 sin 2A sin
2
A = (r ' )2 =) cos 2 E
Fo r a given maximum value of e l evat ion E and minimum r ange r .
max 0 rmn
seen that th e maximum angul ar acceleration occurs when A =45 and
.. 2 2 2
A
max
= U
t
/ r
mi n
cos E (1. 5-3)
:. ' ':,
This s hould not be confused with t he maxi mum angula r "acceleration for a given
crossing distance as thi s occurs at A = 60
0
Equation 1.5-2 is al so wa rn ing us
that angular acce lerati ons can be i mpossibly high if very high ilngles of el evat i on
are specified; in pract i ce ~ m a x i ~ . often li mited t'o about 60 .
Simi larly, expressions for E and E can be obtained :
U
t
.
E = r s 1n E cos A
(1. 5- 5)
-,
E
U 2
t
---z tan
r
Clear ly the absolute maximum value occurs when cos A =a and is gi ven by
U/ tan E
E = - 2 (1.5-6)
r
mi n
and
( 1.5 - 7)
0, i ,e. the target is going to pass direct ly ove rhead then
U 2
E
t . 2E
= -----z- s1n
r
mi n
Equation 1. 5- 7 can be used to obtain maximum values for E c 45
0
and equat io n 1.5-6
to obtain maximum values for E > 45 .
If t he maximum value of E =60 i s specified then Table 1.5 -1 summarises the
If however A
positi on.
TABLE 1.5 -1 t1AXIMUMELEVATI ON ACCELERATIONS
E 5 10. 20 30 45 60
E
max
0.1 74 0. 342 0. 643 0.866
1/
-1. 73
2 2
U
t
/r
mi n
-
~
90
A 0 0
' 0
0
a 900
10
(
(
c
It is SEen t he re fo re tne t , even f or t he .3_ppJ. fE:fitly s t re i qnt fo rwarc case of a
constant speed ::target 9fl y i ng at cons cant he ight angul ar rate$ and acceierations
-- i - . -- _ _ . _
are not const ant . Had t he an qul a r acce le rati on been CC71Stc:nt 'il E coul d have

calculated the aono -zcnt: fo ll owi ng e r ro r by t he "", thad already di s cuss ed; in
pra ctice the tracking e rror will vary i n t i re . The gr aphs drawn i n Figs 1. 5- 2
and 1.5-3 show t he rati o of t he actual f oll owing error ee t o the approxi mat e
value given by the i nstantaneo us input enuul ar acceleration divided by the open
loop gain . The res ul ts have been conoutec for a systemwhose rate l ccp is modell ed
as a second order sys tem, see Fig 1. 4- 3. They are appli cable to motion in azimuth
whe n t he angle of e le vati on is or t o i n el evat ion wh en Ai s s ma ll,
as t his illustrates bette r what is goi ng on. The generalised angle e has been
us ed as the results are t hen appl i cable t o both channels . The angular acceleration
i s incre asi ng up t o a = 60 , and t hen f or e > 60
0
. We see that when the
accel erat i on is increasing , the f ol l cwi nq e rror is s l ightly Lees t han t hat gi ven
by t he instantaneous accel e rat ion di vi ded :J the open l oop gain ; the converse is
t r ue when t he acce lerati on is decreas inq. Thi s is simply expl ai ned wh en one
real i s es that t he con t r o l l e r is not s imply an i ntegrator wi t h a gain . It is a
. 1 . . " hi h - d f b . ... k I ' 1 , - . .
pr oport i ona pi us l nl. egr- aJ e ierren.. h, t c .ns ... ea 0 e .. r;g wr t t t en 2 \ 1 -:- ' J I
1S)
1 $
bet t.er wri t t en as K
2(
T
l
s + 1)/Tj s i .e . i t is phase advanced integrat ion. The pnase
advance part al ways makes t he out put la rge ; i','hen t he i nput i s incr-e asing )
and decreases t he output when the input is di min i shi nq; and the effect of t his
mus t ) in general, more t han offset th2 1:9 i n the rat e i ocp, If it did not the
whol e systemwo ul d be unstable as t he effe ct of th2 two in t eqr at i ons (one e lect roni c
an d one i mplied ) alone is to pr oduce a phase l ag of 180
0
in t he freque ncy dorna in
at all frequencies . When one t akes t he ra: h'=i' mere conpl i cetec inputs (e . g. motion
i n azi mut h wh en E i s not smal l) one arri ves at a siioila r concl usion : the act ua l
f'ol l o.... ing error fer a Type 2 servo t o a good epprcximat t on is t he instanta neous
i nput acce i e r at ion di vided by t he open l oop gain . The fac t t hat they con be
appreciably gre ater t han th is value for vel ues of I great er t han 50 i s of no
:.,. . .
pract i cal si qni f i cance as t he act ual. val ue of 6 i s rapi dly reducing to zero at
t hese large values of 9.
Suppose t herefore t hat the pr obl ern i s t o t re ck tArgets f lying up to 600m/ s as
accurately as possi bl e at ranges frorv -+ t o 32 km an d that t he design ai m is , un der
the wors t conditi ons) f or t he r. m.s . t r ecki no e r-ror not t o exceed 0.3 mi ll iradi ans .
--- - -
If we conce rn oursel ves wi th the ele vat i on channel only and assume t he t racki ng
elevation wi ll not exceed 45 , equati on 1.5 -6 or 1.5 - 7 can be used :'0 compute
.. Thi s occurs when = 45
0
and j s gi ven by
" max'
i: 606
2/1
' x ' 0
6
/ 2- x 10-
2
ra d/s
2
max ::; 0 I ::. '- . :)
(
(
(
(
(
c
(
,.
. -
-' - -
The Accuracy of Target Tra ckers 11
d :
1000
WnQ"'
10
}Jo = ~ i :
o 5
.,-
c :
5
UI : 200
Ut. 400
U, : 600
13
8
eWn
6
e
1.2
1.1
1.0
09
-..: :::-::- .
---
: ' ';
--==-=-:::: --;;:. :-
-- - ~ - - -
o 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
O'---_ -L..._ -----'__...L.:._--'-_ _ -'--_-L_---l'---_--L_--.!
90
eo
( a )
1.3
\\
8
a
W n ~
. '
- - -
1.2
\ \
c =00
e
\
. \
1.1
~ \ \
~ "
1.0
0 9
o 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
O'---_-'-_-"-_--l_ _ -"--_-L_-----'_ _ -'--_---L._--.!
90
(0)
FIG 1. 5-2 Fol.l.oirinq ,el ' l'Qr _,Q r' a -cype 2 servo;
12
Gu ided Con to l Systems
---l.
80 70 60 50 4O 30 20 10

\ \
6
( " )
\\
c =CD
\
\
1.i.
1.3
1.2
8
e
wnb

8
1.1
LO
'l
:{
90
1 4 r

8
e
W
n
6
e
1.i
, \
.\ .
\ \.
\

d o l 000
W 2
iJ
o
= 0. 5
c :;; 5
U , 2 0 0
- ' --' - U 400
o 10 20 30
40 50 60
':., . ;
80 70
{

. 9 -
1. 0
o
- - .:;l
, _ .
13
is 2.25 x 10
2
/3 =
" no t herefore i s flO = 8.7
The Accuracy of Target Trackers
- 4
t o be 3 x 10 radians
l oop natural f re quency
The ml nlmum open loop gai n for ee
75 rad/s
2
/rad. Th e mi nimum outer
rad/s .
The dampi ng J:at i os of t he out e r and i nner Loops and the r at i 0 of thei r bandwi dt hs
have l itt le effect on t he tracki ng ac curacy_but they will ,_of course , a f f ~ c t t t:.:.
stabi lity margin of t he system. Sorre i ndicati on o f t he opt imum val ues of these
pararreters can be obtaine d by considering t he tracking accu racy i n the pre sence of
noi se.
1.6 THE EFFECT OF THERMAL NOISE
Noise is present in all re ceivers and the re ader is re'ferre d to Skolnik (4) for
a discus sion on th e ma in sources of nois e i n radar re ce ivers. Our problem s t ems
f rom the f act t hat in cl ose d loop sys tems high amplification of e r r or signals is
needed to obtain good system accuracy ; nevertheless ampl ification of si gnals
amplifies nois e as well , so that some form of compr omi se i s neces sary . The main
source of noise i n r adar re ce i ver s is "t he rma l noi s e " because electrons i n any
conduct or at a t emperat ure othe r than absolut e ze r o ar e al ways in ran dom mo t ion.
This mot ion gi ves r i se t o an electrical nois e voltage whi ch i s es s enti al l y "white "
i.e. its s pectrum i s independent of f re quency f rom d. c. to a frequen cy far i n
excess of any s ervo t r ac ke r banosi dth , There are many other sources of noi se
ass oci ated wit h r ecei vers i ncl udin g env i ronrrent al background noi se but in practice
it i s f ound t hat if re ce iver noise is si gnifi cant i t is l argely due t o t he rmal
noise , and therefore i s s ensibl y constant for a given receiver. The actual noise
out put expressed as a rre an square voltage howeve r i s not constant . If t he
i ncomin g si gnal is strong (e . g. a large t arget at short ra nge ) an aut omat i c gai n
contro l re duces t he gai n of t he IF ampl ifi er . i n orde r to keep t he output independent
, : ... ~
of t he si gnal powe r and t his effect ive ly re duces t he noi se out put . The re sult is
t hat t he si gnal -to- nois e rati o var ies . I f one is illuminating and tracking a
ta rget the re cei ved pOwe r vii 11 vary i nve rs el y as ~ h e (r ange)4 , all othe r t hings
bei ng equal. An as s unnt t on that i s usua lly made th e re fo re is t hat the nean sq uared
nois e output from a re ce ive r fo r a given tar get , r ange and atrrosphe r ic conditi ons
var i es invers ely as t he si gna l - t o- noi se ra t io and is pr oporti onal to (r ange) 4.
Sin ce all ang l e channe l re ceivers ar e des i gned t o pro duce a voltage propor tional
to t he angul ar mis al ignment it f ollows t hat t he mean square noise output can be
regard ed as a mean squa re angl e. Suppose that the r .m.s . output from a rece iver
i nt o a given i mpedance is v volts . If the receive r gai n i s k
l
volts pe r r adi an
misa l ignrrent the r .m.s . noi s e re garded as an angular i nput is v/k , radians . It
is convenient to r egard th i s as a nois e i:nput or i qi nat i nqut the target , and
the re i s no lo ss of generality i n doin g t his. Hence , t he r ma l noi s e i s of t en
. _ . . .-.A.. __ . .
14 Gui ded pon Cont ra 1 Sys tems
referred to as "angul ar" noi se . Let t he s pectrum of this noise lie oef i nsc as
= K/ \' her e \ i s a cons t ant,
The problem now ',i s to determine t he me an,squu value (and hence r vm.s . value) of
t he antenna "j i t te r" due t o t hi s noi se . It i s mos t i mportant t o note at thi s
stage t hat , ideally we require a 'se r vo to have zer o bandwi dth s o that all thi s
noi s e i s f il t e re d out. Consider nO\' 1 t he mean square output 0
2
of a f il t e r whose
transfer fu ncti on i n f r eq uency form i s il l + j",T, The i nput is white noi se whose
s pectrum is constant up to a f r equency "'b' Tne rre an square outp ut is t herefore
d",
LTL
, '"
do.:
"'b
0
2
= K 2 (
a Ja Ii- 1 + '"ZTZ)Z
K Z
, a - 1
= I tan "'b
T
Provided "'bT > 10 say this approxi mates to oK/nT, This means there f ore tha t the
mean square outpu t woul d be the same as that from anot he r f il ter whose pass band
was flat up to a f requency equal t o " / ZT and t hen cut off completely at t his
f r equency , in other words a si mple first or der i ag has an effect i ve bandwi dth to
wh i t e noise of TI/ Z t i nes i t s own banJdidth of liT, it is easily s hown that the
equiva lent' noise bancldidth of any l i near fiiter i s a funct ion of the coeffi ci ent s
of t he transfer function . . In a l i near sys te mwill have a trans fer functi on
of the form
where th e order of t he nume rator is at leas t one l es s t han that of t he denominator ,
i nt egr als of the form
I =! !b(j",) I
Z
d
J_ la (jw) l<
a
can be eval uat ed and Table 1.6-1 gives values fo r sys te ms up t o fou rth oroe r , We
, .
will be conce r ne d wit h noi se bandwidth of two'main l oops, one th e
target tracki ng loop and t he other t he mi s s i l e guidance loop . In both cases
a
o
= b
o
= 1. We justify i nt e gr at i ng up t o ", = ee because t he noise bancvi dth is
so much greater t han the syste m
it i s i nst r uct i ve t o evaluate t he equi valent noi s e bancs i dth of a si mple one- to -
one s econd order system whe re a
l
= Z_I "'n' The equ ivalent noi se bandwi dth is
t herefore
'" W
1T n 11" n

L.. (:1J . u
If = 1, it is ""'n/ 4. Now a critically dance d secoro d or de r sys tem nas two equal
.. ;
The Accuracy of Target Trackers
TABLE 1. 6- l EQUIVALENT NO I SE BANOWIOTHS
Orde r of system Value of I
Fi r s t or der
TI
Tal
b Z
1
1T a
2
+ 1
Second ord er
Z a
1
2
~ + b 2 :=. 2b
+ a
2
Third or de r
TI
a
3
1 ' . ' 2
'Z a
2a 1
.- a
3
a a a ' a
1
a
4
b 2 ( ~ _ _1 )+( b 2_
2b
b ) ~ + b 2_2b
+ a
2
- --
TI 3 a3
a
4 a4 2 1 3 a3 1 2
.
a
3
Fourth order
Z 2
a
l
a
2
-
a
1
~ 4
- - - a
3 a
3
.
15
roo t s ; i t is equivalent to two first orde r systems of t ime constant T = l / "'n in
series . Thes e "two" filters therefore have an equivalen t noise bancMidth equal to
one half of one of them taken i n isolat ion . Co ns ide r now t he s ame sy stem with the
fo rward path ga in increased by a factor of f our. The undamped nat ur a l f requency
"'n is now doubled , the damping ratio is hal ved and t he equiva lent noi se bandwidth
i s quadrupled. Clear ly , the equi valent noise ba na"i dt h of a sys t e m can have
quite a different value from t he signal band"idth whi ch is defined as the f requency
at which t he output ampli tude has at tenuated by 1/1L of t he amp l itude at ze ro
f reque ncy ; it corresponds to the "half- powe r bandwi dth" as used by tel ecommuni ca -
t ions engi nee rs . Tabl e 1.6- 2 il l ust r at es this point.
~ .. "'" .
TABLE 1. 6- 2 8ANDWIOTHS OF TYPE 1 SECOND ORDER SYSTEfoIS
Da mping Ra tio 1 1/12' 0. 5 0.25 0.1
Signal bancr"idt h
0.64 1 1. 27 1. 48 1. 51
"'n
Equi va l ent noise bancr,/ i dth
0.785 1.11 1. 57 3.14 7. 85
"'n
However , t he ma i n close d l oop systems " e "ill be considering are Type 2 sys tems
with an appro=imat e transfer funct i on of
+ 1
8
0
-
e -.,---.:..r- ---
1
where b
1
= a
1.
This co uld represent t he si mpl est pos s i bl e target tracker wit h a
If t hi s i s differentiated \,ith res pect t o "o and equated to zero we fi nd that a
minimum occurs wi th \1
0
= The nrini mum noise bandl'lidth is t hs re fore 1tW
no
whi ch
i s precis ely doubl e t hat for a Type 1 second order sys temwi th th e same damping
ratio . Thi s i s because the compensating el errent i s a proportional plus in tegral
element wi t h a transfer functi on of 1 + l / T
ls
and is t herefore equival ent to pure
integration with a gai n of l /T
l
in se r i es with a proport io nal pl us derivat ive
el eme nt as we have already noted. Excessive fe edfop':a:f'd of the derivative of
the error has t he effect of increasing t he bana.'lidth whereas feedback of deri vati ve
of the output i n general has t he effect of reducing the band-r i dt h. Tab l e 1.6-3
sbows the bandwidths of Type 2 servo systems for different damp ing ratios .
TABLE 1.6- 3 BANDWIDTHS OF TYPE 2 SECOND ORDER SYSTEMS
Both Tables 1.6- 2 and 1.6 -3 show the di sas t rous effe ct t hat poor stabili t y ma rgins
have on equi val ent nois e band..vi dtn ; clea rly t he r-e quirement i s fer t his t o be as
small as poss i bl e.
Now cons i der a more realistic mo del of a tracker as shown i n Fig 1.4-2 wne re ti le
electro-mechanical lags are shown as equi val ent to one time constant T
2
. If
T
2
/T
l
x, and we note that for st abi lity x < 1 and use Table 1 .6-1 to deterrm ne
the equival ent noise banGdi dth we find t hat t hi s i s now
n (2u
o
+ 1/ 2u
o
)
2" wno I - x
where w
no
and "o def i ne th e l oop with no rate loop time 'Co nstant . This i s a
surprising result . It is pet,fectly cl ear t hat addi t i onal l ags i n a systemwill
re duce stabil ity margins and one mi ght be t empted to restore t he phase margin by
in cre as i ng t he value of T
l
keeping w constant . The stabi l ity margin i s increas ed
no
by increasing T
l
; t he valu e of u i s i ncreased. Nevertheless t he equi vale nt noise
a .
banrn,idth i s also i ncreased. Hence t he abs olcte mi nimumequiva lent noi se bandwidt h
of a Type 2 servo i s nw
no
and t his OCCurs "hen "o 0. 5 and t he re are negligibie
lags i n the rate loop .
And fi nally let us consider the e f f e ct of e f fe ct i ve l ags i n the rate l oop as
from
1. 4-1 ) a
1
= 2u
o
/ w
no
= 1
1
(see equation
The quivalent noi se banddidth
Hence b
l

I" 'K 'K / 2 f'" ,.? .
I _ ,:;
Guidec Co nt rol Sys t erns
Damp i ng Ratio
,
1/ /Z 0. 5 0.25 0. 1
,
Si gnal band\"l i dt h
2.48 2.05 1. 81 1. 61 1. 57
I
w
n
Equi vs l ent noise bancr.di dt h I
3. 14 3.92
I
8. i 7
1
I
I
3.92 ,
3. 34
w
,
I
I
n I ! I
,
negligibl e lag i n t he rat e l oop.
2
a
2
l / w
no
T
l
/k
lk 2k
j and U
o
'
Tab1e 1. 6- 1 re duces t o
16
=-,
shown in Fi g 1.4-3 an d rlhos e t r ans fer f unct ion is de f ined i n eq uati on 1 . 4 - ~ . The
equi val ent noi se bandwi dt h is now
The Accuracy of Target Tr ac kers
- -
--
jjW
no
(. 0 - 1/
4c
"i + 1/
4

0
)
1 - 7. c - " .Jc"
o 1 1 0
j '
17
/
3
,
3
"
,
;:
Q
"
2
"
z
<
'"
w
V>
i5
z
....
z
w
-'
;;
5
0
w
...,,: :
- -; /
/
Agai n , t he equi va l ent noise ba nC'ri idth i s always a mini mum if c = 00 . I t i s fai r ly
i ns ens i t i ve to " i provided c i s 4 or mo re and t he bes t choi ce f or " i us uall y l i es
between 0. 4 and 0. 5. For any practi cal value of c t he mini mum noi s e bandwi dth i s
achi eved i f " 0 i s between about 0.4 and 0.6 . Fi g 1.6-1' s hows t hese res ults
graphi cally.
i
l
t
- I
- I
,
-
0.1 0.2 0 3 OA 05 0 6 0,7 O,B 0,9 10 1.1 12 13
FIG. 1. 6-1 Ec wi va l ent: noi-se bandui dth of a f OlA-M;h or der Type 2 s ervo
Let us t he refore nov, f ix t he mai n design parameters for the servo. w = 10 glVes
nO
us the neces s ary tracki ng ac cur acy with a sma ll mar gi n. " 0 = " i = 0. 5 and c = 5
s ay t o mi ni mi s e t he equi val ent noi se bandwi dt h. Any compensators s uch as 1ag- l eaa
and le ad-la g networks are placed in t he r at e loop to make pos s ible a fa st inner
l oop , t he faste r t he better . The equi veI ent noi se bandwi dth is t he refore
DW (0. 5 - 0. 1 + 0. 5) = 47 radls
no 1 - 0. 2 - 0. 2
We now cons i der a pa r ticul ar antenna and recei ve r des i gn and ass ume an equi ve l ent
echoi ng area of t arget. The s pectra l dens ity of t he t he rmal nois e (t o take a
realistic figure ) i s gi ven by
2 - 15 4 4 2
a = K
e
= 8.0 x 10 R. I R rad I radl s
_ ~ 0 .
whe r e R
o
is a re fere nce r ange of 1 km andR, i s t he ac tua l . r ange oJ t he t erqe t in
km. The me an square ji tter of t he antenna due ;:0 t he rmal nois e is th ere fore
18
G
n
2
-r r- 4 ?
8 C
', r,-" '7 R d-
. x _ x -t x. . ra
The r. m. s. vai ue 0 is
n
.
R 2/
10
7
':l
ra d
on
0 ., I oJ
t
ch i s 0.01 x
10- 3
ra d at 4 km
0.04 x
lO-
3
r ad at 3 km
0. 15 x
10-
3
rad at 15 km
0. 35 x
10-
3
.rad at 24 km
0.53 x
10-
3
rao at 32 km
It is clear that we cannot meet the requirement of an accur acy of 0. 3 x 10-
3
rad
at th e l onger rang es due t o exces s i ve ser vo but a large se r vo band"idth
is not re qui re d at th ese ranges . One rre t hod t herefore of i mpro vi ng the overall
performance is to redu ce t he gain of the loop starti ng at r anges i n excess of
16 km s ay. To keep th e damping r atio of t he out er loo p constant t he values of k
2
and T
"
see Fi g 1. 4-3 would have to be vari ed t.oqet her . This is easil y i mpleme nte d
in practice as range information wi l l almost cert ai nl y be availabl e from t he
recei ver , This wi 11 not only decre as e th e bancwi dth of t he outer l oop but wi ll
al so i ncreas e the value of c thus reducing the e f fe ct i ve noise bandwi dth still
f urt her . Table i . 6- 4 Sh Oh'S the estimated tracking acc uracy a fixed gai n
servo 100p compared wi th a. vari ab te gair, Ioop . Si nce t here is no cor- re l at i on
ce tween thE: acceleration of the sight line c..nd thermal noi s e i n the receive r and
of t he re cei ver wi l ) have a normal dist ri but i on vie are that t he noise output
j ust i f ie d i n assuming
o =;
t
Ic 2
a +
n
2
I
\
I
I
\
i
I :
(
(
(
(
where 0t is t he to t al r.m.s . t re cs inc error and va is the tracki ng e rror due to
sight ii ne mo tion .
TABLE 1. m"CKING ERRORS Ii{ tIILL IRADI ANS
RANGE !
FI XED GAlt! VARIABLE GA IN
km
1
::Ie: On
0. w C
a
On
" t
I
,
no
4 km
\
0. 225 ": '0. 01 0.225
1
10 0. 225 0. 01 0. 225
8 km
\
0.056 0.04 0.059 10 0.056 0.04 0.059
,
,
I
16 km 0.014 0. 16 O. ;6
I
5 0.055 O. 09 0. 11
24 km 0.005 0. 35 0.35 2. 5 0.10 0.14 0. 17
I
32 km 0.003 0.63 0.53
I
1. 4 0.175 O. 19 0. 26
I
1.7 THE EFFECT OF OTEER INPUTS AND DISTURBANCES
An i mponant cont ri but ion to tracking wh en usin g radar is t he pnenonenon
of "ql i nt " . It i s wel l known t hat the apparent radar centre of a target (ot her
...
-..J
The Accuracy o f Target Tra.ckers 19
t nan a per f ect sph ere) move s during fligh t due t o ta r get not i on caus i ng diffe ren ti al
phas e changes at the recei ve r be twee n th e re t urn s scatte re d f rom different pa rts of
the target . Such motions are ca use d by vi br at ion , target manoe uvr es , range cl osure
causing a changing target aspect and air turbulence (ai r cr af t ) and sea waves
(s hi ps) . Sometimes these angu l ar mo t i ons of the ta rget cause the radar to i nte r pre t
t he t r ue centre of area to be we l l out s ide the ta r get outline . The fluctuation
r ate is pro porti onal to target angula r ra te and also t o mi cro-eve freq uency. In
st ri ke ai rcraft gl i nt is l argely a yaw phenomenon and i t s r .m. s . val ue i s of ten of
t he order a fift h of t he wingspan and this me ans that its r . m.s. value coul d be in
t he rang e 2- 4 metres . Thes e figures are very approximat e-as t he amo unt of g1in t
. ,
ca n vary considerably wi th t a r get aspect and wil l vary from target t o t a r ge t
dependin g on t he "smoothnes s" of t he reflecting area (5) . A freque ncy analysi s of
t he time record of the gl in t f rom an aircraf t t arget often su gges t s t hrt its
s pect rum appr oxi mate s t o whi t e nois e pass ed t nr ough a firs t order l ag of ti me
constant T
g
i.e. K 2
+ g ( ~ ) ~ }T 2 + m
2/rad
/S ( 1. 7-1)
g
If L
g
2
is t he me an sq uare valu e of t he glin t t hen fro m Iao I e 1.6-1 , L
g
2
0 rr K
g
2/
2T
g
"
T
g
is t ypicall y i n t he ran ge 0.1 to 0. 25 secon ds. Hence i f T
g
and L
g
a re known
approxi mate ly K
g
2
can be eval uat ed. Although noveceys , i n any se r ious si mulation
of a ta rcet , gli nt is r arely represented i n t ni s 'tiay (9) , ne ve rt he l e s s a first
esti mate of its effect on tra cki ng accuracy can De Dotained by making these
ass umpti ons.
There is no doubt t nat glint is a very l ow r requency source of noise origin ating
at t he target, and t he energy w111 be l a r gel y withi n the pas s -b and of th e r ada r
servo, except perhaps at t he l onger ranges "h e re t he s ervo ban dw idth is so low.
It is i ns t r uct i ve to calculate t he r .m. s . anten na movemen t due t o gl i nt for
different servo bandwidt hs. As sume for si mplicity t hat t he servo
a second order system i.e . one wi th a ve ry fast i nner rate loop.
is depicted in Fig 1. 7-1.
approxi mat es t o
The si tuation
GLINT ANTENNA JI TTER
Kg]
I
SERVO FILTER
/
FIRST ORDER
,
F ILTER G,IS)
I SEC OND ORDER )
WHITE
G] I S)
NOISE)
FIG. 1. 7- 1 Cl-int: l' epl 'es em:::ea as urn te noi se
having pass ed zhrouqh. a f i rs;; or-der ji l- tel '

ANTEl'iN A li T TER
Gr I S I G] I S i
1 _
L..-.-__I

Kg ]
-
..; (
Ie
J-
I-
k
I:
2:l S [i -r
o no
2 T "'
9 no
2
1
L , 2 I
s !;,; + ".z S :.:
no 0 no
Tabl e ' 1.6- 1 we fi nd t hat th e eq uiva l en t noi s e usi ng a.na
n
Z
T o "" 0-"
= . J as
ba ndl"l1 dt h i s
20
The mean square output or j itt er due t o gl i nt is t herefore
v 2
"g
2 + T "'
9 no
i w + I + l l w I
9 no no 9
I 2
" g
Tabl e 1. 7-1 shows t he rati o of
I", + I + I /w I
9 no no g
r. m. s . ante nna j itter to
( 1. 7-2)
t he r. m. S . \I a1ue 0 f t he

gli nt for var ious normalised s e rvo
TABLE 1. 7-1 ANTENNA JI TTER DUE TO GLINT
w T
q
1
0.25 0. 5 1 2 10
nO
Cg/ L
g I
0.65 0. 85 1. 00 1. 07 1. 04
,
Thi s me ans t hat i n genera 1 the f", m. S j i t t e r due t o gl i nt i s about t he s are va1ue
as t he r. m.s . val ue of t he gli nt itse l f , except when t he undamped natur al fr equency
of t he s e rvo i s les s t han about one hal f t hat of t he gl i nt banc-n dtb , It is
poi nted out t hat t he j itt er has been expres se d i n met res rat her t han i n angul ar
measure. Thi s is because gl int is es se ntially an apparent novenent of t he t arget
in met res . The radar sees t his as 3:1 angl e but t his \-:i11 resul t i n a rro verrent of
t he t racki ng beam i n met res at the t arget. An r. m. s . jitter of 2mat a range of
4 km is.. an anqula r t racki ng error of 0. 5 x 10- ; rad due t o t his cause al one and
t his means t hat we cannot me et the speci ficat io n at the short er
There is however 'a well -known techni que ca l le d frequency agility whi ch ca n De us ed
wi t h nonopul se radars for s preadi ng the gli nt s pect rum over a wider fr-equency cend
(6) , (7) ; i t can al s o effect on t he vel ce of t he gl int and t he
t e ndency is for i t t o re dai:e ra t he r t han i nc re ase t his va l ue . The effect of
changi ng t he transmitted f requency i s t o change t he in t erfe rence pat t ern
at t he aeri al of t he wave s s catte r ed fro m the t u get by alteri ng t he phase
di f ferences between the cont r-ibutions f rom t he indi vidual s catte re rs , If, for
exampl e , t he e t f'ec t ive ba ndwi dth c a n be i nc re ased by a factor of ei ght and t he
ori gi nal t i me constant is 0. 16 s t hen the apparent gii nt bandvJi dt h now ext ends
t o 50 ra d/ s , an d much of t hi s enerqy 11 be f i 1t ere d out by t he servo.
How does a target manoeuvre af fect accuracy? Suppose a t arget shoul c
suddeni y nak e an evasi ve manoe uvre of 4g. The maxi raurn effec-: or. s ight l i ne
,.
,.
,
,.
acce l e r ati on wi l l be if t he target flight. path is down the line of si gh s uch that
t he t a r ge t acc e leration i s init ially perpen di cular t o it. At 4 km range t he si ght
line accel erat i on due to t his manoeuvre is 4 x 9. 81 / 4oo0 rad/s
2
and this is
approxi ma tely 1 x 10-
2
r ad/s
2
. Thi . 40 f Lhe fna xi 1 1 t i d " 1 S l S . 0 , e maximum angu ar acce era i on ue
t o a straight fl ying ta r get. The effect on s te ady state accu racy wi ll depend on
the plane i n wh i ch t he ma noeuvre takes place but in any case there wi l l be a size -
able erro r during the t r ans i ent period .
Drifts i n t he propor t ion al plus integrat ing amplifier coul d s e r i ous ly affect ac curacy .
Nowadays d. c . amp l i f iers are readily availab l e ....lith offset s that can be t r i mne d
eas il y and whose dr i ft rate s with changes i n temperature. .'l.re very smal l. For real
preci sion the propor t ional plus ope rat i on done digitally (11) .
Any steady biases or s l o drifts e l s ewhcrc in t he se r vo '.'till then ha ve no ef fect
whatsoever on t he sys t em a ccuracy. ha ve already trent i one d that resilience i n

t he dri ve f ro m the motor th roLiqh the ao"te nna s t r uct ur e const i t ut ,

a dynamic The modes of cs ci l l e t i on are bound to be very_li_sb..tlY damped'
---- ------
espec i3.l1Y_Y.i.i.ttLlarge s uppor t i ng structures made of li oht aJJ..2Y i'ti t h a low el as t i c
-----
mJdulus . Ideall y the l owes t fre quency 1"Gee should be at least fo ur times t he
system open -loop gain crossover frequency other--lise the cl os ed- l oop s tabil i t y wi i t
be The r e i s an increasing tenden cy for trackers des i gned f or 'hi gh--
- _. --,--- - - - _.-
accurac' to use dr i ve roto rs driving di re ct or t hr ough an
anti -backlash singl e gear reduction .. An ol te rna t ivo ne t hod of e l imi nat i nq the
destabil i sing effe ct of t he backlas h is to two oppos i ng motcrs (10) . The
ef f ect of lightly damped mechan i ca l or s t ruct ura l resiliences can be partiaLLy
cance ll e d by the use of notch filters (13) . The not ch filt er ze roes have to be
ca r ef ull y placed as the angle of cep art ure of the root l ocus can easily result in
cl os ed loop poles i n the right hand plane (14) . Anot her t echn i que of reduci ng
the effects of load res oriance is gi ven by Shinners (15). l\ useful te chni que W1 Ui
hydr-aul i c drives i s the use of pre s sure \' {hicn is es sent i a l ly acce l erat t or,
feedback, ,;'h i ch helps to damp cut t he pr-ina ry re s onan ce in tre drive (10 ) . S-i pc e
none of t hesestabilis irlg t echni ques (lie per fect , "i t fo l l ows that unl es s ! Li;;:
Tne Accuracy of TaCge t Tra ckers
21
1

I
11
,.
I!
I
\
i t
!r
Ij
!
I '
i t

I !i'
In
; i
, I
\t
II
!
. ,
H
Ii
( t
I'
l
\.
, I
I,
i i
I
i
acc'J r acy i s degr aded.
outp ut sp ee d is (lr:-:; tcr
,I
" \ 22
.\ .
Ii
.. i
I i
!
Guided fiea pon Con t rol Sys t ems
LI N
" "-:--'-"1:
,-
-
, -
-
FIG 1. 7-1 A tracker servo ~ i t h a torque dis t urbance
wher e k
a
is the power amplifier gai n V/V
k
m
is the motor t orq ue cons t ant at s tal l Nm/V
J is t he sys t em inertia r e f e r re d to the rot or
f i s t he vis cous f r i ction coeffi cien t Nm/rad/ s
k
b
is t he motor back e . m.f. cons t ant (i f an armature cont ro ll ed d.c. notor
is us ed) V/rad/ s
kg is t he t achogene ra t or cons t ant V/rad/s
N" is t he gea r r atio
The l oad di sturbance can be shown as L/N at the rrotor . Now , the r-ate loop can be
si moli f i ed as a steady st ate gain of k
3
rad/s/V and a time cons t ant T{ Both k
3
and T;:0'are reduced on account of t he tachogene r ator feedback . It is easil y shown
that if the gain i s reduced by a factor x then t he t ime const ant i s re duced by
t he s ame facto r . I'i g 1. 7-1 therefore reduces t o Fi g 1.7-2.
, ,
':.. .:
,...-- -,
I
I N, I
FIG 1.1-2 A reduced form of Fig z, 7- 1
Fromt hi s diagram h'e can wri te down t he transfer function for 6_/ L whi cn i s
c
8
a
LIN K k
a m
Simplifying this i s
\
\ .
\
------ -- -
The re are four j mpo rt.a nt
I r.e Accuracy of Tc;rget Tracke rs
v
a

- ---
23
(L7-3 )
trans fe r' fun ct i on :
(a) An i nt egr a t o r in the f'eedback path o f a ccns t ant "input" re sults in ze ro steady
state output (wr i t e j w == 5 and let w - G) . if th e "i nput " is changing
very s lcwly then the integrator i s a Iways adj usti ng its out put ion an attempt to
reduce t he output to zero . At the hi gh f requency end the outpu t must be ze ro al so
due to the natural f i i te r i ng effect 0;: th e sys t en.
(b) By introducing so me fate feedbac k -C 02 gain of
by a f a ct o r x. In order t o restore t he open 100p
design value, as de te rmi ne c oy t he recui remer.t t o
the gain k
1
has to be i ncre a s ed by a ';:,ic t S/' 1/ x.
gi yen L by a fact or x,
t hE.::fdtE l ocp k
3
r.as (;:::c (, ,-e GLi CeO
gai n to i t s original
-" ,
'h l1Gi'; si ght l i nes ,
Thi s rsduces t he output for a
(c) Cons icc r in q nC'd the Gi:r,:::::n1nJ.tor c f t.u- t,r-.:::f .e .: -:.. ! ... SiL.... C -;- , ":. ; : (1 ..,
3 1
product K
1
k
3
are both fixe d, 'dhat e ff ;:: c t. n.:.") -;--.'2 , n S Gi: t he ec ui vel cnt
noi s e benc.ri cth ? Since Tcl'is 3.S ;j ':.:1: ; =.t'2;:eed.Ja:k thi s l1',2u ii S
t hat t he coe f f i ci en-, of 5 3 is re cucec. of the value of a
con stant mus t improve sys tem stabi lity and t nerefc raraus t reduce the equivalent
noi se be.n c'fi idth . Re fe rs nce t oTabl e 1.5-1 far;: -:: rdr-d or der systemShO'dS t he
denosrin eto r for t he va l se of the i nte gr 2.
1
value of t he -integral is al s o r ecuc ed.
reduce d t r.e
- I
I
inevi t ecly neens t hat t here '\"l i ll be g:" s;};:e r or: t he power arnpl i f i er and
moto r ; t hes e two se r vo i t.ems y;i ll probe:!)' have t c be re pl ace d by ones wi t n a
gre ater power handli ng capabil i t y : ,) avoid saturat ion . If hig h gai n and feedbacK
cured mos t problems and t here was no cost. voul c be very relll closed
lo op prob l ems in pra ct i ce .
'hi nd torques acti ng cr
The t solat i on
S3. r::E: probl em.
of the antenna f rom ",'lil a t o rques i s es sent i el l y tti 2
;arg2 an::/lna have been calcul ated
I
I -
I
gust ing wi ll depend on t he geogr aphi,: al s -; t :J at i c(J J. nd t r,e degree of exposure .
to be of -e rIe fa r r:; :
c.w.c.s.c-c
the vri no
Vi s the mean wi no speec
T] has a mean value of about 5.5 se conds
T
2
is abouf 0.5 s e conds
Yi ina gus t in g is t herefore see n t o be a ve ry l ow frequency phenomenom. Gi yen tn e
wind spect r um t herefore and t he s e rvo transfer fun ction f rom t o rque t o ant enna -
positi on t he r . m.s. ant enna di s turban ce due t o win d ca" be esti mat ed .
finally what sort of fi gure i n pract i cal systems i s claimed for the total
ef f ect of se r vo noise ? Some Ar.eri can direct drive systems cl ai m a ro ughnes s of
drive better than one arc se cond . However , mos t macero tracking s e rvos us in
geared motors ! nd one or more of al ready out l ined can
servo noi s e down to less t han 0.1 [ .m. s .
24 Guided Weapon Control Systems
...,
1.8 A SELF OPT IMISING SERVO
We are not s ugges ti ng that the vari able gai n se rvo in section 1. 6 is an "cpt imun''
servo. For instance one can argue t hat the gai n at the l owes t r anges shoul d be
in creas ed t o i nc re as e t he overall accuracy . One could ar.que that the s t ruct ure
of the servo l oop is not the "best", a lag-lead compens ator could be used t o
increas e the gain , or one might even envisage a type 3 servo . Howe ve r , there are
objections whi ch are far IDJre fundament al than t hese . We have des igne d f or the
worst possible value of 6 and in most a value of 45 wi ll not be
encount e red. have assumed a given equivalent reflecting area of the t ar qet
and we have as s urre d no j ammi ng noi se ; and we have ass umed a gi ven spee d of ta rget.
Target s COUld be much s l owe r than this or conceivably fas t er . Atmospheri c
condit i ons (such as rain) and a smaller or iarger t arget could easil y result in
t he act ual"noise level present: :0 be more or l es s t han tr.e as sume o value .
All t hes e arguments ar e suggesting that i n order t o be truly adaptive we ought t o
make s ome intelligent enqui r i es during t he engc.gerr..ent in order to f i nd out just
what i s going on. A simple method would be to make use of t he tn formet ion al reacy
avail abl e i . e. t he t racki ng err,or signaL If there i s no noise present th i s s ignal
will es s entially be a "d.c." '5"i'gn al as it wi ll be changing very slow ly with t i me .
The re wi i 1 ce rtai nly be no hi gh f requency components present . NO\'l cons i der the
nature of the "er-ro r" signal when there is white noi se present from t he receiver.
I f t hi s si gnal is fed to a f i lter wi th a pas s -band f r om s ay 0. 5 Hz to 1 kHz , t he
fi ltered output ,Ii 11 know virtually nothing of t he t r ue t racking error. A l arge
output \'1'il1 merely indi cate that there i s a lot of nois e in t he system. To obtain
more precise i nf orma t i on concerning errors due to accel erating si ght lines we need
t o pas s t he error s ignal through a Iow-nass f ilter wi tb a pas s -band f rom 0-1 r ad/ s
say. If t he wh i te noise has a bands i dtb of 5 kHz or thereabouts , the out put f rom
I
I
I
1
\
I"
-------- .------- - --- -- _._--
The Accure cy of Target I re cker s 25
t his fi lte r ,-nows vi rt ue l l y no th i ng of t he noise in the system. Fig 1. 8-1 is
DlrrERENTIAL
AMPLIFIER
I

PROPORTIONALl
PLUS L __ AMPLI FI ER
iNTEGRATING
AMPLI FI ER
SIGNAL USEO TO
VARY k AND i
l
LOW PASS \ i SQUA RER
I _1 FlL: '=C : _ ---'
I I HIGH PASS I I
L.,-1 1-------1
I FILT ER I i

CHANNEL
RECE IVER
iNhEREr,l POSJiIC:-: FEECdACK
i nvar i ably posi t i ve) and the respective output s fed to a di f fe re nti al ampl ifier' .
If this difference is t hen fe d to a f i i t e r (sayan integrator ) t he out put of this
filt er is used t o vary t he ga.in and inte grcting t im: constan t of the proportiona l
pIus i nte gr a l el cnen t , I f t he output f r cm th e iCYI pas s filte r is less t han t hat
of t he high filt er the mus t be t o decrea se t he gai n of t he
system and vi ce-versa. I f 'the gains 07 : !'lese f i l t er s are chose n cor rect ly t he
tracki ng er r o r can be min imi s e d (8) . Since t he track in g e r ro r dee t o ang ular
acceleration i s i nve rs ely pr opor ti ona l t c (banCdidth)2 and th e j itt er is proport t ona!
to it is s hown t hat t he syst em optimi sed wh en the
squar e j i t ter due to whi te noi se i s four tirrs t he wean s qua r e t r ue t ra ckin g error .
An alte r nat i ve method of adapting to (iidely varying signa l -to-no ise rat ios is
given by Adelman and Shinners (16); thi s a t terro ts to keep t he t r acki ng err or' down
to a pr eas s i gned val ue . It does not SEek an cpt i mum band..ri dth .
i
i
\
I
\
\
REFE:'J::.:ICES
1- . tiCCLURE C.L. Theo ry of i ne r t i a l ?...-entice Hail lr.r.e rne t i ona l
1960.
1951.
4. SKOLnIK Int r oduct i on to sYSt2iT1S. SOCK Coy
26
Gu ided Contro l Systems
5. DELPJ"iO R. A theory of target glint or s ci nt i l1a tion 10 re oe r
trac ki ng. ? r oc I RE, pp 177.8- 1784, Decerrber i953.
6. Ge ran. Reduction of rada r t racki nq e rrors wi t h frequen cy agil ity . IEEE
i Transacti ons on Ae ros pace and El ect roni c Syst ems Vol AES - 4 No 3 t'.ay 1968.
7. BIRKEt'.EIER W. P. and f!ALLACE N.D. Radar tra cki ng accu r acy i mprovement by means
of pul s e - to-pulse f requency modulation . rEt.E Trans Conrnun i cat i ons and Ele ct ronics
Janua ry 1963.
8. FISHER fLH. Aa aptive control of ra cer tracker se r vos . iLSc. t hesi s , Gui ded
l,. /ea pon Syste ms Cours e , Royal r1i1itary Coliege of Sci ence , 1976 .
9. WARNE R. L. An app ra isal of t he gli nt prob l em to radar tracki ng. f1.Sc. t hesis ,
Gui ded Wea pon Sys t ems Cours e, Royal Mi l i t ary Co llege of Scien ce , 1978.
10. LOZi ER J .C., NORTON J .A. , and nlNlA i1. The se rvo syste m f e r Tel st a r antenna
pos iti oning. Aut omatica Vol 2 pp 129-1 49.
11. l,olINSTON G.C. Des i gn of a precise servo control system. Control Engi nee ri ng
t'lar ch 1970 pp 84-89 .
12. TITUS j .H. Wind torques i ncuce c on a l arge antenna . US Naval Research
Labor at ory Repor t No S549.
i 3. WI LSON D. R. pra ct i ce in servo design . Pergamo n Pr es s 1970.
14. WI LLI AHSON S. E. The root Iocus me thod. IERE Vacat ion School March 1977 at
t he Un iversity of Re ading.
15. SHi tiNE RS S.M. t'.in i mi s i ng Servo l.oac Resonance Er r or . Control Engi nee ri ng
January 1962.
15. AD::UiAN S. and SHI NNERS Automat i c t racki ng cons iderati ons fo r ball isti c
tar gets . Pr ocee dings of t he Fifth Nat i onal Conven tion on r'lil itary El ect r oni cs 1961 .
";... :
(
-
._- ---- - - - - -- - - -- - - - - - - - .......
---_.- ---
Cl-l-APTER 2
MISSILE SERvas
; ' '':,
- ,
2.1 SERVO REQUIREMENTS
Anyt ni ng otr .e r t r.an t rie (( c. rhec, c c:. nd f uze of a mi ss i l e is ceec e ignt. Mi ni mLi m
weigh-: and volume are al most over - riding re q:.iircroc:"nts for any mi ssile servo . Gave
s he l f life , 10''': cost and reli ability are requi rernent s , and a Tac,;lity t o
te s t is an advantage although it can ar gued t hat i f reliability i s excellent
then a requirement " to test} hhich involves t i rre , -cra ining an d test equ i pmen t , s hcc l c
be dis pense c with. Servos fer rada,'s ar:d l auncher s are ei t her e Ic ct ro -
hycr eul i c or al l -e l ect r !c. of t his type tend to use d.c. mo t ors
with constant fie ld excitat i on and sol id- s t at e controlied armatures . Now a
tactical guided mi s s il e car, Weigh any t hin g f r om 10 kg to 1000 kg wit h fli ght
ti mes of 5 to 100 seconds or mo re . Some systems are li abl e to experience very noi sy
g:..lidance signals whil e others may he ve a compa ratively quiet r i de . It is this
di ver s i t y in size, durati on of f l i ght and t ype of duty cycle that has resulted in
a nurbe r of successful designs of t o ope r at e cont rol surfaces or th rust
vector elements. Qui t e clearly a ser vo s pecification will call fo r a minimum
dynami c performance and this coul d be conveniently expressed as lithe phase lag in
t he f requency range a to b rad/s sriel l not be horse than t ret of a quadratic l ag
of undamped natural frequency ::: r adjs arid damp ing r at i o c". Some control over
stability can be cbt ai ned by ca l li ng far a r;,}xiiiH..:m value of closed loop ampl i tuce
ratio, or resonant gai n :t i s ca 11ed. Now all miss ile ser vos
. . 1 - . . t . -. 1 fl . . . - - 1-
0
2-
0
macnam ca! stops \,. 0 11i11 tne angUlar 'tr-ave! to a sa e trm t , typ 1::al lY:: ::> -
Suppose 6
0
= 0.3 rad and vie c;::. 11 Q pztfo n:-: ance no HorSE that de f i ned by
w
n
= 150 and u :: 0.: . Si nce th e f in vc lcci ty i s :: w 9
0
:.: 45 rad /s , or
about 450 r-ev/ mi n cne has C::-lS1 C2r tllic.:. ccaparat i ve ly l arge amo l t t cce
thz t f i n i at e have in t hat tends t o
unstabi lise the aut : pil at . SiGce i f it occurs, be ma in ly to
27
10", frequency glint noi s e jand bread-band white therma l noise, it fo llows that an
accurate esti mate of noise levels is desirable before a servo spec ification is
"ritten. Hence, maximum fin rate wi l l always be defined . The l oad ine rt ia will be
quot ed of course in addition to the maxi mum aerodynami c hinge r.or.nt due to the
control surface centre of pressure not al ways coi nci di ng with t he axi s of r otati on.
Some t hr us t vector methods involve considerable coulomb fr t ct i on due to s eals .
28 Gui oe c v-IE:dPOf; Contro l Systems
. .
-
c
c
-
'-.
-
'-
-t
c
c
. -,
techniques and apply t o all the
se rvo s to be descri bed.. Actuation
STOIUC<
TAHi
I
,
,
SOLENOIO
power i s s tcre d g3S
wbi ch i s _r:.el ea se d j ust before f i r i ng
----
by means of a sol enoi d- operated
.-_. - - _._-- _. --_.._- -
start valve . A re duci nq valve
r egul at es t he pre s su r e to a l ower
value s uch that the se rvo supply
pres sure r emains appr oxi mat ely
constant until the bott le pressure
FIG 2.2-1 Mechanical and el.ec ta-o-necrani cal:
components of a stored gas system is le ss than the reduced pres sure .
n:: system i llus t r at ed represenJ;-S..il gdS The
doubl e acti ng actuator is the "area-half-area" type and op_e!.a!:;;
Conver sel y i f t he compensated error signal i s conver te d i nt o a pulse -width modul ated
si gnal t he ser vo operates as a l inear system with a super imposed high f r equency
car r i er eq ual to the modulating frequency . If the crmoensated error s ignal i s
si mpl y used t o operat e the solenoid when t hi s signal i s posit i ve (say ) and not
t o operate it when it is negative t hen a limit cyc1e will A small high
2.2 STORED COLD GAS SERVOS
The advantage of using a fluid operated r.otor compar ed wi th an electric device to
produ ce a for ce or torque is the mu ch pressures that can be ut i lised with
high pressure gas or hydraulic fluid. In a stored gas system working pres sures
are typi cally about 5 (1 :.:N/m
2
s 145 lbf/ in
2)
and th is i s much higher than
the effect i ve pressure obta inable in any elect r i c motor ; t his make s f or a small
f inal control element or "actuator ". Fig 2.2 -1 5110""5 the rnain features of a
pneum?t i c f i n se rvo ; the
signal i s obta ined by summing the
input demand voltage with the
-_.. __.- --- - .
neqat i ve fe edpa ck f r om a potent i ometer .
Compensation and amplification of
t he error s i gnal are also performed
electr i ca lly . These are conventi onal
-
t'ii ss i 1e Servos
29
, ',;.
f reqr.e ncy limi t cyc le i s not a bad thing i n a servo Yihere t he coul omb f ri ct ion is
appreci able as it tends to i mpr ove the accuracy . The Arneri c,3. n f i r m Chandler Evans
Inc has manufa ct ured a number of suc cessful guided weapon and aerospace pneumatic
fli ght contro l sys tems (1) .' Hel i um or nitr-oger. is stored et 50-55 r1N/m
2
, and an
ei ectro-expl os1ve cutter which r uptures a seal i ng is a standard technique.
Gas containers are subjected to a wei qht che ck and mass spe ctromet er l eakage t es t.
Such a system is at tr-ac t i ve from a l onq t e rm storage po int of vi ew and the
re1iability i s excei l ent because t he fluid i s clean . The ele ct ron ics and valve
design are s imple and cheap t o manufacture .
If however t he l oa d i ne rt i a i s ccns t cer abl e , the ba ncl'iidth ob tai nabl e with a
pneumati c servo is li mi t ed; t he dynami c l as from va1Y3:: pos i t i on to lo ad s pee d is a
. ,
secon d orde r one due to t he of the gas and the pneumatic
f r equency decreases with an increase in 102. d inertia . Tne pneumatic open loop
f reque ncy can be increased by increasir:g4:he gas s uppl y pressur. e or by in cre as i nq
t he c i eme ter of the act uat or (2 ) . An i npor t ant design factor i n any high
v
per formance servo is an amplifier s peci f i ca l l y des i gned to reduce (he
el ect r i c al time cons tant associated '.-l i th t he induct i ve sol enoid iiinding (3j .
Pneumati-c servos are USually as sociated vi t h sii'iJll mt s s i l es and fa irl y short t imcs
of flight ; the weight of f uel pl us bot tl e t ends to be pro hibi ti ve if t he t ot al
- ene rgy demand i s la rge.
2.3 HOT GAS vas
The advant aqe of bur!ling__ te 0" __
and . .. 92.S t o drive t he act uato r i s
__
the reduc t i on of the si ze and hence
_.. - --- ._-- -- ---,.'-- -
be s uppl i e d is la rger.
are reduced . Although
wei ght container . The cordite ::;:; ;1 bum at t he supply pressure and
need not he stcred at say t i nes the s upp Iy pre ss ur e . Sinc e howeve r cor di t e
bums at a greate r rate at a higher pressure a re l i e f valve must be us ed to a110n
gene rated gas to es cape to atmosphere at t irnes 'i;hen t he demand i s l ov. Ei9. 2.3-1
a t ypi ca 1 1 i lJ_9_.pjs.t..on . An area-he 1of-
area design i s oft en for hot in which cas e onl Y One valve is
required per act uator ; it i s necessa rily bigg=r howeve r since the volume of ga s to
However, reli abil i ty i s tu cr eesec and manufa cturinq COSts
a di !'ect blced f r c:n t he ;;;,, 11: oronul s ion rootor ol us a heat
-- --- ---'- ----'- - .-'------- -
sink has on a sys tem a-- f 1-ight __ a separ ete
--- _.._- --..-._- -- ... - - --_. _- - -_._-
charge of much cooler burning CQr.jit2 is qene re i l y Since cor ci te produces
"" ery dirty hot gas it :.'il1 be .. tcj 2. long f l i ght ti me creates s ome

severe design prcbi ems , enc __.. gas syst ems have
to mi __\:/j th (1:JY: s l:.;t; .but seems to be no; f undarrenta1 reas or:
why thi s should always be s c .
-::".. . -_.
=======:::::;... 0::;: .=, ,, _,:
'-
30
-,
RE.L1 EF VALVE EAM AU:;,T
ACI u .:..TO R
EXKAUST
-,
GAS
GENE RATO R
ENVIROMCNfA... r
SEAL
h
RE.L1EF
VALV E
WSOL ENO ID
w...""':'r-!,L---,I'--.J VALY E'9.
- ACTUATOR
PIG 2 . ;5-1 11
- I
TO SECON D
ACTUATOR
I- U==:-"
Ci +1 I\ ,FIN
POS ! T ION FEE DB ACK C::=======--.--J==J
POTENT tO M E T ER.
.' / .
,--,-,..
hot'-/as servo
2.4 R.AM AIR SERvas
The co ncept of Obta i ni ng one 1s s upply of air di rect t ro m the atmosp here has always
bee n attract ive . Al thcuqh prototypes have been desi gne d and su cces s f ull y t es ted
in a wind tunne l no such sys t em in a production mi s s ile is known to the auther .
Fi g 2 .4-1 s hows such a air being s upplied t hrough a number of pitot
i ntakes pos i t ioned around t he body and connected t o a common manifold . As ,litti all
pneumat i c sys t ems th e va1ve switches t he fi ui d s uppl y from one s i de of the act ueto r
to the other such as to reduce t he er ror. The only ot her so urce of power i s a d.c .
e l ect ric al s uppl y and the system is extremely simple . HOI-lever Table 2 .
4-
1 shows
t hat for t ypi cal missile spee ds t he pressure recoverable from pitot tube i s l ow,
A ram air servo is unthinkable f or speeds bs l ow about r,\ = 1.5 . Th is relat ively low
supply pres su re
will be l ar ger ;
f r equency .
means that , for a gi ven ser vo actuator torque , the actuator s i ze
t hi s has a beneficial si de effect i n increasing t he pneumat i c natural
"
,

!
I
- - - - -- - -
'-
;
j
os
t1i 55 i 12 :' VDS 31.
VA NE
ACTUATOR
-
PADDL E VALVE

----' EXHAUST
, :C
=:=J C
I
' I {?: ISWI1CH :lJ----
L- POTENl lOMETER
r-- MOTOR c
==::!.'JI A IR TO I 'V"--__
ACiUATORS
I Fir,
'-
?
TABLE 2.4- 1 STAGNATION PRESSUR (?:\jrn'- i AS ..:.. 0;: ;1AC;; NLr13ER AND hEI GHT

I 0.8 0.9
!
1. 0
\
1.5 2. 0
\
3.0
Hei ght
\ ,
r-
I 0 km 0.053 0.0 70
\ O. 09 i
0. 243 0.473 1. 12
I
iO km O. Oi 8 0.024 0.306
I
0.082 0.1 59 0.376
--
The dynamic performance of a ram ai r systemwi il vary with Mach and al t i t ude
and t his tends to fol1cw the aerodynam-i c char e,ct eri s t i cs of t he mi s s il e . This
shcul d not create any nevi autopilot design ;:;rrJbl e:r:s . Si nce t he s i ze of tne
compl et e ser vo system does not i ncr eas e with f l i ght time (except fo r t ne c.c ,
electric supply) as does t hat of a :cr. \!e,:;::::.n.:d ;: Gt cr cold pneumat ic system I"mien
-'
re quires a larger gt. S gener a: or 0 1- : ......t t f ound tha t c. r am ail system
can offer s l i cht weisht and s ize fer' t imes of fl ight . However')
Convent i onal ...-a l ve - cont r c l1 e d hydra ul ic ect i.etcrs have beeil uSe d \11 fllanj' Sj::::..e:liS .
If a supply pr ess ure of J__ aT_mer::: i s '... sed one act uat or s i ze .s very small
32
bulk noculus of hydraulic
Very hi gh performance servos
50 Hz or more can be obtain ed .
I _.
I -
I _
indee d an o t o rque t o i nert i a ratios are e xce pti onally n i qn. ny cre ul i c natura l
frequencies are hi qhe r DC accoun t of t he much greater
fluid compared that of say ni t rogen 'at 5 MN/ m
2
.
can be designed using hydraulic _power ; bana,idths of
----"----_... - . ... . - ..-- '.
They are an __1..arge inertias are involved , as . movinqwjnqs.
" 50 , if a recirculating system as described by Walters (4) is us ed a hydraul i c
sys t em will probab l y be t he lightes t of all f or a l ong ti me of fl i ght . rA non-
ci wh_e!:S..Q.il j s..expe.ll.e.cLt:rOfil.a e! p.l as been
used i n Seacat wh i ch has a s hort time of flight and moving wi nqs ; used oil i s
di s cha rged to atmosph ere .
- - .. - _ .--'
In a recirculatina sYstem h. i.gh. pr es .sur e oil carl be obt ai ned by means of a coo l cor dite
gas generator which drives a t urbine coupled to a gear pump (e .g. Thunderbird ).
Alternatively a nono- f ue l such as isopropyl nit r at e can be burnt to provide gas to
operat e a t ,1O cylinder reciprocating oil pure (e . g. Seas i ug and Seadart ) . None of
t hese i t erns are c heap and v'hen one adds t he cos t of t he fi 1t e rs tact uators , re1i ef
valves , and cont ro l val ves (th e mos t expens i ve item) i t ', i ll be fou nd t ha t a s mall
conventi ana 1 hydraul i c servo f-9.!: .. .9- __ i i te m
- -.
indeed. Hydraulic s er vos are not made corrre rci a l ly be l ow abo ut 8kfl and t act i ce l
mi s s i l e servos rare l y requi re such large powers . Howeve r , Sper-ry Gyroscope (U K) nas
recently developed some consi derably cheaper hydraul ic servos . The ve ry expensive
proportional valve has been replaced by a s impIe on- off valve. The driv e elect ronics
i s designed t o produce a culse -wt dth mod ul at.ed output for a d.c. input anc hence
the servo still remains a proport ion al one wi th a ne gli gi bl e li mit cycie as t he
carri er frequency is hi gh. A furt he r gre at simpli f i cat i on occurs if t he s e rvos are
required during boost onl y (s ee a discus sion on t his point vncer Thrust Vect or
,
Con trol in t he next Chapter ) ; t he hydr aul i c oi l is si mply pres s urised by the hi gh
pressure propulsive 'gas es an d t he oil i s not recirculated. If t he servos are
required during the s ust ai n or coasti ng ph ase the oi l can be, pressurised f rom a hign
pressure bottle cont ai ni ng heliumor ni trogen. If t he es t imated noise levels are
, .
not very high and t he ope r at 'hYg t i me not more than about a mi nute a bott le-p ressu rised
non- ci rcul at i ng system has been found to be preferabl e t o t he more expens i ve
circulating system.
2.6 ELECTRIC SERVOS WIT H D.C. MOTORS
A convent i onal pennanent 'magn et d.c. se rvo roto r apparently comp ares ve ry uufavo ur ably
wi th a pneumati c or hvdrau jc rot or on a bas is . Howeve r , t he power out -
put quoted by t he manuf act urer of an el ect ric mo to r is t he ::-a::ed powe r , i . e , based
on t he ass umpt i on of continuous ope r at i or; re su l t i nc in a ri se .
For a fl i gh t ti me of a minute or les s an e le ct r-i c ro t or car. be considerably ove r-
--------
re t ec. Nos t convent ional pi:: Cmcint nt me qnet mo t ors can accep t an armature current
J.r times the_ t hi s resul t in partial
d ernaqne t i s a t i on , Serre missiles Lis ing d .c . electric IT'.Otor s use IT.{) tors with wo un d
fie lds contr ol t o tlw . This re s ul t s in a
slightly heavie r mo to r and a sma1i less in E:-:ficier:cy but very l arge cur-rents can
be accepte d for sho r t periods wi th no petrr;anent 't; eak ening of t he fi eld. Al t e rne t i ve l y
motors "li th s ama r i um cobalt permanent iT::3.gnr:ts (7) can produce a short term output
f 1 0
" "/' d .. 1 t i ., - . 0
5
o near y . '+ K,', Kg en. a zero spee c me xumm ecce era i on 0 1 neer iy I.:; x I fae ;
s2; and t his is cons i ce r ebiy highe r that obtainable from ba sket -',-iOI.;'Hl ;Jr-
prf nt ed- ct r cui t armature ro t.ors . The cos t of th e permanent magne ts
nean s that these motors are expensive . Lc'{," -inertia t ron l es s r ot or mo tc rs ho... e,.. c r"
have very sh ort ove rl cad rat i ngs as th e abs ence of ircil' \'''sul ts in a r apic ri se
in t he tempe r at ur e of t he wi ndi nqs when or. ove r l ce c. \ Such motors cOuld :1:
at t re ct i ve for mi :;s i l ES "(li t h flight :i r.:: ;: :f :255 : rlan about 20 s econos . For a
given motor t orque t he maximum lo ad acca l c.at i on
beinc t he gea:" ret i o. The equi val er.t c ;
i s' t , -
' Iii ' \"-I! , .
- ,
I
The acce l e r ati on of t r. e loe c 5 i s :/".>.::fl by
,
and sin ce j i s 2:. r i xe ; q'..,I:; i,:1l/

..::. 1 ./ ..
11 1 j"

- I
- i
It f0110\';5 t ne t t ric ij n:c.t;:.;.: ..... .;._ alc: .... i tu iii0:;;;;CS
having t he best torqi.l e
2/inert
ia r et i c.
2.7 OTHER J::LLCTRlC
The power deve I ope c Sj c, servo mo t or in ccnt r cl l i nq a mi s s i l e control surface i s
consumed me i niy in ecce le r et inc er.c t r,e C.c' il:.iri2c ir.e rt i as of t r.e
mo t or and load ; the .... er ne cessary :0 br ake :hE: Io ec has t o be S vpp l i e d anJ is
then dissi pat ed as hea t i n' t he nctcr. A drive WOJi;; De f ar t oo
expens ive f or such a s inp le exoen dabi , ::2 ';i ...2. ,:. , of ,-ect.:ing
re quireme nts and eliminating the e f f'ect .J f riiC: Or' i ne rt i e IS t c run d notc r
(preferably with incre asec i ne r t ie ") ar.c :r!i:: load 8j cl ct cr.es Of" by c.
clut ch/caps t an drive. h"nen the l c ac i s y()'....c r i s r ro.n t ne
rot or and i,then the load is decele:r2.ti;: -3 t r.e is tiit: t0r-'ql"l'C
is reversed but th:::: ccnt inues i,' \;[-;'2 sa.lie sense . Ove r c. peri oc of
cl ut ches 'rft,2n t hey are siitJiJ1ng . AF.:ry ':;;::1";0 (s , i s sno ..r. in
in Fi 9 2.7-1. i .....o con::"c'-rot C'lt-; ,,:; dr JT,:':: (J:\:::o.!,: ,!lGtiOil r r.om a.Ji re ct
--
/
34
G' J10cC Cont rol Systems
spr i ngs
I
output
nut
dr ive motor
'-'--;0'=:
actuating
coils
mechanical
interlock
\". .."....
... Co,?<>.UIQ',
nut at one end enc One member of a clutch at t he other . Actua t ion of one c l ut ch
positive t orq ue to t he final drivE) t he capstan acting as t he main power
ampl ifi er ; actuat ion of the other clutch provides t oroue i n t he opposi te sense.
, .
A rrechanica l interlock prevents t he si multaneous operation of both cl ut cnes . Th e
output end of each clutch spring is at t achec t o t he rot at in g nut of a screw j ack.
The translati ng screw t he missil e fin s haft t hrough a rack and se ctor
,"
gear . >!h en t he error is zero the springs act as brakes lo ckin g t he out put shaft .
In t hi s des ign the maximum power output of th e roto r was reduced t o less t han 60%
of t he maximum power demand. Alternatively , the spa ce .evai l eble for t he servo
component s may suggest that the capstans be dispens ed wit h and t he ma i n powe r
ampl i f i cati on be provided by magnet i c particle clutches alone ; the hea t dissipa tion
i n t he clutches may now be a limiting f act or . However , th e fa ct t hat one cheap
motor can be s hare d bet wsen t wo Or fo ur servos is a consi derabl e advantage . How
do sol enoids for direct actuat ion of control surfaces compare with othe r forms of
e le ctri c actuation? Sure Iy f or sne e r si mplicity, cheapness and re l i abi l i ty t he re
i s no equal in t he field of el ect ro-me chani cel energy ccnversivn. Howeve r , on a
...
--------
35
pm'ler/weigrlt bas i s t hey comp a re unfavourao l y wi th
,"" ,-
.... '- . mo to r s . f ht funuauent a1
- i
-I
- j
- I
"
,
- ,
reason why there is a differenc e is t hat al t hough bot h devices utilise the force
generated between t wo s urfaces due t o elect ric currents and electro- magnetic fields
we use these forces over and over again in a rotary machi ne thus enabling l a rge
pcwers to be converte d. In a sol enoi d th e f orc e i s a la rge attracti ve one which i s
used once on ly in a wor ki ng st rok e ; t he fo r ce a l so va r i es considerably with the
changing air gap . Howeve r , f or s ma l l mi s s il es and very s hort times of flight the
si mplicity and compactness of direct sol enoi d ope rati on will certainly be attractive.
The use of solenoids in homi ng head actuation is re marked upon in Chapter 8. And
fi nally we not e t hat although al l mi ss il es need some form of electric power
supply , those using electric ac tuati on will need much more . I t is difficult t o
previde the perfect power suppl y for a mis s i le wi th a flight tiwe of 20 or
even 10 seconds as ideally Vie ,IDu1d l ike a si mple cheap .!i'attery which pro vides a
near -constant vol t a ge and whi ch i s capabl e cf gi vi ng t he who 1e of i t s s to re d
energy i n t his ve rJ s hort t i me . thermal batt eries conta in an el ect r ol y t e whi ch at
or di na ry tempe r at ures is an i ne rt soli d. pcwer is r equi re d a che mical heat
so ur ce Hi th in t he battery is ign:ted an,j tn i s ne i t s th e el ect r ol y te . Act i va ti on
t i rop-s are us ually l ess t han a s ec ond. They hcve ex cellent shelf l ife and reliabili ty
but s uf f er from c ons i ce rab I e vol t eqe dro op as dis.:harge cont in ues . I f "':he fi ight
t ime is l es s t han 40 seconds or so some of th,: cct t ery capaci t y has to be wa s tc c.
The re app ea r s to be no hope at t he presEnt of prcvi oir. q 'a t he r ma l bat te ry wh i ch i s
efficient for ext remely s hort di scharge t i res I alt hough of course t hey are wi de l y
used in sys tems "li t h ma ximum f l i cnt ti rr,es of SC'J 12 seconcs . Such s ys t.ems de not
usually use e lectric ac t uat i on. The ai te rn et ive to the t hermal ba t t ery i s t ne
s11 ver-zinc battery whe r e t he pot es s i urn hydro xi ce e l ectrolyte is fo r ced in to the
cells j ust before us e. These batteries are be s t used wh en the di s cha rc e ti me i s
several minut es .
2.850 :11 TE-" TATI VE CO NCLUSIONS
_ 1
Hissile ser vos a re ra re l y cheap, especial ly for t he hi gh performance 5ur ra ce-t o-ai r
and air-to-ai r mi s s i l es whi ch require such a la rge banc!.idt h and hi sn ma ximum fin
rate. The a ut hor is of the opin ion t hat it i s not pos s i bl e to t ne
c.. ... <-." 5::- ,,_.......--.: Y-4..L.:.J .. - r .
for servos i n t his cl as s with electri c act cat i cn of any s ort . Very hi gh performance
servos can be des i gne d us i ng hot or col d fOI t he hea vi er me di um- r anqe
miss i l es hydraul ic provide the 1isc.test and most compact s ol ut i cn -
and the most expen s i ve . Systems des igned to hit s tationa ry or 510\'1 movi ng targets
1ow band'dl c:th autcpi l ct s end i of :r.e noi se 1eve 1s are not
expected t o be hi gh a modes t ser\.:Q..._spec l f.i catiDEi.-:::(l! I_ Q_e s u(fi ct en t enab1i ng
electric act uat ion to be us ec. One ;:F-thod c f re cucinq se r vo power cequife: mentS i s
).
t o use twist an d s teer) canard cont rol S and a head conta i ni ng t he s ervos and
control f i ns de covp l e dfrom t he ",ain body in roll . Ailerons wi l l then have a ve,'y
small ine r t ia 'to cont r ol and el evators need t o operate in one sense only . Di r ect
s olenoi d a ct uat i on has been used in s uch a system.
REFERENC ES ~
1. POOL E Ha rmon A. Jr A s t o re d gas a ct uator unit fo r t he TOWmi s s i l e . Pro ceed ings
of f l uid pove r sys t ems and component conf e rence . S. A. E. 1965.
2. BURROHS C.R. Fl ui d power s ervomechani sms . Van Nos t r and Re i nhol d Coy 1972 .
3. SHOESr1ITH T. Oevelopment of a high sp eed s olenoid and drive amplifier . Royal
Ai rcr aft Est.abl i shrren t Technical Report No 69206.
4. HALTERS R. Hydraul i c and el ectro- hydraulic se r vo systems . I l iff e Books Ltd
196 7.
J . HALL J . L. and SCHREI BER C.R . Flight cont r ol a ct uat ors ','or mi s s i l e applicat i ons .
Ameri c an Society of Enginee rs (N.Y.) 1968 Conf eren ce in aviat i on and space -p r ogress
and pros pe ct s .
6. ABATE S. J . The future of electrical ac tuati on of mi s s il e con t rol sur face s .
rLSc . t hesi s, Guided Weapo" Sys t ems Course , Royal Hi l i t a ry College of Science,
Sh ri ve nham. 19 73.
7. ROSS L N. Rar e earth-cobalt magnet s . El ect r ical Re vi ew Vol 198 No 20 21 I';ay
1976.
36
----..... - - - - ~ .._, . .. .~ -
Cu i o er: \'H.:apon C ontr o l Systems
,-
I -
I -
i -
1..-
~
, -
i
1-
,
I _
, -
":.,.:
", ;
\
!
3
MISSILE CONTROL MET HODS
:U INTRUDL:CrlOl\
Before goi ng na then.e t i ce l det ail conce rn i nc the noti on OT a 'mi s s ; l e in space
as a resul t of gui dance corraa r.cs , some and discussi on are des i rab l e .
For instance, are we goi ng to let t he missi l e toli fre ely or are He going to
control i t s ori enta t i on i n roll? Are \'le to manoeuvre t he mi ssil e by moving
control s urfaces or are E: going a1te r 21re ction of t hr-ust ? This cr. epte r

is t herefore ma inl y des cri pt i ve and di scusses ways and ans .

"
It is convenient to start wi t h a def i ni t i on of the tas k of a mi ss i l e contro 1

system. It is one -of t he t as ks of the gui dance sys tem to detect whether t he
missile is flying too hi gh or too low, or too much t o the left Or right . It
neas ures t hese deviati ons or errors and sends s i cnal s to t he control syst em to
reduce t hese errors to ze ro. Th e t as k o f the cont rol sys tem t herefore is to
manoeuvre the missile quickly and effici ent1y as a result of these signals . Suppose
the guidance "s ees " the mis s il e at mr el at i ve t o its own boresight and t hat we
i nterpret t his to t hat t he mi s s i le i s to o fa r t o t he ri ght and too low. In a
cartesian sys tem the guidance angular er ror detect or produces two signals, a left-
right si gnal and an up-down si gnal ;,hich are transmi t ted to t he mi ssil e by a " ire
or radio link to two separate servos, say s ervOS and elevat or se rvos.
Fig 3.1 -1 shows that this sa ne infomat i on could be expressed in polar co-c rctnat es
i.e. R and yo If .the sa me i nf ormat icn i s eXpiESSed i n another i'/ ay t hen the contro l
system mus t be mechanised di fferentl y . Tn : usua l re t nod is to regard th e:;. s i qn al
as a command to roll t hro ugh an angle ? c2cscred f rom th e vert i cal and t hen to
manoe uvre outwards by means of t he mi ss i l e t s elevators . t!he method t( r6f
o
J-
compatib le 'lith pol ar commands is or twi st and st eer 1 And II u..,.J:;:...-{
finall y, by \/ ay of tn trccuct i on , we should perhap s be rathe r mo re s peci fic
concerni ng t he wor ds "el evetcrs " and lln;";cers"; and "ei l e rons " shoul c also De
37
38
LEFT
Guic ed Weapon Control Systems

UP
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
..... -
. 0
1
<, ;
,-_.::'"
I m
I
I
FIG. 3.1-1
PoLar
I UP
I
I
I

V ,
I --.
m
I
I
defi ned . Guided mi s s i l es us uall y have one or two axes of symmetry . The re aso ns
are dis cussed in Chapter 4. If a mi s s i l e has four cont ro l s ur f a ces as s hown in
Fig 3.1 -2 one regards s urfaces 1 and 3 as elevators and 2 and 4 as rudders e ven if
the miss ile shoul d roll s uDsequen:l y .
r
J
2
y
FIG. 3.2-2 Looking rear oj missile
If 1 and 3 are mechani cally linked t ogether such that a servo must impart t he same
rota t i on t o both t hen these surfaces are elevators cure and The same
ar gume nt appli es to the rudders . ;'\len su rfaces 1 and 3 each have their own s er vo
it is poss i bl e for them t o act as ail erons . If looking in the direction y one
surface is r ot ated <0 clockwi s e and t he other surface <0 anti -cl ockwise t hen a
pure couple is impar t ed t o t he mi s s il e about t he fore and aft axis and thi s wil l
. - - - - - ---- - -
ten d t o make t he mi ssi le r on :.' Such control s ur f aces are now called ailerons . We
can doubl e t he power of t he ailerons by doing the s ame th in g t o control surfaces 2
and 4. If now the aerodynamics are linear i. e . the normal fo rc es are proport ional
to incidence then the principle of superposition applies . Comnands for e l evator
r udder and ail eron moveme nt s can be added electrically resulting i n unequal moveme nts
t o opposite cont r ol surfaces . In t his way we have th e means to control roll motion
as wel l as the up-down (i.e . pi t Ch) mo t i on and left -right (i . e . yaw) mo t ion .
Alternat ive rrethods of cont ro l are s hown i n Fig 3. 1-3 .
,'
..
. r i,,"
- _ ._------ - -- -- ---- --- ----- -
Mi 5Si h:: Contro 1 ;it: t nc dS
[OIiTROL HETHODS
39
i

I
TWIST AND STEER
I
AEROOYIIAHI[
I
I
[ARTESIA II
I
I
AERODYIIAMI[
I
THRUST
VECTOR
[OIlTRDL
I
REAR CONTROL --_HOVING
SUPFA[[S , ::WINGS
I
CAII/, ROS
ROU
RATE
CONi
ROL

FREELY ROIL
ROLLlIIG POSITION
CONTROL
GINEj., UED
MiliD.!?S
T"""
BAil /,NO
SCUD
Of? nixu
NOZZLES
I
SPDIL EHS
VANES
I
S[[OIiDARf
FLUID OR
GAS INJECTION
::c.i;H CDNTROl
SURFACES
I
MOViNG
WINGS
CA NA.RDS
3_2 WHY NOT MANOEUVRE BY BANKING?
--- Tne ccnven t i ona l me thod of a l t e r i ng COUrse to t he left or right in ql i ce r 01'
aeropl an e is to use the ailerons t 9 bank i. e . roil sec Fig 3.2- 1.
If t he li ft f or ce i s i ncreas ed slightly by the us e cf the elevat ors s o that
vert i cal component of lift equals the then t here is a hori zontal component
of li f t equal t o t he total lift t i rres sin S. It is this componen t of lift whi ch
causes the f li ght path to change. An exact analysis of the manoeuvre is not
si mple as the ai r-f Iow over t he outer win g is faster than that over the inner v/ing
due to t he r ate of t ur n. In pract ice a sra l l amount of rudder is applied in an
at tempt t o rake the seneral ai rfl ow di rect l y alcng the fore and aft _axis of the
aircraft and in the plane of the vtint;s . : n thi s ccn ci t i on there __
an d hen ce no nett sideforce . This i s th e pr ef'e7're c me t hod of manoeuvring s i nc e
lifti ng f orces are most- effi ciently generc.: ec perpendicular to the l,.;i0 9S; the li f t -
to-drag ratio is a maximum i n t his ccndi t i cn. from a passenger's point.
of vied this IT' thod of manoeuv re i s best fer his corrf'o r t as t he total fo r ce he
expe r i ences is alweys syrr:rr:-e-s r ic21 ry seat DT hi s pants .
. .
Even so the re i s so me additi onal dr2;9 \-:hen ma noe uvr inc. An c.ddit.ionai
manoeuvring force is obtained by i ncreasing the i ncidence and t his means that UH:
normal for ce is i nclined backwards to t he va ioct t y ve cto r by t he ang le of
c.w.c.s. c-.o

+ .- ... ; "
40 CUlltr o1 SySterns
...
, :
i
'-

, \
. \
, ,
I
: V..- r1 IC ;""';
I
comp(>nl,:nl \
lil : :.v
! :
I ;
i nc i derice .
L.... .
- 1'".
There is a usefu1 component equal to the norma l f orce t i mes tne
, -
, '
,

3.3 ROLL CONTROL

cosi ne of the angle of i ncidence and a proportional to the sine of
t he in ci dence opposi ng the ve locity vector . This "in du ced drag" will always
occur whenever a l ift i ng for ce is produced irrespec tive of the met hod of manoeuvre.
Never theless the great majo ri ty of mi ss i l es have a symme t rical cruciform conf igura-
ti on i . e. "two sets of 'di ngs and t wo sets of ccr. t rol surfaces . Why is thi s ?
There are t wo main qbj ect ions to "anoeuvring by ai lerons and el evators . Fi rstly,
it ;s a s l ow process as t he manoeuvre cannot start to take pla ce un ti l the
full bank angle i s achieved. Th i s mi ght not be acceptable wi th some systems
desi gned t o hit fas t moving Moreove r , it is not a very preci se method
".,
of manoeuvrin g. I f t he el evators are mcved at th e same ti me as t he ailerons
there wi l l be movement in the pl ane perpendi cular to t he des ired one. I f
one vei ts unt il banking is complete there i s an addi tional delay .
if sent t o t he el evator
Up -down gui dance s i gnals
ver ti ca1 manoeuvre of the
launch during t he whol e fli ght.
servos should t hen result i n a
cart esi an control ideally one woul d like the miss ile t o remain in t ne seue
ori entat ion as at
Wit h
roll
mi ss ile ; and l eft -right signals if sent to t he rudder servos should result i n a
hori zontal wanoeuvre . However a mi s si l e is nct designed l ike an aeroplane and
- ,
Missil e Cont rol Methods 41
\
. '
j
,
,
\
\
i
i
there is no tendency to remain in the same roll orientat ion . In fact it will tend
to roll due to any of the followi ng causes:
(a) accidental rigging errors wh i ch cannot be eliminated entirely.
(b) asyrrmetrical loading of the lifting and control surfaces in s upersonic
flight wh ich occur when pitch and ya" incidences oc cur s imult aneously and are not
equal. This effect can be considerable but can be mi ni mi s ed by good design and
tends to be small for long thin missiles . The roll moment from rear s t abili si ng
su rfaces when asynmet r-i c shock waves impinge on them can be rrore or less
eliminated by mounting these surfaces on a collar which i s free t o rotate about
the mi ssile fore and aft axis; but in practice, complete fre edom in the bearing
. ,
which could be carrying large lifting fo rces, is impossibl e.
(c) atmospheric disturbances es pecia lly if t he missile is f lying close to the
ground.
If the guidance error detector is on t he up-down and left -right signals
,
can be implemented correct ly if a roll gyro and re s ol ver exist in t he mi s s il e to
ensure that the commands are mixed in t he ccr re ct proportions to the elcva tors and
rudders . Howe ver , it wil l be d emo nst r ute d in a l at er chapter thatfuigr, roll \
cause cro s s - coupl i ng between t he tl"iO channel s and tend to unstabilise the. system'
7
:
Eonversely , if the guidance error detecto r is i n t he mi s s i l e (e.g. al l homing
systems), then the guidance system and t he control system share the s amer-e te rence
axes ; i f the gui dance error ro!ates so does ._t he cont rol system and the If
necessity of resolving gui dance signals due to missile rctation does not arise .
However, the re are many occas ions when the sys tern des i gne r woul / wi sh to ro11
pos ition control (i .e. stabilise ) the missile:
(a) if the mis sile is l i kel y to be guided by raaar at a low angle over the
ground or sea , the use of vertically polarised guidance commands together with
vertically polaris ed ae r i al s in the missile will assist the missile re ceiver in
discriminating against ground or-sea reflections; the "multipath" is
much more severe over sea t han land.
(b) If the 'mi s s il e is a sea ski mne r contrclled
it will be necessary fo r t he alti met er to poi nt
if sufficient apertures are avail able i t may be
in height by a radio a l t imete r ,
,. 0
downwards r15 or so .' However ,
pos s i bl e to i ns t alI an all - rc uno
,
: \
I
i
,
. :
- :
looking aerial system. a t hat radi ot es energy i n al1 direct-
ions not only wastes powe r but al so advertises its presence - not a very popul ar
cours e of action. en all -rauDe looking aeri al systemwill probably
invo lve a we aken i nq of t he mis sile s truc ture , ,.
(c ) If t he rm ssi l e is a hcrrer and there is a mechant ca : dri ve f rom th e mis s il e t o
the hbmi ng head, t he t erqe t may be l os t if is a hi gh rol l rate and t he
homi ng head i s lookin g si ceways , the inert ia of the dri ve motor and f ri cti on i n
th e dri ve ,,,i ll tend to make the head fol1ow the mis s il e rmt i on, Th i s can be
ove r come by s peci fyi ng very hi gh performan ce servos i n the homing head. Rol l
posi ti on cont rol enabl es lower performance' servos to be spe cified.
(d) I f one i s going to over-fly a t arget it wo ul d seem desirable to empl oy a
pol a r i s ed wa rhe ad i .e . one whose e ffe ct is uni -directional . Roll position cont ro l
- - -- ----
would ensure that the warhead always poi nts downwards .
(e) Due t o t he aerodynami c shape of t he mi s s i le it may be consi aered inadvisable
t o risk the possibi l i ty of high roll rates due to t he adverse af fect on system
accu r acy alre ady men tioned. I f high roll ra t es are the danger t hen t he mi s s i l e
can be ro l l - rate s t abili sed instead of roll - pos it i on stab i l i s ed.
It should be noted that a twist and s teer form of control involves r oll pos i t i on
stabil isati on; or mo re s pecifi call y it involves roll pos i tion demand. The
details of i mpleme nti ng ro ll cont ro l a re di s cusse d under aut opil ot des ign.
42 Guided Weapon Coritr"ol Sys tems
,
1-
, -
3.4 AERODYNAMIC LATERAL CONTROL
Hith c carte sian control system t he oitch con"Crol is I.de ia E:ntical t o the
yaw control system s o we need dis cuss one channel only ; i n this respect t he
nome nclature differs f rom t hat used i n aircra ft . With rm ss. t l es. l ateral movement
. - --"--'-":.:.:'-'-""--= = = .:..::.
us ua.!-l y means up-down or left -riaht, polar control one rolls and elevat es .
Tne followi ng remarks apply to th e elevat ion channel i n t wi st and stee r mi s s i l es
al so.
i -
\
t
!
, .
"f':
Rear coricro l: surfaces
The maj ori ty of tacti cal mi ss i l es have fixed main lift ing surfaces (o ft en called
wit h t he ir centre of pres sure s omewhere near t he mi ss i l e centre of gravi ty,
and rear cont rol s urfaces. Wi th s ubs onic mi ssiles i t may be IDJ r e fficient t o us e
,
"
, .
together Hi th any
1eayes t he cont ro1
.,
associated electronics i ncl udi ng.J he guidan ce This
__. . - '--------- - -
system to occupy t he re ar end wi th the blast pipe passi ng
cent re. If t he re are four servos it .is not impossibl e
the controls as fl aps i mme di at el y behind t he Hings as t he flap contro ls the
ci r cul at io n over th e ' whol e surface . Hith s upe rs oni c flo'" t he cont r ol su rface cannot
affect the fl ow ahea d of itsel f and t here fore it is pl aced as f a r to t he rea r as
possible i n orde r to exert t he ra xi mum momen t On the mis s il e. Rear control s urfaces
often make f or a convenient of components . Usually i t is desirable to
- . . >,
ha ve the pro pulsion system p,l ace d in the t he ce ntre. of
gravity movement que It i s
-_ - ' --
s ometi mes es s ent i al to have the warhead and fu'Z.L:LtQe.J'ront
packa ge r ound this pi pe .
Wnen consi de ri ng th e l at e ral forces and mll"Ents on missiles it i s convenient
firs t of all to cons i de r the corrbined normal forces due t o i nci dence on th e body ,
,.'
r--
i1i 5S i le Con tro 1 tnocs 43
I
I
t
"i ngs and control ' "" f oces as act i ng t hrough a poi nt on t he body called the centre
c
of pres s ure (cP.) and t o r egard the control surfaces as permanentl y locked in
t he ce ntral pos it ion . I If the c . p. i s ahea d of t he cent re of gr avity (c. g.) then
, the mi ss il e is said t o be s t ati cal l y uns tab l e. If it coi ncides with t he c.g.
't hen i t' is said to be neut rallv s t abl e and if it is behi nd the c.g . it is s ai d to
be stat i ca ll y stabl e) Tn is of course i s the reason why fe at hers are pl aced at
t he rear end of an arro'(/ to mcve the c. p. ef t . The se t hree possible conditions
are s hown i n Fig 3. 4-1 to 3. 4-3. Ihe mi s s i les are s hown wi th a s mall i nci dence
i .e . t he body is not pointing in the s ane direct ion as t he mis s il e vel oci t y vector
U
m
In t he uns t ab l e condi t i on any pe r turtiat i on of away f ro m. t he di r ect ion
of t he ve lcci t y vecto r re s ul ts in c. mcren t about the' c. g. whi ch t ends t o i ncrease
Um
-
i
I
i
CG aria C?
FIG. Z. 1-1 PiG. 3. ';-2 ;'/Bld.lyJ:L s zab l e FiG. 3. ';-:5 Stable
r-......r ",.....r \../"".../V -: -...-.......r
t his perturbat ion . Conve:'Se1y i n t he stable ccnci t i on any pe r t uro a t i on of the
body direct ion results in a rror:'ICnt '.'thich tends to oppose or decrease this
perturbation . The distance of the c.p . to the e .g. is ca ll ed t he s tatic marg in .
Si nce 1ate r a1 ;o:"r -=c-=e--:a':' n""'d--C-
h
d
by exer ting a moment on the body such that $cr.z inciden ce it fo l lows that
if the stati c i s,excess ive, the missile is unnecessari ly stab l e and cont rol
momen t s Vl il l be rel at i vel y i nef fect i ve in oroducing a si zeable manoeuvre. There
has to be a compromi se here between st abi l i ty and manoeuvrabi l i ty . Now consi der a
missi l e whose fon/ard speed i s cons t ant , 'Hith a steady wi ng inci dence of
3 and a control s urfac e noverent from the cent ral pos i t ion of 1:; . fWe will consi der
mo tion i n t he hori zontal plane only and the missi le is not rol l ing ; t he
ef fects of gravity are zero in this pl ar.e. Fi g 3.4 -4 shows the normal force N due
to the body, wings and rear cent ral surfaces assumed to be in t he csnt ral position ;
- <'- - '-l -\;
this force act s the_.c ,p. But there ..lin be an addit ional force N
c
due \
to the control being deflected by an Le t t his force act a t a
dis tance t
c
from the c . g. Neglecting the small damping mcment due to trw f'act
that the miss ile i s executing a steady turn) this p i ct ure can rep res ent dynamic
equi l i br i um i f the rudder rrorran t N i i s nume r i c a l ly equal to Nx* where x* is t he
c c
44
Guided 'o'i eapon Con t rol Sys tems
,.. ... . .
(3
Urn
Rear s urfaces subs oni c
N c
\
i
FIG. 3. 4-6 Ccnard cor.t:!'oz.s
?IG. 3 . 4- 4 Recr s upersonic
\N
\
\
\
\
\ N c'"'
\'
Y'
Nc
N 2 N C.

,. \ Nc
\
Urn
FIG. 3. 4-7 l:o...nng tJings
'<l' . .' "t CO "
.44",4" 4 C
. ;:
Missile Con,rol Methods
---------------------
\
45
,
.-j
If 9. / x*
, c
for ce i s i n Not e t hat this
st at i c margin .
10 say then N lQ N
c
' and the total latera l 9 N
c
the opposite sens e to N
c
' Si nce x* is t ypically 5%or
->'7.. --:- _ _ _ __ ,
l ess of the body lengt h i t i s eas i ly se en th at a small i n" t he stat ic mar gin-
can s i gnificantly af fect the manoeuvrabil i ty the' t he standard
method of obt ain ing a la r ge l at e ral ;;-miss'; i-; ti;;ve a l a r ge rorrent
ar m by placing the cont rol s ur f aces as f a r f r om t he e.g. as b'y
I designing in a small s t at i c Clargir.. The rea de';' wish if t he
c. p. of the Hings and body el one is at t he c. g. t hen CO of control s ur f ace movement
wil l produce t he same a:rount of body incidence . If the C. p. as just defined i s i n
front of the e.g. t hen CO of rudder Hill induce rro re t han CO of body incidence . If
t his c. p. is behin d th e c.a. then less t han CO of bO<t-- i ncidence If
a mis sile has no autopilot (i .e . no instrument feedback) a s i zeable s tat i c ma rgin
.
has to be al lowed to ,ens ure stability in flight, say 5%or more of the overall
1engt h. Wi t h i ns tr- ument zero or even negat i v; st ati ( ma rgi ns can be
used, thus assist ing raanceuvr ebil t t y . Be fore leaving rear contro ls it s,.hould
be noted that t he ove ra l l c.p, can neve r be re qardad as i n a f i xed position. The
cY..:, of t he body in particular will vary with i.n.<:.ideC'SLand wit h [,lach numbe r .
2o:r..Jard control, s1.Lvtfaces ({ c. ",,-, ,d)
Since t he main object of siting a control s ur face i s t o place it as far' from the
C. g. as possible, a position as far forward as i s practi cable appears a l ogical
choice . Forwar-d control su rfaces are often called "canards " named after ducks
who apparen tly steer t hemselves by m ': ing t hei r head. '
poss ible case of dynamic equilibrium. In this case it
Fi g 3.4-6 shows another
i s se en that the l ater al
I
I
,
I
I
i
\
force due to t he miss il e as a \'thol e nQ;-{ adds t v t he fo rce due t o t he deflection
of the control surface and t herefore if = 10 as before , then th e tota l normal
force is 11 N compar ed with 9 N I'li t h rear contro ls . Also , the final sen se of ./
c c
the total normal force is in t he s ame sense as t he control force . Canards t herefnre
ar e sl ightly more effici ent in t he use of late ral control fo rces. if t he reader
thinks that canards will automaticall y rende r the missile unstable he ,li11 note
t hat the canard controll ed mi ssile has been dr awn with the l ifti ng
ra ther further aft to c.p . aft of t he e.g. J t is t he pos iti on of
, .,.
the overall c.p. rel ative to t he e.g. wi th t he control s urfaces centralised which
i s the stability cri t eri on.
Si nce canards appear to be superi or' t o le,"r cont r ol s why do we find 50 many
- - "
missiles with rear contro ls ? Fi rs t l y , 'fie shall s ee that with feedback inst rume nts
in a cont ro l systemt he static margi n C H, be inade zero or even negati ve whi1st
m?in taining over-al l stability; s o the diff erence in total normal force ava i labIe
can often be neqli qibl e , Secon dly , t here is the quest i q,n of conven i en ce in
packaging as already rrent i oned whi ch usually fa vours rear controls . Finally , and
(
. (
r-
Cut ce d ,it:apUi; Control Systems
t hi s is probabl y t he cni e f reason , the down>ias h f rom cana r' OS onto t he mai n lifting
=
can, i n many conf i gur ati ons, nul li fy any at tempt t o cont rol th e mi s s il e
in roll . ' A long t hi n missi le suffers l es s i n this r espect t han a s hort one . The re
are two ways aro und t his prob l em. I f t he mi s s il e is a twis t and steer one , the
small front portion of the mi s s i l e can be attached to the main body by me ans of a
beari ng vhi ch al l ows the rea r body t o r otate freel y t hus uncoupling t he head from
r olli ng noments i nduced in t he wings . An alternative is t o mount t he \<ings on a
collar whi ch al l ows them t o ro tate comparatively f reely around t he bony as alrea dy
ment ioned.
10ving wi ngs
To us e se rvos t o move the mai n lift i ng surfaces and empl oy s mal l f i xe d rear
stabili sing surfaces is unusual. There coul d be t he r are occasion when t he
s e r vos ar e mos t conveni entl y pl aced nea r the centre of the mi s s i le t : For instance,
_ '" c- -..::....-.;. -.
if a medium range mt ss i l e 'has t wo separate motors '; a boost motor and'"a- sustain
mo to r , t he fo rrne r may occupy t he whole of the rea r end of t he mi s s il e and the
sus t ainer motor may occupy most of the remaining re ar-haH of the body , dis charging
t o atmos phere through two inclined nozzles . In s uch a case t here is j ust no room
to i ns tall se rvos at the rear . I f th e missil e ca r ri es a homing head they cannot be
placed at t he front eit he r; <!:! owever t he ma i n reason for adopting th is confi gurat i on
would be , for a given acceleration , t;;;;in im\s e t he body If
the propul s i on system is a ra m j et the air intake i s like l y to choke if the body
i nci dence is l arge , say 15
0
or more,", Alternat ively , if t he miss il e i s a sea-s ki mme r
wi t h heigh t cont rol governed by a radi o al t i nete r it may be ne ces s ary t o s pecify a
ma ximum body inci dence . In Fig 3.4 -7 the normal force from th e wi ngs for a given
i nci dence is shown as half that due to wings, body and s t abil i sing sur f aces comb i ned,
a s it uat i on whi ch i s possible for fairly large f ixed stabi li s ing s urf aces . If
r
t he dis tance of the c.p. of the wings forward of the c.g. i s t wice the st atic
ma r gin t hen the steady st at e body i nci dence is equal to the wing defl ect ion, givi ng
a t ot al normal force th ree - t i me s t he or iginal normal for ce from the wi ngs . In othe r
' lords a wing de f'lect ion 0/\0
0
produces a body i nc i dence of 10
0
r esulti ng i n a
fina l I'ling of 20
0
./ However there a re some dis t i nct_oenalti es i nvolve d
i n the us e of moving wi ngs . Cl early the se rvos will be appreciably larger to
cope wi t h t he i ncre ased inert i a of t he load and t he l a r ger ae rodyn ami c hi nge
nonerits . Al s o, it has already been demonstrated t hat mo vi ng wings are an i ne ff i ci ent
way of producing a large normal small !BQ.ment am availabi e .
Owing to t he fa ct that t he whole bending moment at the wing r oot has t o be t aken
-..... '.'. -
by a shaf't, the wi ng will ha ve to be d es ign ed much t hicker around t he mid chord.
. - . - .-. ----- -
This not only j ncre as es 1O.he we;i.ghLbuLEt s peeds it I<i ll
i ncrease the drag , the pressure drag varying ,lith the t hi ckness - to-chord ratio
46
Missile Control j'letf-t ods 47

- "
..
,
r -
I
I
I -
I -
- !
- \
,

squared. It is desirable to make th e centre sect ion of the miss ile body square in
cr os s secti on to eli mi nate a wing -b ody wh en t:!:'e _wi ng t : def l e cted ; such
a gap cons i der abl y reduces the gene rated normal f or ce . And f inally s ince t he moment
arm is s mail, th e position OT t he c . g . i s cri tical as a s mall shift will make an
appreciable change in t he control momen t ar m. Neve r t hel ess , if the maximum g
requireme nts are low and t he speed i s subs onic, such as for an ant i - s hi p missi le,
the overall weight penalty may not be excess i ve if small movi ng wings are used .
3.5 AERODYNAMIC POLAR CONTROL VERSUS.C..... RT ESIAN CONTROL
The great major ity of t actical mi s s i l es are requi re d:{ o have the s ame degree of
manoe uvrabi l ity ve rtically ana hori zontally ; t his is why the conventional ccnf i qur a-
tion is a cr uci f orm one wit h triO eo,uil ef li fti ng s urf ac; s and tw. of
control ' If 'no f orm of roll co..tr-Jl is re quired only two servos are
neces sary provided oppos ite cont rol surfaces ar e l inked t ogether. If s ene formof
ro ll cont rol is r equired at l eas t three se r vos are neces s ary and in pract i ce four
identi ca l servos are us ual. If only three 'here used and they were al1 t he same
s i ze t he two controlling only one fir! each 'n'cu.1d be unnecessari i y i arge. Tne
advant age of adopci ng a t wist and steer methc d of control is to be able to us e unl y
one pai r of iifti ng s urf aces and one pair of control s urfaces " This cuts down
wei ght and drag and su ch a config ura t ion wil l certainly be advantageous for
hor i zonta l s t orage between decks of a s hi p or f or l aunchi ng unde r t he wi ngs of an
aircraft. As an exa mple of t he dr ag bonus> about a half of the total drag of a
conventi onal supersonic mi ss ile comes f rcm t he fOur wi ngs and f our cont rol s ur fac es .
Clearly the re are advantages . Tne me thod of manoeuvrin g the mi ss il e is thi s . The
y goes as a pos i t ive comma nd to control surfa ce an d a negat ive comn2nd
to the other . This causes the r oll. The R comnand goes
su rfaces al ways as a pos itive demand. The i nt ent i on is to make the re s ponse in ro ll
so fast that the conmands can be appl ied simultaneously which makes for simplicity.
Neverthel ess, manoeuv re cannot be so and fas t as wi th cart esian cont rol .
There i s also a possibility t hat in ce r t ai n situations the per-formance of a t wi s t
and stee r systemcould be distinct1y inferior to a cart es i an one . Suppose in a
s ur f ace to ai r system a target is apprcachi nq nea r l y head on. The mi s s ile has t o
pull very little 9 but if t he re i s much noise t he system t he miss il e could
easily be ro ll i ng backwar-ds and f or "a,ds through 180
0
or so beca use th e t a r get
appears to be at 12 oclock and then 5 oclock. ' The effe ct on system accuracy i s
,-.- .,--, - .. . . .
difficult to pre di ct under'such ci r cums t ances . Bloodhound i s t he well known example
of poler contro l and t he arguITEnts f or its adoption stem- pr-i mar-i Iy f rum the cnoice
of a ram j e t f or t he propuls ion motor . . No,,! i f tvo ram j e ts extern al to t he rna in
body are used t here i s room for only one pzi r: of wing s. At t he ti m= th e air i ntakes
,
, .
================:;: ,::;: .:; , .:.J:
48
Guice a 't.cc.p0 n Contr o l Sy s t.ems
could accept only a siua l l body incidence due to i nte r fe re nce r r on. tr.e boay so
rmvi nq wings were adopted (1) . These two wings are t herefore used as ailerons and
elevators 'at the s arre t i ne and control1ed by separate servos ; the wor d "e l e vons "
is sorret imes app l i ed t o s uch control s urf aces .
3est (2) has demonst rated so rrp- of the diffi culties i n ensuring a stable system
with pol ar cont rol used in a homing system , and in ass essing t he sy stem perfonnance .
With cartesi an cont r ol it is possible t o r esolve t arge t , and mi s sile mo t ion i nto
tdO planes and to cons i der t he pi t ch and yaw channel s as independent two-dimensiona l
orob l ems, This simplification is not possible in the cas e of pol ar cont rol; i ndee d
the equat i ons of not i on which result are , i n general , not sus ceptibl e to analysis.
Detai led three-dimensional s imul at ion has t o be empl oyed. Bearing in mind th e
f ac t that ca r tesi an control mus t be a qui cker method of movi ng l aterall y i n any
one dire ction and that analysis of t he performance of cartesian syst ems i s s i mpl e r
it is understandable why t he great majority of missiie systems use t his method . A
l ater mi s s i l e , Seada rt , uses an integral ram jet with the eir i nt ake in t he nose .
Since there is no i nt e r f er ence from the main body l ar ge r incidences can be accept ea
with s uch an arrangement , Mo ving wi ngs are not nece ssary t o reduce body i nci dence
and therefore a conventi onal cruci form mi ss i l e using cartes i an cont rol and rear
cont ro l surfaces was adopte d; it was considered t hat an integra l ra m jet was not
feas ibl e Vl i t h Bloodhound. Clearl y t herefo re, pol ar control i s not feas ibl e if roll
pcsi t i on stabilisation is re qui red ; nor i n t he case of home rs , if a high roll rate
mi ght disturb the homi ng head undul y . Si nce s o fev mi s s il es use pol ar control i t
is c l ear that most designers do not consider t he advantage in sa ving rJeight drag
and space do not compens at e f or t he l oss of accuracy and speed of respon se .

3.6 THRUST VECTOR CONTROL

A compl e tely differen t method of steering a mi ss ile i s to alter t he di rect i on of
t he effl ux f rorn th e propul sion motor and such a method is kpovm as th rus t vector
. .
control (TVC) . This method':bf control is clearly not primar ily dependant on t he
dynami c pres sure of the atrrosphe re , but on the ot he r hand i t is inoperative after
mot o r burn-out . It will be argued later that i n many situations there are
advant ages in having a boost -coast velocity profil e. WC is therefore likely t o
have a limite d app l i cation . The following s ituations make TVC essential or
des irabl e :
(a ) It i s essentia l t o use TVC in t he verti cal launch phas e of all inter-continental
bal l i s t ic mi ss il es as these mis s il es whose total wei ght is wel l over gOt fuel have
t o be l aunched ext r emel y gra dually t o avoi d dynamic loadin g. Aerodynamic controls
would be completely i ne f f e ct i ve f or s am: time and the mi s s il e woulo topple over
due to a small inev itable t hrust mi sal ignrrent unl es s an and rve
c
c
c
.'

"
Missile COfl t rol Xethods 49
we re used .
(0) If a mis sile i s sepa rated some dis tance f rom its cont roll e r such as in t he
anti - tank system Swingfire and rap id gat he r i ng is requi red t o aCh i eve a sho r t
minimum range then it must be possible to manoeuvre t he miss i l e almos t immediately
aft er l a unch.
(c) In a s hort range air-to-air mi s s il e , one may be trying t o hi t a fast cross i ng
target with no aim-off and with a flight t ine of a few s econ ds . The exceptional
manoeuvrabjl ity one obtain wi t h TVC would give the syst ema bett e r coverage.
(d) I t can be a t hat sose sys d'be 'cheaperand 5imp 1er if one
launched vertically and then turned over rapidly, thus e l iminatin g an expensive
,' " ..
. ,
and heavy launcher.
(e) Ve r t i cal l aunch followed by a rapid turnover is an attracti ve concept fc r
mi ss i les car r i ed and launched frcm a vehicl e ; 360
0
arc of f i re, is obtainabl e , and
st or age and reloading is almost certainly facilit "ted. This is espe cially s o fo r
miss iles launched f rom a ship. With a convent i onal trainab le laun cher there may
be cons i der abl e blind arcs due to ot her occupying part of the deck space.
(f ) Submarine la unched missiles s ur f aci nc i n dif fe rent se a condi t i ons may weil
need very ear ly cours e correction .
J -ln order t o appreciate the degree of m an c e uvrab i l i ty that can be acni e v e c le t us
cons ide r the req uirerrent to tum t he bcdy of a miss"ile t hr ough s ay 90
0
as soon as
pos s i ble after la unch i .e. when t he mi s s i l e speed i s l ow. Aerodynami c forc es wil l
be small during t hi s period and will be neglected in the fo llowing cal culation .
Fi g 3. 6- 1 shows t he forces act ing on t he miss ile if the thrus t T is deflected
through an angle y.
T sin 3
Ie
_______ C G.
1'_______.
" I
FIG. 3. 5- 1 For ces
OJ
If for examp le the mas s of t he mi ssi l e i s 30 kg, th e noment of i nertia /abou t tne
r
c.g. i s 1 kg m
2
(bet h ass umed constant ) , t he t hr ust is 1500 N and the moment ar m
9, C is 0.35 m t hen for y = 4 ;.,. -( '"?; ",.,.,.J-.
T I
C
s i r. -(/J
- 1500 X G.35- x (Lv] ::; -5C.t;
2
racj s
Ass uming i t i s neces s ary to bring the oody to res t at t he ena of tne t urn tne
perfect contro l system"iil accel erat e t he body t hro ugh 45
0
at maxi mum accel eration
50
Gui ded We apon Contro l Systems
and then app ly full brak ing torque fo r t he sa me t ime. pn thes e slightly optimis ti c
as s umptions the t ime for a complete turn from rest t o re st will be found to be
about 0.(, s econds; and t his is for a comparatively sma ll thrust deflection . It
" 0
s hould be noted that a lthough th e body has been turned through 90 the velocity
vector wil l have been turned through a smaller angl e . To turn t he ve locity vect or
through a gi ven angl e requires i nitially a body tum great er t han this i n or de r to
des t roy any momen tum already gained in t he original dire ct ion . The difference
between a hori zontal turn and ene i n t he vertical plane is t hat i n t he latter case
gra vi ty helps t o destroy the vertical component of momen t um and theref ore a tight
tum is slightly easi er i n the vertical plane .
There is , as wi th aerodyna mic control , addit ional comp l i cation if ro ll cont r ol is
requ'i red. Two ba 11 and socket nozzl es can produce a r oll moment if t hey are
mo ve d differentially i n one plane . Pitch and yaw control is obtained by moving
t hem together i n t he desi red plane each controlled by t wo s e rvos .
3.7 METHODS OF THRUST VECTORI NG
As in dicate d in Fi g 3.1 -3 there are se veral methods of di-re ct i nq t he thrus t of a
rocket motor and each met hod has advantages and di s advant aqes wh i ch mayor may not
recommend i t for a parti cular application.
G-:rr:baHea r;;o;;o:rs .-(Fi g 3.7-1)
Wnen li qui d propellants are used t he fuel and oxidi ser are fed under pressure to
one or mo re cormust i on cherro ers and expanded to atmosphere t hr ough convergent-
dive rgent nozzles . If t he comb ustion chantlers are mounted i n gima1s anc controll e d
i n pos i tion by s ervos the direction of t hrust can be cont rolled. I f a pai r ar e
move d different ially some control in roll i s also obtained . The me thod is essentiall y
Ios s -J'ree -and t he "los s" of axi al thrust i s merely a cosi ne e ffect whi ch is i ne vit able ,
As yet large ly due to t heir toxidity and the relative comp lexity of the ove ra ll

propuls ion system, l iquid propellants. are rarely used for tacti cal mi s s i l es despite
the ir high s pec i fic i mpul s e. If hOliever it i s necessary to programme the. magni tude
of the t hr us t , l i qui d propel j ar.ts provide the only answer (e .g. Lance ).
-"'
noz zZes (Figs 3.7- 2 and 3.7-3 )
If a s oli d propellant is used t he next best t hi ng to a gimbal led motor i s to
pres e rve t he smooth internal l ines of a convergent -divergent nozz le by us in g a f lex-
.. - ,
i bl e nozzl e or a ball and s ocket joint: ' In t he forme r one att aches t he nozzl e to
t he mo t or cas e by mean s of a flexible rubber s tiff axially
-: i - - 0 .---
but rel at i vely compl i ant in the pitch and yaw pl anest : .1 of nozzle movement
produces 1 of t hr ust defle ction . This is a good for t hr ust defl ect ions of
4
0
_5
0
but large torques are req uirad to move a nozzle much IOOre tnan thi s ; cl e ar l y
t he resistance t o move ment increases Hith an
gl/
- - - --- - - - - - - - - - - ---
Control Ilethods 51
OXYGEN
TANK
PROPELLANT
TANK
;. ' '':,
. ,
CONTROL
VALVES

\ GIMBAL
FLEXIBLE HOSES L..--+t---tf

COMBUSTION > !/)!

CHAMBER
FLEXIBLE

I
------=::J
FIG. 3. 7-2 nozzle
I
I.
!
I
I
\
52
."
Guided Weapon-Cont rol Systems
1
1
j
,
\
I
I
n PIVOT
~

..
?IG. 3. 7- 4 l':oving va::es
FIG . 3. 7-5 Semaphore epoi Lexs
...
FIG. Z. 7- 6 Gas i r.jection
CONTROL
VALVE
= -;--
- --- - - _ .- - -_.
Mi s s i l e Cont rol Me thod s 53
. i
M obv i ous method is t o us e a bail and s oc ket joint with some form of low-friction
seal; there will now be some coul onc f rict i on but t he actuation torq ue 'di il not
i nc rease with ang le. One of many types of t hr ust vec t or control package joi ntly
de vel oped by IMI Summerfield
and Sperry Gyroscope is s hown i n
Fig 3.7-7. It was devel ope d for
a mo tor developing 20000N t hrust
and use s t win nozzles whi ch can be
incependen t ly rrove d i n two planes.
giving c6ntrol in roll pitch and
ya" . In general it has been
fou nd t hat = 15
0
nozzl e de flecti on
coup le d with a sepa ration distance
of approxi mately one t hird t he
missi l e dia rrete r is sufficient to
cater f o r all roll momen t requi re -
nent s . In t hi s des i gn t he non-
recircu l at i ng oi l is pressu r i sed
f rom a- high pres s ure he l i un bottle,
and t he servos a.ce. _
power-fu l to enable aero dyna mic
cont ro l s urfaces to be di rect
coupled to t he sarre ac tuat ors ,
giving control duri ng any coas t i nq
phas e . An aitemati ve scheme
de ve Toped by t he same f i rms is to
us e one ban an d socket nozz le fo r
pi t ch and yaw control an d t o use
t angenti al t hrusters for th e
FIG 3.7-7 180r;:n TVC Package control o f rol l .
T ' . h I r: ' ' 7' . , - ")
r.:e "t OG.3 \., 1 gs j. an a ':' . 1-;.),
The re are many methods of el teri ng t he r:D,rer::..:iil ie:::cr of a. jet by i nse rt i nq an
obs t ruction in the st ream. Since t he f1 0\'/ is, inve r i ab l y supersunic, shock waves
are produced and t hi s causes a ri s e i l l pre s s ure and a I o s s i n vel oci ty . Ipt e r-
met bo,k il
re
rpi2 ti vel y crude and _i oss '{-, but have t he advanta ge that ve ry
sma ll movi ng parts are required and 'therc:forz t he s erves are small. Perhaps t he
oldes t j e t is t he mc vi nq vane as use d i n t he V2 ib y!orl d Har II.
11any Pershing have used vanes .
The re i s a severe-er-o;i;;;-problerJ of course due to the high gas t empe rat ure and
54 Gui cec Cont r ol Systems
velocity. Graphite has been used and rrore recently tungsten and molYDoenum.
With t t'0 vanes nearly 24
0
vane angle i s needed for 100 thrust deflection . Because
t he vanes are permanent ly in the jet stream about 8% of t he thrust is lost with
four vanes in t he nul l posi t ion increasing to.20%with 20
0
in cidence with two of
t he vanes . The erosi on prob lem is excepti ona ll y severe with propellants cont ai ni ng
an apprec i abl e quantity of aluminium.
Anothe r COl1J11on me t hod is the semaphore spoiler "hich the Fren ch have used on mos t
of t heir anti -tenk miss iles . Verj small servos are required. " 22
0
t hr ust
defl e ction has been obta ined Vl ith Brit ish des igns but the axial thrust loss is
not less t han 1% per degree deflection . A small disadvant age of the s e maphore

spo il e r is t hat the assembly must be housed around the nozzl e exit, l e adi ng to
a larger than normal mis si le base area . In the Fre nch anti - t ank sys tems Ho t and
11i1an only one spoil er i s use d. Guidance comnancs are in polar form ; the R command
cet ermines t he servo pulse wi dth and t he command i s us ed t o dete rmi ne the_
phasing of the command >lith respect to the mis s ile verti cal .E.0si ti on. The mi s s ile
is deliberately roll ed and carries a roll position gyros cope so that the mi ssile
ro ll orientation i s always known .
Injection methods (Fig 3.7-6)
The of inje cting a liquid or gas in to the motor vent ur i i s to obta i n a
sideways comDonent of than. venting radi al l y outwards
dire ct to atmosphere . Even if an augrrentation of side -thrus t i s obtained , t he
me thod fail s if appreciable axial thrust losses resul t . fjany f irings have been
conducted using different fluids suitable for t acti cal weapons . Thes e ha ve
ranged f r om inert fluids l i ke Freon t o reacti ve fluids such as strontium per-ch l o re te y
<
water solutions . The maximum jet deflection for an i nert liq ui d sys t em was
found t o' be 4
0
. With reactive fluids the e f f i ci ency drops off rapidly beyond 4
0
jet defle ction . A(l advantage of secondary fluid deflect ion is the si mpl e low
mas s control system associated with it (3) . Jet ceflect ions of up t o ..l2 have
been obtained by injecting hot gas bled directly f rom the mot or colfbust ion charrbe r .
This is potentially the sinmrest system of all but the pro spect of controlling
small quantities of this ve'ry hot di rty and erosive gas i s not att ract i ve: However
the use of fluidic controllers has been suggested inte r es t in hot gas i njecti on
is being revivedl.r short bum _high mot ors (3) .
Summari si ng, interference methods (espe ci al ly se maphore spoi l e r s ) are attracti ve
be caus e t he servos are smal L :" They ere strong contenders f or s hort range mi s s iles
s i nce t he >leight of prope llant is not large and an increase of say 5- 10% i n t he
propellant car r i ed to make up for t he thrust loss es may not impose an overall
weight penalty . Iloving nozzles are verv efficient but reguire more nowerfu l
servos._ Two sVlive1 nozzles can also pro vide roll control. At the present t ime
--
they are cons i de re d at aii could be us ed only when
REF ERENC ES
i. FARRAR D.J . Tne Bloodhoun d J .R. Ac . Soc Jan 1959 .
2. BEST D. Some probl ems of polar missi le cont rol J .R. Ac. Soc Aug 196 0.
3. LLOYD R. A review of thrust ve ct or control systems fo r tacti cal mi ss iles
AlAAj SAE 14th Joint Propulsion Conference July 1978.
inject i on methods , if
deflecti on an gles are
Missile Contr oT Methods

(
,
{
55
\
.,
. .

1.1 NOTATION AND CONVENTIONS
55
t an _ s cos
(4 .1 -4 )
('L 1-5)
(4.1 -6)
(4. 1- 1)
(4. 1-2 )
(4 .1 -3)
, .
":., . -:
of inertia about 0 are de f i ned as :
'. -. F ;: em xy
;3. : incidence i n t he plane .
A; in cidence plane angle .
6: total incidence, s uch t nat :
and 6 = t3r e s i n h
CP.APTER 4
AERODYNAMIC DERIVATIVES AND
AERODYNAMIC T RANSFER FUNCTIONS
The yaY, Qil ne is planeana __ plane. Tne fo11m'li09

angles are defined :

a: incidence in t he pi tch pl ane.
The prcc uct s of in ert ia ar e de r ineo as:
0 = E 5m yz
.-
= E om xz
Fi g. 4. 1-1. The moment s
A = E om (i + / )
B = Z 15m
(zZ +
l)
c
= ...z
om(i -i-
l )
angu1a r ve l ociti es , and t he of t hese quantities are s he:..m i n
z axis, cane d t he ya';'{ axi s , dmm\'ords i n the plane of syrare t ry to form a
r i qht handed orthogorlcl sy s tem \'l i:h the othf:'f t',':o.,
Table iL "; -1 de fi nes the f orces an d riOiT.-2n ts ect i nq on t he mi s sile, the 1 i nee r J,nCl
The reference a xis system standardis ed in the guided wee pons industry is centred
on the e.g. and fixed, in t he body as fo l l ows :
x axis , called t he ro ll a xis, f or wa r ds , al ong the axis of synrre t ry if one
exists , but in any case in the pl ane of symre t ry .
y axis, called t he pitch axis: 30d t o the right if viewing the
missi ie from behi nd.
!'=---_. __ .- - .. _- - - _.. _----.--- - - - - _ . __ ._----------_.
_ _ : ,1
Aerodynamic Derivatives and Aerodynamic Transfer Funct ions

57
z
r
z
B
v
y
q
y
Pitch axi s
x
...., :t.
L
x
u
p
TABLE 4 1-1 'WTATI ON
Roll axis
each axi s
about each axi s
ncme nt s of i ne rt i a about
of Inertia
I Angular rates
I Component of missile
I velocity along each axi s
r Component of force acting
I On missile a l ong ea ch axis
I noments acting On mi s s il e I
I !
,......,.......,.......,.__.,.....,._....,.........,. -+ -J
I . , i
L C "C_ I
D, E .
c
. i -F:-:-j
__ _ :--L
The rae son i','hy U, t he mi s s il e ve l oc ity al ong x axi s is cen c t e c oy a capi t a l
, I
letter is to t hat it i s 2. large pos i t i ve quan t i ty changing at mos t onl y
\
r
r
I
I
i
i
I
The angula r rates and comp onents of velocity along the
tend t o be much sma ll er quant i t i es wnich cao be
ha ve la rge r r ates of change.
IS CENTRE OF
MISSILtc i
{NOTE: 0
./
B M q
.,
a f ew per cent per secon d.
pitch and yaw axes howe ver,
posi ti ve or ne gat i ve and can
I
t
.--- - - - ,
58 Guioed iieapon Con t ro l Sys tems
4. 2 EULER'S EQUATlO!';S OF MOTION FOR A RIGID BODY
(4 .2 -6 )
L
r1
N
m (V + q'd
-
rv) = X
m ( v + rU Prl)
y
m (w- qV pv) Z
Ap
(B C) 0( 1'
2 2
E(pq r- ) F{r-p qr -r-
q ) - -e
Bq (C A) E( p
2
r
2
) F( qr p) O(pq
-
rp -r- -r
Cr- (A B) F(q
2
pZ)
O(rp q) E(ar pq
+ -t-
I r.ere an:: six eq ua t ions of mo t ion for a oooy with six degrees of fr ee dom: t n ree
f orce equat ions and t hre e momen t e quat i ons . The eq uati ons a re somewha t si mple r if
the mass i s cons tant and the r adii of gyr at i on change s lowly (1) , in which case
t he "standard" Euler eq ua t i ons can be used . During boos t t he mass f at e o f ch ange
can De rela tively fas t Gut the r adii of gyration usually cha nge s l owl y . In t nt
gre a t major i ty of des l gn ca lcula ti ons the standa rd equa ti ons are used . They a r e:
(4.2-1)
( 4. 2- 2 )
(4 .2-3)
(4 .2 -4)
(4 .2 -5)
The first equation does not ree l l y c.mcern cs , ... e ar e in t er e s t e o in t.ne ecce l ere t i on
perpendicular to the velocity vector as tm s wiil resul t i n a change i n tne ve t oc i ty
dire ction . In any case in order to determine t ne cnariqe i n t r.e f o rv.e ro speed 'o"i t:
need to know :he meqn i tude of o ro pul s ive eno orag t orc es . l"tO" consider' e\..jvctlon
4 . 2-2 . The term - mp...' is Sdyl ng tns t t rie r e 1S 0. force in Y c i r e c t i o n duE: to
i nc i de nce i n pi tch ( 0. :: "" / U) and roll motion. In QUi et "fI o r ds : ne pi tch ing mo tion
of t he missile is coupl e d to the ya'f!ing motion on ac count of roll ra te . The t e r m
mpv in equat i on 4 . 2-3 is also saying that yawi ng mo tion ind UCeS fo r ce s i n thE: pi tcn
plane i f roll ing mo tion is present. This is mos t unoes i r ab l e as \"I E require t ne s e
two "channels" t o be compl e t e ly uncouple d. I dea ll y r udder mo veme nt s should produce
f o r ces and momen t s i T:! t he yar,' plane and resul t i n ya'wing motion only; e l e vato rs
shou ld res ul t in a manoeuvre i n t he pi tch plane . Cr'oss vcucpl i nq Jetheen t he planes
must contribute t o system inaccuracy. l o reduce t nes e unCles itdc l e effects t he
de si gner t r i e s t o kee p roll rates as low as pos s tc l e , and in :. si mplifi ed an alysis
on e usually neglects t he t e rms enc p", t f r-oll r-a t cs are expe c t e o t o De sma ll
and inc i de nce (vane w a r e propor t ione t t o in c i oence ) is not l arg E: . Neve r t nel e s s
":.,.:
t he re i s e vi de nce t hat 10" roll ra tes (say 1-4 ca n nave a s i gnifi cant effect
on s ystem accuracy . If p = 20 say ( a ppr o xlma t e l y 3 revs/ s) , U : 300 and " =0. 1
?
then w = 30 , and t he p(oduct ir, Equat ioll 4 ,2 -2 i s 600 any a ut o-
pilot or guidan ce f eedback tne r oll r a t e on tne pitcning motion
a spi r al motion of ampl itude 600/p2 = 1 .5m radius . A hi ghEI- 1"01 1 rate proauces a
larger cross -coupled Uut t e nds t o be atttfluated I n positl0n aue to
the higher frequen cy . If an autop ilot wi t h accelera tion fe edDac l<. is us ed w e
effects wi l l be re duc e d, In any cas e t he gu idance loop has a cert ain s tiffness
whi ch "i ll tend t o r e duce this effect; the missile does no t fl y open -loop .
(
(
,j
...-i
Aerodynamic De ri vatives a nd Aerodynamic Tra nsfer Functio ns 59
Now consi der t he roome nt equations . Ideall y t hese should read
. .
Ap = L; Bq = M; Cr = N
i . e . mome nt s about a give n axis produce ang ular ac celerati ons ab o ut th at axis.
All other terms in these eq uati ons are cross-coupl i ng t erms and a re unde s ira bl e
from the point of vi ew of system accura cy . We note t hat three out of fo ur of t he
cross -co upling terms i n e ach eq uation disappear if t he pr od uct s o f ine rtia are
zero . All t hree products of i ne rt i a a re zero if there a r e two axes of sy rrme t ry ,
and two wi ll be zero and the t hird wi ll be s mall if t here is On e axis of symme t ry
an d the mi s s i l e is reas onabl y s ymmetr ical about anothe r ax is . With two planes of
symme t ry and a small ro ll rat e therefore t hes e equat iqns re duce to :
(U rv ) X
;
(4 . 2-7) m + qw -
m ( v + rU)
y
(4 . 2-8)
m (w - qU) = Z (4 .2-9}
Ap L (f; . 2--10)
Bq M (4 . 2-]1 )
Cr N
The jus tification for neglecting the terms pq , pr , pv, is t hat t he t e nus q, r ,
v and ware not large terms and if p i s small then their product s can be negle ct ed.
[ Eq uat i on 4. 2-10 s hows t ha t th ere i s ze r o coupling between the pi t ch an d ro ll and
"';'j. .
L.. yaw and roll mot i ons if the re are two axes of syrme t ry (8;;; C) J and unl ess the
missil e 15 very unsyanetr-i cal t he cross-coupli ng shoul d be weak.
Neve rthel es s, even '.'Iith a mi s s il e wi th two axes of symretry , t he pr i nc ipa l mome nts
/
of i ne rt ia about t he pitch and yaw axe s (8 and C re s pe ct i ve l y ) will be much great e r
th an t he moment of inert ia about t he r oll axis (A) . floderat e ro ll rates will
ce rta i nly affect the acc uracyof t he system. This i s cons idered in more detai l i n
s ect ion 6.11 .
4. 3 T RAJECTORY CONSID ERATIONS
Be for e discussing how \;/e obtain for ces and noment s on a mi ss ile i n order to change
its flight pat h direc t i on SOrTE furthe r t houghts on Eul er's equati ons are pe rnaps
a dvi sab l e . Consider a parti cle with velo city U and acted upon by a f o rce
perpendi cul ar to t he velocity vector . There will be an accele rati on f normal to
t he velocity vector given by
wh ere R is the radi us of t urn
and '.)If is th e rate of turn of the ve l ocity vectOr.
Si nc e "
then f = (4 .3-1)
,
rfnat then i s the acceleration of a mi s s i l e pe rpenui cc l er-v to the flight path Que to
a f orce Yon the mi ssile ? It 1 S l oci cal t o resol ve the total ro rc e on a mi ssil e
60 Gui ceo '/h:apon Control Sys terns
- - - -. - -
(
into co mponents pe rpendic ular arid al ong t he flight path; tne l at t e r component will
increase or decrease the spee d of t he mi s s i l e but will not change its flight path .
Due to the incidence S of the missile the component normal to the flight path is
Y cos B. Hence' 4
wf U = Y cos :lIm = f (4. 3- 2)
Th." other component of the Y force is '( sin B and is usually called induced drag
and tends to reduce the speed of the mi s s i l e . Since the Y force i s approximately
proportional to incidence it is clear that induced drag is approximate ly
pcoportional to (incidence)2 . Thi ? is the mai n why designers usua lly aim
to keep i nci dence low; 10
0
_15
0
is usually the upper li mit.
In addit ion, two other i mportant forces have to be considered when computing the
missile 's trajectory. Firstly, the "zere incidence drag" Xlriill act along the
missi le axis . There ".ill be a component Xl cos S which tends to reduce the speeo
and a component - Xl sin B normal to the velocity vect or . Any propulsive force
has the converse effect. Hence , if tne ne t t e r fe et of propuls ive force less
total drag is to accelerate th e missile , it i s cl ear t hat t he pr opul s i on mo tor
helps the missile to s teer . I f ho"e ver the mi ss i l e is coa st i ng and has a long i tudinal
de celerati on of 50 m/s
2
s ay, and an i nci dence of 0. 2 r adi ans tri en the normal
acceleration is reduced by approxunet ely iO m/s
2
due to t he f orward decel erat i on.
extreme manoe uvrabi lity is required , s ay in a s hort r anqe air-to-air sys t em,
it is conmon for the propuls i on motor to provi de a large boost (s ay 20g ) for 4-5
seconds. The normal forces result i ng from inc idence previded by the control system
work toge ther to produce maxi mum ma nceuvr abi 1i ty.
And fin ally " hat is the physical mean ing of t he t e rms v T r U and w - qU in
equations 4.2-8 and 4.2-9 . Clearl y t he flight path direction is the body directi on
plus the jncidence angle . v an d w are t he i nc i dence r at es tines U, and rand q
are the body rates . Therefore thes e te rms are t he trajectory rates times U i.e .
the normal accelerations, see equation 4.3- 1. The reason for the change in signs
in the two equat ions is t hat t here is no absolute syrrmetry in a right-handed set
of axes : Thi s curi ous fact al so re flected in some of tne pi t ch ae rodynami c
derivatives being of opposite sign t o their yari counterpar-ts . The reader may
note a cos s in equati on 4.3-2 and no s uch te rm in equation 4. 3-1 . This is because
our i maginary particle had a veloci t y U. In the mi ss i l e case U is defined as the
velocity along the x axis; its vel oc ity i n t he di re ct io n of t he velocity vector
is U cos B.
4.1 CONTROL SUR.fACE CONVENTIONS
(
,
Let the contrel surfaces be numbered as shown in Fig . 4. 4-1.
'4are defined as pos iti ve if cl ockwis e looki ng outwar ds
hi nge axis . The foll owi ng quant i t ies ar e def ined:
uer l ec t ions t.l J ; 2'
alang the indi vi oua l
,
.
Aerodynamic Derivati ves and Aerodynamic Trans fer Func t i ons
?IG. ';. 4-1 Cor.. 7,CO & SiA.J. '!WH:'S as seen ji"Om che r-ecz- o f t he oriee i le
Aileron deflecti on =: 1 -t- F, 2 -t- ; <; -r- <4)
or 1 1 +<3)or !2 + i;4)
if only two surfaces act di fferent ia l ly .
61
. I
. -1
El evat or deflectiori
Rudder def 1ect i oft
rt = l 1
, 1 2
axi s .
Positive elevator deflection produces a -ve 'ro rce 10 tne z ot re ct ion and an
.
,
I
i
,
l '
I
,
The re ade r may wish to check that
Pos iti ve aileron defle ction produce s an 'lnti-clockltri se a.bout the j..
,
;
, ant i -clockwise moment about the y axis.
i
\ Positive rudde r deflection produces a force in t he y ci re ct i on and a - ve
\ norren t about the z axi s. - '
v,
4.5 AERODYNAMIC DERIVATIVES
Aerodynamic derivatives are.c1?vices enabling control engin"e,-s t o obt ai n transfer
f unc t i ons defining of a missi le to atleIon , elevato r or
The method is not new; an analys is of the torque-speed characteristic of a
hydra ul i c motor cont r olled by a piston val ve r evea ls t hat t he sy s t em is non-linea"
in that th e out put-input r e l ati ons hip is i nput ampli t ude depe ndant. Unf or t una tel y
t here is no gene ra l sol ut i on t o any non- linear differenti al equation. Yet we can
make a fair ly accurate es timate of pe rfo nnance , certainly f rom the stabil ity
as pect by 1i nea r i s i ng t he equations and taking s mall per turbations about a given
ope rating point to obtain the slopes of t he curves .
Consider now t he graphs s hown in Fig . 4.5-1, "hich s ho" rolling Il ome nt LIE) as a
funct ion of aileron angle i; for a part i cul ar cruciform missile with rear cont r ols
for sea level at 11 log . L(. \ is not a l i nea r functier of ., for t"o re asons:
<I
(a) ai leron effect; venes s dec reas es wi t il to ta l i nci dence 6
(b) f or a given i s not a linear f un ction of ( t althougn tne grapn does at
l eas t pass through the origin .
62
2 c 8
I
70
FIG. 4.5-1 l.. i lel'an. etfec ci venees ce Q. [unc ci on of ail.e1'on angl.e
L is defined as :
<;
L ;
<;
L
--.::.ill n.. 0
'" , w x t ....
0"
15 i n radians
The incremen t al momen t !... due to a sma l l i ncrernent is tne refore giv en 'OJ
L ; L. ,
"
whe re t he value of depends on t ne operati ng p o in t . Bearing in m i n u t ha t in
" mos t appl icat i ons <; is unlikely to exceed a fe 'N degrees we mignt re as or.abl y regard -
as a constant .
L
p
i s t he damping derivative in roll and nas cirnens i oos of torque/uni t r ol l rat e .
Since t he torque will always oppose th e roll mo t i on its al gebr a i c sign is i nvariably:
- ye o Th i s der ivative is oft en re garded as a cons tan t for a given numner
(or s pee d if s ubsonic ) and opera t in g hei ght. Ther e are no ot her importan t
derivati ves i n roll .
oocy cue to The norma1 force on a
S C
z
where p is t he ai r density , S i s a reference area , usually t he maximum '0OOy cr oss -
sect i on and C
z
is cal l ed t he normal force coeff ic i ent wh i ch i s a function of
i ncidence fo r a given Mach number and heigh t. For a symrret r i ca l mis s il e t ne
normal f orce coe ffici ent C
y
assoc i at ed with incidence in yaw has t he same value
as C
z
. The fo llowing der ivat ives are defined
We now consider the pit ch and yaw deriva tives .
pitch inc idence i s usually as:
1 pU
Z
and Z
a
, C
z
aa
I t i s important to note t hat these lateral force de ri vat.ives are ca lcula ted from
t he t ota l f orce f rom t he wings , body and con trol s urfaces on the ass umpt i on t hat
the control s urf aces are in t he ce ntral position . f10s t win gs and cont rol su rf ace s
are designed t o produce a normal force proportional to incidence (provided the
i nciden ce i s not too large ) but the nonnal force from a slende r body in cludes a
t er m proportiona l t o incidence and another t o (i nci dence) 2. Thi s ef f ec t is discernible
for a t ypica l super sonic missile with rear controls in Fig . 4.5 -2 .

63
]5 75
De ri vat ives and herodynamic Trans fer Functi ons
FIG. 4. 5-2 force coe jji c i en t: <.loS a. [una t iori of i nc 'i. dence
There can also be vari ations of norma l force rlit h A (Fi g 4. 1- 1) but f or a g1ven
11ach nu;;;ber and height Y
s
and' Ze are gene r all y only we ckl y dependant on mc i dence .
It is often conven ient t o divide t he se two de r tve t i ves by t r.e mi s s i l e vel oc ity V;
t hey t hen become Y
v
and respect i vely . Si nce for s mall angles v/U " 0 an d w/V c
th e f ol lowing re l at i ons hi ps hold:
l i t tl e variat ion with i nc i dence but for re e r con t rc l s there is usua lly a
i s t he fo rce derivative due Y
<;
shows
and
y '( 0 i . e. '( " Y I V
V
V
;3 >-' "g
Z w Z a i. e. 7 : Z IV
W a W U
to rudder def lection . For
(4. 5- 1)
(4. 5- 2)
canaro cont rol s
s mal l loss of cont r ol with incidence due to the downwasn f r orn t ne " i ngs but
this is rarely more than about 15% for body incidences 100 or' so . It is i mportant
t o note that if the body 'i nc i dence is ;3 and the rudder de flect i on i s tr.en t he
act ual rudder i nc i dence is g -+- 1;; nevertheless the total force increment is not
YSS + Y<; (3 + c) but Y
S
3 + \<; since the norma l force due to tne unde f l ect.e o
rudder has already been included in t he es t imat i on of Y
s
" In some missi les t ne
controls are mounted in line with the mai n lifting surfaces ; i n others they are
set at 45
0
t o the plane of t he wings . These are often refe rred t o as "t nt er-di qt t etec"
64 Guioed ',.f eapon Control Systems
concrols . If the booy incidence is small there is some loss of l i f t at small
angl es of i nci dence due to downwash . If the controls are in t erdigitated thi s l oss
occurs at much larger angles of incidence . Wi th in-Lin e cont rols t he effect of
downwash ten ds ,to decre ase at l ar ge angles of incidence say 15
0
or more . Hence
Vie usually fi nd t hat controls are i nte rdi qi t at ed on mi ssiles wh i ch ar e desi gned
for low angle s of inci dence, such as mi ss i l es with ram jet propul sion and ai r
i nta kes Vi hi ch do not perform we ll at l ar ge i nci dences , or sea skimning mi ss i l es
with radi o altimeters .
a diffi cult one. It i s the lateral force uni t yaw rate.
It i s di ff i cul t t o cal culate , diff icult to i n a wind tunnel and fort unate ly
t urns out t o be very small and not sign i f i cant .
N
v
i s t he for ce der ivative Y
v
ti rres t he distance of t he c.p . f romt he C. g.; t ni s
dis tan ce i s known as t he static margi n. It is ess ent i al l y an aerodynami c s t i ffness
te rm and i s a meas ure of t he s tabi lity of t he mi ssil e . If t he c.p . i s beni nd t he
c. g. any per t ur bat ion of t he missi l e i n yaw i nci denCe will res ult i n an aerOdynamic
res to ring monent , Conversely if t he c . p. is in f ront of t ne C. g. any per turb ation
of t he missile in i ncidence will induce mort inc i cence ; t he mi ssile is sa id to be
statically unstable . Fig 4. 5-3 shows the shift in c.p . f or a typic.' supersonic
missile Viith rear cont rol s .
,

(
b 60
o
en
20
...... -
1. 2 fb3'
.97\
\
\
90'
80-- -
1.71' ,
'\
'\
\
-,
1.4
..

2.75
53
J
50 J
56
57
58
. 59 u,
0;;;
wo
"' z
<
- w
Z I
w_
U
c.: ::<:
w o
c..c.:
<"-
<fl o

w =>
c.:<fl
=> <
<fl W
tQ :L
c.: I
"- -
,,- '"

w .....
c.:
-Z
W
U
FIG. Cerit i-e of pressw'e poe i z-ior: cs
. . .. . ( 0
nW7lDer and WC1...anoe n = 1; = ; ).
c }"-i.-..'"'1C t ion o f Nach
= 0 or 90)
If the c.g . i s about SOl of the l ength of t he mi ssile af t of che nose one woul o
expect t he c. p. t o be typically 50-55%of t he mi ssi l e l ength aft of t he nose. It
-.-
,j
:i
'i
,I
,
65 Aerodynami c Deriva t i ves a nd Aerodynami c Tra nsfer Functi ons
".
va ry only if t he e .g. move s . , ",
. .
N
r
is the dampi ng deri vat i ve in yaw and is t he aerodynami c momen t per uni t r ate c f
yaw. It i s a s mal l te r m and i s not sensit ive to in ciden ce .
He have now di s cuss ed t he mai n roll and yaw derivati ves . The re , s anothe r set f or
t he pitch pl ane and for a syrrrret r i cel miss ile these wi ll be i dentical in magnit ude
,
to t he ya'd derivat ives . The re are some chanqe s in algeorai c si gns as we go from
the yaw plane to the pitch plane but th i s i s due to t he essen t i al essy me t ry of an
orthogonal right -handed se t of axes ; t hi s has already be en not ed in equati ons
4.2- 8 and 4. 2-9 .
Fig 4.5-4 provi des a us eful gene r al pi cture of how t he force der i va t i ve for t he
body + wings controls var ie s over a wide range of spee ds . The mis s i l e is
conventional in s hape with 101, aspect - r at io wi nqs . The act ual values of C
z
wi 11
depend on t he s hape of t he mi s s i l e and the actual r ef e r ence area selected. The
i s seen t hat a t sub son ic speeds and ve ry 10'" s upe r s onic s peeds t he c . p, tends t o
be ra ther more forwa rd than at highe r l1ach numoe rs. Al so , the changes in c . p,
with incidence can be considerable at low s peeds ; this is ma inly due to th e general
r earwa rds sh ift in the c. p, of t he body with i ncreasi ng incidence , t he c .p , of t he
control su rfaces and wi nqs changi ng very l itt l e . Unfortunat e l y , t he positi on of
t he c .p. is also a functi on of the inci dence plane angle A. For a symmetrical
miss i l e the pi ct ur e is i dent i cal to Fi g 4. 5- 3 f or A = DO and A = gOa but it is
s lightly different for A =45
0
say .
N, i s the morrent de r i vat ive due to rudder de fl ecti on and is Y, tirres the distance
of t he c. p. of t he rudde r from t he e. g. If Y, is sensi bly cons t ant t hen N, wi l l
force der i vati yes by t he ma ss
of i nert i a. It wi ll be seen
and n
v
t he der i vat ives
practi ca lsi gnifi cance ) ,
are of oppos i te s i gn
and t he derivatives
f ro m Table 4. 5- 1 t hat wi th
by t he mOffient
t he exce pt i on of z , y ,
D ,
are then in semi non- di mens i onal f orm, (Zq and Yr a r e of no
1\1 and Il
v
change s i gn for an unstable mi s s i l e and 1\ and N,
fo r cana r d controls.
4.6 AERODYNAMIC TR.!\NSFER FU NCT IO NS
ass umpt i on that norma l force i s proport icna l t o incidence is seen t o be a fai r
approxi mat i on es pec i all y at the hi gher s pee ds.
For control purp os es i t i s conve nient to di vide t he
At the commencewe nt of a desk study desi gn cf a mi s s i l e cont rol system one mus t
ma ke certai n as s ump t i ons . A t r adi t i onal assumption i s one of the l i neari ty. of t he
--- ----_. . ... -_.... -...... .- . .
hardware i . e . the e lectronics , fin servos, i a st r-urrent s (if any) and t he equat i ons
of motion. Indeed, as has already been remarked, :ine2rity i s a necess ary constrai nt
for one t o use operato r methods to anel yse system response . Howe ver , li neari ty
of the equat i ons of motion implies linearity of the aerodynamics - a defendabl e te net
when the concept of small adhered t o but " on l es s cert ai n grounds
I
I
r
l
j
, ".. , ..
,-
t:
el

t(

fi
-(5

b'
a'
p,
m,
a
o
2.75 2.0 2.25
MACH NUM5 ER
.8 .9 1.01.11.2 H t71
o - - - -
o . 5
66 Gui ded Weapon Control Sys t erns
11
j
10
N
U
9

z 8
1
UJ
u
7
--- LL
---
LL
UJ
6
0

u
UJ
5
u
0:
0
LL
--'
3
:L
oc
2 0
z
t
?IG. G. 5-; force coefficient as a function of Maar.
number anc (n = = 0 ; A = 0 or 90)
TABLE 4.5-1 ALGEB?AI C SIGNS AND DIMENSIDNS
DF THE MAIN AC RDDniAMIC DCRIVAllV>S
_.
" -
Syrroo1 Semi non-dimens i onal
Algeb rai c Dimensions
form
Roll , Pi t ch Yaw sion SYrrDO1 Dime ns i ons
L, - ye Nm
1.- = L IA
sec-
2
L<
tim sec
, <
= L' /A
- 1
- ye
'p
sec _
l p
<
- ye tim-
I
sec
ZW
=
sec_
l
Y
y
- ye
Nm-
1
sec
yv
= Y/m
sec_
2
Z . - ve II z = Z 1m msec_
2 n
Y ': . :rye N y"
= Y"/ m msec _
1
Zo
,
usuel Iy - ve cl sec z'
= Z' / m msec_
l
Y
r
.usuelly -ve N sec
yO
=
yO 1m
m sec
- 1
I\,
N
r
:\;/B
m-
1
- ve sec

=
"
sec- 1
N +ve N sec n
v
= N IC
m-
1
se c
M
v
Nm
MV /B sec- 2.
- ve m =
n
II - ve Nm =
N"/C
sec-
2

;
- ve Nr.J sec m'
= M'/ B
sec-
1
"
- ve Nm sec
nO
_.

se c
1
"r
r
wilen the mi ss i l e i s exerci sed through incidence changes of 20 or roorE and the
attendant body rat es are l arge .
. . .
Ae rodynamic Derivat i ves and Aerodynami c Transfer Functions 67
' f
The general met hod of designi ng a mis s ile contr-ol sys t em i s t his . One considers
a ty pi ca l s peed (or Mach number i f the miss il e is s uper s onic ) and the he i ght t he
mi s sile will at . One can take a se t fo r zero
and des ign a control system on t he assumption t hat t he miss ile i s
exercised through s mall pe r t urba t i ons about ze r o inci dence ; i n othe r words One
regards t he ae r odynamic de r ivat ives as cons tants wit hi n t his small r ange. Since
t he control sys tem i s des i gned to meet a spe cificat ion conce rn i ng steady s t ate ga i n ,
ban<1o'1 idth , pha se. la g and damping , we invest igate the respon se as a f unct ion of
frequency on these ass umpt ions , We now look at the derivatives at 50 i nci dence
(s ay ) and the same cal culations are carried out to see i.f t he s pe ci f i ca ti on ca n
..-
be me t 'o'I ith these new val ues of derj vat i ves . The ca1cciliitions are repeated for
as many combinations of in cidence and roll angle as judgmen t deems advisable .
And f i nall y the missi le well have to operate over a range of speeds and
height s . A r epr ese nt at i ve number of these operating cond it ions also tested.
When one consi de r s that th e inertia , mass ar.d pos ition of th e c. g. may due
t o propellant usage it i s seen t hat the arrount of detail ed wor-k i nvol ve d in check in q
and poss ibl y modifying the design can be considerable . The concl usi on one draws on
comp le tion of this exercise is t hat i f t he des ign is sati sfa ctory at all t hes e
poi nt s t hen it is satisfactory at all intermediate points .
The 1inearised approach can now be taken furt her . The guidance and control systems
can be put together on a rel ati vely si mple computer and a preli minary ass essment
of system performance can be made i n one pl ane . The f inal s i mul at i on on a digital
or hybrid computer will el rrost ce rtain ly pr ogr arrme One or two of t he i mportant
derivatives as a function of incidence and will take note of any cross -coupling
(4 .6-5 )
(4 .6-4)
(4. 5-3)
( 4.5-2)
(4 .6-1 )
1-' a + Mr
q , rt
+ mn
n
Nr + N r
r "
+ n ,
,
l.
p
P
+
\'
M
"
+
"
ffi",w
+ m
q
q
"
N
"
Nvv
+
nvv
+ n r
r
r
P
8q
q
Cr
i. e .
i , e .
i , e.
that may occur .
We wi l l now wr ite down th e control equations for a missil e , omitt ing the for ce
.. . t his neithe r o.ff ects tile r c:2.l d i.ijch Q.t:....Y.9Il'-Jl'&t .0n .
We wil l a1s0 omit til e gra vi .. .. y
of aerodynamic The effect of gravity will be consi dered as a s eparat e
issue under autopilot design . Equati ons 4. 2-8 to 4. 2- 12 can be wr itten
mf
y
= m (v -+- rU) = Y = Y v + Y r + Yr
v r -,
i . e . f
y
v + rU " j" v + y r + y ,
. v r I;,
mf z m (w - qU) " Z " + Zqq -r Znn
i .e . f z" w - qU"Z w+z q+z n
w q n
Ap L" L P + L_, (as s umi ng B C)
P {,
"
I:
i
, .
,.
_ _ _. -
'-'
Ii
I
i
,.
______
68 Guided Weapo n Control Systems
(4.6 -7 )
Roll ra te Zai I eron P/I;
This is the si mplest aero dynamic t ransfer function , Equat i on 4.6-3 can be rewritten :
p - t
p
P
t I;l;
r.
c
- t i t
or in the transfer function formE. = ' I; P (4.6-6 )
c,; 5 - 1 l S + 1
P a
where - t l; / i
p
be regarded as a steady state gain and T
a
= l / -t
p
and Can be
regarded as an aerodynamic time constant .
Lateral acceleration/rudder fyi,
Equations 4.6- 1 and 4. 6- 6 can be used to eli minate r and v to yield:
2
fY _ y,s - y,n r
S
- U(n v - nvi i; )
- s2 - (y + n )s + y n + Un
v v r v r
The reader wi ll nQt i ce t hat Yr does not i n t his transfer function; it has
already been remarked that it is a very small quant i t y' and i n this context i t is
usuall y omitted. Sorr,,' considerat ion of t he i ndivi dual terms is wor-th wh i l e.
Clear l y (Y vn r + Un
v
) is (the undamped natu ral freque ncy)2 and is usuall y referred
t o as t he weathercock freque ncy; it reflects t he te nde ncy for a stable mi ssil e
to re t urn to the unper tu rbed ze ro i nc idence pos i t ion . If , for a morre nt , vie regard
t he mis s il e as a weat hercoc k 'pin ned at its c.g. t he n t he undamped nat ural freque ncy
i s give n by:
2 = the res toring morr"nt/ unit -angul ar deflection
wn mome nt or l nertla aDout C.g .
N
s
UN
v

1... . L. v
Th i s does not agree wit h t he exp ression given in 4.6-7 since t here is an extra
term yvnr ' This not surpr is i ng si nce a missil e is riot: pinned at its e.g . and
we wo uld expect t o see additional momen t s opposi ng t he mot ion of a body wit h s ix
degrees of free dom. Never thel ess i n IOO st cases when the stat i c mar gi n is from
2-6%of t he mi ssil e le ngth find t hat Un
v
is at least twenty times t he magni t ude
.
-
of yvnr"
Consider now a ty pical surface-to-air mi ssi l e wit h rear controls whose ma in yaw
derivat ives for M 1.4 and hei ght 1600 m (U = 467 m/ s ) are :
n
r - _.
-2. 89
Hence t he static margi n
Inse rting t he values for
n
,

n
v
0. 309
Yv
- 2. 74
y,
197
The mi ss i l e is 2 m l ong and C = 13.8 kgm
2
and m = 63 kg.
= N / Y = n C/ y m = 0.029m or about 1. 5%of t he le ngt h.
v v v v
t he deri vat i ves i n 4.6-7 we obt ain :
197s
2
+ 570s - 457 (1460 - 60. 8)
s2 + (2. 74 + 2.89 )s + (7. 9 + 144)

(
c
69
2
Thus

u is gi ven
Aerodynami c Dtrivctives and Aerodynaw.ic Transf er Funct i ons
7.9 + 144 and "'n = 12. 4 rad/s ; and vi e note", 2 = Un . The dampi nq r at i o
n v -
by = 2.74 + 2. 89 and hen ce u =0.23. This dampin g ratio inci dental ly
,
will de c r eas e as the square root of t he ai r dens ity and t herefore can be very l ow
at high alt itudes; t he damping terms vary with air dens i ty , and so do the force
and mor.:ent terms , but th e i nertia remai ns t he same . The steady s ta te gain is
- 467 x 1399 /152 = - 4300. Tnis me ans that if t he aerodynamic s were l i nea r 0.1
rad r udde r de f l ect i on would pro duce a lateral acceleration in the - y direction of
430 m/s
2
i .e . about u3g . Th is appears to be a very high aerodynami c ga in , but
the re is often a good reason fo r this as will be discussed unde r autopilot design.
a se cond order response (s ure l y t he airframe i s ye t another exampl e of a
damped s pri ng- mass sys tern ) i s- compl et e l y defi ned by t he 's teady s tate gain, t he
:. 0":;
undamped nat ural f requency and the dampi ng rati o. wh at -then i s the sigifi cance
, .
r
,
of t he ext r a two numerat or t erms ? In t he ti me domain al1 t hey can do i s to
defi ne the initial values at t =0+ (as opposed t o t he i nitial at
t 0-) . If we cons i de r a uni t s t e p i nput then t he l at e r al acceleration at
t 0+ is gi ve n by the fo r ce f rom t he r udder only divi ded by the mi s s i l e mas s 1 . e .
f
y
= Yr; Hen ce the va lue at t = 0+ is given by the coefficient of s2 in the
nuner et or ; t he coe f f icient of $2 in the denominato r is un ity . Th i s result 3:.d
t hat f or t he in i t ia l value of t he slope can be obta i ned f rom t he i ni t i al value
i
I

I
fact that canards , wings and body are al l
s ense. Fi gures 4. 6-- 1 and (b) show t he
t he increase in gain is due t o t he
produci ng normal f orce i n the s ame
t heorem. The ncme ra t.or can be wri t t en:
- 655 , 000 (- . 000301s
2
- . 00087$ + 1)
t his i s: - 655, 000 (s/59.1 + 1)(- s/ 55. 2 + 1)
This is s ayi ng t hat i n the f requency domai n t here are two zeros, one non-min i mum
phas e , of about t he same value , whose pha se contri buti on will appr-oximat e ly cance l
ove r a r ange of fre quencies but whos e ampli tude contri but i on wi l l be come reckonab1e
in t he range 60 rad /s and abov e . Thes e t erms ca n be a nui san ce i n an
des ign as t hey pre vent t he conti nuous attenuati on with frequency associated with
a si mple second ord e r system. The reas on is obvi ous; all the t i me the rudder i s
moving t here will be a lateral accel erat ion t he frequency .
Wnat hap pens if we t ake t he cont r ol s to t he front of t he and move t he
.,li ngs back s o th at the position of t he c .p. remains unchan ged? Assume all
aerodynamic de r iva t ives are unchanged numeri cal l y ; t here will be a in t he
it i s now +ve. " Thi s wi; l have t he of changing
. ( -
One t erm.m the numerator f ro m - 467 (1460 - 60.8) to - 467 (- 1':60 -- 60.8) = 710, 000.
v;:) ,The steady state gain is now 71 0, 000/1 52 = 4570 an i nc rease of abo ut g%. The
;\ T' /,r eas on for t he change i n algebrai c sign of the s t eady s t ate qai n is due to the
. / fact t hat - ve canard rudder defl ect ion produces +ve inci dence . The reason for
/
I
r:---- _. ._.. :. ,.,. __
._-_.
i'
70 Guided Cont rol SY5temS
time response for f
y
' for a'step rudder input for t he tail controlled mi ss ile
compa re d "li th:.. a s imi l ar missi ie wi th cana rd s . For convenie nce of compa rison both
res ponses are regarded as +ve.

c
.-
Ju e: It"..
(a) Rear cont r ols
' uc h,..
(0) cont ro Ls
..
\
j
FIG. '1 .6- 1 LateraZ acceZeration [o a step r udde r input
Fi nall y , consider t he or ig i nal rear controiled mi ss i l e whose C.g . has moved forward
slightly t o increase the small static margin by a fa ctor of four . The steady state
gain is decreased approxi mately by a factor of four , t he we at hercock frequency i s
doub l ed and t he dampi ng rati o is halved. The signifi cacce of t he static margin
should nowbe apparent. A large static rr.a r gin res ults in :
(a) a srr.all steady state gai n
(b) a hi gh weat ner-cock fre quency
(c) a VEry 10;' damping rati o.
A sma 1.1 static mar gi n results i n:
(a) a large steady state gain
(b) a low weat her cock frequency
(c) a 10;' or mo derat e damping r ati o.
It fol l ows therefore that -the position of the c. p. and the C.g . ar e of vit al interest
t o the missile control designer .
For a symmetrical miss ile the transfer function f z/ n must be ess ential ly the same
as f or fy/c, . There are some changes in s ign however . Fo r i ns t ance +ve rea r
el evat or deflection eventually produces acceleration in the +ve z dire ction.
Rate of change of flight pat h/rudder
Fl i ght path rate and lateral acceleration are essential ly th e s ame th ings . There
i s a difference in scal e only . To obt ain f l i ght pat h r ate we divide f
y
by U.
Stri ct l y s peaki ng we also multi pl y by t he cosi ne of t he mi ssil e inciden ce.
Body rate/rudder rlr,
To obtain this transfer function v must be eli mi nated from equat i ons 4.6 -1 and
4.6-5 to yield :
...
- I
- .

'.-
r _ ..... '.
- , ,
Aerodynami c De ri'v at i yes a nd Aerocy nami c Transfer Func t i ons
71

"here t
c
is t he distance fro mthe c.g . to t he C.p . of t he rucder and x' is the
stati c margin.
It is seen that , for a given mi ss il e t his t ime const ant increases wi th al titude
and i ncreases if the speed falls . It tends to be a large t i me const ant and
t ypically varies fro m0.25 to 2 s . Negl ect i ng t he small numera t or t erms in t he
t ransfer f unction for f y /i; , the approxi mate relat ions hip between lateral accelerati on,
flight path rate and body rate is s hown i n Fig . 4.6-2 .
(4. 6- 8 )
r
-
(n,;; v - nyYi;)(T;s
+ 1)
ca11 ed t he i nci dence lag (mas t confusing : ) and.has t he va i ue :
n
1
T
i
i;
(4. 6- 9) = =
( I
- nyY/ n,;;v)
- n,.Y + nyY
- yv
,
'" v
1
e _L =
. 365 se conds =
( I
- yv
-
-yv
f
y
FIG. 4. 6- 2 The approximat e relationship between
f1i ght path rate and bodY
It is useful to regard body rate as ph ase advanced flight . path rate ; Or to a
different scale body rate is phase advanced l ateral accel er at i on. Thi s is t he
reason why feedba ck from a rate gyro i n an autopilOt whet her it i s emp loyed in an
aircraft, hel icopter or guided mi ssi l e tends t o damp the weathercock mode ; it
cont ain s a powerful derivative term. Figure 4.6-3 shows body rat e f or a s t ep
r udder input for t he pre vi ous mi ssi l e with rear controls .
where T
i
is us uall y
ns - nv +n
v
r i; 4' V V"i;
Z = s2 - (y + n )s + y n + Un
v r v r v
If one compares th is with 4.6-7 One sees that t he undamped nat ura l f requen cy and
the dampi ng rat io are the same ; i ndeed, fl ight path rate , l ateral accel erat ion ,
body rate and i nci dence are all osci llatory modes of t he mi ssi l e and t hese
are ide nti cal in frequency and damping. Only t he initial values and slopes and
steady s tate gains are differe nt . Us ing the same set of aerodynami c der iv atives
the steady state gain is t herefore - 1399/152 = -92 which i s the s ame as that for
Body rate has t he same steady state value as fl ight path rat e. What the n
is t he essential difference between body rate and rate ? Con s ider the
. .
numerat or in equat ion 4. 6- 8 wh i ch can be written
i.
I
72 Gui ded Weapon Control Sys tems
.(
+
I
.,
,
(
../
,
100
1 sec
(
(
/
(
=at-
u
FIG. 4. 6-3 Body rate for a step r udder input
The concept of body r at e and flight pat h r at e can be confusi ng. Consider Fi g. 4.6 -4(a) .
Amissile is flying strai ght and the rudder is s uddenl y defl ected as shown. In
Fig . 4.6-4 (b ) the missi le is s hown havi ng turned wi t h a s te ady s ta t e i nci dence
equal t o - I f t he i nci dence i s const ant t hen t he body r ate must be equal
ind denc t!
(aJ
(bJ
FIG. 6-4 Pl.ight par;h di rect.ion Lags behi nd body direct ion
t o t he flight path r at e; and yet in t he same ti rre t he angl e the bedy has t urned
t hro ugh has" been gr eater t han the change i n fl ight pat h ang1e< The explanat io n of
th i s is t hat during the t ransient peri od when the body i nc i dence was bui l ding up
f ro m zer o t he body r ate mus t have been f aster t han t he fl igh t path r ate . How el s e
could it have got ahead? In other words dur in q t he trans i ent period body r ate was
equal to fl ight path rate p1us.. lts differ ential ti mes a constant.
Body incidence/rudder 5/ ,
To obtain thi s t r ans f e r fu nction t he s ubstitution 5 = v/U is made and r i s el i mi nat ed
i n the s ame t wo equati ons as before t o y i e l d:
(y, S - n, U - y, nr )/U
- (yv + nr )s + yvnr + Un
v
(4.6 - 10)
The denominator has not changed of course. The nune r at or term i n "s " is i ns i gnifi cant
and t he s tea dy state gai n i s 3.52 rad/rad i . e , 1
0
rudd er wi ll produce 3.5 2
0
body
",-- ..;:... -
----'--_ _ -'- .- -=,j
i
I
!
Aerodynamic Derivatives and Aerodynamic Transfer Funct i ons 73
i nci dence i n th e s t eady state . Th is is obta ined by havi ng a powerf ul r udder wi t h
a long mome nt arm and a small static margi n. Fig ur e 4.6 -5 shows t he i nci dence
res ponse of the mi ssile to a unit step r udder i nput. Thi s is indist i nguis hable
from a s i mpl e second orde r re sponse .
<f--f'--''f-- - ---:= - - - - - - -
6
r
FIC. 4 .6-;5 Body incidence [or a step rudder input;
4.7 ALTITuDE AND SPEED CONVERSION FACTORS
Subsonic condi t ions
Supposi ng aerodynami c deriva tives are given for s tanda r d conditi ons at sea l evel
and f or a gi ven speed say 100m/ so How do we convert a given derivative t o say
150 m/s and a given height ? any effe ct s due to Reynolds Numbe r which
are usua lly small or very s ma ll we can say that all normal fo r ces are proport ional
to pU
2/
2. Therefore the fo r ce derivative Y and the moment der ivat ives N and N
r
2 c 2 <;
are very si mply converted by t he ratio pU /po U
o
. However ' N
v
and Y
v
mus t be
approached wit h caution re memberi ng that Y
v
is the l at er al force devel oped per unit
s i de- s l ip velo ci t y and tha t 's = v/U.
Ac t ual f or ce = Y
s
S = Y
v
v i .e . Yv =Ys /U
Hence , if we know Y
v
for one condit ion we multipl y it by pU/poU
o
(not the square
of t he vel ociti es ) . The same goes for N
v
'
Supersoni c condi ti ons
In s upers onic condi ti ons l1ach numbe r is now an independent varia bl e i . e . normal
f orce i s now a f uncti on of 11 and proportiona l to pU
2/
2. For a given M:
No rmal f orce pU
2/
2 pM
2
a
2
/ 2 where a i s the local s pee d of sound
= a, x p a 2 M
2
o a c 0 0
eo 0
Tabl e 4.7-1 shews convers i on fa ctors for the main deriva t ives on t he assumpti on
t hat we know t hem for a given r"ach numbe r at sea leve l.
I
\
\
\:
II
I
I
I
\
\
f
\'
I
Guided j.iecpon Contro l Systems
.c
- -
Al t itl1de Va lues of f actors at al'.:itude (m)
Deri vati ves Conversi on
Factor 0 5000 10000 15 ,000 20 , 000
*y
tI
: pa
1.0 0. 567 0. 296 0.1 355 0.0615
v v
poa
o i
*y
N
y

i
c c
r
L
1. 0 0. 536 0. 262 0.1168 0.0531
Po
a
N
r L
p

a
TA8LE 4.7-1 ALTITUDe conVERSION F".CTORS FOR
DERIVATIVcS A
' Likewise f or the corresponding pitch de r i va t ives .
4.8 AERODYNAMIC DERIVATIVES WITH TVC
How do t he aerodyna mic deri vatives of mis siles using TVC differ from those of a
mi s s i l e using aerodynamic cont rol? Firstl y the main lifting surfaces will
probably be move d slight ly t o t he rear and the use of rear stabil is i ng su rfaces
will be dispensed wit h. The f oll owi ng derivatives can still be es timated i n t he
..
r
saoe way as for aerodynamic cont rol : L
p'
Yv' N
v
' N
r
, L
w
' f\t M
q
.
'fIe s ubst i t ute the norrnal fo rce/uni t th rust de f l e ction . Si nce "Ie
For Y and Z
C n
have made sma ll
i
I -
I
- -
lve
I
I
Ae r odynami c
Speed at sea 1evel (t;)
I
CJnt r ol (Y )
Boos t ing at 40g Sus t ai ni nc
,
0. 7 20, 400
I
299 2, 540
1.1 20 ,400
I
1620 6 ,280
1. 9 20 ,400 2870 15 ,000 ,
Some comparat i ve f i gur es are i n Table 4. 8-1 .
,
TABLC 4 8-1 VALUES - TVC CO:; PARE D WITH THE USE OF RUDDERS
angl e approximat i ons t hr ouchcut thi s is si mply t he val ue of the th rus t itself .
ValUES f or N, and t1 aut orratica ll y fo l l ow, If t wo swi vel nozzles a re used f or
n.
ro ll control t he n the va lue of L;; is t he th r us t from one nozz l e t irre s the ce nt re
l ine di stance f ro m nozzle to noz zl e .
nO>l ever , it is i nstructi ve t o compare t he rudder and ele vator si deforce control
der i vat i ves Y
r
or Z f or a surface to air mi ssile wi th a conventi onal shape
n
si milar to that s hown in Fig 3.4-4 . With a body diamete r of 18 . 5 cm, the
coefficient of drag Cd base d on a body cross -section (S) of 0 .0269 m
2
is 0 .32
at s cos onrc spee ds well be l ow M 1 , r is ing to 0. 70 for M 1.1 , 0.62 for M = 1. 3
an d 0 . 52 f or M 1.9. ".n ave r a ge' val ue for \ is 15 ,00 0 for 1. 9 and is , to
a first ap proximat ion , proporti ona l to ( s pee d) 2 The mas s will vary during flight
of course but for eas e of comparis on ass ume it remai ns at 65 kg. The
s us t ei n t hrust T
s
is gi ve n by, . :
....... -- =.
- - ~ - - ----- - - - - _._- -
Ae rodynami c Deri vat i ves and AeroCly namic Transfer Functi ons
75
Al t no ugn comparisons will vary from missile to mi s s il e , the general conclusions
are clear : the sideforce/unit deflection i s very large whe n a motor i s boos ting
at a high g, but i s very low indeed when sustaining s ubs oni cally. Even s o, this
nay just be s uffi ci ent f or systems des igned to hi t slow mo ving ta rget s , say an ti -
tank systems . r ~ o r e agile systems usi ng TVC in the boos t stage may requi re, in
addit ion , aerodynamic control surfaces connected to the TVC servos .
1. ELLIS J . W. ana t1cARTHUR c.v.
to roc ke t motion . ARS Journal .
REf ERENCE
Ap pi i ceb i l i t y
Novembe r 1959.
of Euler 's dynamica l equati ons
.
.,
. .
,
. i
\
i . J
CHAPTER 5
MISSILE INSTRUMENTS
5. i INTRODUCTION
f10st closed loop systems incorporate an inst r umen t (or transdu cer as they are often
called ) to measure t he system stat es. The output f rom the transducer i s usua lly a
voltage and t his is r ea dil y comp a re dwi t h the i nput or reference if t his al so
exi s ts as a vol t aqe , Obvi ous exampl es are pot ent i ome t ers and t achogene r ators t o
rronitor the pos ition and s pee d of a shaft , Consider now any as pect of t he mo t ion of
a miss il e through s pace . For ce s and moments vri l l produce acce lerat i ons and hence
vel ocities and di s placement s <l ith r espec t to the ea rth ; or, as i s often s t ated with
respect t o i nertial s pace , I f " e ' fish to make a closed loop system of controll ing
the mot i on of a mi s s i l e then i ns t r umen ts ''' ill be req uired to me as ur e accel er at i ons ,
velocities and displacements i n s pace . Clearly , conventional pot entiomet e r s and
t achogener ato rs do not do th i s , Ins t ead , a ccelerome t ers, rate gyros and pos i tion
gyros are use d. It is us ual t o call a sys tem compris i ng mi s s i l e fin or t hrust
vector servos , an ai rframe , i ns t ruments and any electronics and networks nec essary
to close the l oop "autopilot"; but t hi s norren cl atu re is not universal. In thi s
chapter , r e l ative ly chea p i nst r uments wh ich are used in short and medium range
missiles are dis cussed. The very sophisticated instruments, used in i ne r t i al
navigation and inertially gtJj:ded mi ss il es are not discussed since this f orms part
of a completely different which is outs i de t he scope of this book.
5. 2 ELEMENTARY THEORY OF GYROSCOPES
We ail know th at i f a r.eavy rotor i s s uspended in a s et of fricti on-free beari ngs
and is sp un up it ten ds to maint ain i ts sp in axis i n t he s ame directi on i n space.
I
We re alise t hat if the gyro is to point on th e earth's su rface it
<Ii 11 appea r t o poi nt i n anot he r di re ct ion due to the curvature of the eart h 's
surface . Also, its spi n axi s will appear t o change in di re ct ion due t o t he
rotation of the earth. Si nce we are i nte re s t ed in t irres of fl ight t ypi ca ll y of
76
.-
: "":,
. .
PIG. 5.2- 1 Ar.gular sho:ar: as a ve ctor
I'
I
77 Mis si l e
vel oci ty and angular mome nt um are bot h rep res ent ed by a li ne oe r pendi cul ar
t o plane of t he spi n and a right handed cor ks cre',; con'/ent i on i s us ed. If now
a rooment i s. applied i n the plane of t he s pin (i . e . about the sp i n axi s ) t he
angul ar momentum changes magn i tude but its directi on i s unaltered. Suppose a mome nt
T i s app lie d fo r a short t i me 6t right angles to t he s pin vector as shown i n
Fig 5.2- 2.
..
10-20 seconds and very occas ional l y up t o about 100 seconds , the di s t ances and
ti me s in vol ved re sul t in t hese eff ects being neg ligib l e .
Un f or t unat e l y th e spi n directi on wi ll ' lande r due t o unwant ed rooment s act ing on
t he suspended mass . Cons ide r now a body of polar moment of i nertia J spi nning at
a rat e w in t he di rect i on shown i n Fi g 5.2 - 1.

..
Jw = H
FIG. 5. 2- 2 Precessicr. oj ro tati ng
If t he body rota t es t hrough 68 t hen Tot equal t he change i n angular momentum.
If we denot e angula r momen tum Jw =H, t hen
Hoe = TOt
and i n t he 1i mit (5. 2- 1)
Tni s change i n di r ection of t he s pi n vec t or i s usual l y known as preces s ion and it
i s new c lear that if i t is t o be snal l , mcr;1ent s mus t be kept smal l ; a l arge
mome nt um is an advantage .
No',; conside r t hree nut ual ly perp end i cular axes ox, oy and oz . I f H i s alon g ox
(i. e . in the pl ane yz ), and t he moment is appl i ed about oy (i. e . in the pl ane xz },
then preces sion will oc cur about oz (i .e . in t he plane xy) . Equall y we can say
t hat if a body i s spi nni ng about ox and i s forc ib iy made t o precess about oz then
a t orq ue reacti on will occu r about oy. And fi naily , .i t vi s now obvious t hat i n t he
abs ence of any mo men t s about oy and oz t he body ',;i 11 not precess but wi ll re mai n
s pi nni ng i n t he same dire ct ion . Be'Tol'e l ooki ng at construct i onal cet ai l s t wo other

78 Guided fleapon Cont rol Systems

I I
mechani cal phenomena are wor-thy of note . .
Consider now a body of mas s m sus pended bet ween : '(/0 point s such that the s t-i ffness
of suspension t hrough t he cent r oid and perpendicul ar to one pri nci pal axi s yy i s s
and about the other principal a;is zz is sz ' If a for ce P act s on th e body t h r o u g ~
the centroid perpendicular to yy t hen t he deflection i s Pj s and is i n the s ame
y
direction as P. Si milarly if a f orce Q acts perpendi cular to zz then t he deflect ion
is in t he same direction as Q and is equal to Qjsz . see Fig 5. 2- 3. I f noV/ thes e
TOTA L
DEFL ECTION
FIG. 5.2- 3 Def1e ctior. d ~ t o anisoe Zaa t i ci ty
t wo forces act toget her t hen the angl e e t hat th e corrbined force R makes with the
zz axis is given by
\
(5.2 -2)
I
Ll
z
(3
y
tan e ; QjP
The angl e B t hat t he deflection makes wi th t hi s axis is however :
tan B ; Lj'?- (5. 2-3)
Sz Sy
, .
and t hese two angles are eqbal only i f Sz ; Sy' The general condi t i on therefore i s
for deflect i ons not to be in the same direction as the force . The deflection has
t wo components, one in t he s ame di recti on as t he applied f or ce and one perpendi cular
to it . Call this latter component I!. . The mome nt about t he centroid i s t herefore
RI!. and since I!. a R, the momen t a R
2
. If t he s ens e of R i s r eversed the sense of I!.
i s also reversed and therefore the se nse of the moment is unaltered. An example
of a re versing force is t he ine r tia f orce due to vibration . In other words the
effect of an oscillati ng f orce is t o pre ces s a gyro if i t s s us pens i on is not equally
s t iff about t he two principal axes . Gyro des i gners say that "anisoe l ast icity
rectifies t he effect of vi br ati on" . A part i al answer to this problem is to make
t he sus pens i on as sti f f as poss ib l e but the perfect des ign has t he tv/o pr incipal
axes equa lly sti ff ; it is then found th at it is equally stiff i n all dire ctions. In
I
I
!
!
I
\
, .
I .
,
~ I
, .
j
- - - -1 !
I.
,
- - _ . ~ - - = = , , ~ . =
- - ~ - ~ - - - - - - - - - - ,
1
!
Mi s si l e I nstr uments
79
pra cti ce mos t gyros used in t act i ca l mis s iles will have a wande r rate proportiona l
to l due t o ani soe l ast i ci t y . Fi nall y, the phe nome na of nutation must be ment ioned.
Nutat ion is a free oscillati on of a gyr o ro tor in its gimbal s and the f requency can
be detennined by sett ing the external morre nt s to ze r o. The'inne r giroa] i s at an
angl e e to t he orthogonal pos i t i on . Ass urre t he angular momen tum H of t he r otor is
constant . Let the i ne.rt i a of t he ro t or plus inner giroa l about oy be J
y
and the
rotor plus both gi rrbal s about oz be j z ' see Fig 5.2-4:
:c
B
.,
There are no exte rnal
It will be noted that
can be di fferent i ate d
, y
I2 y
FIG. 5. 2-4 Rotor rotating in gimbaLs
torques act in g on t he gi mb als so we can wr i t e :
T = 0 = j On - H cos e n
oy y y z
and T
oz
= 0 = j zOOz + H cos e n
y
any s mall damp in g t or ques have been ignored.
to read:
(5 .2-4)
(5 . 2-5)
Equation 5.2-5
(5 .2-6)
ony =j z02n z/H cos e
and this value f or Ony can be s ubsti t ut ed i n equation 5. 2-4 to yield :
2 j y jz c
(0 2 2 + 1) 0z - 0
H cos e
d h h t t
f H cos e = W J cos e (5 . 2- 7)
an ence t e nu a 10n r eq uency W
n
=
~ ~
,whe r e j i s the rotati onal i ne rtia as befo r e . If t he r ot or i s a sphere t hen J
y
mus t
be mo re than J and J
z
mus t be more than J
y
' In practice one will find that t he
nutation frequency for e = 0 is about 70% of t he rotational frequency. If now the
!J..Do VVl/4.
rotor sp eed is 24000 re v/ mi !! t hen the nut at ion frequency is l i ke ly to be about
0.7 x 400 = 280 Hz . Fundame ntal bendi ng mo des of missiles 6m long are like ly to be
around 25 Hz an d 100 Hz f or small miss iles abo ut 1m lo:;g. I t is ess ent ial that
th is mo de of oscillat i on is not e xci t ed. Hence it is des-i rabl e to keep t he rotor
speed as high as possible and to a void large values of e.
The s impl est position gyro has three degrees of freedom and is of t en cal le d a
"fre e" gyr o. I t consists of a heavy rotor sp inn ing at a high speed in a l ight
f ramework ca lled a gimbal. Thi s gimbal is s upported in bearin gs i n another gi nbal
ideally at righ t angl es to t he s pi n axis . Figs 5. 3-1 t o 5. 3-3 s how th r ee
al t ernat ive ori entations of a pos ition gyro: If one angul ar positi on trans ducer
det ect s relati ve movement between the mi s s i l e f r ame and out e r gi mbal , and another
t he r e l at i ve movement bet ween ' t he t wo ,gi mbals , t hen it is pos s i bl e wi th one f re e
gyro to me as ur e t wo angular r ot at i ons of the miss i l e . I f t hree angular ro t at ions
have t o be measur ed t hen two such gyros are re quired. It is i mport ant t o note
t hat t he vehi cle can have unl i mited fre edom to r otate about t he out e r ..gi mbal_axis
and wi ll al ways have unl imi t ed angular free dom about t he gyro spin axis wi t hout
impairi ng t he original orthogonal nature of t he three axes . Consider now the ro ll
and pit ch gyro i n t he configuration shown i n Fi g 5.3-1. The mi ssil e can cl earl y
yaw as mu ch as it I ikes with the result t hat the gi mba l framewo rk merely rotat es
abou t the gyro spin axis , Al so t he missile can have unli mit ed movement about th e
roll axis . In both cases t he two s et s of gimbal s re main orthogona l and pi tch and
roll output s are. corre ctly measured. Howeve r any pit ch roo t ion of t he mis s ile wi ll
t end to brin g the two sets of gimbals i nto the same' plane ; gOO of pit ch will me an
t hat if, i n th i s position , t he mi ss i l e now yaws , it will t ake t he gyr o sp in axi s
wi th it , as one of t he degrees of freedom has been dest roye d. This phenomenon i s
called "toppli ng". Spin about one axis and enf orce d pre ces s ion about anothe r will
res ult i n an angular accelerati on about the thi r d axi s . I f a mi ss i le carri es two
f re e gyros t hen it cannot ha ve unli mited angular fre edom in mo re t han one
,
direct ion . Since the angula r momentum H i s a large quantity , even a sl ow enforce d
pre ces s ion will re s ult in a la r ge gyroscopic react i on and hen ce l ar ge angul ar
acce lerati on; i n any ca se th e gyro r ef e re nce di re ction i s destroyed.
The quest i on is nail as ked , if the vehi cl e f ra me ro tates s uch t hat t he or igi na l
, ..
vehicle x, y and z axes c e a ~ e ' t o coincide with t he gi r;bal ' axes , do the angl es
as indi ca te d by the pick-offs s t i ll indicate t he correct vehicl e rotations?
Re f erence is made to Fig 5.3- 2. The mi s s il e can clea r l y roll about t he x axi s
wi thout in any way al tering t he es sential geome try of the system; it is merel y
rotati ng about t he s pi nni ng gyro. Also rotation of the mi ss ile about the y axi s
or t he z axis does not a ffect th e ac curacy of measurement provided these two
rot at i ons do not occur t ogether . Assuming now that the rotor does not wander let
t he mi s si l e yaw t hr ough an angl e ~ and t hen rot ate t hrough e about i t s own pitch
axis . v.'h at i s the ro tat ion of the outer gimbal relative to t he missil e fr-amework
as this will be the i ndicat ed yaw angle 0' and what i s t he relat ive movemen t
80 Guided ,Ieapon Control Sys terns
'5,3 FREE OR POSITION G"fROS
,
~ . _ . ~ - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - = ~ - ~ - = = =
I e
I
j
I
,
i
i
I
1
Hissile Instruments
PITCH
. OU TPUT
<,
FIG. 5. 3-1
81
v
ROLL AND PITCH GYRO
(VER TICAL GYRO)
. ' '':,
. .
YAW A ND PITCH GYRO
FIG. 5.3-3
PI TCH OUTPUT
(I F REQUIRED)
YAW OUTPUT
(I F REQUIRED)
FIG. 5.3-2
/ ROLL
OUTPUT
-.
!
; ,
,
I
i
\
,
!
i
I "
,
,
ALTERNATIVE ROLL ( AND
YAW) GYRO
\
- ~ -
82 Guided Weapon Control Systems
bet ween in ner and outer gi mb als e : as t his wi l ] be the measured pitch? Reso lv ing
t hese angular move meots gives this result
sin 0 ' si n e cos
and tan = sec 6 tan
(5.3- 1)
(5.3-2)
Despite the apparent symmetry of the axes , these two equat i ons are not s i mil ar.
Suppose e = = 30
0
. These t wo equati ons tell us t hat th e i ndi cat ed pitch angl e
is and the i ndicated yaw angle is 33!o. The same argument appl ies t o t he
measurement of mi s s il e roll. On e can see from Figs 5.3-1 and 5. 3- 3 th at there
are two possible orientations of the s pi n axis i f one is in t e res te d i n r ol l only ,
and dependin g on t he antici pated subse quent mi s s i l e motions one may be preferabl e
to the other s i nce t he distorti on of meesurement is less . Th is gi nba l disto rt io n
i s one cause of phasing e rror i n command systems as " e shal l see l ate r . A method
t o overcome this distortion is to sense when t he inne r gimbal is not orthogonal
to the out e r gimbal. If t he arrangement shown in Fig 5. 3- 1 i s used, any mi s s i l e
pitch movement will result i n t he i nne r and outer gi mbals no l onqer bei ng at
ri ght angl es. I f torq ue motors apply a moment of the cor-rect sense t o the out er
gi mbal about t he roll axis the gyro wi l l precess about t he pit ch axis unt il t he
error angl e is zero. In thi s Vl ay t he gyro axi s is al ways at right angles to the
mi s s i l e f ore and aft axi s .
Precisi on min iature ball bearings are normally used for t he s uspensi on of all t hree
axes . Free gyros desi gned to r un f or long periods us ually have air bearings to
supp ort t he rotor but t hese are not a f eature of gyros used for mi s s i l es Vlith
s hor t times of f light . The r ot ors can be blast started and t hen alloVied t o
coast . This method is obvi ous l y suit able f or use i n systeras whic h are required
to have a short t ot al reacti on ti me s uch as anti -tank, air-to-air, and s hor t range
,
surface-to-air systems, If compresse d ai r is used as t he power source f or the
missile servos tnen two symme t rically pla ced j et s can be made to i mpi nge on Pelton
wheel -li ke buckets machi ned aro und the r otor. A rot or can be s pun up to 60 , 000
revs / mi n in half a second i n t hi s way. If , as is usual , t he reference direction
is re qui re d t o be t he at launch t hen t he two gimbal s mus t be uncaged
immediately afte r the rotor is s pun up. Some sort of delay mechani sm i s necess ary .
If the miss ile s ervos do not use compressed ai r then it i s usua l t o blast start
t he rotor by means of a s mall separate charge of cordite . Anot her t i me delay is
ne ces s ary to al l ow t he gyro s to run up before th e ma i n rocket mot or i s ignited.
11i ss iles with times of f light of more than about 40 seconds have electrica lly
driven gyro s . Hys t e res is motors are suitable s in ce they have t he characteri stic
of devel oping fu ll t or que from s tandstill up to synchronous s peed. I f a 400 Hz
sup ply is avail abl e then the maximum rotor speed ;s 24, 000 re vs / min. A typical
r un-up time is about 20 s econds but this call be redu ced to about 6 s eco nds r i f an
-

I'
I '
Hissi le Ins t ruments 83
i niti al over-drivi ng is us ed. t1otors are des i gned i ns i de- out with an
i nne r stat or ' and an outside r ot or . Fig 5.3-4 s hows a typical bl as t s ta r t ed
positi on gyro fit ted with One potentiometer and wei ghi ng 255 grams .
PIVOT PIN
ROTOR
/ - ....._-
COVER
PLUNGER
RETAINING
FUSE WIP,:::
i
I
I
I
I
I
!
FIRING LEAD GIMBAL CAGING PLUNGER
EXT RACTOR
FIG. 5. Z--;: 31..c.Gt started pos ition gy ro
The fol I owi nq pa r t i cul ars appl y to a Consi der now some causes of wander rates .
blast star ted posi ti on gyro :
Initial ' wheel speed :
"heel speed aft e r 33 seconds :
Wei ght :
20, 000 rev/min
> 75% of original
0.35 kg
speed
It is diffi cul t t o be s pecific about dri f t rates unless t he envi ronment can be
def in ed mo re or less exact ly . T.1ey could eas i l y be l ess t han o.Oso/s econd but
coul d approach about 0.2s
o
/ s econd i f th e mi ssil e is rotati ng at a mean speed of
3 revs / s econd as the f r i cti on torques: from one set of beari ngs wi ll be unidi r ect i onal.
Also drift r ates coul d gre atly exceed 0.05/ s econd dur i ng hi gh g s uch as t he boost
peri od. Other caus es of dr i ft are torq ues from s l i p rings, potent iometer wipe rs
and from motor leads if the r ot or is el ectri cally dri ven . A t wo axis bl as t
star te d gyro of this quali ty wi l l cost about 200 at 1979 pr i ces . Convent ional
gyros with l ower drift rates are usually bigge r and wi ll ce rt ai nl y cos t mo re . A
dri ft rate of 10/ mi nut e i s typical of a re all y good gyro use d i n a me dium ra nge
mis si l e wi th a fli ght time of about 100 seconds .
5.4 RATE OR CONSTRAINED GYROS
The great majority of rate gyros ","asure angular rate about one axis. A rot or is
mounted in a gimbal whose motion about an axis at righ t anglss t o the s pi n axi s is
84 Guided Weapon Control Systems
constrai ne d by a torsion bar 0: f r i ct i on-free s pri ng system. Th e re an: no ot her
gi mbal s s o t he ro, tor has one degree of free dom only about its own spin axis . Fi gs
5. 4-1 and 5. 4- 2 ' :s ho'd t he mode of operat i on and some const r ucti onal det ai l s of a
hi gh performanc e si ngle axis r at e gyro . The cyli ndrical gi m al is enclosed i n a
, pe nnet i cail y s ealed outer case and the gap between t hem is fille d wi t h viscous
fl ui d i n wh i ch t he gi mb al is f Ioate d wi th neut r al buoyancy . The flui d provi des
viscous s hea r damp ing , mi ni ma l pivot f r i ct i on and protect ion from shock . Define:
k = torsion bar s ti ffness
B = angul ar tvris t i n t he t orsion bar
H angula r momentum of the rotor
J
g
t otal i nerti a about the torsion bar axis
f = viscous damping coef fi ci ent
n ; rate of t urn of mi ss i l e about the i nput axis
If now t he mi s s i l e rotates about the sp i n axi s no reaction of any sor t is set up.
If a steady rotati on about t he t ors i on bar axis occurs t he rot or is constrai ned
t o pre ces s at th i s ra t e als o and t he gyroscopi c t orque Vl ill have to come from
dire ct shear of the pivot at one end and direct shear of the to rsion bar at t he
other . If however t he mi ssile rotates about the "input axi s " as i ndic at ed t hen
precession of the r ot or wi l l OCCur at vt ne expense of t ors i on s et up i n the torsi on
bar, and in the steady state the angle of twist will be proportional t o t he input
rate . Equat i ng torq ues about the torsion bar axi s we have :
2 '
Jg D 8 + fOS + ks = gyroscopic torque =
(5.4 -1 )
H/k
r! s<'l" <. + 2"s /" + 1
n n
?
where k/J =" and = f / k
g n n
Thi s i s an exemp l euf a l imi t ed gain-ban d\'lidth pr oduct . For a gi ven H hi gh gain
is obt ai ned by havi ng a comp l i ant t or s i on bar , but t his only lowe rs t he f r equency
response of t he instrume nt i .e . one can have a high gain or hi gh but not
both . For mos t gui ded mi s s,1,l.:e appl i cations a hi gh nat ur al freq uency i s desirable ,
usually of t he or de r of 80 'Hz or more , s o a s ti f f t orsi on bar and l ow d.c . gai n
mus t be ac cepte d. If, fo r instance "n = 500 re d/s t hen k/Jg = 500
2
. I f the ro to r
s pee d i s 24 ,000 rev/min i . e . 800" rad/s and as s umi ng t he rot or i nertia is
appr oxi mate ly equal t o t he gimbal inertia then the d. c. gai n f r om equa t ion 5.4-1 is
give n by :
where
Hence
0 =Jw = =800" = . 01 radlradl s
rl K k 500<' 500
2
(5.4 - 2)
I
If t he maximum input i s 4 radians/sEcond then the maximum output i s
, or jus t over 2 . Th i s i s why the majority of rate gyro s have a.c . pick-offs for
I measurin g thes e smal l angular mover.p-nts . The one illus cr at ed i s a li near var iabl e
i.
LV..W
;
5 , r=
= =
-

Miss i le Instruments
85
\
\
\
\
-,
-,
,
TORSION BAR
CL AMPED TO
FRAME HERE
OF
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
/
" ,
; :.. .>
- - _.. -
-- -

TURN OF
MISSIL E
RESlA,TANT
- - __
fLUX FLOW UNBALANCED IN
OUTER LI MBS G!VING UNBALANCE D
VOLTAGE . PHASE DEPEN:>EN T ON
DRECTICN Of TVRN
,
,
-c ; I
I
I
I
\
\
\
\
\
, -0::''''':"",,_
GI).,ABAL ,
,
PIVOTAL /
AXIS
FIG. of operat i on of rate gyroscope
FIG. 5.4-2 ccnstructionaZ detai Zs of a rate lfiroscope
-I
:1
BEL!.O"' S
'"0 _ - - "
;>LA'E
OU T(;l C E
ENO COvER
FIL LE.R
evv c
OUTER
COVER
i

i
86 Guided Weapon Control Systems
1"
i
1
i'
f J
j.
j
I
,
I
~ \
1'\
, i
Ii
I
!'
I
Ii
!
1
I
j
i
I
,
,
,
,
,
i
\
;
,
, ,
,.
!
. \
~ !
i
!
\
\
\
i
differential t r ans f onr.e r often called an "E type" pick-o f f. I f one requires a
re al ly accurat e rate gyro a small angul ar movemen t is essenti al s i nce any displ ace -
ment of t he spi n axis will res ult in t he sens i t ive axis bei ng displaced by t he
same arnountvand hence cross coupling. from rat es i n a plane at right angles t o t he
nomi nal one will occur ,
Ve ry good re so lution and lineari ty can be obt ain ed with rate gyros but to reduce
bias over a wide r ange of operating t empe rat ure s t o much less t han 2%of ful l
sca le calls for much s ki l l on the par t of t he instrument des i gner (1) . Rat e
gyros , li ke positi on gyros, car. be blas t started or electrically dri ven. If
bl as t started and all owe d t o coast a conti nuous l oss of gain with t ime must be
acce pted but if t he i ns trument ' is requi red fo r aut opilot damping s ome 20%los s of
gain wo ul d not be critical. On e gas fired rate gyro weighing onl y 130 grams costs
about ~ 1 0 0 . Conve rs ely .a re all y high per formance mi ni at ure two axis rate gyro
wh i ch t ogether wi th an elect ronic module provi des t wo d. c. out put s cor r es pondi ng
t o r at e input s about two orthogonal axes is made by Brit ish Aerospace and wei ghs
56 gr ams plus 36 grams fo r t he electroni cs . Th i s sub mi ni at ure. transducer has
a wi de dynami c r ange with excel lent re s oluti on and l ow bi as . The operati on of
t he se nsor depends on the gyroscopi c f orces act i ng on f iuid re volving about an
axis at high speed. Such a package would be i dea l for stabilisation purposes in
ce r ta i n homi ng heads .
5.5 ACCELEROMET ERS
There are three type s of linear accele rometer in conrron us e :
(a) Spr i ng- mass acce le romet e rs usually calle d se ismic mass accelerometers
(b) Pie zo-el ectri c acce l e romet e rs
(c) Forc e- balance accelerometers
Type tb) exhibit an electric cha r ge ac r oss t wo f aces propor t i onal to th e i mpressed
f orce and hence ,accel erat i on but need a special charge ampl i f i er i f low frequency
accelerations are to be recor ded. Type (c l i s real l y a more accurate spring-mass
ac cele r ometer and is used when great accuracy is requi re d. Type (a ) is t he
t ype mos t often emp loyed jri t actical mi ss il es and consists of a mass suspended in
'. ,
a case by a l ow hyst eresi s spring ; fl uid damping is generally used . The force and
hence deflect ion of t he spring mus t be proporti onal to the accelerat ion and t he
des ign is such that t here i s one sens i t ive axis only with ve ry li ttl e cr oss -
coupli ng , although there are s ome desi gns with a more complicated suspension and
t wo pick- offs so that t wo orthogonal accelerat i ons can be measu re d, However, as
t he sys t em is a conventional sp r ing-mass arrangement t here is a second or der lag
i nvol ved as wi th t he rate gyro ; a. c. pi ck-offs s i milar t o t hose us ed wit h r ate
gyr os measure dis placement with re spect t o the case . Un damped nat ur al f req uencies
- I
- I
I
-
I
I
-
I
-
I
I
-
I
I
-.
I
-
I
I
-.
I
-
I
-
J
I
1
1
l
J
.... . ....." - .-
..-< .
. I
=
87
===
55 i l e Ins tr uaents
i n the range 80-100 Hz are typical. Again l inearity and high res ol ut i on are
comparat ively easy to achieve , but to guarantee a bias mu ch less t han about =2%
of f ull sca le deflection under conditions of vibrat ion , rough usa ge and wi de
ra nges in t emperature is not easy . Acce lerometers for t actical mi s s iles ar e li kely
to cos t from 60-250 depending on speci f i cat ion . Some axi s accelerometer
detail s an:; shown in Fi g 5.5 -1 .

1
1
:1
....
l
J
!
1
5.6 RESOLVERS
In si t uat i ons where the guidance is on the ground and the mi ss i le is not rol1-
pos i't ion stab il is ed it is nece ssary to reso l ve the two gui dance corronands (i . e .
".
"up-down" and "l eft - r i ght " ) into freely r olli ng miss il e axes . Suppose t he
guidance demand up-down in '1
1
and the missile wa s l aunched with t he e l evat ors
hori zont al but has since rolled anti -clockwis e through an I f the
elevat or servos r e cei ve a corrrnand proportional to V
l
cos and' t he r udde r servos
receive a command proportional to - V
l
sin the missile wil l manoeuvre
always assuming that the aerodynamics are linear and the cont ro l surface movements
are proportional to the input cor.mand. The induction res ol ver consi s t s of a roto r
and a stator, each with two windings whose electri'cal axes are at 90
0
to each othe r .
The secondary voltages which result are proportional to t he si ne and cosine of
t he shaft angle . We therefore hold the rotor st at ionary i n space by means of a
roll gyro and al l ow the stator to rotate with the missile . The l eft - righ t guidance
s ignal i s appl ied to the other primary winding . The res ul t inq r elat ive voltages
and forces from this arrangement are shown diagramatically in Fi g 5. 6-1. The re are
coupl i ng factors between pr-imary and secondary windinqs whi ch are normally t he
s ame for each winding .
An alter nat ive resol ve r using d.c . is shown in Fig 5. 6- 2. If the up-down guidance
corrmand is V
1
and the ler't -right corrrnand is V
2
then V
1
, V
2
- V
l
, - V
2
are appl i e d
t o th e point s indicated. 'Two wipers at right angles will pi ck of f linear functions
of '1
1
and V
2
wh ich are well approximated to sines and cos ines i f th e values of
resist ances are carefully chosen . Using eight tapping points as il1 ust r at ed a
n:;ason ab1e approximation is obtained if the voltage at 45
0
is 0.75 t imes the
voltage at 0 . Fig 5.6 -3 shows one approximation to a 'cosine for wiper angl es
from 0 t o 360 fo r given values of R
2/Rl
and RiR1 '
5.7 ALTIMETERS
Radar altimeters' are used in aircraft to indicate height above the ground or sea .
A barometric altimeter indicates height above sea level or some other s el ect ed
elevation . If a missile is required to fly at a given above the ground for
a distance of 20 or 30 km a simple barometric capsule or even a pie zo electric
G.W.(".$.-<3
Vzsln q;
To Et ev ator
Yow Comm an d
V
2
e
v, cos ... ij SIn (l
To Etevator Servos
R = s cal Ing f actor relating
Servo \-Offoge -t o aerodynamic
f or ces for r udder s
= di t to f or et evat or s
V
z
cos f-
ToRudder
V
2

, To Ruoaer Se r vcs
- RV, s in 0
,
,
,
I
, I
..---I
', I
.
, Angle
\ ,
\ I
\ - RV
1
si n c/J
1
I \VlCOS
, \
8 '
Guided Weapon Control Sys tems
Pitch Com mand
V, V,
cose
ToEl eva t o r fJ
FTC . 5. 6- 1 Relative voZtages ana as a
reeul.t: of gui dance commande V, end V,.,
" "
-V}S/[l P
To Rudder:.... :
Reference or Null Pos ition
:2
PRII1ARY
WINDINGS
(ROTOR)
_ _ _ _ _ _ __ E\icos(>
I
,
, '
\ -v, :
' ...
\
88
- -
t1 ; 55 i 1e Ins t ruments
.. ..... . l
, .. .. . " .. 1. ':;' ""
. ~ _ - - Z . .
8S
-,
Ot "OO", 10"-
FI G. 5.5-1
90 Gu ided Cont rol
.-
+V .
R.
m
]'1---11
FI z
R] R, R, R]
- ,
R
z
R,
R
z
V
z
- V
z
R,
R
J
R]
R
z
WWt #
R] .V, R
J
FIG. 5.6-2 Rinc resoZvel"
WIPER
vOLTAGE
l ' - - ------ - -- - --- - - - - - - -
75 r--
t _:: "' _':=
FIG. 5.6-3 ReL-acitJe cs J. [unc zi on of wi pe l' engle
pres sure transducer shoul d be accurate enoug n to indicate height provi cing tnis is
not less than about 100 m. Below t his height t hey are not su itable due to local
small variations i n and t heir l imi t at i on of dis cri minati on
and accuracy.
Radar altimeters are discussed by Hovaness i an (2) . Bot n FH/Cw alia pcl sed s ystems
can no<; operate down to altitudes of a metre or so out FH/CW systems appear t o be
more accurate i n t he range 0-10 m. 80th types of altimeter can be made to indicate
height continuously over a very wide range but this requires an elaborate aesign.
If height measurement i s required in the range 0- 60 m only then a si mpler' instru-
ment is possible weighing not more t han about 2 .5 kg. Both types can be oesigned
with a large permitti ng roll and pitch angles up to 25
0
or mo r e . The
distance measured tends to be t he distance to t he poi nt of nearest return . A
\
\
-- - ------'---''-
.-- --------=
9 I
< 5% or
"
0. 5 III bela... 10 In.
Th is devi ce
i 11urn; na tes
the
;1i 55 i le Ins truments
t y pi ce l commer cial alti mete r has an accuracy of
An alter nati ve t ype of devi ce i s the la se r alti meter.
target wit h a short durati on package of radiation deri ved from a laser source .
Radiation ref lected or from the target is detected by a receiver in cl ose
proximity t o t he l a se r s ource . Conventi ona l ra dar ti ming techn iques are emp loyed
to give t he altitude Laser al timet er s have been constructed using
conventi onal sources and semi -conductor gal l; m arsenide (GaAs ) devices . A
system des igned and produced by EM! Electronics Ltd using a GaAs laser woula nave
a typica l per f ormance 0. 3 m to 50 w with of 0.1 m at ra nges out
to 10 m and :: 1% from 10 m t o 50 m. In gener al , laser al ti meters have narrow
beamdidt hs (or t he or der of a degree or so) and hence give spot meas urement s of
alt itude ab ove t he t er r a i n.

(
REF ERU,CES
1. SIr10NS W. R. Errors in r a te gyros copes and some compens e t i on tecnnl ques .
Design Electronics , August 1966.
2. HOVANESSIAN S.A. Ra dar dete ct ion and t r acki ng syst elll s . Artec House Inc.
1973 .
I
I
I -
I
I'
CHAPTER 6
AUTOPILOT DESIGN
6.1 INTRODUCTION
An au top ilot is a clos ed loop sys tem and it is a minor l oop inside t ne ma in guidance
loop; not all mi ssi l e sys tems r equire an auto pilot. A mi s s i l e will manoeuvre up-
davin or le f t - right in an apparently sa t is factory manner i i f a control surface is
mo ve d or t he directi on of thrus t altered . If t he mis sil e car ries acce le rome t e rs
and/or gyros to provide addit ional f ee dback into the missil e s e rvos to mo dify
t he mis s i l e motion t hen t he mi s s i l e control syst em consistin9_QlJ&!:..vos,_cont r ol
su r f a.<: e.2.-or e1 , us
control electronics is us uall y ca lled an auto pilot, but t his defin it io n is not
--. _ - _ .-. - - - -. ._-- -
universally accept ed , as already men tion ed in th e last chapter. Broadly speaking
,autopilots control in whi ch case
t hey are called l at er al autopilots, Or th ey cont rol t he rot ion about t he fo re and
- ---------_._._- _. - -.-
they__ Thi s cont ra sts wit h the
usual de f in it ion of aircra ft aut opi l ots; those desi gne d to cont rol t rie no t i on in
the pitch plane are called l ongit udi nal autop i lot s and onl y t hose to cont rol tne
mot i on in ya" are called lat eral autopil ot s. For instance, an aircraft autopilot
designed t o keep t he head i ng. cons t ant wo uld be ca lled a lateral aut opi l ot . For a
symre t r-i cal cruciform pitch and yaw autopilots are often i denti cal;
one i njects a 9 bi as i n the ver ti cal plane to offset t he effect of gravi ty Out
this does not affect t he desi gn of t he autop il ot . Roll autopil ot s serve quite a
different purpose and will be consi de red separat el y .
The requirements for a good lat eral aut opi l ot are very nea r ly th e s ane for conunenc
and homi ng systems but it i s more hel pf ul ini ti al ly t o con, ider t hose as sociated
wi th command systems where the gui dance receiver pr oduces si gnals propor t ional to
the mi s a l i qnme nt of t he missil e from the li ne of s igh t (LOS) . A s impli fi ed closed-
loo p block diagram f or a vert i ca l or hori zontal pl ane guidance l oop wit hout an
autopilot is s ho"n i n Fi g 6.1 -1 .
92
Autopilot Design
. - -- - -
--- _...__..._-
93
OIJ/().,l.. CE.
C"" 'Ifil l/Gilt
... M:)lA. ... .... ERROl'
CI-f/l"'''E:L
'. -
F I "i SERVO
SIO .... "'l
PROf-OR nOHAl
rc O{ST... OFF
lCS
,o. t;ItOOrNAH>CS
...NO
RUDDER
Olf fl"'roll'
AHOLE
1
I'
I
,
FIG 6.1-1 A or plane gui dance Zoop
The target direction e
t
i svdet e rmined by the target t racke r (we shall put the
tar get and mi ss ile tracking sy s t ems toget her in the next chapt e r) . Let the
guidance receive r gain be k
l
vol ts yrad (misal ignmeot:'j . The guidance si gna l s are
then in variably phase advanced to ensure closed loop stab i l i ty . In orde r t o
maintain constant sens itivity to mi s s il e l i near from t he LOS, the
signals are also mult iplied by t he meas ure d or assumed mi s s i Ie range R
m
be fore
being passed to t he mi s s i l e servos. Thi s ne ans that the effe cti ve d.c., gain o f
t he guidance error detector is k
l
vol t s/ m. If the miss il e s ervo gain i s k
2
rad/
vol t and the control s urfaces and airframe produce a steady state lat eral
acce l e r at i on of k
3
m/s
2
/ r ad t hen t he gui dance loop has a steady s tate open loop
ga in of k
l
k
2
k
3
m/s
2
/ ;;] or k
l
k
2
k
3
s- 2 The l oop is clos ed by two inh erent
i nte grat i ons from ateral acce le rati on t o lateral .posi t t on. Since the error angle
i s always very small one can say that t he change in angle i s t his l ate ra l displace -
ment divided by t he instantaneous mi s s i l e range R
m.
Hence t he x R
m
and ,
fact or s can be regarded as cancelli ng each ot her out . It is argue d lat er t ha t
t his as sumption of a double i nteg ration i s not strictly correct but t hat i t is a
good approximat ion f or guidance loop stabil ity calculations . We wi ll examin e the
guidance loop struct ure in more det ail in t he nex t chapter ana t he reade r is
asked to accept at the moment t hat t he guidance loop has a gain whicn is normally
kept constant and consists of t he product of : he error detector gain , the Se r vo
gai n and the aerodynamic gain .
Consider now the possib le variat i on in t he or the aerodynamic ga1 0 K
3
" if I
due t o uncertainties and changes in t he e .g . because of
(a ) propellant cons umption
and (b) manufacturing tolerances
and changes in c. p. due to
(a ) changes i n incidence
(b ) changes in mi s s il e speed
(c) manufacturing tolerances
the value of k
3
coul d easily change by a factor of 5 to. 1 if tne s t at i c ma r gin
shoul d change from say 2 C;;] to 10 cm in a mi s s i le anout 2 m lon g. If , i n aco i tion,
there can be lar'ge venations i n t he dynerm c pres sure ~ pu
2
due to cnanges HI
height and speed (many :nissiles have a boost -.coas.t vel cci ty profile) , then t he
ove r all var i at ion i n aerodynamic gain could ea s il y exceed 100 t o 1. Also , we
have al ready seen that the weathe rco ck frequency of the mis sile wni cn is a measure
of t he speed of response of t he airfra.me i n producing a lateral accel erat i on is a
fun ct ion of the s tat ic margin and the aerodynami c derivat ives . And fi nally, since
t he mi s s i l e r es ponse depends on the semi non-dimens ion al form of the aerodyn amic
de r i va t i ves , i t follows that all as pe ct s of the mi s si l e re sp ons e wi ll va ry as t he
ma s s a nd i ne r t ia vary wi t h propellant usage . A sati sfactory gui aance loop cannot
be en gineered i f very l a rg e t ol e r ances exi s t i ns i de th e l oop , unless of course
thes e va r iati ons are known .
Si nce t he ban dwidth and damp ing of the guidance loop a", optimised to pro ouce
minimum mi s s di st ance i n th e presence of t arge t motion and noi s e of various so rt s
it foll ows th at t he receive r des igner as well as t he mis sil e control sys t e m
des i gne r have t o work t o f a i r ly close t ol erances on gain , and in t he l at t e r' case on
dyna mi c r esponse as wel l , No problem exist s in ma int ain ing' a const ant missile s ervo
gain . If now i t is known that the c.g . pos it ion wi ll not vary f rom ro und to r ound
and t hat i t ;;ill not shift during flight , that t he c. p. pos ition will not change
e i the r , t hat t he ai r density and missile velocity wi ll re main cons t ant and t hat
the aerodyna mics a re pe rfectly linear (i .e. normal f or ce i s pro por t ion al t o
incidence ) , t hen he may have no wor r i es . There are sene ei r f ra ne con figura tions
( us uall y wit h wi ngs wit h l ong root chor ds ) whe re t he c . p, changes very little
wi th changes i n Hach numbe r and i nci dence . r ~ o r e o v e r ) if one can ces i qn a missile
f or high stability and hence l ow manoeuv rabil i ty (i .e . wi th a stati c mar gin of 5%
or more of t he length ) then a s mall shift in c. p. Or c . g. shoul d not re s ult in a
large percent aqe chan ge i n st atic ma rgin . f',any ant i - tank mi s s il es ar-e i n th i s
category . The naxt mun g r equi r err-e nts fo r such missil es which are des t qnec t o hi t
relative ly s l ow moving t arget s are typi cally 3 to 4 g at th e mos t . In addition ,
they are us ua l ly boosted a nd s us tai ned t o f l y at a nea r-constant vel ocity. In such
a case the prob lem of keep ;".,9 t he aerodynami c ga in roughly const ant hardly aris es .
We are now i n a position t o dis cus s t he ma in obj ect i ves in lateral a ut opil ot des i gn.
6.2 LAT ERA L AUT OPILOT DESIGN OBJECTIVES
The maintenance of near-cons t ant steady state aeroduncmi:c gain
t ~ o s t guidance l oops are conditionally stable i .e . a vari at ion i n gain either- up o r
down will e rode s t abili t y margins . Tne missile control des i gne r mi ght reas onab ly be
asked t o keep to a t ole ra nce of z; 25%of a nominal value . Howeve r many command
systems use "fee dforwe rc t e r ms " t o improve ac curacy and t hese wi l ! be di s cuss eo 1<1
t he next chapte r. To make f ull use of these the cont ro l sys t em should have a close
-
95 Autopilot Desi gn
tolerance on steady stat e gai n , ideally lOX of a nomi nal value or better . In
homi ng systems, we sha ll see t hat t he pe r fo nnance i s seriousl y degraded i f the
"kinematic gai n" var i es by more t han about:: 30%of an i deal value. Since t he
kinemat i c gain depends ,on the cont ro l sys tem gain , t he homin g head gain and the
mis s il e- t ar get r e l at ive velocity , and the latte r may not be known ve ry accurately,
it is not ex pected t ha t the mi ss il e control des igne r wi l l be all owed a t olerance
of 00 re t han :: 20%.
So we arrive at a general conclus ion that an open-loop mi s sil e cont rol system i s
probabl y not ac cept able for hi ghly manoeuvrable missiles wh i ch have very small
:. ''':,
st at ic margins esp eci ally thos e which do not operate ' af a constant height and s peed.
To increase the iseazhercock: fl"'eq:J.8r'.C"d
A hi gh we ath ercock f requency is ess ent i al fer the st ac i l i ty of ~ h e guidance loop.
Sin ce the re s t of the loop cons i s t s essential ly of two integrations and a d.c.
gai n it fo llows that if there are no dynami c lags in t he loop wh at so ever we have
180
0
phase l ag at all frequencies open loop. To oot ain stab ility we can pass t he
gui dan ce erro r signa 1 th rough a phase advance network whcs e trans fe r func t i on is
-r- Ts
+ oTs ' wh"re " , 1, t ypi call y at.cut 0.1 .
In t he fre quency domain t his approximat es to l/a for' waT > 1 and hence tn i s
operat i on of addi ng t he approxi mate differential to the e rror s i gnal has the
i ne vitable e ffect of s er io us l y degrading the s ignal -to-nois e rati o at frequenci es
> wT ; 1 as some high f re quency noise will al mo st certainly be present . The
raaxi mua amount of cha se advance'" OCCurS when
1"' "max
wT ; l/ic
gi vi ng
(1 , )/ Z
-
(6. 2- 1) t an ; - '0.
me l.
For a
;
0.3
"max
;
31
a 0.2
.;
~ 2
max
_ _0
a
;
0.1
~ m a x
00
If .:l =. 0. 2 , t he network is often referred to as a "5 to 1 pnase aovence network"
and if 0. ; 0.1 as a "10 t o 1 phase advance network" . The poin t that i s being
stresse d at the moment i s that amplitUde s multiply and phases aad.
\':e sh ai l poi nt out in t he next chapter that one can -do a li ttle be tter tnan th i s
with a nore complex type of 'phas e advance transfer function but the fun dane nt a 1
problem still remains : if one requires rore than about 60
0
phas e aovance One nas
to use SEveral networks in series and the deterioration in signal -to-noise ratio
tends to be catastrophic . Hence , although the number is sonewhat arbi trary,
desi gne rs do tend to limit the armunt of phase advance that is going t o De
re quired to about 60
0
. This means that if one is goi ng to aesign a guiaance loop
I
,
GUldt:'u \"Jt:c pon Contro l Sys tems
i-ntn c. minimum of 45 pn ase margin , the tota l phase lag permi ss ible from t he
mi s si l e se rvo and t he aerodynami cs at gui dance l oop unity gain cross -over fre quency
\'d11 be 15 . Hence the s ervo must be very much faster and li kewi se t he weat he rcock
frequen cy s houl d be much f as t e r (say by a facto r of fi ve or mo re) than the gui dance
l oop undamp ed natural frequency - i . e . t he ope n- l oop unity gain crOSS-over
frequency . Thi s may not be a pract i cal pr opos i ti on for an open loop mis s il e cont r ol
system especial ly at the l owe r end of t he mi s s i l e speed r ange and with a smal l
stati c margin .
To increas e t he weat hercock damping
We have seen t hat the we athercock mode i s very un deraamped, es pecial l y with a
l arg e stat ic margin and at high al ti tudes . This has s ev e ral unues i r abl e effects.
Fi r st l y, a badly damped oscillatory mode res ul ts in e l ar ge r .m. s . out put t o b roac
band noise. The r .m.s . incidence is unneces sar il y large and "his resul ts i n a
significant re duct i on i n r ange due t o t he i nduced dr ag. The accu r acy of the
mi s si l e wiil als o be degraded somewhat. A s udden in cre ase i n si gna l wnich coul c
occ ur afte r a t emporary s i gnal fade will result 111 a l arge ove rshoot both in
i ncidence and in ac hi e ved lateral g. Thi s might cause s ta ll ing and in any case it
would mean t hat t he airframe woul c have t o be s t resse d t o s t and nearly t wi ce the
maximum designed steady stat e g.
To reducrq croee-rcoupi i riq between. pi zci: tind yea.; moz -ior:
If the missile has two axes of symmetry and t he re is no roll rate tne re s noul o
be no cros s- coupl i ng between the pitch and yah mo tion . HO'r'1 eVEr many mi ss il es are
al l owe d t o ro ll f r eel y and equ ation 4.2-2 shows t hat t here i s a t erm produci ng
acce l era t ion along t he y aX1S due to roll ra te and in ci den ce in pi t ch . Likewi se
equat ion 4. 2- 3 s hows there is .a t erm producing ac ce le rati on along t he z a xi s due
t o ro ll rate and incidence in yaw. Simi la rl y t he re are i nduced morren t s in pi t ch
and yaw due to roll, rate and angular mot i on i n t he otne r pl ane as t he moment of
inerti a abou t t he roll axis i s usually an order of magnit ude less t nan t hat
about t he pitch or ya\'1 axis; equat ions 4.2 -5 anc 4. 2-6 refer . These cros s - coupli ng
e ffects can be recarded as and anu ciosed-loop sys t emwi l l De
v
cons iderab l y less s ens iti VE to any disturbance than an open-loop one.
To aoei et: in qazher-iriq
In a command system the missile is usually l auncne d s one oi s t ance off tne line of
si ght and toe- in and s upere l evat i on are added s uch tnat i f t he r e ere no ui s turnence s ,
the mi ss ile will fly in to t he beam or LOS ; in ot he r woros the mi ss il e nas to fly
open-loop for some time . Thrust mi s al i gnme nt , bi ases and cro s s winds all cont ribute
to dispersion . A cl ose d- l oop mi s s il e control sys tem (i. e . an autopilot) , i f it
behaves like any other 'c lose d-Jocp syst em shoul d be reasonably resistant to outs i ce
di s turbances . To i mprove gui dance accuracy t he systems engin eer will wan t t he
, .
I
I
,
:i
----- ---_.-.._-
Auto;:>i iot Des i go
..
97
nar r owe s t g ui da nce beam pos s i bl e . Toe majority o f supersonic CLOS and Deam
ri de r s would st and a very s mall chance of gathering if t hey possessed no eutopi l ot .
Neve r the l es s t here are a nurrce r of t ube- Laoncheo miss il es which carry a beacon
and use an inf ra- red se nsor f or tracking the mi ss i l e. This sensor is moun ted
al ongs i de the launching tube , and t he refore the mi s s i l e is actually launched in
th e beam. Some of t hese missiles do nct have an autopilot .
Be fore proceeding to c det ail ed discus sion of sor.e part i cular autopilots it may
be helpful t o classify t hem as s hown in Fig 6 .2 -1.
AUrDPILO TS
, -':
- .
I
ROLL AU TOPIL OTS
I
ROLL POSIT/ON
STA B/ LISA TlON
[
F;OLL RA TE
STAB/LISA TlON
I
SPECIAL Au TOPILOTS
i
ROLL
POS/TlOIl
OEMAND
LATER':"L AUTOPIL OTS
FOR CONVENTIONA L
CLOS, BEAM RlD/NG
AND /-IOM/NG SY TEMS
I
Tw O
ACCELEROME TERS
MANUAL
GUIDANCE
SYSTEMS
I
SEA SKIMMING
AND HEIGHT
LOCK SYS/ENS
ONE
ACCELEROME TER
ONE RATE GYRO
VERTICAL
LAUNCH SYSTEMS
AZ IMUTh CONTR L
8 Y INERTIA L
MEANS ONE RA TE
GYRO
6.3 A L 'l.T ERAL AUT OPI LOT USIN G ONE ACCELEROMETER
A;-';D O;-';E RAT E GYRO
An a r r anqe rnent whereby an acce l e r ometer prov i ce s tn e me i n reecnack an a a. r a t e gyr' O
is used to act as a c:a:7: ;J er i s CO:iIO-::-o n in many ni qn per ro rmance conmenc ana nami ng
rri s s i l es . Identical autopilots are used to control the pi tcn 5.n<1 yaw mo t ions if
t he missile has two pianes of synmet ry , so we need consider one cr.anne l on 1,1' I tne
ya<l autopi l ot say . The accelerometer is placed well f orwar d of t ile c.g. proba ol y
about a half to : ..... 0 t hirds of t he dist ance fr om t he c . g . to tne nose. Its
sensiti ve axis is i n t he direc tion oy. nes t o a voi c pl e ci nq th e a cce l e r omet e r
near an antino de of t he pr i nc i pl e be nc i ng ;:'10': e o r t he mi ssil e o tnerwi s e t ne
vib rati on pick-up a t t his point may re s ul t in ae s t r uc t i on of t he mis sil e . If t nt:
missile servo can res pond to t his body be nu i n; f r eq ue ncy tne resulti ng fi n IliO' .. erllent
will tend to r e inforce t his na tural moos . The r a t e 9.Y'1'O i s no t i de al l y pl a ce d at a
no de ....,h e r e t he enq ul a r mo vement due to vi uret i on i s a me xrrnun. It.e r al.';: gyr' o's
98
-- --_." - - -"---- -_._ --- - -- -- - .
Gu ided Heapon Control Sys tems
s ensit i ve axis i s about 0 2 i.e . i t s output is proportional t o yaw rat e r .
Fig 5.3-1 sh o-rs . t.he arnangement i n a si mplified f orm for a mis sile Hit h rear
cont r ol s. First ly t he dy nami c lags of the rate gyro and acce Ie rome t er have been
FIN SERVO
AERODYNAMIC TRANSFER
FUNCTION

- k.
t;
..:.... ka t
f
y
+ 2f1s/GJ . 1
5 1,.:
... 2fJ a. s/(,,) + 1
w
1
ns ns
no<
na.
AERODYNAMIC
RATE GYRO
TRANSF ER FUNCTION
()fr--
r TiS
1
kg t---
U
CS
l
ACCEL EROMETER
@
k
a
FIG 6 . 3- 1 A simpl i f i ed di ::.gl'a:r, ..-'-"0"1' Q Z- a r. i;; l '(). Z c<.u. ;; of/i L;;; {; wir;h r'eciz- cont ro ie
omitted as thei r bandwi dt h i s us ual l y more t han 80 Hz and ill t his context the phase
l a gs they in t roduce i n the fr equenci es of i nt eres t are negligibl e . Se con dl y it
is as s ure c t hat the dynami cs of t he f i n se rvo are edequete l y des cribed by a
quadratic lag . Thi r dl y , the s mall nume ra tor terms i n t he transfer function f:/r.
ha ve be en omitted , s ee equat i on 4.6 -7 . For c l e r i t y t hi s t rans fe r f unction has bee n
expresse d as a steady s tate ga in k and a quadrat i c l a g ( i . e . the weat he r cock
ae
fr equen c)"w
nae
and a damp ing ratio) . We establ ished in s e ct i on 4.6 t hat a st abl e
mi s s il e with rear cpntrol s has a negative s teaoy state gain . If we as s urre t hat t ne
gain of t he feedback instr uments are posi tive and t hat t hei r outputs are s cbt re cteo
f rom the input demand t he n a negative f e e dbac k si t uation wi l 1 be a chie ved only if
the servo gain is s hown as i .e . a pos i t i ve voltage i np ut prod uces a
negati ve rudder def l ect ion .
Wi t hout goin g into any algebra at t he moment , what coe s this di eqr am tell us '!
Fi rstly , since the autopilot is a Type 0 closed loop sys t em we sho uld ai m a t a me an
open l oop steady state ga in of 10 Or more to make t ne closed loop ga in rela tively
insensiti ve t o var ia t ions in aerodynami c gain ; t his open loop gain i s ksk
ae
( k
a
+ kg/U) . Second l y , gain and feedba ck ,lill reduce the s t eady state gai n and
rais e the bandwi dth of t he system. I t is us ually a fair approxi mat i on t o ass ume
t hat open loop gain crossover fre quency approximates to the fundamenta l closed
loop natura l frequen cy . If , fo r exampl e He are aiming at a minimum autopilot
band'didt h of say 40 re d/s we have to as k what sort of banowt oth do we nee d f ro m t ile
'-
.
,
Aut opi l ot Desi gn

99
fin se r vo? Since the open loop gain cr oss over frequency will be at l ea s t 2 or 3
ti mes the open loop wea t he r coc k f r eq uency we ca n r ega r d th e light ly damped airf r ame
as producing ve ry near l y 180
0
phase lag at gain crossover . A glance at the
instrument fee dback shews t hat the r at e gyro produces s ome moni t or i ng feedbac k
equal to kg/V and some first deri vati ve of output eq ual to kgTi / V. It i s th is
firs t derivat i ve compone nt which i s so us eful in pr omoti ng closed loop s tability .
If now the accel erometer is placed at a di s t ance c ahead of t he e.g . t he total
acce l e r at ion it sees is eq ual to the accele rat ion of t he c .g . ( f 1 plus the
angular accelerati on ( r ) ti me s t his di s t ance c. Thi s t otal is ( 1 + cs /V + CTis 2/ U).
It is clear t here fo re t hat i f c i s positi ve ( i. e . t he is ahead of
t he c .g . ) we have from t he t '110 i nstruments some feedbac k plus s ome
fi r st and second de ri vat ive of t he output , all negati ve feedbac k. It is not
pos s i bl e at t his stage t o be pr e ci s e but i t appea rs t hat Ije may ab le to ac hie ve
70
0
or mor e phas e advan ce i n the feedba ck path wi t h this arrangemen t . If t his i s
so we can allow t he s ervo to pr oduce s ay 20
0
_25
0
phas e lag at ga i n Cr os so ver
fre que ncy in or der to ach ieve 50
0
open loop pha se margi n . This means t hat the
ser vo bandwidth must be 3 or 4 ti mes greate r t han t he desired autopilot bandwi dt h ,
say a mi nimum of 150 ra d/s for an aut opi l ot ba nd,i dth of 40 r ad/ s .
We now consi der t he mo re exact form of t he t ransfer fy/r. , 'l'I i t h the
s mall additi ona l numerator t e rms . see Fig 6. 3-2 . This has been exp ressed i n t he
sa me form as i n equat ion 4.6- 7 su ch t hat t he k
ae
of Fig 6.3- 1 i s equal to
V( neY
v
- n v _l / (yvn + Vn l . The inclusi on of t he airf rame zeros also unfor tunate ly
., V"I.., r v
compl icates t he t rans f e r f uncti on for r / f
y
. The rea der may wis h to ve r ify that
the product of t hese two aerodynamic trans f e r functi ons f ylr, and r /fy produce s t he
transfer funct i on r / r, gi ven in equ ati on 4.6-8 . Man ipula t ion yields the followi ng :
f
Y
f yd
- y
s2
:
,
4
a
4
s +
+ Y n s
r, r
( - y - c n)
r, r,
(6. 3- 1)
I
a : r--- {2" -
3 K . W . S
S ns
(y n 1
v r }
w
ns
t --
\ .
L

i' _
100
____ __ _ __ . . _ - _..
Control Systems
=
RUDDER
ANGL E
FIN SERVD t AERODYNAMi C TRANSFER FUNCTION
'YI
'''' ' .k, 1 I Iy
. fI
- s2 '2/J5 1' ' 2
- -, T __s_. I' I' 5 - ()I" + nr J5 T y v nr + Un"
IWns - W
n s
. ' , \
t
BODY RAT E
RATE GYRO
r AERODYNAMfC IRAN 5 FER F U,....'CTION
k + 5 + nvYt - Yv
I 9 I I
1 .
ACCELERCNETER
,k
o
LATERAL OF C G
\
TOTAL LA TERAL OF
ACCEL EROME TE R
PIG 6. 3-2 La zeral: Q.u:;opiZot l.;ith one cccc Iercce cer- and one H1Ce gy l'Q
In crcer to design the autop i l ot fo r a rear controlled missile we must make a first
es timate of the require: ae rccynazri c derivatives . We ca l c ula t e that the mi ssile
7
may have to develop c lateral acceleration of 250 m/s- at a fo niard velocity of
500 m/s { l ater al 9 requirements ore dis c ussed i n t he ne xt chap t e r) . The mi s s il e
is t o be of the bo?st coast type and the maximum ve loc i ty Hi 11 be IZ x 500 m/s and
tn e minimum veloci ty will be sec/II m/s i .e . a speed variation of 2 :'0 10veral1.
We oake the force will be propor tional to i nc idence and
I i mt t body incidence to O.2: :radians . Hence Yas = 250 = Y
s
x 0.2 ., Y
s
= 1250 .
Cut 8 = v/ V fo r small : . Y
v
= 1250/500 = 2. 5. However si nce s ome of t he
lift of body + ':;lngs + cont r ol s ur f ac es i s l os t with a tan controlled mis sil e
we should a l i ow a t l eas t + on thi s estima te , say Y = 3.0. We e s timate t he
v
mi ss i l e length to be 2m. t he a ll -b ur nt mas s be 52 kg and t he all -burnt
la teral moment of inert i a C to be 14 kg r.? The value of n
v
wi l l depend On Yv enc
the s i ze of t he s t at i c margin whi ch we have some con t rol over s i nce we car,
di ctate to s ome extent the pos i t i or, of t he win gs . Let us go i niti ally t o a s t at ic
margin of of t he : o: al bee r in q in mind that t his will vary scmewnat
wi t h incf osnce and !\acn i'1t:r::b er .
N
v
= Y'I x* wher-e : 15 t he static ma.;-<jir. ana " v = Nv/C and Yv .:: Y/ nt. I f
i s O.09m, i . e . 4. 5% of the mt ss i Ie length t hen li e find that " v .:: 1.0. 00\"1
,

=" -
"
Autop ilot De s ign 101
cons ider th e strength of rudder required. If the rudder mome nt arm i s t hree
quarters of half the missile length i .e . 0.75m and the s t at ic margi n i s O.Ogm then
to balance the stability moment with a rudder deflection of 0.2 r adi ans we need
yr, = J250 x O.Og/O . 75 = 150. However a steady latera l accel e rati on re sults in a
s teady body rate and hence an opposing damp ing momen t which also opposes the
rudder moment . Suggest y = 180. The dampin g deri vat ive n is not necessa ry to
r, . r
sp e cify so we take a fi gur e based on s i mi l ar designs i.e . n = - 3. Si nce we know
. r
the cont r ol s ur f ace moment arm we find nr, =500. Tentat i ve l y we put the acce l ero-
meter 0.5m fon,ard of the c .g . Summarising therefore (and put t ing i n the corre ct
al gebrai c si gns ). our cont r ol parameters are
The reader will already know that a fundamental quantity in any closed loop is
t he open loop gai n , and this is the product of the feedforward gai n and the feed-
. .
bac k gain . So f or conven ience we can design t he system as a-nonrina l l , t o 1 system
:. ' '':.
, ,
yr, = +180
nr, = - 500
c 0.5
500
Yv = -3.0
u
n
v
+1.0
n
r
- 3. 0
This leave s us with 5 parame ters over which we have some control and wnicn we
wish to opt imise vi z k , w , U , k , k ; we s hall attempt i n th e f irs t pl a ce", to
s ns sag
des i gn the autopil ot without any compensat ion circuits .
Wh at will the spec i fication look like? Suppose the nominal qui.dance Loop gai n i s
10. \lith phase advance the frequency at which open l oop gain crossover occurs
wi l l be increased from /TIT to about 5 rad/s . So we are looking for a small phase
l ag from t he autopilot in the crit ical frequency range say 2-12 rad/s . A require -
men t f or a maximum autop ilot phase lag of 15
0
at 5 radls and 30
0
at 10 radls would
be just adequate . Th is is t he r eas oning beh ind t he requi re ment for a mi nimum
autopilot bandwidth of about 40 radl s in this particular sys tem. The sys t em uses
fe edfon'ar d t erms s o we would expect to keep to a given closed loop gain" 10%
but we might be al lowed a few per cent more than this at th e extremes of mi ss i l e
s pee d. \Ie would expect to see something in the spe cificat ion to control the
degree of stability, such as percentage overshoot i n t he ti me doma in , and gain
and phase margin i n the frequency doma in . In addition there may be a l imit
i mpos ed on the closed loop r esonant gain in order to limit the equivalent noise
bandwidth . The autopilot wil l also have to be sat isfactory from the gathering
poin t of view and a very close watch will have to be kept on the servo gain and
bandwidth to avoid f in rate saturation in the presence of noi se. In this
connecti on the des i gner wi ll try f or the l owest pos s ible se r vo gai n and the
1 ~ l e s t pos s ible s er vo bancrdidth as these measures wil l res ult in a r educt ion of
r . m. s . f in r at e .
:
'-
;:
,-
I
r:
-
c
- ,
. - :- _.. .....
._' ...-

r"
. . ..... '.
- .
, -
.. ...
...
Guided Cont r ol Sy s t erns
i. e . the closed loop gain is t.. n i ty . Since the a ut opi l ot is a type 0 feedback
system and the r ate provides s cme of the f eedback we can wi thout los s of
generali t y put t he accel erorre t e r gain t o 0. 8 as a fi rs t try . If i n pra ct i ce
it i s more con ven ient to put t hGac cel eror.e ter ga i n to a t ent h of t his
then t he open l oop gain is ea sily res t ored t o its correct value by i ncreas i ng
t he s e r vo gai n by a fa ctor of 10. Let us t ake a s pe ci f i c e xamp l e . Suppose t he
design a i m i s fo r a gui dance open loop gain of 10 and we des i gn t he a utopi lot
cl osed 100p gain as tn i t y. In t hi s case t he qut dance error detector e t c must
have a gain of 10. Alternat ively we coul d re duce the auto pi l ot feedb ack gain by
a f act or of 10 say and increase the fin s ervo gai n by a f act or of 10 to keep t he
a utop il ot open loop gil i n cnal ter-ed. The a ut opil ot Closed loop ga i n is now 10 so
t he guidan ce error detector gain mcs t :Je reduce d 0 eni t y , It should be obvious
that fer any gi ver: gilidance error the ouirp ui: from t he f i r. se r vo is i dent i ce l in
both systems . We r epeat : in thE: of complete clos ed l oop systems t he gai n of
ir.c.-:"vidw=.l. components or s ub-sys terrs is a mat te r of conveni ence , beari ng i'1 mind
t he vol tage l evels that are availab1e. Whet is r e aily s ignifi canf "i s t he open
102
,r
I
!
i
I
i
I
on an anai ogue s i mul at or it looks as t hough
yolts/rad/s will r es ult i n a reasonable aut opil ot. and k :: 30
9
val oes i n equat ion 6.3- 1 and fi nd t hat
a
o
6.39 x 10
5
; i .u ns
v
4 a ,
1. 636 X 10 " - kgn,
? '
2. 06 X 10- ; 11\ + k
a
( - y, - c n,) -
a fi r st t ry
se t t he servo na ture l f requen cy w
ns
t o 180 ra d/ s , Co
be obtained with a good hot or a conven tiqnal pneumat i c servo f igure wh ich can
and " s :: 0.5 . From
k
s
:: 0.007 rad/velt
we now insert t he se
loop gain of a Or sub s i diary ieep .
Le t us therefore
a3 ; 0.. 82
a
4

This coefficien t j s approxima tel y zer o if c
place t he acce ler ome ter forward of t he c .g .
; 2, Ik w
s s ns
10- 3 - k
x = i I S
o which s hows how vi t cl i t is t o
ens
{c. 3-2)
. 2.537s .
'!"---:;-T T
.u
i n order to consider the stability and mode s of os cillation cf t rn s fourtn orcer
sys t em we need t o cons i de r the coeffi cien ts of t he denomi nat or onl y of t he clos e c
l oop transfer function . The characterist ic i s obta in e d by rewr i t i o9 the
transfe r fun ct ion as a cqua: i on and equat ing t he l eft hand s i de t o
ze r o thus :
(0_6895" 1.2825
3
3. ZZ2s
2
10
8
T 10
5
T io"
Factorisati on of this equation by t r i a l and er ror i s not pos s i bl e s i nce it wi1 l
al most ce rtainl y f act or i s e into two e3. ch ...ri th comp l e x roo ts. I ne
-- - -- - - - --------
....
Autopilot Des ign
s t andard method of solving such an equat ion i s to wr-it e it in th is f onn
s 4 + 2as
3
+ bs
2
+ 2cs + d = 0
-. 3 2 2
and to solve the cub ic 2k - bk + 2 (ac - d)k - a d + bd
From t hi s c ubi c equat ion one r ea l value of k can always be fo und.
e and f are then obtained f rom the equations
a
2
+ 2k = b + e
2
and k
2
= d + f2
whence t he values of s can be obtained from the two quadrati cs
s2 + (a - e)s + (k - f) = 0
and s2 + (a + e)s + (k + f) = 0
Equat i on 6. 3- 2 thus facto r ises to :
103
= a
va lues of
(
s2 2 x 0.611s
--or + 6"
65.:> " .j
S2 2
-r- 1)(:-::< +
185
; . ,,:.
x 6.. 286s -r- l) = 0
11;5
(6 .3-3)

I
)
I
I t i s easil y shown by the re sidue me thod th at the re sponse. to a. s tep i nput i s
dominat ed by the slower mode defined by w
n
= 65.3 re d/s and u = 0. 611 ; in f act
the amplitude of this slCMer mode is about seven times larger than the faste r mode.
This main mode is well damped. The fact that the faster mode is r ather poor ly
darme d i s not serious and it contributes relatively little to the system response .
The open loop weatherco ck mode is defined by W 2 = Un + y n = 509 , and 2uw = y
n v vr n v
+ n
r
. Hen ce w
n
=22.5 and u =0.13. Thus we have increased the sp eed of re spons e
of t hi s s l ow mode by a f actor of 3 t o and we have increase d the . dampi ng to a very
respect able value . Wha t aids ar e there ava i l abl e to t he des i gne r in a rri vi ng at a
s ati sfactory f our t h- or de r respons e?
A much c l e are r insight into the behaviour of l i nea r sys t ems is obtained by using
a normali sation procedure . Consider the transfer function
eo
e
l
Wa are familiar wi t h the method of writing it thus
6
0
1
- -,,--..,,-----'-- - - - - where -
81 - 2
1
2 + 2"s / w + 1 w
n
- TaZ
S w
n
.. n
and we know t hat the time or frequency response can be normalised against non -
dimen sional t i me w t or non-dimensional frequency w/w . In other words we have
n n
reduced the number of variables by one and the shape of the respons e dep ends only
on the normalised value of a
l
.- We also note that this value 2u i s li ke l y to be a
small number say b e ~ d e e n 1 and 2 . Graham and Lathrop ( 1) , have shown that systems
G.W .C.$.-H
of any orde r \"Ji t h i oe nt i ca l nO:011ali s e c transfer functions possess ident ica i pol e -
ze r o geo metry, ,di ff eriQg only >in sagrlitude propor t iona l to the nonnali sat ion
fre quen cy w
o
'
Thus for a fourth- order system we write ; (1 /
4)1
and S ; s/ w such t hat our
o ' 0
characteris tic eq uation c an be rea rranqe d f rom equat ion 6. 3- 2 to rea d
r:
::.,
- _. --_.+- - - - -- - . -- _..-
104
J
- I
: I
- I
:- 1
-
-
(6 . 3-4) + 1 ; 0 + 2.81 S
109.7
Denomi nato r
S2 + 1. 45 +
5
3
1 7' S2 1r; c 1
+ . ::J + 1::: . .... -r
<1 3 2
5 '+2.15 + .3.4S + 2. 755Tl
2
3
Or der
wher e l.:.l =
o
We ha ve already cons ide red t he "opt i num" damp ing r ati o for a s econd orde r system
i. e . 'de have to cont r ol the coefficient of S only . i n a fourt h-order system t he
prob lem i s the same i n pr inc ip le except now we have to control t he coeffi c ients of
s' . S2 and The optimum value of these coeff i cients wi ll cle ar ly depend on t he
performan ce i ndex se lected . There i s general agr eement amon g control engi neers t hat
for any order system t he t r ans f er function which minimi ses the in tegra l of (time x
absolute error ) ITAE to a step i nput will have a good transi ent r es ponse and a
good f requen cy response . For sys t ems with no cl osed loop zer oes the opt i mum t ra nsfer
function coefficients are shown i n Table 6.3-1 .
root locus me t hod gives valua ble insight wh en one is varying parameter at a
ti me, s uch as t he 'l oop gain . In the cas e of a lateral autopil ot , a change in
ae rodynami c gain due t o a. change in missile s peed say re sul t s simultaneou sly i n
changes in all the other aer.odynamic parameters such as the weathercock frequency
, .
and t he \o!eathercock We not e t hat our normal i sed denominator as gi ven i n
equation 6.3- 4 i s ve ry si mi lar to the ITAE optimum form . Now a l itt le exper ience
wi th such systems leads one t o t he conclusion that there is a fa ir amount of
latitude about t hi s so ca l led the system is not very sensitive to
sma ll changes in the coefficients about these optimum va l ues . The coeffi cient of
53 i s about 80% of the ontimum val ue , Thi s s ugges t s that one of the modes may be
rather underca mpe d. I f we I co k at t he terms which compris e a
3
we se e that it is
proportional to t he servo damping r at i o to a good f irst approxi mation . Those
readers who have v/O:ked with the r oot l oc us l.'1i11 r ealis e th at the s i mple s t \'lay to
i mprove t he dampi ng of a cl osed 100p mo de is t o s t ar t \'/ith an open loop mode which
TABLE 6.3-1 DEII OI':INATO R OF rWPJI.ALiSED ITAE OPTH1W'l 5YSTEMS filTH NO CLOSED LOOP
ZEROC: S
The au t hor considers t hat t he method of designing t hi r d and fourth order systems
with the aid of these normali sed f orms i s particul ar l y useful i n t his context , The
I
t
j
\
'\
:\
!\
1'1
,
I
\
l
..... 3 2
=
. ;r="
.'-,;;s
Autopilot Design 105
- .
i s well damped . So a f undamental an d i mp ortant pr i nc i pl e eme r ges : if t he se rvo
r e s ponse i s well damped {u = 0. 7 t o 1. 0 sa y ) the des i gn of a wel l damped autopi l ot
i s greatly facil itated.
Fi na ll y , before cons i de r i ng how t he autopi lot respons e cha nges when t he mi ss i l e
speed changes it i s in struct ive to look at the autop i lot transfer f uncti on usi ng
the Ro uth Hurwi t z stab ility criterion . The conditi ons fo r stabi l ity are
2
a
l
(a
3a2
- a
la4)
> a
oa 3
(6.3- 5)
It does not ma t ter whet he r we use ;the ori gina l t r ans f e r ftmc t i on or t he normal i s ed
one , we will ar r i ve a t t he same answer. In t he l at t e r cas e a
4
= a
o
= 1 an d hence
6.3-5 r educes to
(6 .3-6)
-
U = 500N2 U = 500 U = 500 x iZ
a
o
1. 821 x 10
5
5.39. x lOS 2.37 x 10
5
x 10
3
1.636 x 10
4 4
a
l
8.29l 3.204 x 10
a
2
1. 746 x 10
2
2. 06 x 10
2
2.675 x 10
2
.
a
3
0.806 0.82 0 .839
- 3
x 10- 3 x 10- 3
a
4
4. 41 x 10 4.41 4. 41
Towill (2) has shown that the absolute minimum normalis ed value of a
2
= 2 when
a
1
= a
3
Examinat ion of the terms whi ch make up a
2
.wi ll convi nce us th at we should
try to place the accelerometer as far fordard as pos s ible si nce a
2
as c
in cre ases . I ndee d, equa tion 6.3-6 i s saying t hat there are t wo condit ions for
st abil ity, the one e xp l i citl y stated and anot her i . e .
a
3a2
- a
l
> 0
One sees immediately that an increase in the value of "2 mus t assis t in promoting
s t abi l i t y. This is just not so for the other coefficients a
3
and a
l
. Now t he
value of a
l
is largely dependan t on the rate gyro gain kg' It is eas y t o show on
an anal ogue s i mul at or that too large a value of rate gyro ga in cause s instab il i ty .
Si mil ar ly i f the servo damping is re ally exc ess ive (inc r eas i ng t he val ue of a
3
)
equat i on 6.3- 6 i s warn i ng uS that in s tabi l ity can a r ise due to t his al s o .
We wi ll now see how t he aut opi lo t re spo nse varies as the mi s s ile s pee d changes .
I nves t i gat i on of wi nd tunne l re sults of some typ i cal r athe r s lender l ow as pect rat i o
supersonic missi le configurations shows that to a good f irs t approxi ma t i on the
normal f orce fo r a given inciden ce is proport ional to and is only weakly
dependan t on i1ach number in the s peed range under considerat ion. I f therefore t he
s peed increases by a factor of iZ " e wi 11 as sume that y , n and n i ncreas e by a
<; <; r
f act or of 2 and that Yv and n
v
i ncr ease by a f actor of iZ, s ee sect io n 4.7.
Inse r t i ng t hese new val ues i n eq ua t ion 6.3- 1 yiel ds th e denominator coef f i ci ents
s hown in Tabl e 6.3- 2.
TABLE 6 3 2 DENor.mIATOR COEFFICIENTS OF AUTOP 1LOT TRANSFER FUNCT ION
...
--- _._--- - - _._ - -

'.
The nonna l i sed
4
0.689s +
10"
106 Gui ded P0r. Cont ro l Sys t ens
(or U = 500/ 1l t he cl osed l oop transfer f '"nct ion reduces t o:
0. 907 ( _ 5.45s
2
8 .410 I"
= jQ4 - 7 + I
O. 422s
4
4 43 3 ?
L s 9 . 59s ' 4.55s
- IT + io" + . 104 + +
= 0 .907 ( - 0 .0238s + 7 1)
( s 2 . 2 x O. 739s i )( s + 2 x 0. 362s + 1)
37.'JZ '" 37.1 . 176. S( 176 . 6
denomi nator reads 54 + 2 .2805
3
+ 6.161 5
2
+ 3. 6505 + 1 an d "'0 =
rad/s.
For U = 500 t he closed l oop t r ansfe r f unct i on as we ha ve seen r e duces t o
. 2
, 03 ( _ 2 . 73, 8 .i8s .,\
I 4 -:-::-z+ .,. I I
10 10
+ 3.222T 2 .587s + 'I
..... Zi or ?
10v 10 ' 10'
= -----z- 1.03 ( - 0 .01695 + + I)
(. S + 2 xr 9 611s + 1) (.L + 2 x 0 .286s + 1)

0:> . 3 " l o5
L
18:J
:> ..... , .....
The no rtnel i s ec reads
54 + 1.G95
3
+ 3. PZS2 + 2 .815 T
and '" 0 = 109 . i ca dis
For U s: 500 x the close d l oop transfer f unct i on reduces vo
f
.,:1-
' yd
80.2

-
a-
" -

<:( -
0::
lu:-
c.---
:::>-
1--
a:: J
:t: 1
...,.....
s
2 2 0 14? < 2 0 " 2
( +,' x I ' .s + l)(........+ x, .< us, l)
i ll . 7
2
." . I I. I 785
L

The normal ised denominator reads S4 + 1. 250S
3
+ 2 .6175
2
+ 2 .0585 + an d tc
o
152 .2
. ra d/s ,
Th e closed loop frequency responses for these three mi ssile veloc i t i e s are shown
in Fig 6 .3-2 and the r esponses to an input s t ep demand of 50 m/s
2
ar e s hown in
Fig 6.3-3. are now i n (J position to say whather we are l i kel y t o meet the
s peci f i cat i on,
(a) The cl os e d loop gain var ies 0 .90 7 to 1. 11 a var i a t i on of - 9 . 3% t o +11%of
the nominal value of unity . }je c r i qin al ly had in mind a figure of 10%. Th is
variat ion is due to a change in ae rodynami c gain of if to 1 ve ry nearly.
!
I
\
I
I
&
Autopilo t Des ign 107
60
80
100
100 Lu
V)
12 0 ~
Q.
o
o
o
o
0 0
2 0
o
20
40
o
o
o
80
200 100 50 20 30
FREQUEN C Y, RAD / SEC
10
FIG 6. 3- 2 Lateral- autopi Lot: closed Loop frequency respcmses
4
~
U= 500//2
"""' 0
--
'- -.....
~ ........
- 2
<,
............ - 4
..
<,
.,
-,
. .
-
6
'\.
r'-"
- 8
r-'
-,
- 1
\
\
J----=
1
I-
\
U= 5 00
I
---
",1
0
--
-
'--
.-
- 2
. ........ ,
'. - 4
<,
-
6
-,
"-
-
i'\.
-,
/ -
r-
i.>:
-
U 5 00 . t:
-
-
I
'\
I I
- 1_-
-
"
I--
---
- <,
<,
L
'"
-
-,
-,
-
-,
-,
-
\ -
\
o
-5
10
5
5
o
-5
.Q
1J
a
.....
I-
10
:
Q::
5
Lu
a
0
:::J
I-
.....
-5
-.l
Q.
~
:
-- .._--------- - -------- - - --- - -
c
c
108 Gu-; ded" :b';j:!:J !i Con t r ol Sys tems
- ~ : : : - : - : : - - I
-=-:-... -5
\ I
VU=500
>--
Cl
a
en
Q::
li.J
Q
Q
:::,
Q::
- 10 Q
- - -I <:
<:(
-------_. _ - -- - --
--- - - -- - --- --
\ V
!
0.1
0_2
TIME SEeS
FIG 6.3-3 La eeral. auiopi.L..o r; Y' ljr, ponse to an input. z i-ep demand f01
1
5U [[1/ 0
2
- - ---- --- --- -
.-._" ...._ - - ~ . --
- '------x:== - --' - . - ' -
Autopilo t Des i gn
- - . - --.- "' :-
109
r
I
I
,
I
I
I
,
(b) The autop ilot eas ily meets the requiremen t concern i ng phas e lag in the
specified frequen cy range . The reason why t he phas e lag i s s mall at t hese low
f req uencies i s tha t the undamped nat ura l f requency of the domi nant mode has been
inc reased. Table 6.3-3 surrrnarises the pos ition .
TABLE 6.3- 3 BETWEEN OP EN AND CLOSED LOOP MOOES
Open l oop Closed l oop
Missile
Undamped
s peed Oominant mode
rn/s
weather coc k Dampi ng
undamped /frequency
Damping
frequency ratio ratio
rad/s
rad/ s
500/ 1Z 15. 9 0 .10 37.1 0.739
500 22. 5 0.133 0.611
32'.0
. ,
500 x IZ 0.16 111.7 0. 142
The r eason for th1S 1ncr ease d speed of response closed l oop 1S eas 11y seen from
Fig 6.3-3. The rudder is al Iowed to go ove r a long way ini tial ly be cause the
f ee dback is so small . The st rongly phased advanced feedb ack however so on
r everses t he r udder in an attempt to pre vent overs hooting. This closed sy s tem
the re fore is fundamentally no diffe rent i n ac t ion from any other f eedback system.
An increas e i n t he s pee d of response depends not on1y'on the t ransfer fu nct ion
itself but also on t he phys i ca l ability to me et the power , r at e , angle et c
r equirement i mplicit in t hi s trans fer function . Ign oring s t abil i ty cons i de r ati ons
at the moment, we coul d apparently, increase the s peed of r espons e st ill f ur ther
by doub ling the s er vo gain . As a result of a given i nput t he rudder will now try ,
init ially , to deflect twice as far as bef ore . Since the s tea dy s tat e lateral
acceleration will be approximate ly unaltered by th is change i n fe edfo ruard ga in it
follows t hat the response s hould be f as ter . But t here is cl ear l y a 1i mit to the
use ful deflection we can use and in any case the servo wi ll have t o de vel op twice
the angular rate as before ; and this may be beyon d its capability. Therefore , if
we are to beli eve i n the transfer func tions we write down we have t o l imit some of
the ga in s in a system or sub -system.
( c) We also note that t he close d lo op system, i n general, is well damped , not
because we have i nc r eas e d the viscosity of the air , but becaus e we have regulated
the timing or phasing of t he t orque pr oduci ng mechanism by su itably shap ing the
feedback. Nevertheless in the high speed range i t i s seen t hat both roode s ar e
under-damped . The dominant mo de damping is gre atly i mproved if the accelerometer
can be moved sl ightly forward . Fail i ng this the degree of st abi lity can be improved
if the rate gyro s ignal is mil dly phas e advanced, using saY,a 3 to 1 networ k.
It is appropriate t hat the use of compensating networks sho uld now be discus sed.
Phase advance and phase lag networks are tuned networks and are effective onl y if
the ti me constants are rel ated to t he open l oop cross -o ver frequen cy , If t he open
I
I
I
I'
I
,
j.
1
loop qe i r. is liK.ely to vcrj contt ce rac ly then a compensat ing Cl et,.i Of'"i<. may i mpr ove
t he re s pons e a t one gai n ex treme an d a ct uel ly de gr a de it at the other . In general
it is not t o phas e ttj e erro r si gnal as t he t o autopilot
has already been phas e in the mai n guidance loop . The relative l y
poor signal-to-noise rati o at t his 'input is i n no way i mproved by differencing it
with the autopilot fe edback signals . Superficially it is quite safe to phase
advan ce an acce le rome t e r signal as the error s ign al r.as been filtere d by the
servo a nd the airframe t ran sfer f unct i on. The filtering effect of the airframe is
nowever s urprisi ngly little at t he higher frequencies due to the presence of the
two zeroes in the transfer fun ction. This is me r e l y s ay i ng t hat e ven if the
airframe does not t urn at all as a re sul t of rudder movement the re \'/i 11 always be a
lateral acceleration due to t he nor ira l fo r ce fr om t he rudder . f1oreover , additiona l
moveme nt of the a i rf rane can r esult f rom ee rodyn emi c or propulsion no i s e . If at
any poi nt on t he a.i rf r ame t r.e re i s a component of Ie t.ere l mo vement Y
r
; gi ven by
'in c; Y
ri
Sill
t he n t ne a cce l e rat io., .=. : tni ; rl(; inl. i s ..;2 t ime s t ni s va l ue . i f t ne re ;jee any hi gh
110 GLoidec ';)1;:2.pCn l.Or:trOi Systems
c:.
c
fre que ncies pr es e n: t his no i s e t f!::fl \:.rH': out put ce n bt vtry noisy
indeed. Eve n if t he acce l e rorre t e . ca n be pi e ce o pr e ci se l y a t a. no de or tn e
princip l e bendi ng mode i t will net 02 c.t c. noce of any of tne n igher f requency
bencing modas , So acce l eromet er- er-e re re l y pr. es e advanc e d. Ang ul ar r at e
s i gnal s ar e riot li kel y t o be so no i sy ;"'0 ;'; z. z.z.c. s t.ould be ...e l l
f il t ered ; signals from position can
, .
uS U:.: 1 ! a jva nceJ re1at i ve
s a f ety . However , the of phas e IC:.! iic-;;',..un-,s ill HIt. fee dDcCK petn ca rl De
ben eficial. Bece vs e they e t tenuat e tr.e IOUP gai:1 at ni gh t hey
pe rmi t hi gh ope n l oop ga ins to be USe..!; at tr.e s ame t i rne they h i 11 attenuate aliY
high f req uen cy nois e i n t he f ee cbe ck p d ': f i .
We conclude t herefore t hat i ns t ruter.t f eedback ca n i mprove the response of the
airframe and t hat moderate chanqe s hi cerouynalidc gain can be e ccomno oe tec. we
ant i c i pat e howsve r t hat if r e ally l arge char.qe s in ae r ouynamic gdin ate t o be
catered for then s ome form of adapt i ve sj s t em wi l l u(: required .
6.4 A DISCUSSIG.'" OF TEl:: " I MPORT ANT" AERODYl'>A:.llC
DERIVAT I VES
It has been s noy,'n tr-io t we ::arl r eeci l y ce l c ul et e re qu i re d ve l ue for' s . and. nen ce
o
Yv if 'de know t he me xunom 9 re qu i rerent.s (;.:1C t he ma ximum body in c i oe nce permissible.
No....' there are six ma in l ate r al ae r odynami c ce rt ve t i ve s fOr' ee cn pl an e dna we
have alrea dy dismisse d Y
r
and as iJeing j us c about neqi t qi bl e . Cons i ae r i nq tr. e
"
ya\'1 plane only, we ha ve a l ready di s cu s s ec alld de t e ru.i ned Yv' H ii s le a ve s f our
others to reconsi de c. Op en I oc p the damping i s cropor t ione 1 t o
is; + n
r
), see Fi g 6.3- 1. Cl ose d 1c(jj..i the domi nan t iit.)Ge rj ailli:J1n9 woul c ve ry
.....
- --.-.--:-- ,... - . -:; : ..-
. ... ,. ;;;j
;.
Autop ilot Design
111
i ndeed w.ithout any synthetic damp ing t erms in the f eedback pat h, and yet we have
f ound th at it i s pos si bl e to obtain a well dampe d cl osed loop re sponse. The
reader who has eval uat ed the i ndi vi dual te rms wh ich make up t he denominator
coeff icients a
o'
a
l
et c in t he example wi ll reali s e t hat the act ual value of n
r
is
not i mportant at all ; it can be set t o zero and t he res ponse , c los ed l oop , i s
virtually unchanged. Thi s now leaves us with three lateral de r ivat ive s n
v
' n, and
y, ' In t he previ ous examp le we somewhat arbit rar ily st ipu lated a given mean
static For a given s; this f ixed the valu: ofn, (or n
B)
and we re alised
that n,' would have t o be s light ly great er than n
66
. As t he rudder moment arm
was known we cou1d wr i te down t he va1ue of y_ once n;; was determi ne d. Hence we
-, z. t;.J
are r eall y s ay ing that a minimum value for Yv is eesi'l y det ermined and if we set
t he static ma rgin to a gi ven f igure a ll the neces s ary des i gn val ues of the other
deri vat ives automatically follow . Suppos e now t he s tatic is set t o hal f
the or igi nal assumed value . Does th is mean that and hence y, can be r educed t o
half their original values also? The answer is , in t his par t i cular exarriple,
decidely no: The value of n, i s a measure of the i nit ial angul a r acce l e ra t ion of
the body per unit rudder , and hence is a key parameter in determining the closed
loop speed of response . If this is reduced the autopilot bandwi dt h\ will be
reduced. So th e key l at era l aerodynamic der ivatives are Yv and n, ; a ll t he rest
are relatively unimportant. Fig 6.4-1 shows the response of an autopilot wi th an
airf ra me which, open l oop, wo uld be well and tr ul y uns tabl e. The gai ns etc ar e
th e same as those used for the previous worked example' with U = 500 but the value
'"
-'
'" 5 <:
'<

a 2
::0
0::
-5 0
<:
'<
ll.J
\E
tu
S)

?
--- --- ---- -- ----
<,
/'

,
\\
-",
\ /
------
- - - -- ../
V
- - -
LATERAL ACCELERATION
RUDDER ANGLE
---- INCiDENCE
,

u
w

-,
E;
50
<:
0
>:::
'<
<>:
a
ll.J
-'
ll.J
t,)
t,)
'<
-'

ll.J
....
'<
-'
a 0.1 TIME - 5 ECS 0 . 2
FIG 6. 4- 1 Re spons e of lateral autopilot which is uns tob l:e open Loop
, ?
.:..1. ...
' ;
of "v has been charl gc: d fr om 1 . 0 to t he a ccel eromet er nas ueen mo ved to U. 7m
f orwe rd of the c . s. One see s t.ha t , f or t he same input cemand , : he rudder f inally
s et t les t o a st eady deflect ion of oppos ite si0! t o which oDtai ns wit h a
s t abl e missile . . The aer?dyn a:nic ga in in creases wi t h an unstabl e miss il e ; of
cours e, since a l t hough t he woment fro n the rudde r opposes t he uns t ab i l i s ing momen t
f r om t he body, t he fo r ce s due to the rudce r and t he ai rf rame consi dered as a
nov, a ct i n the s erre sens e . The response of a he ll des igned l a t.e ra l aut opi l ot
t her ef ore is re l at i vel y i ns ensiti ve : 0 the posi tion of t he c .p . or e . g. (Wi th in
reasonab le Limi t s l ) The idea l state of affairs, 'i t is sugges ted , i s for the
nemi nal s t a tic ma r gin to be zero . A shirt i n :: . 9. -.,..; i ) l al most ce rtai nly occur due
pr ope l l ant usage; in t he majori ty of mi ssil es t he e.g . of t ne pr opellant is
somewnat to t he rear of t he mis si l e . The c .p. wil l change with incidence and
with numb er , the amount depending en t he design . It is corn f or t i nq to know
t na t a sat is f actor y response i s possible wi th vari at ion s of t h i s so rt. The
condi t ion t hat one must avoi d is tOO 7..c.rge a st a t i c me rq in . The rudder win ha ve
a li mit ed useful travel and a large stati c will i t impos sicl e f or t ne
rudder to produce t he nsces s e ry body incidenc e to manoe uvr e t r.e mi s s il e .
At t he r is k of ove r - s i mpli fy i ng a rather compl i c ate d s t t ue t i cn consider once
agai n t he denomina tor coefficients of tn t: au topilot t r ans f e r f unct i on.
a
o
=
a
1
=
a
2
d
3
=
e, c.
,
caGJwiOttl Deen fOW/ IO t o D2 r el a t iv ely
k U ( n y
a 'C;; v
- k n
g c
T r.
o c
" .,
L l.l
S
/ K
swns
1/k 2
S os
For 10w'1 ae rouynanri c gC.lriS the eut cp i l ot
n v i
-r
( -J -
<;
k U n \.:
d r/ v
..:r I r }
,
and a"
,
maKi ng
wn i en t he servo dyn ami cs be come neglig i ble l ri
Al s o the two t erms -Y, eric -en t end t o c,:.r-, ,,: c:"l Q\Jt so
, ,
anot her c r ude as surapt i on t hat tney :.a.llc.. el cor np l e t e l y anc ci .. i oin 9 :'0 ' dl and Uz
by k
a
U nr,.Y
y
to make a
o
:; 1 We see t ne ner- va l i.e of 6
2
l ,1K
SK
c. U ric/ v' hence
t he undamped c l os ed l oop fie. t ur e 1 frequency :.: / k l---U----ny- ; i -: is 3150 5t: en t ne ; it:
sa:; 'I
i s t he r a t e gyro f ee dbac k wb.fch provides tne cc.ffiping. At t he ru qner lOOP qe in s
10\'1 ; i n such cases
can be neglec t ed.
prevail i ng wi t h hig her mi s sil e s pee ds t hese ve ry si mpl ifying assumptions ere too
crude to be of quantita tive value . Never t n21es s it still correct to sa) t na t
n
s
and Yv a r e a l ways t he "j rnpu r tant"
us ual l y asso ciated with Il
v
' i t would
t he i mportant lateral derivativEs.
aerodynamic ce r iva t t ves ; or sinc e U i s
be more ac cura t e t o say t ha t n ana j
.; c
are
THE TWD-ACCELEROMET R LATER.AL AUTOPI LOT
An acceler orreter Dr k pl acec at G c ahtaa 0; its inp ut
a
, .
--,--'--
113
- ,
~
Autopi l ot Design
axis parallel to the mi ss i l e oy axis produces a signal equal to
k
a
(f
y
+ cr },
'lihere f
y
is the acceleration of the e. g. i n t he sense oy.
An accelerometer similarly oriented but at a distance d behind the e.g. produces a
signal equal to
k
a
(fy - dr )
Since the additional component from an accel erometer due to i ts distance forward
of the e.g . has a valuable stabilising influence i t fol lows t hat i t would serv e no
usef ul purpose at all to place an accel eromet er t o t heYear of the c.g . Neverthe - 'I
less t hr ee very wel l known Bri tish systems use space(Caccelerometers to provide 'I
instrumental feedback and the ingenious method of mixing the two signals is th is :
t he forwar d accele rometer gain i s increased to 3k
a
and t he rear accele rome t er gai n
is increased to 2k
a
but this latter signal is fed back posi t i vel y : The total
negative feedback is therefore
,
-
+ cr ) - 2k (f -
a y
(f
y
+ ( 3c + 2d)r )
+ I s
N
3T s
ra )
= k
a
(3 T 3Tras - 2)
I + I S
ra
k
a
Rearranging this is
and this is equivalent to a 3 to 1 phase advance net'<lork . The f iltering part of
the phase advance has the effect of making the autopildt fifth order whioh makes
deta iled analys is of the closed loop rather more tedious . Fig 6. 5-1 shows t he
response of an autopilot to a step demand using t,1O acceleromet ers each spaced 0.5111
from the e.g. with the same servo gain and aerodynamic derivat ives used for the
single accelerometer rate gyro case and U =500; T
ra
has been set to 0.038 secs.
Th ere are otb erways of mixing 't he signals from the t wo accel erometers wh i ch make
this configuration very versatile ; in particular it is comparatively easy to
I + I s
ra
Ignore t he t erms due to the angular acceleration for the momen t ( i.e . regar-d the
accelerometers both situated at the c. g.) ; the total negative f eedback is the re fore
2k
a
This is equi valent to having one accelerometer much further forward of tne c.g.
However , t he stabil i s i ng terms l argely af f ect the a
2.
te rm in t he denomi nator of
t he cl osed loop transfer function and the important term kg n, ;;hich large ly
controlled the value of a
l
in the one accelerometer and rate gyro system is no;;
absent. Suppose nov t he signa l f r om the rear accelerometer is Zagged by passi ng
i t through a fi lter having the transfe r function
1
i,
L.
1:-
I
I i-
I .;
I
I T::
1"-
I c -"
I ~
I ~
...
LOiltr cl Sys t ems

I
u
"
5 0 1
-,
E
,
'" '2
I
--c
0
Q:
I
'"

'"
"
"
"

<
'"
'"
"

LA TERAL ACCELERATION
- --- RUDD ER ANGL E
INCIDENCE
0 .1 TIM E - SCS 0. 2

?IG B. 5-] a 7;(.;)0 acceZerv"7:'ie ter Z-.:::.tf!!'al.

t o a step input
a qui ck and well damped mo de witn zero overshoot .
yiou ld e tt r ac t i ve i n Co system U ::i1 n g re m jet pr- opulsion as d large ove r s hoot 1i1
has a t ender: cj to choke t he ai, i nta ke and ext ingu1$h the engine.
\ __)';'6 THE SINGLE RAT E GYRO LATERAL AUTOPILOT
As far as i s known only one British system - Thunderb i r-d - used rat e gyro fe edoack
onl y . Sin ce a rate gyro (u se d in conj unct i on with an accele r omet er ) provides on l y
a smut i f r ac t i on of th e mai n fe edback it f ol l ows t nat i f one is to des i gn a system
wi t il a compa rab 1e open loop gai n one wi 11 Itave t o i lier ease t he rate gyro gai
consi derably , typ ical Iy about 10 times . This me ans that the main damp ing t e nu i s
now much too large so One can r emedy t his by passi ng t he r at " gyro s i gnal t hrough
a phase lag circuit. I t i s difficult tc obta in a reasonably consi stent re spon se
wit h m derate variati ons i n gain . A1 so s i nce t he effective d.c.
acce leration feedback is propor t i onal to l/U the lateral acceleration /un i t i nput
will be proporti onal t o U. It is i nser.sit ive to Un i th accelerometer feedback.
Fig 6.6- 1 ShO'dS the res ponse of a sin gle rate gyro autopilot with la gge d feedb ac k
and the sene leap gai n etc as t he acce l er-os eter ana rate gyro aut opi lo t.
6.7 THE EFFECT OF CANARD CONTROLS ON LAT ERAL
AUTOPILOT DESIGN
Cons ider a mi s s il e \'/ith t he sane body and main l ifting surfaces as our mi s s il e
wi th rear control s . We r emove these re ar cont r ols and install t heir. as canard
controls. This mOVES .the c . p, fOf\;:::'id so He move the main lifti ng s ur fa ces bacio:.
SO t he s tat ic margi n is The onl y f un dament al change in t ne aer-ocyna mic
-I
.
-j>4C -- 7......
".
'--;-__. ........;.......:.:,-==,,-_=::;
I
I
115
V)
lu
lu
<>:
I
'"
I
lu
\
a
lu
'"
I
'"
!
<:
""
'!
0 cc
i
lu
I
a
a
::>
,
<>: 1
a
j
<:
'<
- 5
lu
'"
<:
lu
a
<::;
:?:;
>-
a
0 . 2
a
co
. ,
L ATERAL ACC ELERAT ION
RUDDER ANGLE
INCIDENCE
TIME -SECS 0.1
---===_ - - -------1
Autopi lor Desi gn
50

,
E
<:
0
a
;::
"" <>:
tu
-'
tu
'"
'"
'<
'"
'<
ffi
s-,
""
-'
\
!
i
FIG 6.6- 1 Respons e of a single rate gyro l ateral
autopi l ot to a step input . demand
deri vati ves is that n, wi l l now be pos it jve, Consi der t herefore t he design of a
lateral autopi lot with canard controls wi th the gains and t he magnit ude of the
aerodynamic derivati ves the same as t hose in the autopilot example i n se ction 6.3,
Since a posi t i ve rudder movement now produces a steady state positi ve lateral
accel er at i on the f in servo qain must nO'" be made positi ve also , but t his a minor
deta il , If the missile is statically stable the aero dynamic gain will now be
l ar ger since the normal for ce fr om t he r udder and t hat f remt he mai n airframe work
together , not i n oppositi on . There is however a not i ceabl e difference in t he
degree of stability wh en t he loop is closed usi ng acceleromet ers . If t he reader
carefully checks t hrough the si gns in t he new cl osed loep transfer function he
will fin d that the value of the coefficient a< is given by
a
2
l lk
s
t k
a
(y, t cn, )' very near l y.
These t hree t erms are now al l posi t ive , and hence t he value of t his coefficient
t ends to be sign ificantly large r wit h a canard control configuration. We showec in
equati on 6.3-6 t hat t o stabi lity it is vi t al to keep t he val ue of a
2
above
a certain mi nimum. This is a direct of the and airframe wor ki ng
together; the initial f eedback resulting f r oma r udder movement i s now negative and
not positive .as obtained wi t h rear control s. Thi s inherent ,s uper i or s tability
wit h canar ds when operati ng cl osed loop ma kes it easier to desig n a satisfactory
autopilot in a variable aerodynami c environment . Fig 6.7 -1 shows t he response of a
lateral aut opilot with U = 5DOm/s ; the only di f fe rences bet ween t his autopilot and
LATERAL ACC EL ERATION
,'WDDER ANGLE
115
the one whose r esponse is
the r udder s er vo gai n has
s hown in Fig
been changed
6.3-3 are that n. has l)een made pos i tive and
,
in sign .
-
\.u
-J
<.:l
:<:
"
a::
lu
Cl
Cl
V)
:;)
lu
a:: lu
Cl
a::
<.:l
<:
tu
"
Cl
llJ
'-'
<:
lu
Cl
<::;

- 2
a
2
0.15 0. 1
- - -- --- I N CI DEN CE
0.05 a

-----=" - - - ---

\
---
...-

/ ' -
---
-
-
-
----
-
---
- --- ---------
I
I I I I
a
50
I
"
.;::
E
<:
o
>::
"a::
lu
-J
lu
'-'
'-'
"
TIME - 5 ECS
FIG 6' .7-1 Response of la-ceral autopilot l.,nr;h eu.rrw 'd
controls to a 0t ep input demxnd
Before leaving the design of )ateral ?cce1eration autopil ot s is inst r uct ive to
dra...! an open loo p Bode di agram. In t his connecti on it is si mpler t o express a ll
transfer functi ons as d.c . gai ns and dynamic lags as in Fig the open
loop weathercock mode has been denoted by V:
m/
, If rea r controls are used t he
aero dynamic d.c . gai n i s negati ve so k
s
must be negat i ve . When canar d cont r ol s ar e
used be posit ive . I f expressed in thi s way b
Z
and b
l
are both negative for
rear controls and are both positi ve "ith canards . b
3
is t he in cidence lag , see
equati on 4.6-9 and rig 4.6-2 . The reader may wish t o check that th e open loop
t r ansfer funct ion can be si mp lifi ed to :
2 <:
(
s / + s / w + 1 ')
W
ns
s ns .
2
(Ys +Xs +l)
2 2
(s /w + s / w + 1')
nyJ w nw
(6. 7- 1)
v/here X
and Y
The Bode diagram for the lateral autopilot disc uss ed in seel io!l 6. 3 U 500
shalom i n Fig 6.7-3 . 'tie have al rcc dy des i gned the cl osed l oop t o conform f ai rl y cl ose ly
t o t he ITAE optimum form and i t is not surprising to f ind tha t t her e i s c phase
mar gi n of 55 and a gain mar gin af 13. 3 db s . The phase margin obtair.abi e with
canar-d controls is appreciably greater, but t he r eader who takes t he trouble to
, b .... 010'
= '"

--- - - -.- ' . (
Autopi 1at Des i gn 117
k
s
. 1
/W
ns
t
B
,
z
( b
z
S b, S 1 ) U
I
y
.,
'"

...J
I
....1" .
",-f-' ..:..L 40
I ; ' 20
500
, - ._ -. 200
w
0 _ _ III
-c
:r
0..
60
FREQUENCY - RAD/ s
FIG 5.7-3 Bode diaqram fOY' latera?' autop-iL::n
;....L.l_I_1 74- , ----.- --- -
_12 i i I I
l-t+H ------j / i --+'--1";"
u..L
1
I , -,\ ...- - -- -+-1---
1
;-' , 1 ---+" J
I
I,' i, '
- 18, '"
I i j I I ..L.t
ii'i "l I It Ii i
I H', ' J I I I I ! ! i I
_24<- 1+-1
1
- .
5 10 100
, . .
, _l... . ".. _.1. _.__ ;.
1 i
; 1 ! ! ! i ::
'" i ! j l' _.._ Od_I-_:----'T
:g .. L .L..LJ
Z' 0
.. L ... L ... , '
, -i-\-I -:-\ ..------l-'-T\ .. .. ,.
- lS ", '1 ' 1' "I I .. . - :.::; l . i \ I ! I ; . : :
'. - I '-II' . ..f.
I I I .J' , , . - ,
- '
I
I
I
115 G;.:idE'C Control Syst ems
-
I
\ .\
, .J
.,
q
I
,
,
.,
ve r i t y tr. i s wil l be ccnvi nceo t ha t des ign of r.lode. at el y comp l ex systems by the
method of normal i s ed coeff ici ent s is bot h qui cker and more direct.
6. 8 A VELOCITY CONTROL AUTOPILOT
The concept of "ve l c c i t y con t ro l" is associated 'wi t h manual cont rol systems where
t he oper at or t racks both the mi ss i l e and t he t arget and attempts t o bring ta rget
and mi ss i l e i nto al ignment by iss ui ng commands to the missile , usually by mea ns of
a specially designed controller and a link to t he missil e . If no
autopi lot is used t hen a constant demand - ei t her up-down or l ef t - ri ght - wil l
result i n t he mis s ile deve-lopi nq a steady lateral acceleration . Cons ider the
action necess ary by t he opera tor t o make a corre ct ion i n posi tion in the yaw plane .
To put i n a left correction a goo d operator wi l l put over hi s controll er to t he
left until hal f t he "error" is el imi nat ed and wi l l then reverse hi s controller .
Transie nts i n t he mi ss i l e i deal l y shoul d be so shor t t hat the operator i s not really
aware of their prese nce . Fi g 6 .8- 1 s hows t he mi ss i l e devel opi ng a consta nt lateral
acce1erat io n as a result of operato r mi ss i l e transients have been ignored.
It is clea r t hat a great ceal of ant i ci pation and t raining is requir ed to develop
s uch a ski ll ; the operat or i s using hi s own i ntelli gence to supply the necessary
afficunt of phase advance.
Consi der a mi ssile carryi ng a position gyro which. reeds back a vol tage proportional
t o yavi angl e . The s i tuat i on now is that the net.t s ignal into the rudder is the
,
....
-
-
FI G 6. 5-1 contr ol: Df a rrri ssi Z,a
THUMB
POSm ON
AND
COMMAND
VOLTS
Mi SSi LE
POSi TION
ACROSS
RANGE
+ 1
i
':".:
I
I
I
I
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
--::::::
I
I
I
I
I
... U
-
DOWN RANGE
AND Ti ME

-
-
. -
'"
- ._ -- -- -
. ....J
Autopilot Design 119
difference bet ween t he command and t he achi eved angul ar pos i t ion of t he miss il e .
flhen the miss i l e i s pointing i n the desi red di rec t ion the r udder wil l automatica lly
be ret urned t o t he cent ral position and the mi ssile wi l l now continue to fly
straight i n t his new direct ion . If th i s departure from th e new fl ight path
di r ect i on i s a sma l l angle then to a s ta tionary observer t he missi le appear s
to have a const ant velocity perpendicul ar t o the or i gi nal LOS equal to U.AWf ; th is
lat era l vel ocity i s propor tional to t he corrrnand . Such a sys t em of controll ing the
t raj ect ory of a miss ile is called "velocity control " . Fig 6. 8-2 shows a plan of
;. ' '':,
. .
FIG 6.8-2 eontrol of a
the f l i ght path of the mis s i l e as a result of a step demand When veloci ty control
i s employed . In this count ry t he opinion is widely hel d th at the traini ng of
oper ators is much easier with velocity cont rol than with accel era t ion con t rol.
Nevertheless mo st people f i nd i t comparatively easy to steer a car t hrough gate
post s . Does not a car tra vel i n a ci rcl e i n response t o a Vl heel or "sti ck" move-
me nt and i s thi s therefore not accel erat i on control al so? Stric t ly no. The
diffe rence i s t hat t he guided Vleapon opera tor is s tati onary Vlhereas t he car ar i ve r
has a canstant velocity hori zon if the steering wh eel is over i n a fi xed posit ion ,
so t he system appears to t he dr i ver as a veloci ty cont rol sys tem. The ta sk of
s teeri ng a remot ely cont rol l ed model car through chai r l egs is mUCh more diffic ul t ;
u
TIME I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
DOWN RANGE
AND TI ME
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ol-- - - -L-.- - - - - - - - -:-''-- - - --l.....
COMMAND
SIGNAL
VOLTS
+
I
MISSILE
- l
POSITI ON
ACROSS
0
RANGE
G.W.C.!>.-1
J ZO
this is a true accelerati on cont r o l sys t em..Another advantage of a gyro i n t he
loop i s that the missile will eut oma t ic all y react to a wind gust , th ru s t mi s al ignmen t
or disturbance d ~ e to a r igging error . With anti - tan k mi ssil es th ere i s al ways t he
danger of hitting the ground . Vihen a position gyro is us ed i n t he pit ch plane t he
missile i s usually launched at a set eleva tion l ith the gy r o uncage d at a n angl e t o
the miss ile f r-amcwor k so that it 'I' lill fly in a hori zontal plane wi t h a small
pe rmanent inc ; dence to overcome gravfty . Wi thout t he gyro qrav i ty compensation
s t ill ha s to be obtained . Any err-or in biassing the e le va t or s e r vos r es ults in the
mis s ile acc el e r at i ng upwards or downwar-ds and thi s calls f or more skill f r om t he
ope rator i f he i s t o bring the missile ba ck on cours e. A veloci ty control system
i s suitable for sys tems designed to hi t stationary or 5 10'11 mo ving targets wher e
small ad justme nt s only are required by the operator . LOS s ystems desi gned to hi t
fas t c r os s i ng targe t s require the nri s s i l e to execute a curved trajecto:y and a
dire ctional autopilot woul d me r el y hi nde r the opera tor in t r yi ng to keep the missile
in the LOS.
Before l eavi rig tnis subject t he effect of t nt incidencE la g should b ~ discuss ed . A
block diagram of a veloci ty con r: r'ol aut opi l c t i s shown i n Fig 6 .8-3 . The transfer'
fun ction for r l i. , ::,ee equa tion 4 . 6- 8 , can be r'earTanged by dividing the nume ra t or
and denominator by ( y n + Ut i) the undamped we a t he rccc k frequency WI',"'" The
v r -v' "
missile se lected has an inC1'1er,ce l ag of 0 .75 'S and is an anti -tallK mi s s i l e
sus t ai ni ng at a steady speed of 140 m/s , j ~ e na.... e ai ready established that t r-a jectory
or flight path rate can be r'egar'ded as body ra te lagged by t h is t i me constant . tn e
i nci dence lag , see Fig 4.6-2 . Now) trans fe r" functions as s ume zero init ial conditions
so i nt e gr at i ng both these quantities gives uS t he result tha t flight path di rection
is related t o body direction by the s ame time constant (the small t e nns rihich occur
i n t he full express ion for 0f/r have been omitted for clarity as they har'dly affect
the argument). Since the opera tor is t fying t o etldnge the position of t nt: e .g. of
the missile the anqul ar position of the mi s s ile is 'i r re l e va nt ; t ne fl ight pc.th
di re ction is all important . I f the r e fc r e we pr oduce a .:'conventionc.l ,t type of
,
c
-r-
-
- i
i

- '.
-.-:-0-.--- - _ _. r--rr -r-: - . - _. -
Autopi l ot i gn 121
re s pons e for ',;; /:J,J . then the opera tor w'i l l be awa re of . t he cons ide rabl e lag in
m rna
producing a ch ange in' fligh t path . For a given incide nce l ag one method of
i mprovi ng th e r es pons e is t o us e a pha s e lag network i,n t he f ee dback path . This
delays t he feedback and allows a large initial overshoot i n body angle; if the
time constants are chos en caref ully stabi l ity can actually be i mpro ve d. The
res ultant l a r ge zero i n t he cl .ose d loop tra nsfer f unction largely offsets the
i nci dence l a g. Fi g 5 . 8- 4 s hows t he re sponse of a velocity control autopil ot
wit h wnw set t o 10 radls and the open loop ga in t o 35 . The compensation transfer
funct i ons in t he f'eedaack pa th are defined by
0 .068s + 1 0 ,1 s + 1
0 .6 8s + I x o.O l s + I
If s uch a n exaggerated body overs hoo t is not pe rm'is s tb re then t ne inci de nce lag
can be re duced by i nc reasing Yv (thi s means l arger lifti ng su rfaces) or by st r ong ly
phase advan cing the s i gnal f romt he operator .
0.4
. -.- -"
j
I
I
I
I
!
!
,
I
I
!
i
B OD Y DIR ECTION 'Jim
FLIGHT PATH DIRECTION '/i"f
/
03
0 .2
o 1
o 0.25 0.50 075 1.0 125
Tl ME -SECS
FIG 6 .8- '; Respo:--:se oj" c:::m;:Z:'ol
autcpiZot a step input demand
6.9 L\TERAL AUTOPILOTS AND DISPERSION AT L\UNCH
All system bias es or di s turbances te nd to caus e inacc uracy but i n a closea loop
system t he i ll effects are us uall y kept fa i riy small due t o t he "s t i f f nes s " of t ne
c l osed l oop. Howeve r some corrmand sys t ems are des i gned wi t h trac kers which may
be up to 100m from t he l aunche r. The mi s s il e has t o f l y ope n lcop f or some ti me
be f or e it en ters t he t ra cke r bea m. If the di s pe rsi on i s t oo gr ea t a comp l et e
miss ion fai lu r e may result . Eve n semi - acti ve home r s whi ch do not ha ve to e nt e r a
!;
j ,
L
l 1
, !
, I
I I
I '
, '
I !
,
i I
I .
\
I
i \
I
I
.
I '
I ,
i :
I ;
i l
: 1
I I
, I
I .
i i
! 1
i !
' \ :
'1 '
L'
122
beam e re r equt re c t o fl y fai rl y s t rai g;-.t d1..i rin g the boost per i oc as during t hi s
ini tial per iod a rear refe rence s i gr: al may not be availabl e due t o excess ive f l ame
attenuat i on f rcm the boost motor. Ha ny modern ant i - t ank mi ss i l es are fi re d out of
a tube which i s: mounted on a tripod . Th-i s very short "gun barre l " will hel p
re duce di spersion . Despite the fact t nat many command systems use a wide gath er ing
beam which i s s ubseque nt l y nar rowed cons iderab ly , the que s t i on of dispe r s ion at
l aunch is i nvari ably considered and simu lated i n great detail .
The mos t se ri ous cause of dispersi on is usually thr us t mi sa l i gnment . Eve n if a
convergent - di ve rg ent r ocket nozz l e is perfectly manufact ur ed and al igned , deviati on'
of the gas flo" from truly axi - symmetri c condi t i ons can OCCur resulting i n an
effective mi s al i qnrrent . Darwe l l and Tr ubri dge (3) have shown how nozzle shapes
gi ving zer o gas misalignment ca n be determi ned . Neve r thel es s , t his st ill means t ha t
the r e is a pr ac t ical limit on the manufactur ing t ol er ances t hat ca n be me t and
chec ked during i ns pe cti on. A tolerance of =2 milliradians in
any one pl ane has been quoted for several systems. Thi s may seem a ve ry small
mis al ignment (about 7' of arc) but unfortunately during boos t t he prop ul s ion f or ces
are lar ge . Suppose we boost at 40g . The l ateral compone nt . of fo r ce wi ll produce
a mere 40g/500 0.8 m/s
2
lateral acceleration for 2 mi l l i radians
However , thrust misal ignme nt produces a t urni ng moment on the mi ss ile al so .
Cons ider the situation when t he missile body has been turned through a small angle.
say 0.05 rad. The of the mi ss ile wil l have component
equ al to 40g/20 29 " 20m/s
2
perpendicular to the original launch direct ion . At
this st age t he angular rate wil l be small so the oppos i ng damping moment wil1 be
smail . Hance , if no autopilot exists the oni y way to reduce di spe rs i on d UE t o t ni s
cause is to i ncrease the s t at i c margin.
NOH cons i der the effect of a sidewi nd . If t he st.e t i ; me r qi n is Zi:ro a si derii nct
,li ll r esult in some effective inci dence . Thi s will in t um result in a ncrme l
f orce and the mi ssil e wil l event ual l y drift downwind at wind veloci ty . HOWEvEr ,
a stabl e miss i l e will t ur n i nt o the wind and t his wil l the ef f ect of
redirecti ng t he propul s i onrtor ces up-wi nd ; t hi s effect is us ually f ar more
':.,.':
s ignificant than t he natural aerodynamic t endency to dri f t down-wi nd . Hence t o
re duce dis persi on due to si dewi nds a very 3maZZ s tat i c margin is
All mi ss iles mu s t exhibit some rigging error and some f in servo bias . The effects
of these in caus ing di spersion could be but wi th modern production an d
ins pect i on techniques t hese ef fects can usuall y be kept small when compared with
the effect s of thrust misalignme nt and si dewi nd; t hey will not considered in
deta ii here .
Fi gs c .g - l ( a ) and (b ) show lateral disp lacement agoi ns t t i me for a sidewind of
10 m/s and a tnrust mi s al i gnment of 2 The mi s s il e Ionqi tudi na l

I
... ...,.-- ---;--:----- ..
-r--r-r- - -'
'-
U
H,
1\
t
,f
'I
Ii
1\
II'"
I
I
i
I
,
1
I
,
l'
-. -
.\
.
;" ,. ;';
/'
. .:.,] J,-
.. /' ,'..-
. / / 1
'
/
l,.- ' /
/-1 / // ,
.' .A/.-; / It :
/' I
-' I !
i 1
i
,

j
s

.( }:'
5
TiME LAUNCH - :: :CS
Cb) [)-ue to a 10 m/e s .. w
,
t
,

r
,
I
1/ / Y
y /
.' , ,/' .. I
,.. I
..
___ I \
z: r
"T


I
1" t--
"1
I
I
'-
I
,
,
-, f-
"i
::r
-r
I
8[-
5
1
.-
I
. L
1
7 I _
.. \

r
L
-.
aerodynamic char acte r-
l t nas been ass umed t hat
Guiaed Weapon Control Systems
is tics are the . same as t he one considered i n se ct i on 6.3.
. 2 .
the ae r ody nami c' norma l force c: , arid :he stat i c marg;:1 has rema i ne d c onstant
during t he boos t phase . It is seen that provided t here is a s ignifi cant static
ma rgin , th e di spe rs ion due t o a s i dewi nd i s not very s ensiti ve t o th e size of the
static ma rgin ; t he cnly di f f erence i s t hat the missil e i nitial angui ar accelerati on
is greater wit h a l arge static mar gin . Th e very small dis persi on shown as negat ive
wit h zero static margin i s of course a di spers ion down wind. Wh en esti mating
inaccuracies of t hi s nat ure one often ass umes that all biases and disturbances etc
acce l er ation has been taken as constant at 400 m/s
2
and t he
12A
have a normal di s t r ibut ion and t hat none of t hem are correlated. One t hen esti mate s
10 or 20 values f or each "i nput" t o the sys t sm and calculates t he li ke l y t otal
effect in t he same '.1ay as with tracki ng acc ur acy i n cha pter 1. A va lue of 10 m/s
has been take n as a 20 value for a cross-wi nd. Since wind could bl ow in any
l
direction relative to t he launch directi on t he probabl e comp onent of a wind of
vel oc ity U'o'l' in anyone direction (in e i t he r s e ns e ) i s 2U
w
/-;,; . HenCE we are sayi ng
t hat t he 20 value of t he wi nd i n any di re ct i on is 15 .7 mjs . Since it is rea l i s tic
t o Hork on probabilities one 's e s t i mate of the !'-lind s pee d '.-Jill be t nf l cence d by its
likely deployment; a systemwhi ch vii 11 be mounted on a shi p is ex pec te d to e xpe ri an c e
app ra ci ab ly greater wi nd speed s than one whi ch is near l y al ways deployed well
inland .

,
,
Op'211 loop, di spersion due t o t hr us t misa1ign;;)2n: is re c.rce c Dj ;; I e rqe stat ic
ma rgin . It i s quite common pr act ice t o re;,ard i nacc uracies due t o tol e r ances i n
manufact ur e t o have a normal di s t r i but i on fiith ze r o mean and a 20 vaLue equal t o
t he t ol erance. = 2 mil iradians has been taken as the to l erance .
Fi; 5. 9,2 (c ) and (d) show la t eral displacement s 0" '::- t o t he same causes out now
wi th an autopilot using an accelerome ter and c r at e qyro as al re ady di scuss ed.
.
Tne dispersion due t o t hr us t mi sa l ignment is s ee n to be reduce d ve ry considerably,
one s hould bear i n mind t hat in pra ctice th e stati c margi n duri ng boos t i s likel y
t o be very small , poss iblyeven negative . The reduc t icn in di spersion OuE: to a
:.,..
s i dewi nd however is di sappoin t ing . The benaviour with zero static margin nas a
l ogical expl a nati on. I f t he l ater al due to t he sicewi nd is t o t oe
right th e autopil ot endeavours t o ste er the miss il e to t he l e f t ; it is the large
longitudi.nal ac cel erat ion whi ch makes i t app ea r that t he au topil ct ove r-compen s e t es .
Un fortunately t he t nc l us i cn of tns t r une nts i n the missile con trol system means
th e f in se r vos are nO'd aware of any i ns t rument bt as es woul c lie abs ent in an
open loop system. Figs
. 1 I 2
equlva e nt to 0 m s on
6. 9-2 ( a ) and (b} ShOd the
the accelerometer and 0.1
disper si ons due to 2 bi as
ra d/ s on t he rate gyro .
I" . ,
the fu ll scale defl ection of the a ccs l erome t.e r 30g and t hat of tne ra te gyro
i s 3 rad/s then t hese biases (which i nClude any hystere sis effects) represtn : G
M
I
I
I
I
I
I
I i
I
i
I
!
125
12
LAUNC H - S EeS
0.5 0.8
Au topilot Desigrl
(d) DUE t o a aidEetod of 10 ,';;/s
04
TI ME FROM
0.2
(c!
I I I I
(bJ
6' 2 , . h '
to a m/ e DW$ on t.he acce t.- erome t el"
I / 1
I .. . :
I j. /
1/ :/
1
-
1/ / ,4
I
.k:/- ' I
.. I
.1/ : , I
...., ., \
Due t o a 0 .1 ra d/ e bias on the rate gyT' ;J
a_ Sta tic margin zer o ", I 1' 1' ,'
I ''':.'''
_. --- - 6% of Jeng1ti . L ...
I ! '/f'1'
I 1 --- '
I .
I
2
3
5 r
4 -
3 -
2 r
11--
E
0
4 -
....
3 -
:;,;
'"
:t
2","
'"
'"
-c
1 --
....
o,
'"
0
<::>
....
"'<
0:
T
'"
t-,
"'<
....
4
3
2
!
- ;; :; -, . . .
I
, .
!
I'
I
I ,
ii
il
II
ii
II
" I
I
I
I -
I -
I
'"\
I
I
I _
I
-
t ol erance of " 2%of full scale .
I f one accept s these 20 values t here appea rs t o be no gre at vi r tue in trying t o
poin t the t o extre,e accuracy . A tol erance here of =1
0
seems r eas onabl e .
The total 2G dis pers i on at 1 seco nd after laun ch when t he missile has t ravel lea
200 m downwi nd for t he mi ssile Vl ith a 2%s t atic marg i n i s gi ven by
20
t
= h.56
2
+ 2 .12
2
+ 3. 74
2
+ 1.99< + 3. 4g
2
= 6. 4 m
Vlh ere t he respect ive cont r i buti ons are due t o bi ases On t he rate gyro and accelero-
meter , th rus t mi sa l ignment , a si dewi nd and poin ting er ror i n t hat or der . If t he
tVlo accel er ome ter confi gur at i on is used then f or a compar abl e performance t he
biases f rom t hese ins tr uments have to be 10Vier . This i s because in creasing the
gain on one accelerome t er by 3 and the other by 2 in crea ses t he probable total
bias by a fa ctor of Ii + 22 = 3'.6 to 1. Set against this t he bias f rom t he ra te
gyro does not exist. Also this conf i gur at i on is l ess eff ecti ve in prod ucin g
f eedback at 10Vi mi ss ile vel ocities , and th i s is jus t wh en it is really wa nted. I f
th e mi s sil e f l i ght path i s changing at a gi ven r at e an accel eromet er Vl il1 gi ve a
large signal at a hig h mi ss i l e speed and a low signal at a l ow speed ( f
y
=
However , if the body turns , a rate gyro will produce a s i qnal i ndependent of mi ssi le
speed . Rat e gyro feedback is extremely useful in the early boost phase .
Finall y it s hould be noted that if a mi ss ile uses t hrust vect or cont rol the value
of Y, and N, and hence y, and n, are not dependent on the s peed of t he mi ssil e .
In order to resist a t urning due to thr ust mi sal i gnment say one reli es on
t he product of N
y
1; . With aerodynamic control t he value of N i s very low at low
, ,
speeds and t his i s the main reason why the di spersion Vli th t he aut opi lo t use d in
t he exampl e i s surpri si ngly large . Better results can be obtained with thrust
vectored sys t ems. The product kaksn, is i n the path if t he "i nput " is a
t hrust m1sal ignment or a sidewi nd , and therefore t o a first approximat io n the
lateral acce l ere t i on Vii 11 be inversely propor t ional t o t hi s product. Conve rs ely it
is i n t he fe edforwa r d path if t he i nput is an i ns t r ume nt bias and therefore in
t his context t he effect on dispersion is much l ess .
FOR ROLL CONTROL
In chapter 3 we discussed some of the reasons Vlhy i t may be desi r able or essentia l
f or a mi ss ile t o be rol l oosi t ion cont rol l ed. If four i ndependent fin servOS ar e
used t hen cont r ol can be obta i ned i n roll , pitch and ya,/' Cons i der an a i r -to- air
homing missile wh ich is roll position s tabilised and due largely t o t he var i abi li t y
i n t he launch speed can have a velocity i n t he range ii = 1. 4 to 1\ 2.8 . Table
6.10- 1 shows t he vari abi li t y of t he roll der i vat i ves , aerodynami c gai n and ti me
const ant over t his ra nge for a missi l e at a hei ght of l500m. The r oll moment of
inert ia A = 0.96 kg m
2
.
126
Gui ded Weapon Cont r ol Sys terns
-.
0 . 1
. e c ..
' - - ~ - - ' - - - - . , - -
. -- , _.,' .. -- . .
Autopilot Design 127
TABLE 6. 10- 1 ROL L AERODYNAllI C DER IVATI VES, GA INS AND TIME CONSTANTS
11 = 1. 4 1,\ = 1.6 !1 = 1. 8 M= 2.0 M= 2. 4 M= 2.8
- L 7050 8140
I
9100 10,200 11 ,700 13, 500
(
- L 22. 3 24. 9 27. 5 30.3 34.5 37.3
p
T
a
- 1 -A
0 .043
I0 .0 385
I
0. 031 6 0.0278
- ~ - r -
0 .0 349
I
0 .0257
p p
i
t
I
I
i
~ - _ L(
I <,
316 327 331
I
336 340 362
I
-r-
I I
"p p
I i
-
PHAS E ADVANCE
PHASE LAG
(lTos 1
I _ ~
;---
1
0 l - ~
-
LTos i
S
- --
ROLL GYRO
~
k.
I
I
FIG 6.10-1 R02-1 posit -ion c:ontl'ol autopilot
the demand ed r ol l pos ition equal to zero. Again , the actual s ervo st eady s tate
gai n - k
s
has t o be negat ive in order to ensure a flegat i ve feedback sy st em. Si rlce
t he s t eady st at e roll angle for- a consta nt disturbing tor-que L i s given by
oss
-
toss 0 .05
--c- = mm = -=-ki<C
9 s s
i t f oli ows that ksk
g
must be not less t hen 20000/1 3500 = 1.48. If kg i s set at
uni t y t hen k
s
must be 1.48. The open loop gain is now fixed at 1.48 L(/L
p
= 535.
I n or der t o det ermine whether the servo dynami cs ere l t ksl y t o be s i gni f ic ant
ignore them for the moment; thi s means t hat the loop is now second order' hi th
r
I
-I'
I
128 Guided f)eapon Control Systems
2
w = 535/ T = 20 ,800 i .e. w
n
= 144 rad/s . If w = 180 as befor e t he servo will
n a ns
cont r i but e consi der abl e"phase lag in the ' f r equencies of int erest . Wi th gOa phase
lag due t o the integrator and so? phas e la g due t o t he aer odynamic
t i me constant we could use a phas e lag compensator to lower t he cr oss over f requency
to reduce t he phase lag due to the servo at gain cr ossover . Thi s can t hen be
followed by a phase advance network. If these t r ansf er funct i ons are set to
I + 0.05s 1 + 0.0257s
I + . I + 0.001 8s
t hen t he phase advance numera tor cancels t he aer odynami c t i me cons tan t and t he
Bode diagram for the open loop is as shown in Fi g 6. 10-2 s howi ng heal thy gai n ana
phase rna rgi ns .
2/0

1000 500 200 100 SO 20 10 5
!'-<-PHASE FfRST
I
FREQUENfY _J
I
1"'- <,
,
/Nf TLA L SLOPE OF - ZO db/DECADE DUE TO
I
-,

PURE /HTEORATO R I
,
I -.


-. I I

-..........
I
1.- 1
5
I "'- ! I
0
I "'-V
SE
LAG COl<PEHSATQR I r-,
. SECOND BREAK,

S
I
<,FREO,UENCY
I <,
0
I
I ..............
: t DE
5
1
> I <, 'IF'
10
1 SE RVO BREAK -
I
; , FREQUENCY
15
I
L.-1- .

.:
20
I
l
!/
,\; 60d. / DECADE
2S
I
I \
PH.A.SE LAO
3D
I I I
\
3S
I I
\ - ' Od. /
'0
I I
PHA' E
COl-l PENSATOR SECOND
" I
'1
I
BREAK I '(
. "
50
55
50
35
3D
25
20
' 0
FR EQUENCY - RAO/SEC
FIG C.10-2 Bode diatJrcun for' roll poei t-i.on contn-ol. aut opi l ot
Roll rate .cont r ol has been us ed on several mi ss il es ; by this one means a met hoa._t.Q
--- , -' -'-- " - . .__. _ . _- --- --_._ ---
pr event high roll r at es . If there are fears tha t th e induced rol l ing moments could
-- - -_.- ._-.__._-
be l ar ge and t her e is no speci f i c requirement for r oll posi cion control t he maximum
r ol l r ate can be very considerably reduc ed if a rate gyro, or i ent at ed so t hat its
sens itive axi s is along the missile roll axi s, i s used t o provide fee dDack i nto t ne
mi ss il e servos s uch that ai l eron movement opposes rol l rat e. In th e steady state a
z;... . x
- 94 ... ,:t ;:: .*'" .. '
zY biOSJtU
t.
...."
con s tant ext ernal r olli ng. moment pr oduces a s low roll ra te . This is an at trac t ive
idea if the missile carries r at e gyros already i n t he late ral autop ilots ; posi tion
gyros are avoided whenever possible in t act i cal miss iles as t hey are l ess ro bust i "
des ign than rate gyros .
A very ingenious method to 1imit roll rate is to use "rollerons ", an ent t re l y
"_.__._,",--------" .. _. -' - _... -_..,,-_.-
passi ve method. A rolleron consists of a hi nged tab moun ted on the outer t raIlIng
edge of each \;ing panel . The tab contains a t oot hed wheel which i s dri ven at a
high angular velocity by t he impinging air -s tream . There i s a gyroscopic action
if t he missile has a roll rate as the tab is caused to precess i nt o the airstream.
If the hinge line is cant ed at 45 to the missile transverse axis some damping in
..
pit ch and yaw i s also achieved . ,
A roll pos i t i on demand autopilot is required if twi st ana st eer is used . The method
- -_...__. --- _ _ . ._____ . --.- 'u
is simi lar t o that used for roll position stabilisation except that a demand fo r
roll angle from the guidance and
$ wi l l be implemented . In cartesian control elevation and azimuth signal, carl tld ve
algeb raic signs i .e . for up-down and for left -right . Wi th polar coordinates neittler'
R nor have signs . This means that R must be interpr'eted as arl "out" demand at
all t imes . Now consider what would happen if we use a ci rcular potentiometer on ttle
roll position gyro for measuring roll angle . As a poten tiomet er must have a begifl -
ning and an end, some trouble is taken in designing a potentiometer with as
an electri cal angle as possible , say 35So . For convenience cal l this 360
0
and
ass ume th at the total voltage across the potentiometer is l SV. Suppose the mi s si l e
is at a roll angle of 10
0
i .e . the demand is 0.5V. I f ttle guidance now sees t he
target at 350
0
relative to the missile, ttle demand must therefore now be equal to
l7 .5V . In the absence of sophi stication the missile will roll through 340
0
and 1f
i t shoul d overshoot beyond 358 the error ',;i11 appear eno,'110US and it wi II ('011
round again , and so on. The system appears impractical .
One way of overcoming this problem is to i ncorporate logic Tne ('011
demand is compar ed with ttle measured roll position in the usual way but before
pas sing th is signal to the aileron servo amplifiers as a true error signal Hie
output is fed to two comparator amplifiers (logic 1 and logic 2) each of wtlictl
drive s a trans istor switch . If the error voltage exceeds t hat correspoflding to a
change in position of more than + 180
0
logic 1 will operate and add a discrete
voltage equivalent to - 360 so that the effective demand is less t han _180
0
Similarly if t he "error" exceeds - 180 logic Z will operate and add. eiser"t.
voltage equivalent to +360 so that the effective demand is less t han +180 . For
error vol t ages equivalent to less than 180 neither logic circuit operate s . Suen
a system:
(a) ensures that the missile se lects t he rldy roulld
I
I
!
I
,
,
!
i
I
I
-
!
I
t
I
I
I

i
\
I

\
I
i

\
!
.----
Aut opi l ot Design 129
130 Guioed Con trol Systems
(b) cannot at any ti me t ry to r ot ate more than 180
0
:
i he discont inuity at t he ends of t he now no l onger presents a
problem. It is t:ue t hat t he systemcould. oscillate backwards and forwardS i n th is
dead zone and theref ore i n one very srna11 sector t her-e is a pcs s i b1e servo error
of ZO . Fig 6 .10-3 illust rates t his pr i nci pl e. In a sense a twis t and s t eer system
seems nat ural for a homi ng system because as t he mi ss i l e rol ls as a resul t of a
ti em ora to
fin
5 U VO S
Gyro feedback
FIG 5.10- 3 l zc-ic f oY' Y'c;;ZZ tierarui c ... r; opi Zor;
guiaa nce command t here is inherent roll angle feedbac k i n t he gui dance l oop (t he
guidance receiver rol ls with t he miss i le) . In order t o acnieve closed loop
s t abi l i t y the guidance 9 signal wi l l have to be compensated before pass ing to tne
fi n servos.
.ft THE EFFECT OF ROLL RATE ON LATERAL AUTOPiLOT
PERFORMANCE
Consider a cartesian con: roilec missi Ie wit h two i dentical autopil ots;
it is free to roll and the t wo guidance commands are resolved i n the missi l e as
discussed i n section 5.5 . The resol ved conmands are usually call ed "demands for
lateral accelerat ion in freely r olling missile axes". The achi eved t ot al l ateral
acceleration of t he mi ssi i e i n space can be regarded as from a latera l
acceleration al ong the mi ss i l e z axis plus anot her al ong t he mi ss ile y axis . Thes e
two vectors will have vert i cal and ho ri zontal components t hat the acnieved
lateral acceleration in space,s hould ideally be i dentical t o the original demanaed
, "
lateral acce leration, see Fig 6.11 -1.
Now i magi ne t he missile to be rolii ng at a: s t.eecy ret e p r sers , and consider f or
the moment a const ant up dema nd; the left -right dema nd is zero. The elevator and
rudder servos will be executi ng si mple harmon i c mo tion at c frequency p rad/s 5nd
it is assumed that the two servos will exhibit equal phase lags of at th is
f requency . If at a gi ven i ns t ant t he mi ss il e i s at zer o roll anct e the n t he
elevator angle wi l l be re duced by a factor equal to cos 's anO tne rudder servos
will have a component propor t i onal to sin 's ' Fi g 6.11- 3 s hows t he respecti ve
output s of the two servos t o a constant up dema nd . ! t i s i mportant to r ea l i se
'--

Aut opi lo t Design
INSTRUMENT
FEEDBACK
131
INSTRUMEN T
FEEDBACK
ELEVATOR
SERVO IS )
Achieved
acceteration
.n space
axes
Achieved lateral
acceteration in
missile axes
'r
AERODYNAMICS
RUDDER
SERVO IS )
,
- - ;
- ,
- .

j
- I
_ i
- I
- -i
I
FI G 6. 11- 1 Reso l- ut- i on of guidance s i qna l-s
r
3
fzd
Cos S I----<>o-{
S in s
i
I
,
- Sin rps
fyd
Cos s 1-----1

--
\
I
!
,
;
;
FIG
I
,
I
i
-v
-
i
\
I
6.11- 2 Cr oss COUD!.1.no beina eer: tiuo -ident- i.ca l- weer -at
autopi lots due to and f in servo Uzg
132 Guided Control Systems
Missile
roll ang le 0
an d time
Roll rote p r ad/ s
Ser vo phas e lag at trus
f r equen cy I S ., 5
cider a ng l e
.>
VLJ p - s i n 0
s
from
r udder
Vup COS tr o m elevator
(6.11 - 2)
( 5 .11 -1)
f
y
=
( f yd
- f
Y3) Yl
cos
s
Y
2 y
f
:
( \ d
- f
z
Y3)
Y
j
cos
" 5
Y
2 z
The additional signals enteri r, g these two l oops cue to cross -coupling are
(f
zd
- q Y si n
9
s
and ( f
yd
-
f
y
Y3)
Y
1
,
sin
; s )
'z
\ -
j
1
f
yd
= O.
'de read -
plane syst em is rig 6.11 -2 is a di agram of the couplec system
Y
"
Y
Z
and Y
3
t he f unc t i ons of t he s ervo ) ae r odyna mi cs a nd t ota l ef f e ct i ve
feedback respecti vely . will Obtain t he transfer f unct i on for fy/f
zc

The transfe r f unction f If wi l l oe iden ti cal t ha t for si n .s
Z yo _
s i n c
s
. If cr-oss -coupl i nq is ignored tnen
tha t as a re sul t of roll ra te and th e s er vo dyn ami c l ag , pa rt of t ne cosmenc 1r one
plane actuall y appears as output in the other plane . I t i s easy to see wnat
woul d happen i f the servo phase l ag a t a gi ve n roll r e t e i s 90 ; an up Ou l d
re sul t in a hori zontal manoeuvre and one coul d trli s as 100%cross -coupling .
A phase lag of 5.7
0
wo ul d result in cross - coupl ing . Tr.e s eme i s t ru e i f t ne re
is a demand in th e hori zon tal plane . Hence t here is cross - coupli ng between tn ES
planes due t o : he effect of roil rate and t he se r vo lag. This will nave
adverse effect On t he e ccure cy of t he sys tem as a wr.ol e , and t his will De co ns t cerec
in the next chapter fo r the moment l et us see dhether t he stabi lity of : he
\
I
I
i
I
\
I
I
I
I
If these two s i gna l s are mul t i pl i ed by Y
Z
and a;1ded t o t he right na nd side of
equat i ons 6.11-1 and 6.11 -2 respect ively t hen t his repre sents t he coupl ed si t uation .
shoe i ng t hat there is no cross - coup1i ng i f = 0 and t he denominato r r educ es to
(1 + Y) Z. The characteristi c equation for e:ch plane is of course 1 + Y =O.
For ma rgina l s tab i l i ty ; us ing Nyquis t 's cri teri on
ZY cos 9
s
+ y
Z
= - 1 (6 . 11-4)
( 6. 11- 3)
133
.. .-
. .
. ' ':".
. .
- - e- - - -- .-
Aut opi l ot Design

For

> 0 the complex roots are
Y = - cos
s
s in
s
j
I f

is less than abo ut 30
0
we can write
If f
yd
= 0 and we s implify by writing th e uncoupl ed ope n l oop t ra ns fer funct ion
Y = Y, Y
Z
Y
3
manipul ation yields
f
y - _ -'----"'--_ .-c:...-.".
T:
d
- 1 ZY + y
Z
z + cos t
s

J Cons ider i ng the root Y = - 1 + 9
s
j t his is s ay i ng t ha t for marq i nal stab ility t he
J open loop phase instead of being -180
0
is now _180
0
+ s ; i n other wo rds fO,r small
roll rates the aut opil ot phase margin is reduced by the se rv o phase l ag at the
ro ll f re quency . Or mor e correctly one should re!1'.2rr,ber tha t in or iginally asses s ing
phase margin for the ze r o roll rate case the ser vO lag at gai n crOSs ove r f r equency
was al r eady i ncl uded in the open loop transfer fu nct ion Y. Hence one mus t shift
[
[
,
,
th e f r equency a xi s for the servo by an amount equal t o. the ro ll r ate . If t he re f ore
t he ro l l r a t e i s taken at p radl s arid one is conside ring a f r equency w i n t he
stabi lity ana l ys is then t he servo frequency mus t be taken as (w + p) rad/ s . A
full er treat ment is given by Frary ( 5) who confirrrs t hese general concl us i ons, but
by an entirely different approac h. This des tabi l i s i ng effe ct of roll rate exp lains
why most l ateral autopilots are designed wi th a fa irly large phase margi n at zer o
r oll rate , typ i cally 50
0
or more.
Fr ary also cons i der s the inertial cros s -coupling effects toget he r wit h the contr ibu-
t i on from the Magnus derivatives . The Magnus effect is easil y app re ciated i f one
cons i de rs a cylinder s pi nni ng abo ut its l ongi t udi nal axi s in s ti ll ai r . If t he
same cyl i nder i s also moving pe r pendi cul ar to this axis the su rface vel oc ities
relative to the airs tream on either side of t he cylinde r are unequal. This
produces a diNerence in the boundar} layer t hi cknes s resul t ing in a fo rce at r i qnt
angles to th e direction of mo t i on. Hence , if a mi ss ile i s rol ling and has a componen t
of lat er al vel oc i t y , a force at right angles to t his wi ll be expe r i enced .
The derivat ives are of the form ypw and zpv and the forces are functions of rol l
rate multiplied by lateral velocity. I t 1s foun d t hat fo r a typica l anti -a ircraft
missile the I'lagnus terms will ap pr ec i abl y a l t er the c irf r ame respons e only fo r roll
r ates above ZOO rad/s . Several modern sup er s oni c mi ss i l es which are free to roll
have been observed to roll at ve ry l ow rates t hr oughout an ZO rac/s
" oul d oe reqar ded as an abnormally high roll rate . Hence Frery concludes tha t
t he Mag nus effect can be safel y neglected in t he great maj ority of systems .
The effect of t he ine:rtia cross -coupl ing tenns however can be reckonable . In
ar r iving at equati ons 4.2-11 and 4. 2-12 t he roll r at e wa s assumed to be sma l l. If
t he roll rate is large then fer a symmetrical mi ss i l e these equati ons become
q - ( C B (6 .11-5 )
A - 8 N
and r - (--c--) pq ; r (6. 11 -6)
These new can now be used t ogether with the angle equati ons and f orce
equations to obtain t he aerodynamic transfer functions whicn will be a funct ion of
roll rate. Since t he latera l moment s of i nertia Band C are much grea t er than the
roll moment of i ne r t i a A the functi ons --i n brac kets approxi m e te t o uni t y for mos t
mi s s i l es . found tna : t he ty pical surface -ta- air wi s s i l e went unst able open
loop at a roll rate of 135 re dys ; t he effect closed loop was however, much l es s.
Th is will surprise most readers who know t hat a conventional shell is spun at a
very high ra te in order t e ma ke it aerooynamical l y s t ebl e . However , a paper by
Murphy (8) concludes that i n certa in regi mes and configurations a s tat ica lly s table
missi le may be made dynamica liy unstab ie above a cer tain spin ra te .
The genera l concl us i ons are 't heref ore that provi ded roll rates are not r eal l y hi gh
t hen and i ner t i al cross - coupli ng effects shoul d be very sma ll. However ,
even modera te roll rates can unstablise a two plane aut opi i ot due to cross - coupling
unless the servo response is rea ily fast.
134 Guided We apon Co nt roi Systems
r

I.
:-
6.12 AUTOPILOTS AND A CHANGING ENVIRONMENT
_e have already discussed the factors that are responsibl e for t he variations i n
t he ga.ins , t ime cons t ant s etc i n an autopilot i .e . ma ss change s due to propellant
usage , changes in speed and height and cna nges in static wergin . Mass and i ne rtia
.
changes are relativel y sma ll end consioerable cnanges in static marg in can be
accommodated in a well designed aut opi l ot . However , l arge changes in speed and
neight will resul t i n s ueJ.1 -s cos t ent i a l cna nqes in t he i mportant ae rodynamic
,,,
derivatives t hat it will bec ome essential t o vary at leas t one of t he gains i n
t he loop in order to maintain a satisfactory response . Clearly the feedDack gain
must be kept constant to maint ain the cl osed loop d.c. gain. In practice the
feedfor,ard gai n is easily contro11ea by varying the gain of the ampl ifier which
sums t he input demand and f eedback si gnals. But to vary tni s par amet er only will
rarely be sufficient to mai nt ain adequat e damp i ng as we l l . In t he lateral autopi lot
using an accelerometer and a rate gyro one could alter t he effective rate gyro
gain ; in t he t wo acce lerometer case good control over damp ing can be obtai ned by
varying the rear accelerometer lag ti me constant . Roll posi t ion control autopil ots
i
-,
,

--;- -
a k ,,:-
Autopilot Design
....
135
,
r:
..
.,..
.,..
'..
1.
-
are altoget her s impler as t he aerodynamic gain L, /L
p
will not change at all wlth
changes in air density and is not very sensitive t o changes i n speed . The aero-
dynamic t i me const ant however can undergo l arge changes . A si mp le gai n change
may be all t hat i s necessary . I f it i s a roll position demand l oop t he closed loop
gai n wil l not change at all wi th aer odynamic vari at ions s ince it is a type 1 system.
Ch anges i n gains and t i me constant s are eas i ly effected by sWi t chi ng in different
values of resi s tan ce and capaci t ance used in conj unct i on wi t h opera t iona l ampl i fi ers.
In t he case of a s ur face -to-a i r system t here will probably be a comput er ass ociated
wi th the s ur vei ll ance and guidance sys t en . The velocity of t he mi ss i l e, as a funct ion
of ti me will be known within reas onabl e 1ir.its , and the tracker elevat i on angle
t oget her wit h a knowle dge of t i",e and hence mi ss il e wil l enable an esti mate
, .
of mi ss il e heigh t to be made . CommaQds from the guidance computer can be made t o
operat e solid s tate swi t ches i n the mi ss i l e to effect the necessary changes . The
numbe r of sWi tching zones is kept to a mi nimum . the missi le can De
independent of the ground i n this respect and can effect the necessary changes i f

some measurements concerni ng the aerodynamic environment are made . Si nce all
normal force deriva tives are proportional to pU
2
and are not very sensitiVE to
Mach number an approxi mation to the dynami c pre ss ur e can be obtained by connecting
one s i de of a diaphragm to a number of pitot intakes On the mi ss i l e Dody , and the
othe r side to the stat i c head . As a result the dif fer ent i al pre ssur e and hence
res ultant for ce on t he diaphragm is nearly proportiona l t o the dynamic pr ess ure
i f the range of Mach number is no t too great . The ele ctrical s ignal f rom a
si mpl e pressure transducer can be mace to change gai ns and t i me constants in tne
autop ilot .
Suc h aut opi l ot s ar e no t t r uly ."adapt i ve" in t ne gener ally accepted sense . Madel
refe rence syst ems are used on many l arge aircraft and despi te the i r relative
compl exity the cost of such systems is still small compared with the cos t of the
ai rcraft . The cos t of such a system has, as f ar as i s known , preclude d their use
i n gui ded weapons; t he simpler system described above, af ter all , does t he job
re asonably we ll . However , an i nteres t i ng suggestion of a comparati vely si mpl e
model r ef ere nce systemhas been suggested by Lewis (11) and has been further
developed by Porter (12) . The general overall arrangement , as wit h all model
refe r ence systems , i s as shcwn in Fig 6. 12-l.
The i deal model of t he autopi lo t is conta i ned wi t hi n the mi ss il e and the i deal
response i s compar ed with the actual re sponse . The difference between the se two
out put s is clearly an "error" . The conventi ona l adaptive systemai ms to adjus t
one or ",or e system paraffieters in res ponse to some f unction of thi s error. This i s
no t a simp l e process . However , Lewis proposes that an addi oioncZ adapti ve comma nd
is i ss ued t o t he autopi l ot (if t he error is grea ter tha n i gi ven tol er ance ) , such
C. W.C.5. _ "
-_._-----
--
-
136
Error

---,
I
I

i

AUTOPI LOT
FI XE D MDOC:L
fyd
CORR ECT I ON S
FR OM
ADAPTIV E
LOOPS
PA RAM ET ER
CHANGES
FROM
EN VI RONMENT
FIG 6.12-1 ModeZ
e s to min irnj s e t he error fun ction . : ;-:2r<:: is a wit h t he stabil i ty of Such
a scheme Porter examines the greater det ai l .
6.13 AZIMUTH CONTROL " Y GYltOS AND ACC;':LEROMETERS
Ther e are many ni s s t l e systems hhi ch usc a su r ve i l l ance sys t em t o determi ne the
height and of a target . To e mis si l e uses whe n it is
near t o the t ar get, say at a r ange of 2-: km and rei ies on az i mut h guidance f r om a
gyro during t he mid- course sust ai n The azimuth aut opi l ot is simila r to
that used tn a velocity cont r ol sys t em except t hat there may be no commands at a ll .
Such systems typically have to 100 seconds and s ust ain at a
veloci ty 250 rn/s ; thi s low velccity resul t s i n a gr eatly re duced dr ag. One
uses a much higher quality azimuth gyro than would be used in an ant i - t ank weapon
with a r andom dr i ft rate of and a ani soe1ast ic r at e of
50 'i ! 2 G c t o : . .. & 1 l ot'
I . / iour g . yrcs use 1,.0 i<eep a rm S S -I r e on cours e i or a compar a 1,.1 ve y ng i me
are usually cal l e d "guidance" gyros . Since th e mi s s i l e homing he ad has a limited
angle of look one has to estimate the ma ximum 1i ke l y look -out angle when the
mi ssile enters the termi nal homi ng phase . Ther e are many causes of error i n such e
trajectory:
(a) We may not have ai med corre ctly i rl t he firs t pl ace or t he target may have
moved an unknown amount dur ing the mi ss i l e flight .
( b) The gyro will dr ift during boost .
( cl The gyro will drift (more Slcdl y ) during the s ustain phase .
'-
,-
,-
-;;;;; =
--
.--
Autopi l ot Des ign 137
..
r
wl

j
w
U
w
T
i
t
,
The azimuth gyro wi 11 do
i s t he direct ion of t he
i
I
I
;
,
,
I
t

,
( d) The missile will drift downwi nd due t o a side wind.
not hi ng to correct t hi sin t he long term as all it knows
body , not the direction of the velocity vector .
If t he missile i s sustaining a constant velocity and we are consi deri ng long
ti mes of fli ght i t is rea sonabl e to assume tha t a given change i n body di re cti on
wi l ] result in the same change i n flight path di r ect i on. Thus , if the gyro drifts
by an amount w t he missile fli ght path wil l al so change Let
R = t he range f rofil t he launcher at the commencement of t he engagement t o t he
t ar get at impact .
= t he range fr om t he mi ss i l e to the target at t he of the homing phase .
the error in ai ming .
= t he gyro drift duri ng boost .
t he gyro drift rate du ri ng the susta ln prl es e constant.
t he component of wi nd perpendic ular to t he f li ght path .
=t he t ifile to reach a ra nge of R - r = (R - r)/U
m
see Fi g 6.13-1.
R
_;;'IG 6 . 13 - 1 Geometry of g ran vie'..J
r
I
- I
maki ng sma l l angle
R - r i s given by
Ass uminq the
mat i ens then
by 6/ r -r- wl + Wz + Thi s reduces to
U
R- r ) w(R-r)(. R- r ) R-r w
+ - r- + - Urn - , I + zr + -r- . Urn
,
\
and t he
missile r ange after boost is negligible and
the total lateral di s pl acement 6 at a r ange
6 = (Wl +'Z) ( R - r ) dt
o
angle of look a i s given
R- r
e = (1 + r ) + w2(l
+ U T
w
appro xi -
(5 . 13- 1)
i
\
I
i
I
i
I
\
I
i
Si nce these four components can be ass umed to be uncorrelated one can estimate the
probabl e dispersion if t he 10 values of each are known . In additi on i t is see n
t hat even if errors due t o ai ming and gyro dr ift can be made negl i gible, never t nel es s
t he di s persi on due to a sidewind can be considerable e.g . 1 km in a range of 25 km
if the si dewi nd is 10 m/ s and t he mi ss il e speed is 250 m/ s , ' The alternative is to
use a "cros s- track na vi qetor" Y/h i ch empl oys negat ive feedback fr oma very l ow bias
acce lerometer mounted on a gyro gi mbal s uch that i t s sensitive axis is t r ul y
138 Guided Control Systems
-
hori zon tal and perpendicular to the miss ile or i qi nal heading. It i s absol ute ly
essent ia l that t hi s acce lerometer does not sense a component of gravity due t o
being eff l evel othe rwise spuri ous si gnals integrated over a long flight ti me
could result inil l ar ge ' di s pe r s i on . Howeye r it may be possible to employ a gyro
which is slightly pendulous to prevent drift. In the absence of biases this
; system has the potenti al of eli mi natjng dis pe rsion since any sideways component of
velocity due to any cause will s how i nitially as an output fro m the accelerometer .
Refere nce (4) gi ves s ome particular; of systems wi th a cruise phase under instru-
rr.ent cont rol.
/
V .14 HEIGHT CONTROL AND SEA SKIMMING SYSTEMS
Ijany countries have designed gui ded we apon systems to fly low Or very low under
alti meter control in order t o remain below the enemyls radar horizon during most
of the fl i ght . This i nc l udes remot el y pilot ed vehi cl es used for surveillance and
t arget ces igna t ion and anti - shi p mi ssil es whose f light path l ies wholly over the
sea . If one wi shes to fiy at a height of 100 m o r more t he accura cy of a barome tri c
altime t er or ev en a pie za e l e c t r i c pressure transducer i s good e nough t o
prevent one from hit t ing t he ground or sea . most surveillance
ve hicles are fitte d wi t h t elevision cameras which continuously transmit a picture
of the te rrain back to the operat or who has direct control over i t s height and
cou r se; controlli ng such a ve hi cl e so that i t does not hi t the gro und is not generally
regarded as being difficult .- Now , even a rough sea is more or l ess leve l , and in
genera l it i s poss ib l e to fl y much lower over the sea with t he same chance of
"di tching" . If one is thinking of flying at a height of 10 mor les s above mean
sea l evel one must know sorrthing about the sea state and one mus t use an altime ter
wit h a very small bi as . This section is there f ore pr i mar i l y concerned wit h t he
problen(of flying very l ow over t he sea so le ly under a ltimet e r control .
We now consider t he sea spect r um. Ther e i s a gr eat deal of li teratur e both
t he or etical and based on ac t ua l measu remen ts conce rn i ng ocean waves . An e a rl y but
fundame nta l te xt i s given by Darbyshire (6) . The r e is a wealth of obs erve d data
i n "Ocean ,l ave Stat isti cs ... and "Standard Wave Spectra" (8). I n the same 'rlay
t hat wind sp eeds are denoted by on the Beaufort s cal e , s o t he i nternationa l
sea state is denote d by numbe rs from 1 to 6 . Thi s number is aefi ned Dj a
parameter known as t he _s i gnif icant wa ve he i qr.t H _ which is t ile average of the
- s 1 g
highest third of all the waves recorded in a specified interval. H. is more
Slg
usuall y wri tten as H
3
r d, and the values are invariabl y quot e d as peak to crouqh
values . There i s some agreement that a typical sea s tate can be cons i dere d as a
random co l lec t i on of s ine waves with a Gau;sian di s tribution of amp l i tude s and a
narrow frequency di stribution dependent on the s ea s t at e . The re l et i cns hi p be twe en
F
-
-=
+ [0" ..- . , =:i
Autopilot Desi gn 139
(6 . 14- 1)
40 wh ere 0 is of COu r se meas ur e d H
3rd
and t he s tandard devi ation 0 is given by H
3rd
about local me an sea level .
Now the sea state is undoubt edly due t o th e wind speed but it is not pos s i bl e to
give an exact relationship between H
3rd
and wind speed as it depends al so on
how long the wind has been blowing , the di s tance over wh ich it has been acting
( ca ll ed the f etch), t he depth of the wat er , and wh ether the Sea is affected by
swe ll (due to a wind which i s, or has beet; blowing elsewhere) . So al t hough a
gene rally acce pte d equati on conce r nin g sea s t at e wi ll be given, it mus t be pointed
out t ha t it i s empirical . The Pierson-Moskowi t z spectram i s a standar d accep t ed
i nternati onal l y as a one dimension s pe ct r um fo r a s t ationary obs erver f or the
case of a f ully deve l oped s ea in deep wate r and is gi ve n by
- 4 x 0 . 78 , ::;'
2 4
O. 78
(H3r d) w 2 1
, ( ) m r ad- s
<'s w = --s- e
w
I t will be noted that
2
Q
,
,
i
i
Fi gs 6.1 4-1 ( a) , ( b) and ( c) have been drawn for di fferent sea s t a t es . I t i s
interesti ng t o note tha t ac cording t o Hogben and Lamb (7 ) the mo st probabl e val ue
for H
3rd
off Cornwa ll f or t he whol e year i s 0.75 m and i s 1.8 m for t he North
Atlant i c . It i s seen from t hes e figur es t hat fo r a rough sea (H
3
rd = 4m) t he
s pectr um is centred about 0.6 rad/s or th ereabout s and t his corr es ponds
t o one wave every 10 secs . The main f re quenci es are about double this for H
3
r d l rn
but the s pec t r irn i s s omewha t wi der . If t he wave f re quency is f
w
(Hz) , c the
veloci ty of wave pr opagat i on and A
W
t he wavelength th en
( 6.1 4- 2)
if tne mi s s i l e velocity
as seen by t he mi s s i l e
cos a
f 2
w
g
+ "
- 'w
g
2" f 2
w
f requenci es are of course for a stat i onary ocse r ver .
an angle a to the wave direct ion the wave f re quency
gi yen by
Thes e
is at
f
m
is
...
i
r
,
i
I
- ,
!
,
l
\
I
I
,
i
\
- i
I
- I
I
l
- .
!
i
-';
If, f or e xampl e f
w
i s taken as 0 .1 Hz and U
m
300 mis , t he f re quency as seen by
t he mi ss il e could be anyt hi ng from zer o t o 2 Hz, depend in g mainl y on the di r ect ion
of t he mi s s i l e ve loc i t y r elative to t he wave veloci ty but woul d be up t o 3-4 Hz
for th e shorter wavelengt hs more characteristic of a calmer sea . If t he height
l ock system approximat es to a second order system an undamped natura l
frequency of 2" x 3 r ad / s and a damping r atio of 0. 5 th en the steady s tate err or
for a sinus oi dal i nput at th i s f requency ( i .e . 3 Hz) is al so a si nus oid whose
ampli tude i s IZ t imes t he input ampl itude . This is equiva l ent to flying precise ly
J
. ..:.._---- - --- -- - - - ' ----
-
c
140 Guiued Weapon Contro l Systems
\
I
I
\
1 :TIl
(a )
I
L
2 .5
N
\
- I
2 .0
\
1.5
I
I H
J rd
=4m
1.0
i\1 I
0 . 5
...;
0
0. 0
0 .08]
0.05
<.J 0.4
'"
V) I
03 I
0 .2 I
'jLI_y<:l I_-L__.-l. L .:::l:===-_ _ '-- -'
0
r 04 0.6 0.8 1.0 1. 5 2.0 2. 5 3.0
I
FRE OUE NCY RAO/SEC
.:.,. ..
(e)
FIG 6 .14 - 1 Sea for different sea owr;es
level " ith a vir tua l i nput IZ ti mes t he real input amplitude : Since it will be
shown th at the sys t em ba ndwidth is unl ikely t o e xceed 4 rad ls we mus t re gretfuliy
come to the concl us i on t hat it Wi l l not be possible to follow t he sea profil e at
all . 1n other words more oft en than cot the output of th e he i ght l ock sy s t em ,Ii 11
be so? 0, more out of phase ;li t h t he i nput and the mean er-r-Or' is l i ke l y
t o be large, than the deviati on in se a height .
Fig 6 . 14-2 shows one type of he i ght control system. Accelerometer and r at e gyro
feedback in the vertical pl ane ens urs a reasor. ably wel l damped and consistent
response f rom t he mis s il e . Si nce hei chtci s t he double integral of vertica1

.... 'iBiiii
it . ...
' ... o ." , .. . -." . '< ' . 1- r:;
~
" .,.,)l:,
Autopilot Design
Gravi ty
comp e ns a tion
141
I
\
I
I
LATERAL ACCELERA TION
AUTOPI LOT WtTH
ACCELEROMETER AND RATE
GYRO FEEDBACK
1
S2
h
Height above
th e s ea
FIG 6.14-2 A height controZ sys tem
acceleration there are two inherent integrat ions in the comple te system if a l t imete r
feedbac k is al so use d. A good deal of phas e advance i s essent i al to ensure loop
stabil ity . The pr oblem of loop stability is eased s omewhat if the phase lag due
to the auto pil ot at gai n cross-over freq uency is almost negl i gi bl e , s ay 5
0
_10
0
.
This can be achieved i f t he loop gain i s ver y low, s ay 4 or less and t he au top i lot
bandwidt h is at l eas t 10 t imes the loop gain cross -over frequen cy ; t hi s latter
f requency woul d be 2 rad/s i f the loop gain is 4, and rathe r more than t hi s al l owi ng
f or the phase advance networks . It may be impra ctica l t o obt ai n a ve ry fas t auto -
pi lot if the mi s si le i s s ubs oni c and is on the big side , say ove r 150 kg . Si nce
t he alti me t er sees the difference be twse n the mi ss i l e he i ght and the instantaneous
sea hei ght (Wh ich is noi sy) applying phase advance to the alti me ter s igna l dire ct
may result i n saturati on of t he miss ile servos . Th is can be avoide d i f t he
accelerometer and alti meter si gnals are mixed and f i ltere d to prc duce th e same
effect ; some ingenuity is called f or here: Gra vi t y compensation is easily provided.
If th e autopilot steady state gai n is x m/ s
2
/ vol t t hen a constant input bias
voltage into t he autop i l ot of g/x vol ts shoul d r es ult in a ze r o stea dy state hei ght
error in the absence of any other bi ases i nt he sy stem. An alternati ve height
l ock loop can be designed using pitch gyro and altime t er fee dback. Pr ovided t he
miss i l e s peed i s roughly constant a f ixed i nput bias voltage can be used to r es ul t
in jus t enough "nos e up" body angle to give a normal force equi val ent to 19 .
We now consi der at wh at height the missile should be set t o fl y . A glance at "Jane's
Fi ghting Shi ps " ( 10) will convi nce one that a typical crui se r or aircraft car r i e r
may Hell be an ea sy target but the small missile corvettes or f ast at tack craft
such as t he Russi an Osa cl ass boats pre sent a very l ow pr ofi l e , Does one t he refor e
Sea h ei g ht
h
s
. .
ALTIM ETER
PHASE ADVANCE
NE TWORKS
.., -
-
1
1
1
1
I..
(
[
r

,.
... .
.,
!'

fly relatively bigh witrl a very 10''; probability of hitt ing a " ave crest ana then
probably overfly t he target , or does one fly l over and ac cept a small ditch in g
probability? this questi on mus t be taken serious ly especi al ly as it is common
knowl e dqe that letha li ty inc r eas es the l owe r one hits a ship . Let us take a
t ypi ca l e ngagemen t '"i t b a ran ge of 24 km , a mis s i l e velocity of 300 m/s and a
f l i ght t i me of 80 seconds . Firstly one must consi der component biases . I f a n
ac ce lerome ter i s used and 50 m/s
2
full s ca le defle c t ion is adeq uat e , a to l er ance
of 1% fu ll scale ( 20 value) is 0 .5 m/s
2
. The r ate gyro probab ly produces an
eq uivalent bias . I f one i s thinking of a very l ow chance of ditching, say 0 .5 %,
one co uld t ake a 2.80 value whi ch, assuming a norma l distributi on gives one a 99 .5%
chance of anyone value being le ss than t his. The tot a l 2. 80 acceleration bias is
therefore 1 .4 16.5
2
-r 0 . 5
2
= 1 m/ s
2
. If the loop gain i s 2 t he n the stea dy state
heigh t e rror i s 1/2 0.5 m; this is because t he loop gai n or "s t i f f nes s " is 2 m/s
2/
m
(height e r ro r) . To t his one must add a fi gure for t he alti me ter error . If t he 20
value i s t aken as the tolerance , say 0 ,5 m then the 2.80 value is O. 7m . These two
b
dd + 6,
2
0 7
2
- 0 86 '.' . d +"- . 1 t t
lases a ... 0" .::> . . - . m. l' OW conSl er ...llreE par t i cu ar se a s .a es
g-iven by H
3
rd :; 1. 2 and -im and assune for th e moment t hat the sea state i s approx -
i mate l y meas ur ed before th e flight. If we take 2. 80 values fo r t he s ea state also
and add s ay 25% to allow fo r the fact t ha t t he foll owin g error is li kely to be
greater t han the sea "jnput" then a cr ude est i mate of the mean height above sed
l eve l that a mi ss i l e s houl c be to f l y is sncwr, in Table 6 .14 -1.
TABLE 6 .14 -1 ROUGH OF "SAFE" HEIGHT TO FLY
I
H
3rd
1m
i
2m 4m
l
I
2. 8 x 1.250 0 .88 1. 76 3. 52
,
Instrument 0.86 0 . 86 0.86
Tota l fo l l ov...in9 error 1. 23 1. 96 3. 63
Add 0 . 4m fo r half wins span 1. 63
!
2.36 4.03
_...
of sea s t at e I Add O.5m for 2 . 13 2.86 4.5 3
.
The sea spec trum is obtained by weather s hips by analys ing the records of speci all y
i ns t r ume nt e d buoys . The quest ion of estimat ing the sea st ate under se rvice
con di t ions is t her e f or e a diff icul t one although exp e r ience d sai l or s wil l say tha t
/
t hey can judge the s ea state accurately . Without exp e r ience however , esti mates can
be very unreliable ; it is very difficult if t he weapon is carr ied i n a .he l i copt e r
and the sea state has to be judged the air . An arbitrary f i gure of O. 5m
has bee n ad ded i n Tabl e 6 . 14- 1 to all 01'1 for th i s uncertainty . It wi l l be note d
however tha t the chances of hitting a wave mus t increase with t ime ; t he longe r t he
flight the greater will be the nu:iiber of vaves that are encountered. The "bes t"
he i ght. to fly th erefore wi l ] al so de pend on the t ime of flight .
..

' &UJc:: ;;a::;

9
~ - - - - - -;-- .- -
Autopilot Design
.
.. ' .. r (.
+ i ... ::- .
143
" . '-Ill

1:.
I f:.
I I:.
I f:.
I I:.
I' I:-
r
. 1:.,
T
An alternative is for the missile to esti mate the sea st ate during t he l ong run
in per i od and to drop to a l ower height duri ng t he l ast few seconds of the
engagement. Cons ider now a perfect ly s m o o ~ sea . The difference between the
demanded hei ght and t he meas ured height must be zero if t here are no bias es in t he
autopil ot . A bi as in t he al t imeter wi l l no t result i n a permanent error signal
as this wo uld cause the miss i le to have a constan t ver t i cal accelerati on; this
mi ss i l e bias me rely causes the mi ss i l e t o fly at t he wrong height . If proport iona l
plus integral control is used with a very l ong i ntegrating ti me constant t he
height error signal will be re duced to zero and the stability of the loop wil l
hardl y be affected. In the presence of a rea l sea t he er ror signal wi ll be noi sy
but wi ll have a zero mean. If t he error is squared all' !! t hen square rooted; t he
. ,
res ulting si gnal, i f i nt egrat ed over a period of 10 seconds or more , should be an
accurate measure of the sea st at e . Th e height t o fl y, after t his samp l in g per io d,
can be compute d f rom a si mpl e law thus
h
d
= mx + c
wh ere c all ows for altimeter bia s , wing s i ze etc, x is t he meas ured sea state and
m is a constant . Mo reover , if t he integ rati ng ti me is say 10 seconds , t hen t his
comput ed bes t heigh t wi ll be continuous ly updated as the engagemen t proceeds ,
6.15 VERTICAL LAUNCH AUTOPILOTS
Some of t he desi rable character istics of l aun ching a mi ss i l e ver tical ly and t hen
tur ni ng it over to the required dire ction have been men t ioned i n sect ion 3. 6 when
cons i deri ng t hrust vector cont rol . There are many mo re consi derat i ons , for and
agai nst . If i t is a ship - borne missi le and it i s stored verti cal ly i n i ts own
cannister ready to fi re, it i s no t res t ri ct ed to a li mited f i r i ng arc due to
obstructi ons caused by t he ship' s s t r uct ure. On the othe r hand it can be argued
that if one can affor d two conventi onal deck mounted launcher s t he questi on of
overall system bl ind arcs shoul d not ar i se . It can also be argued t hat a ver t ica l ly
launched missile poses a sli ghtly i ncr ease d threat to shi p safety in t he case of
a par t i al mi sfi re . Moreover there i s a proble mof get t i ng ri d of the exhaust
gases from t he miss i l e. - Perhaps the greates t advant age of ver t i cal launch is t he
increased rate of fire th at i s possibl e s ince al l the miss i le s can be f i red almos t
si mUltaneousl y at multipl e targets arriving at closely spaced intervals . A si ngle
ejection poin t and a carousel type of mi ssi le feed i s a pos sib i l i t y. However, if
semi -active t ermi nal homing is used, one i s st ill l i mited by t he number of t arget
illcminat ors . Anot her advantage of vert ical l aunch wheth er from a shi p or no t
is t hat system rea ct ion ti me wi ll be reduced by about two seconds . Typic all y i t
takes about three seconds to tra in and elevate a la uncher (ass umi ng about 90
0
slew)
but up t o about one second i s "wasted" i n launching vertically i nst ead of i n the
I
I
I
I
\
I'
I"
i
I
correct c i re c t t o n. T ne r e is an udditional argument for ve rtical launch for ground
launched missile s . On a great many sites i t will be found t hat there are a
s urprisi ng number uf bl j nd arcs at low angles of el evation due t o terrain screening .
Sites at the top: of i solated hill s are not always avail ab l e: A miss il e that is
l aunched ver t i call y and t ur ned over at a hei gh t of ab out 50m wi ll avoi d most of
these diff icu lt ies . However , this will requi re a soecially elevated t arget
tracker /i l l umi nat or and th i s poses a l ot of enginee ring problems . And f inall y,
al though one i s savi ng the cost and weight of a trainabl e l auncher, a slightly
heavie r and costlier missi l e will be i nevi tabl e (15) .
We nOw consider possible autop ilot arrangement s . Fi rst ly, a s i mpl e boost - coast
t ype of propul s ion system, despite its si mplicity , will certainly not be ideal.
If t he missi le body i s turned by TVe at a f airly high mi ss i l e f or. ard vel oci t y the
i nduced drag wil l be cons i derabl e and a lot of propel l ant will be wasted . It is
1ogi ca1. t o tur n the body atal ow ve 1ocity and then i ncrease t he mo t or t hr ust t o
ful l boost ; th is precludes the possibility of a s imple propulsi on mot or. Secondly
we have to decide whether to use aerodynami c control or not for the t urn- over
phase . Only detailed si mulat ion will give the rea l i n any given case but
aerodynamic control vii 11 result if I t he mi ss il e taki ng much longer to turn ; it
',>'111 rise to a much greater hei ght and t he turn will be le ss efficient fr omt he
induced drag aspect . TVe will result in a much t ighte r , quicker and efficie nt
turn . However , assuming that t he mi s sil e is a homer and has t o be roll pos ition
controll ed at the end of t he turn to faci litate target acquisition by t he homing
heed, what sor t of Tve does one use? The trlin swivel nozzl e sys temdi scussed in
sect ion 3. 7 i s ideal for th is application and coul d me et almost any conceivable
specification . It is of course rel atively expensive and heavy and wil l res ul t in
a longer mi ssile . A sing le swi vel noz zle is much l ess costl y but rol l control
,
"auld have to be provided either by t angential thrusters or by aerodynamic me ans .
If roll control i s' done aerodynami cally, the complete oper ation "ill certa inly
take longer , probably an addit i onal 0. 5 second. The tightest po ssible turn wi l l
be made if the servos are hard over for approxima t ely half of the t ur n and f ul ly
, .
reversed during the since the aerodynami c damping is so small . This is
very eas i ly prcqr-arme d. However, this may l ead to unaccepta bl y l arge missil e
incidences and excessive induced rolli ng moment s > and the demand to t he ser vos may
have t o be modifi ed as the resul t of s imul ati on (16) .
And f i nal l y, how do we cont rol after boos t ? If t here i s a coas t phase then sub-
sequent control will have to be by aer-c dynami c mea ns . This rne ans ei ther separate
actuators for the control fins or controlling them' in par allel with th e hydrauli c
TVe ser vos . Both methods must be consi dered as t he choice is not obvious . If
however , there is a mo t or - s ust ai n control by TVe all the way may be po ssibl e
144
Weapon Control Systems
C I
I
C
r I
I
I
I
- I
I
I
C
l
- I
I
- I
J
C
,_ 1
. \--
-
c

_I

= =:= .........
,
. --- ..
Autopilot Design
::t - - ' __of I . '
145
\
for near -stationary t argets , Out would cer tainly be inadequa te f or fa s t -mov ing
targets ; t he reader rs refer red to secti on 4,8 ,
What sort of instrument ati on is necessary for a ver t i cal launch aut opil ot? If
t he mi ssil e is a homer t he requirement "i ll be f or t he mi ss il e to be poi nti ng in a
given di recti on in space af t er turnov er so t hat t he homing head can acqui re t he
t ar get . The accuracy r equirement is 1i ke l y to be in t he range 2 or 3
0
point ing
error . Variat ions in achi eved hei ght or cross -range of a fe" te ns of met res
"oul d har dl y be significant i f the ta r get i s 2 or 3 km away. If ordi nary gimbal l ed
free gyros are use d t o measure mis sile att itude t hen t here wil l be a gyro toppl ing
prObl em. Ra th er elabor ate sys tems involving extra gimbal s have been designed and
used qui t e successfully to overcome t hi s problem but , with most sys t ems involv ing
mechanical complic ation, t hey ar e expensi ve . Bri t i sh has designed a
"free rotor gyroscope" which is es sentially a fre e-spinni ng bal l suppor t ed by an
air bearing . Ther e are no gimoals and the i ns t rument has unl i rn i-ted angul ar fre edom.
II pat t ern of light and dark areas is ins cr i bed on the rotor and three 1ight sour ces

and phot oel ect r i c pi ck-off devi ces are mounted on t he gyro case . As wi t h any ot her
fr ee gyro, angul ar i nforma t ion about' the gyro spin axi s is not available ; so for
control about three axes , t'dO gyros woul d be required . We therefore demand a
change of atti t ude spcce and measure the achi eved at ti tude i n s?ace . The
act uat i ng signal is t he di f ferenc e between t hese two cuant i t ie s . Bearing in mind
tha t t he miss i l e wi l l be sta cked ver tically with the mi ss i l e z axi s pointi ng
hori zont ally in a giv en direct ion , i t i s easy to see that all ver tical launches
cons i st of a t urnove r in one plane only . I f the direction happens to be in t hi s
original z di rection t hen demands will go to the elevato rs only . If t he
requi red direct i on i s in the or iginal mi ss il e y direct ion t he dema nd mus t go t o
t he rudders only . Any other f i nal direction will r equi re th e demand to be shareo
by el evators and rudders . In other words the guidance comput er has t o resolve the
demand . As wi th any other "ngula r position autopilot ( see sect i on 6.8) some
angular rete fee dback also Hill be necessa ry to ensure cl osed l oop st abi lity. If
t he pi ck-of f inf or mati on from a f ree rot or gyro is too noisy t o permi t t he use of
a phase advance net"ork then a ra t e gyro/ channel will be necessa ry als o.
An alternative scheme which will certainly require only one in strument per closed
loop. i s to use s t rap -oovn instruments i .e . rate gyros . Angul ar position infonnation
can be obta ined by i nt egrat i ng the respective outputs . Si nce t he i ntegr ati ng
ti mes are very shor t , er r or s in comput ed attitude shoul d not be too grea t. Howeve r ,
some cauti on is required in selecting the rate gyro. If a ve ry quick turn i s
required the maximum angular rates can be extremely high, of the order of 400
0
/s or
more . If the instrument saturates the angular position could be grossly
in error . If t he r ate gyro dynami c range extends to 500
0
/5 t hen a bias of 1% of
:1
I
i
I
\
I
I
!
!
I
----.
-
GUl 'Ji:: C ", 2 6 pUI, Cunt r ol Sj S t erns
f ul l s ca l e ccul c iliecn an error of 5 over a peri od of 1 s econ d: Hov... eve r , tne r e i s
a f unda me ntal diffe re nce when usi n.; st r ap -cown t nstrume nt s . Ra t e gyros measure
. .
rates i n free ly r otati ng mis s i l e a xe s ; t hey measure r ates p, q and r .
We are demanding pos i t i ons (and hen ce r at e s ) wi th r espect to a known axi s sys t em
in s pace . If two sets of r i ght - ha nde d orthogona1 axes r el a t e d to each other
by t hree r ota t ions , e and taken in then t he equations rel at i ng
boay fixed fates t o "Eul e r i an" r ates ( in Our case with res pe ct to the earth ) a r e
given by :
'i P
q sin
c tan e -r- r cos
9
ta n 5
5
0
cos

r sin
9
y si r. c s ec
(0 r cos Se c 5
Tne i nverse ax i s t ransfo rmati on is gi yen by
p
0
c - s i n 5
q
0
e cos + sin
4
cos o
r
0
- e s i n + cos cos e
;... pc s s i ol e arr-angeiint with rate gyr os i s shown i n Fig 6 .15 - 1'. I n order t o know
t he Euleri an f a t es r e sul ting f r om p , q anc r i n the mi s sil e one ne e ds to know the
i nitial values of , e a nd ( the mi s s i l e may be on a movi ng pl atform) Whi ch are
obtained usi ng the fi r s t se t of If t hese r at e s aie integrated
then t he updated va l ue s of '} , 0 ano we re e va i l eb l e . Conve rs e ly when demanding
anqu I ar rates f rcn t he mis sil e the i nve r s e ope rc t i cn mu s t be ca r r i e d out . The s e
axis transfor ma ti on equa t ions are usually e xpre s s e d in mat r i x form f or ease of
s ol uti on by digital means . The us e of ra te gyros means t ha t uoth positi on and rate
f eedba ck are av a il abl e . Addi tional compens a t i on networks mdY or may not be ne cessary .
To t hese comput at i ons en board the missil e , a ac t ing digi tal computer
is ess ent ial . One s uch uses a conE f ci a i proce s s with a capaci ty
of 2.25k of rr:emory , 1. 25k be i ng act uall y required . It exec utes a ll the control
s c cet i ons i nc l udi ng self- t e s t rout ir. es i n i. 25ms whe reas a t i me interval of 2.85ms
is a vailable. at t he chosen sample rate of 350 Hz . 32 bit fi xed point mul t i pl i cat ion
.:.,.
i s The fast comp ut i ng s pee d is obtai ne d by t ne of a special mu l t i -
plica t i on unit) a memor y- type t r i qonomet ri c fun ct ion uni t and an i mpr ove d memor y (13) .
I f ve r t i cal l aun ch is to be empl oye d wi th a l ine of sight sys tems t he autopilot
desi gn is more di fficul t . tiot on ly doe s the mi s s il e have t o be poi nting approxi mately
i n t he righ t direct i on but also it mus t fini sh ins ide t he Dear.wid th of t he ' mi s s il e
t racker . Acce l e rome ter s woul d have t o be us ed s o th at the pos iti on in s pace coul d
be computed. As fa r as is known such an aJtcpilor not designed.
/
\./;. 16 T HE EF.FECT or :FI:-i SERVO SATUR..4.TlON
Si nce t he i nput t o an a utopilot is invariably no isy i t f ol l ows t ha t the fin (or
... t
A
c
-.
"
.. . .. . . . . . .. . , . . . , .. , . , . . .. .
. , .. . ,., . . . , . , . ,. , . ... , ., . ... ..
., ., ., ., .,
., .,
,
'-' ,-, ,..-.
, __1 ,..... ...... _ 1 _ ' .. le-' J-1 tt I
. . r
I
'\
,
ANGULAR DEMAND
l
IN SPACE AXES _ KIjJ
SERVO 1
r
.
-

TRANS -
AN GULAR DEMAND
$d
!0--[J FOR,IATION
SERVO 3
l
I
IN SPACE AX ES
I\:_ MATRI X
.
-
,@_QJ <',
I
1-
l
SERVO 2
ANGULAR DEMAND
Od
.
IN SPACE AX ES
-
I
- I
SERVO 4
LEAD
LEAD LEAD
NET- NET- NET-
WOHK
WORK I'>ORK
RATE
I!..L
- / ' I,G;YRO
I-
L-
0
r
TRANS -

I NTE-
--!.-
..:1 ,:
MI SSIL E
FORMAT ION
P
RATE
GRATION
ljJ MATR I X
I-
q
GYRO
T
M
TI

DYN AM I CS

RATE

IN I TI AL
I--
("f1tJn IT ln N c,
GYRO
FIG 6.15-1 A vertical launch aut opilot using rat e
...... _. __.__-4_-- ..
.. . __ __ . _ _ '_ 4 _ _ ..
"
c;
<+

0
-o
I

,
0
I
<+
, I
0
\I
ro

! i
co
=>
,
,i
I
, I
, I
;.\
, I

s
"
" I
I
,L

;::;:11
--- - -- -- -- - - -- - - --
- --- - - - ------- -- -- - - _.- - - -
-----.
143 Guided Control Systems
thrus t may easily become satura ted . One ODV10WS res ul t of t hi s i s
that t he ser'l05 .1'/;11 not. be able t o i rllplcr:-:ent t r ue commands as eccurate l y as th ey
should . Howe ve r , i f s at ur e t i on d02S not' last lon g t he syste m may .....'e 11 be i n a
posi tion to recover But can have other l ess obvi ous ef fect s.
Consider a posi tion servo ...lith a sinusoidal inpu t a t a give n ampl i tude and frequency .
If the amplitude is smal l the se rvo will this i nput wit h a given amplitude
ra tio and phas e l aq . 'Lf now th e amplitude or freque ncy is say doubl e d t hen t he
maxi mum angular velo city required at the output i s doubl ed. NOvl the maxi mum
veloci ty of 3 0y servo is limited: it is l i mi te d by t he suppl y vol t age in t he case
of an armature electric Servo and i t i s li mited by t he ma xi mum val ve
opening in a hydr aul i c or pneumatic ser vo. Limi ting on veloci ty must result i n a
aynamic pe r f ormance which is i nf e r i or t o t ha t whi ch i s defi ne d by t he nomina l
t r ans f er function . A t ransfe r function only defines a linear system and t hi s '
amongst oth e r t hi ngs i mplies t hat s aturation does not occur . Signi fican t f ate
l i rn i t i ng must result in an infer iof response in the t i m2 domain as it will ta ke
l onge r to i mp l eraen; any dema nd. I n the freq .J en cy .comai n t hi s re sul t s i n a si ignti y
smaller ampli tude rat io and a cO!ls iderably i ncr e as e d pha s e lag . Now the great
number of autco i l ots rely on c. ;f:.ry fast ser ve respons e t o maintain loop stabil ity .
An increase i :-I phase lag fr om t he servo in t he frequen ci es of i nte rest wil l have a
oe s t ebi l i s inc effect on the a ut opil ot. HRat e i imi t i nq" as i t i s us ual Iy c a ll e d
would have to be really severe t o uns t ab i l i s e t he autop ilot completely . Neverthel ess
a significant reduction in autopiiot stab iiity i mplies a reduct i on i n t he effective
dampin g and : his t hat t he r . m.s . of t he au topilo t due t o noise is
l ncreas ed. This decreases t he accuracy of the system and i n additi on "decreases t he
of th e sys tern due to t he inc r ease c i nduce d drag . Sin ce noise wi 11
ne ve r consist of one arnp l i t ude and one f requency one can as sume t hat wha t is
i mportant is tn : f i n ra: e to noi se . If th i s f . m. S. r at e approaches or
ex ce eds tne maximum veloci ty attainable by t he servo then the system effecti veness
,
\
,
Thi s is th e basic re as on why missi le
t o l imi t t he angular travel . ;\ng1e li miti ng wi l l clea r ly have t he effe ct of
reducing t he r i ms . ga in of t r.e servo . If t he servo is no t limi t ing on rate it
s ervo pe rfor mance
mechan i cal stops
is approachi ng one of t he critical limits .
, -
servo s pe ci t i ca t i ons in ca ll for s uch a good dynami c performance . A
design 'dhich Cell s for a high aerodynamic gcin ( e _g. ze r o s tat i c ma rg in) and a
servo gain vii 11 hel p the s e r vo des igne r i n t hi s res pe ct ,
nO\'I cons i de r the l ikely effect anql:e li miting have on t he
si nce all fin servos or t hrust vector servos are cons t r ucted with
l ow

(
(
(
me ans t he t t he t i me (o r f rec uen cy) re s pcn se mus t be i mproved as t he s e r vo
ha ve t o .... ork so hard hac t here been no l um t.s . Thi s wil l us ua l ly s how as
reduct ion i n phas e l ag a t any given frequency .
wi l l not
a s ma il
- (
(
---

" . ..: .. ...
Fi nally, it should be poi nted out that the prec ise si mulation of limiting is
diffic ult (e .g . does the f in velocity fall to zero when a mechanica l s t op is
reached , or does the load bounce?) . An investigation of the effect of the servo
dynamics on t he autopilot performance is best done wi th the actual se r vo in situ
with si mulated aerodynamics and instrume nt feedback . Such s imulations that have
been carried out by the aut hor suggest t hat in practice rate limiting is more
li kely to have a si gni f i cant effect on t he autopilot per formance and si nce the
ef f ect is invariably bad one concludes th at a rea listic specification for the fin
servos is essential . It i s ve ry easy to over - speci fy so that one is on the safe
side but t his often res ults i n a l ot of extra i nstead of being
Autopilot Des i gn 149
I
,I
II
, I
i
i
I
i
;
\
,
I
\
I
\
. \
\
,
.I
: \
. .
able t o use a conventional or existi ng design .
6.17 DIGITAL AUTOP1LOTS
t he f act that mos t mi s s i l e se rvos require an anal ogue input and the f eed-
back transducer is anal ogue, and t hat mo st aut opil ot instrume nts give
output s , there are those who clai mmany advantages from digi t al control . Firs t ly ,
it can be cheaper es peci all y no" t hat di gital ci rcuitry and digital computers are
so well devel oped; many elect ronic f uncti ons can be ti me shared. An undo ubted
advantage is t he flexi bi l ity and adapt abi l ity because t he computer can be programme d
t o make l ogi cal decisi ons and because these program,es can be so easily changed i f
desi r ed. Also self-test routines can be bui l t in wi t hout t oo extra cost .
There is reall y nO l i mi t t o t he r ange as more bits can be added to the word
l ength . Digital circui t ry does not s uffe r f rom dri f t . And fi nally there seems to
be general argreeme nt t hat dig i t al circuits are re liable t han anal ogue. Indeed,
the ver t i cal launch autopilot desc ribed in section 6.15 would just not be feasib l e
witbout an on- boar d digital computer.
Never t hel ess digital cont r ol has certai n disadvan tag es and bri ngs i t s own probl ems .
Analogue t o digital and digital t o anal ogue i nte rfaces ar e required and sampling
rates have to be high andvoro lengt hs have to be compat i bl e with these data rates;
this aspect is discussed in section 7.5. And lastly , soft"are has to be organis ed,
and debugged .
It is t he aut hor 's opi ni on tha t di gi t al cont rol i s more li kely t o De useo i n a
homi ng mi ss i l e than in a l ine of si ght In a homing systemit is possible
to comput e the best possible trajectory to i nt ercept the target and this will
certa inly need an on-board computer . This is not really feasible in a LOS system;
t his.aspen is disc ussed i n mor e detail at t he end of the "next chapt er . In all
systems di gi t al circuit ry is i deal f or data proces sing associ at ed with f uzi ng, but
wi t h a homi ng mi ss i l e t here are t he addi t i onal funct i ons assoc iated with guida nce
and s i gnal detection, opt ima l guida nce laws, and homi ng head stabilisation . A
I i
!
I
i
paper by Nesline and NaDncfeld (.14) discusses the mani pula t i on of a ut opilot ga ins
as a result of changing f l i ght ccndi tions and the means of compensating for aero-
dynami c cros s -coupl tnq . Al so , with digital cont rol it is possi ble to pr even t an
actuator from rate li miti ng t hus avo i di nc th e pos s ibili t y of unstab il ising the
aut opi l ot . The desi gn of a digital autopilot des ig ne d fo r t he rapid l aunching of
an a i r borne mi s s i le i n any s pe ci f i ed di rection wi thout ch anging aircraft or
launch er ori ent ati on is gi ve n by Kl estadt (1 7) .
ioO GLJ1 GeO Contro l Sys t en.s
I
I
i
I
REFERENCES
1. GRftHAH D. and LATHROP R.C. 1953 Trans . Am . I ns t . Elect . Engrs, 72, 273.
2. TOWILL D.R. Tr ans fer functi on techn iques fo r control eng i neer s . l1 iffe Books
Ltd 1970 .
3. DARWELL H.t\. and TRUBRIDGE G. F. P. Desi qn of r oc ket nozzles to reduce gas
mi s a lignment . J our nal of Spacecraft and Rocket s . January 1968 .
4 . I nt e rna t i ona l De fence Revi ew, Apr il 1971 , pp 168- 9 .
5. FRft.RY D. J . The prediction of autopilot behavi our in the pr esence of roll
motion . Bri t ish Ai rcraft Corporat ion Report no . ST 5686. May 1971.
6 . DARBYSH IRE J. Pr oc . Royal Soc . A.215 Vol 215 1952 No . 1112 pp 299-328 "The
genera tion of wa ves by wind
'l

7. HOGBEN N. and LAMB F.E . Ocean Wove Statisti cs . H.M. Stati onery Off ice 196 7.
B. NEV ILLE E. J . St.anda rd wave spect ra . Nat iona l Phys i cal Laboratory Ships
TM 301 March 1971 .
9 . MURPHY C.H . Free flight motion aT symmet ri c mi ssil es . Aberdeen Proving
c
c
' r
, -
I -
[ ",
.
I. -
sys tem
Memo
into an adap t i ve autopi lot control
Royal Ai r cr aft Establishment Tech
Ground report no . 1216 J uly 1963 .
10 . J ane ' s Fi ght i n9 Ships 1979-80 . Jane' s Yearbooks .
,.
11 . LEWIS H. Proposa ls f or an adaptive control sys t em fo r t ail co nt r oll e d
c r uc i f or m t ype gu'idee missiles . Royal Ai rc r aft Est ablis hment Te ch Memo WE 1316
Octobe r 1969.
12. PORTER N.D. Fur t he r investigations
for a t ail cont r olled mis si le .
ad 8 Sept ember 1977 .
13. VFW-FOKKER. Devel opme nt i n Germany of an e xperi me ntal vehicle for vertica l
launch . 19 75 .
14 . NESLINE F. W. and NABB EFEL D. Design of digi ta l aut opil ot s for homing miss iles .
AGARD Conf erence proce edi ngs no 270. "hi s s t le sys tem flight mechan i cs " May 1979 .
15 . CARTER J. W. System de s ign requiremer.ts f or separation of t ac tical a i r- launch ed
mi s s iles . AGARD Confe renc e proceedings no 270 .
16 . SCHt-llTZ K. and GAIDOSCH H. Vertical launch and its impl i cat i ons for miss ile
s t abi li t y and con trol . AGARD Conference proceedings r.o 270 . .
\
i : .
,
-
I:..
"':"
.. ". -
, .
"
., ' #
151
; .
oed
, -
17.
AGARD
Autopi lot Des i gn
KLESTADT B. Rapid all aspect postlaunch cont rol of an air launched mi ssi l e.
Conference proceedings no 270.
G, WCS. _L
CHAPTER 7
"
Hence we can
a missile
'IS :
LINE OF SIGHT GUIDANCE LOOPS
'i .1 THE EFFECT OF TARGET AND MISSILE MOTION ON
MISSILE "G" REQUIREMENTS
There are many types of LOS systems but before examining some of the differences
between them we shall consider some of the common aspects. LOS systems can be
called "3 point systems since there is one point which defines the
tracker, another the target and a third which defines the position of the missile.
The object of the guidance system is to constrain the missile to lie as nearly as
possible On the l ine joining the tracker and the target called the line of sight
(LOS) . The concept is simple and can be implemented in many ways ; perhaps it is
this apparent simplicity ' which explains why the majority of guided weapon systems
as yet designed are LOS systems . Nevertheless they all exhibit some fundamental
characteristics which limit t heir performance and coverage .
Consider target flying straight and at constant speed, and a missile f lying at a
different but constant speed, having been launched when the target occupies a
position To' see Fig 7.1-1 . The plane containing the target velocity vector and
the tracker is called the flyplane . After intervals of time of I, 2, 3 etc second;
the LOS is shown as OTl' OT
2
... "OT
3
etc . Since the missile ideall y always lies on the se
o {L,I,UCHER}
'.
'J '0
FIG 7.1-1 A t ypicaL missiZe for a moving target
152
....
...
...
-
-
-
r:
-
'-
-
t he instan t sneous
. .: 1
''''. :
cOfi siderat1 i angle
t21'1;] is. i r:-:.:rsc s..:: d by ': : ! C0S 0;; , .'.;,c-.:i :: i t'
rc'-.. --"',., ... "or .. -'; .. . ,". ,-: ', ." ?ct" " .".',.:", ",., vcio .. ... I,.:f-' \.,,; ;_! , ;" '_.: . ::" 0. ... ; ....." 'J;;; _ _ '-' ... __ _..... _
D. ccciel' 6. t hg in $.:r.::.e ; vii-:'i
the tange rt to t he

MOL p
aAq .-e l ,gh t
acce ierati on ( ':1 a"i: 3. x
ll
) .
of t he vs Ioc i t y . 'is tr..:! t th e mi s s i le ve l oci ty vector
automati cally fG1i0'..i . Body-tobeam angl ;; IS al so do l: i mpor t ant par ame t er s i nce t.ie
mi ssil e has t o de'/e l op ::;. of cr::..:e1e f'dT- i on per ;J Endi ct.; : a, t-: the beam d'..'f::
t o bezr: as t he bod.Y' :o- be'='fT: o.iig :e .:) pl""c e: ches 90 sa doc s the
t he m
issi1e
1,-l ith th2 aid of r ::: ".:, r ot ef 12ccor::; ::he sa me app1-:2s si nce thei r
'<=2
1 1
<- " 0 1::.1: : .... ,' " 1, ',' r,' ,'"" '"' . f t e .... ,. a s
1::' ; CI.. : .... 1-':.:>:", I 'll ..> i l ',', l'..: l i J ...... l t.: a :.. . : ! : '::' _ I ... ;) v';::" ..... "' .... _
re asonable for bee ccnc , 45 fo r n:t;CJI'c f12' c:or s . ane 50 f'c r beai!:-r- i d ing lind
the mi s sil e be to :eft of th e pat h.
1:] SOiil C: LOS sys t csis ';:i-; E ca r- r i es (, tv tro.r1S0it pos i t i on infurma t ion
to t:he :rackt r . be acon ',', 111 ..;2 (: beam-,,,idt h and if the body-
:o-bea m an g12 exceeds t his ii s er tc us CT 5; 9:1&1 \'iil1 re sult ., If one tracks
and t his h i l l exceed t he tre.jectory-tc- D2aiil angie by t he anql s of i r.c i dence . The
5 in ce a LOS is of t en r e f e r re d :0 as a b.E 2. ;1i. I t t .... s cal l ang le " th e
tc-beam ang1e
ll
i s re e l l y signi fica nt is th e t.QcJy - [: o- beain e:1gle
can check thi s Ly not ing i . : -1 tha t the 1atera1 acce l eration must
_ _,_ .. ,_._ _
c
Substituting these expressions for eand e in equat ion (7.1- 1) and rea r rangi ng for
a constant speed missile yields
2U
mUt
sin
t
si n
(Ot
- )
2U
m
U
t m
(7.1- 5)
f = -----a-
cos
om
= -----a- x c
..
(7. 1- 4)
(7. 1-3 )
( 7. 1-2)
T
a const ant so another
sin
2
2U
t
_ 3
= - -y si n 0t cos 0t
d
t .e. sin om :::
Guided Weapon Cont rol Systems
__ _ _
FIG 7. 1- 2 FlypLane geomeuy
fl ying target the crossing distance d is
e is gi ven by
o REFERENCE DIRECTION
where <> is a non-dimensional factor and is a function of 0t and om' But i f 0t is
given then om can be calculated using equation (7. 1-2) . Fig 7. 1-3 shows the
relationship between omand 0t for discreet values of RmUt / RtUmand over l ai d are
lines of constant acceleration factor <> .
If Om is known then an additional component as already noted in equation (7.1-1) is
e = U
t
sin
2
0t/ d
and e is obtained by recalling that e = and
For a straight
expression for
"
"
Now e and e clearly depend on the target velocity and position. If ref erence i s
made to Fig 7.1- 2 we can write
e = Urn si n = U
t
si n 0t/ Rt
R
m
U
t
t Telr
t m
a component of acceleration perpendicular to the beam of Urn sin om' Hence we can
write down the latax required perpendicular to the velocity vector for a missile
at a range R
m
fromthe tracker due to a target at R
t
from the tracker thus :
f =2U
m
e+ om- Urn si n 0m/ cos om
= 2U
m
e + I cos om - Urn tan om (7. 1- 1)
154
,

I
. '
j I
I
!
1 ,
.! ' I
l-
I
!
II ,
Jt l
J jl .
1( '
I,
a:az .
.....- fiI
.. _""" t , itS 1 _ -- :-.
Line of Sight Guidance Loops
$ ' 5
ca t
155
I
i
I
I
1.0
Acceleration factor Ct
60
contours drawn in
full lines .
0.9
0.75 R
m
UI
50
Drawn in broken lines
--
,2
RI U
m
40
cr.'
m
0.50
30
---

-
20
0.25
--
10
0
80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180
cr.'
I
FIG 7. 1- 3 Trajectory- to-b eam and
f act ors as a f unction of 0t
involved. If the missile is coasting and therefore decelerating, the longitudi nal
acceleration is say 60 m/s
2
and Omis 500 then the additional latax the mi ss i l e has
to pull is given by 60 tan 500 = 71 .5 m/s
2
. This is a disadvantage of a boost -coast
velocity profile ; missile g requirements are increased in the coasti ng phase.
The reason why the geometry in Fig 7. 1-3 has been defi ned by 0t and not e is t hat
the reference direction can be drawn in any direction and equation 7.1- 3 still
holds. It is natural to draw this direction parallel to the ground in which case
eO = 180
0
_ 0t
O
onZy if the target is flyi ng at constant height; but t his is not
the general case. Equation 7.1-3 holds good under any conditi ons . What gener al
conclusions can we draw from this figure? Firstly it is obvi ous that lat ax
requirements are greatest in the region of 0t equal to 130
0
to 100
0
and t his is f or
val ues of 8 between 500 and 80
0
. A speed superiority i s an advant age as t his
helps to keep trajectory-to-beam angles to reasonable val ues . At cross ing point
the angular acce leration is zero and beyond cross ing point (Ot
O
< 90
0
) the
angular acceleration is negati ve. Equation 7. 1- 1 the refore i ndicates that l at eral
acceleration requirements tend to be less for receding targets . Does equation
7.1-5 imply that if t he cross ing distance d i s very smal l the l atax requi remen ts
are always very la rge? Consider t he 1imit i ng case of d = 0. , i. e. a t arget f lyi ng
straight at the t rac ker. In such a case the sightl ine has zero rat e and zer o
156
Guiaec Con tro l Systems
angular acceleration and om=0, and therefore t he mi ssi le ideally flies st raight
with zero latax. Equat i on 7.1 - 5 re duces to
2U
m
U
t
. 2 . 2U U d
f ' s m t . = 0
= - d- rn Vt = --cr- sm Vt
If nCM we think of a target at a given sl ant range t hen a re duct ion i n crossi ng
distance wi ll resu lt i n a reduction in e i. e. v
t
tends towards 180. Therefore
short cross ing di st ances f or a given rw'ge of targe t r esul t i n small l at ax
requi rements as we are implying that the target is more or l ess heading s t r ai ght
t o th e tracker. The really diff i cult task therefore is area defen ce and not point
defence . Even so , t he latax requirements will be moderate or low for an area
defence system i f the i mpact range exceeds about 3 kmsay since e is i nver sely
propor t ional to R
t
and e is i nversely proport ional to R/ all other th ings being
equal. Table 7.1-1 shows the la t eral accelera t ion re qui red at interception for
U
t
=270 m/ s and Urn (assumed constant ) =540 m/ s for different cross i ng distances
and i nte r cept i on ranges ''ti '
TA8LE 7.1-1 LATE RAL ACCELERATION REQU WED AT INTE RCEPTION

!
I

\
100m 200m 500m
1
2 km
I
0.5 km 173 342 583
\
Ge ometry not
possible
2 km 10.9 21. 8 54.4 146
3 km 4.8 9.6 24.2 90. 4
Short range mi ss iles can be designed to pull more t han 20g if the speed is i n
exces s of about t1 = 1.5 and even 30g for M = 2 say, but only moderate l at ax is
feasible i f the speed f all s to 11 = 1 or les s. The latax a rm ss i l e can pull in
practi ce is limited not only by t he dynamic press ure and the wi ng etc size Dut by
t he maximum i nci dence it is . f ees i bl e to alIow; and this l eads us t o a discussion on
..
the differen ce between t he results shown i n Fig 7. 1-3 and Table 7.1-1 and those
which woul d obtain if the mi ss i l e. inc idence i s taken into accoun t, as indeed it
mus t be i n pra ct i ce. Consider t he case when the trajectory-to-beamangle is 1 a
and the in cidence i s say 5. Si nce the cosines of 10 and 15 are sti ll nearly
unity t he e and et erms are bot h increased by a negligible factor of cos l Oa /cos
15 and the 0 term is increased by a facto r of ta n 15/ t an 100. In other words
when the angles ar e smal l t he effect of i nci dence. i s pract i cal l y negli gible . This
is not s o when trajectory-to- beam angl es are 40 , es pecially when one not es t nat
incidence i s like ly to be gr eatest when th ese angles are large . Eve n i gnorin g th e
beecon / r et r-c r-efl ector Zr ece i ver probl em t hen ) one s ees that lateral ac celeration
requirerrents can escalate to ri diculo us val ues i n pra cti ce if body-to-beam angl es
are l arge es pecially if t he mi ss i l e is coasti ng.

.-:-..; --' - - ,- ' -

--- ._ - -,-
What then is tne ideal profile for a mis sile? Clearly for a manual sys t em
when the human ope re t or .t r acks both -:he target and the mi s s il e , a constant ve locity
mi s s i l e ma kes i t possible to des i gn Co_ mi s s il e wi th a near - cons t s t ent r-esponse
wi thcut t he use of instrument feedback. Vii th a short r ange air-to-a ir system when
flight times coul d be a few secon ds only and targets may be approaching, cross in g
or recedi ng, a mot or whi ch gi ves a "oder at e boost for about 109 for 4-5 seconds
has the advarltage that U
m
i s positive during the crit i cal per iod when l at ax
can be exceptionally hi gh , see equation 7. I -I. Amissile which is
Iaun chad froman aircraft starts <l ith a fai r speed i ncrement but if the initial
man oeuvrabi lity i s not sufficient a system \/hich uses thrust vector control and is
boos t i ng offe rs excepti onal mance uvr abi l i ty. There are strong arg uments for a
boost-coast propuls ion motor giving say 40g fo;' 2 seconds: f or a surface -to- ai r
missi le designed to hit approachi ng t arge ts . We have seen that the highest latax
demands tend to occ ur a t short r an ges i t due to late.acquisit"i on of tne t a.qe t
or due to the s heer s peed of the on coming t drget t he impact range ' i s short rie
require maximum manoeuvr ability of th e missile as soon as possible) and t ni s,
requi res d hi gh mi s si l e sp eed . I f the targe t s peed i s 1 0 \'J a t' acquis i ti on is ea r ly
i mpact viii1 oc cu r at a greater range and the re f o re lat ax req ui r ements w-il1 bc= l e s s .
a Iowar missile speed at greate r ran ge \dl li probably not res tri ct t he COv8r'c. 9c ,
Also, a boos t .-cces t rcq ui re rrent r e sults i n a simple moto r' whose nozzle e xi t a r ea
can be designed f or maximum t hrust. A meter whi ch has to t hrus t at t wo le ve I s
mOIAe complex and will be less effici e nt as t he nozzl e design must De a compromi se .
Also a boost -coast velocity prof i l e enables the missile , in t he f irst 2 or 3
seconds , to get to a greater range t han one' wi t h a lower boost foll owe d by a SuStaln
phase and this can be vitally i mportant in si mple syst ems where t he survei llance
i s such that it i s improbable t hat ta r gets will be f irst s i ght ed at ranges in excess
of 4-5 km. This t ends to r e duce l at ax r eq ui rene nt s . Fina lly if at any ti me the
operator can be invol ved in trackin g, t he absence of s mo ke i n the coast pha se may
fac ilitate h'is tracki ng tas k.
Line of Gui rJaiice t.cops 157
. ,
. "
A us e f ul i ndi cati on of t he kinenati c con ditions gove rn ing covecc92 Tor 0. cccs t -cc es t
mis s t l e i s given by Gri dley (1) . It i s aS SL; im G t hat t he ur i s s i l e i s bocs t e d
ins tant aneous l y to a speed B t i mes t hat of the velocity of the ta rget vthose SP:2t.::o
is as s ure d to be constant . I t i s al so assume d tha t t he decel e r a t ion of the mi s sil e
is pro porti onal to ve l oci ty , .:; f'a i r appraxi me t i on f or s ucerson i c cond i tions i . e .
-,
U
m
L1
m
/ t
,,,
joinere 1" t yp icall y has a val ue of 8-10 f or many s upe r s oni c nri s s i l es ..I f Ol l e c ::;S-.ji.lf=S
that the nanoe uvr-in q fcr- ce is de ve l ope d to t he velocity vectcr ,
solutions for t he l e tax r equ i r e d and th e t ra ject ory- ta- beam angles at i.ni.e rcep t-i ::
can be obt ai ned fo r a pert i cvle r va lue of 8. The followi nq non -di :nens 1C:!"l51
-
158 Guided Weapon Co nt r ol Systems
parame ters are defined
r R/ U_T wnere R is the range at intercept ion
c
and A f,/U
t
The graphs shown in Figs 7. 1-4(a) , (b)' and ( c) approximat e though t hey may be on
acco unt of t he assumptions made , do i ndicate t he ve ry small cove r age provi ded by a
missile aga inst a fast target unl ess it is boosted to at leas t t wice t he target
speed. For example, if , = 10 and U
t
= 200 t hen t he maximum crossing distance i s
appr ox ima t ely give n by
r = 0. 5 for g
snd r 1.0 for B
1. 5, i , e. d = 1000m
2. 0, i . e . d 2000m
Again , it is emphas is ed tn et as om increas es , so t he gr jphs must become increasin gly
i nacc urate on account of the body inc idence becoming reckonable.
7.2 TYPES OF LOS SYSTEMS
There are many types of LOS systems but the great majori ty fall into one of tr .e
four main t y pes bro adly described below .
B e ~ ~ r iding systems
Be am r iding s ys t ems us e a target tracker whosc purpose i s to maintain th e ant.enne
boresight poi nti ng at t he centre of the r eflecting area of t he t ar ge t . We have
discussed s ome as pects of target tracke r s i n chapter 1, The missi 'Ie ca rri es a
complicated re ce i ver which can detect the mi ssile 's ang ul ar de vi at i on f r cm tne
ce nt re of the beam. The s t ee r i ng signa l s designed to br ing the missil e t o the
centre of the beam are therefore generated i n the missile i tself and a missile
t r acke r" i s not required. To keep the sensitivity (vo l t s ym off the beam) of tne
re ceiver constant its output is effectively multiplieG by a factor proportional
t o the r ange (us ual Iy as s unec ) from the launcher, as already discussed i n cnep te r
6. 1. Earl y mis s i les achi eved tnis by feeding one eric of c potentiome ter with toe
recei ve r output. A slider !s driven Dy an ele ctric motor tnrough a speed re cuce r
and the voltage at the s l i'de r i s the mo di fied e r r or signal . I f HIe s pee o of tn e
mi s s il e i s appr oxi mate l y cons t ant a linea r' pot entiome t er and const ant s pee d motor
suffices . If th e mi s s il e spee d is not const ant , espe ci a ll y wounc non- linear'
pot ent i ome t e r can be des i gne d, Today ve r y ac curate in t eg r ate d cir cuit mul tipli ers
are available one inp ut t o Vlhich can be a generated vol tage propo r t i ona l t o t he
as s ume d nominal ra nge, and the other input the signal 'from the receiver , Fig
7.2 - i shows i n bl oc k di agram form, the general s t ruct ure in one plane of a be am-
r i din g sy stem,
If t he sys tem uses one beam for t re ck inq ana ano tr.e r beam fer' guiding tne missile
t here will be t he problem of keeping these two beams truly parallel ana a
coll i mati on error e has been s hown as an i nput to trie guidance loop . If tne same
c
r-
.-
r-
-
-
-,
. -
159
, 5
1. 5 Cal B -
T,A.RG[T"
DIRECT/O,..


1 0
Li ne of Sight Guidance Loops
FIG 7.j- 1 I: ccc2eraxi cn and
cnql.ee for a booe i - ccaci: mieei.l:e [o different vaZues: of H
160 Gu io ed We a pon Co ntr ol Systems
..---- - - --
, r -------,
o I IN THE MISSIL E ' I
Sf AMPUAER e
a
... C: MISSILE COMPENSATION I - , (;)
. RECEIVER'r- COI>PENSATION f- MOTOR TRACKING - INCLUOING I- fl. K,NTE
S
c-
m
LOAD etc I RECEIVER RANGE TERN I I MA tc .
e6em I
(TARGET) TRACK ING LOOP _________ _ _ _______J
{ MI SSIL E J GUIDANCE LOOP
FIG 7.2-1 Beam-riding system-tracking and guidance Loops
Deam is used for tracking the target and guiding the missile the question of
col limation error does not -arise .
Honual: systems
The expression "a manual guided weapon system" i mplies that tne human operator has
the t as k of tracking both the target and the missile , and generating commands t o
bring the missile into the LOS . rl,ost, but not all manual systems that have been
designed have been anti -tank systems . For ranges in excess of about 8)Om some
ta r ge t magnification is required , so the operator has to keep t he t ar get within
the field of view of the s i ght and generate commancfs with t he aid of a spec ially
des igned thumb controller . It should be particularly noted that the operator i s
acting as a different ial tracker; provided he can keep both target and missile in
the f ie l d of view the absolute tracking accuracy is not relevant , With help from
train ing si mulators the human operator can develop into a highly efficient guided
mi s s i l e controller ; his task is al ways regarded as a littl e easier when some defined
background is present as t he results of his commands are easily discernible . This
is usually referred to as a "pursuit" tracking task . In a surface -to-air situation
with a -flear sky , he is only aware of the angular error and the result s of his
commands are not so easy to interpret especial1y if the target is manoeuvring ; s ccn
a task is usually'referred to as "compensatory" tracking . Despite the obvious
s implicity of employing an operator to perform the tracking task a manual system
i s rarely considered nCil'I a,s .a serious competitor to semi -automati c systems .
Unfortunately it does take' .'time to train an operator even with the aid of a good
s i mul at or and hence the weapon must be regarded as a specialist weapon . Also , bad
weather can greatly reduce his effecti veness and t here i s al ways a limitation on
the minimum effective range since it will probably t ake the operator at leas t 3
seconds after firing before he has the missile comple tely under control. An
or semi -automatic system s hould do better than this.
Semi-automatic systems
I n a semi - a ut oma t i c system the human operator only t r acks the t ar get; his task i s to
keep the optical cen tre line of his sight point ing at the required point of missile
i mpact. His sight will be fitted wi th cross -wires or an etched spot on a graticule
t o ass ist hi m in aiming, and his sight may wei! be servo dr iven in azi mutr, and
.....
I
.....
"?'"
16 1
c
c
elevat i on as a resul t: o f co mmands generat ed from a thtmb Or an u fin ge r hel d
joystick. Fig 7. 2- 2 indi c at es s ome of t he 'dell known f eat ur es of t he s urfaca - t o- ei r
c ,.(l 10/'"
C(lm..... l .. '
.-- or-
.'..
1 '
,
I
,
I
I
I
I
.1
I

c
FI G 7.2-2 P..:ll:IER -" a s eurir-auzomatri c CLOS "3ys t em
qui de c "r, E3pOfl sy s tem Rap i er (2). The mi s s i l e t r acker i s mounte d e l oncs i oe t he
ope r'ator-
I
$ t racki ng t.e l es cope and is co l l i ma t cd t o it . S'iqna l s pr oport i ona l to
t he an gul ar mi s a l ignment of the mis sil e from t he mi s s i l e tracker boresight are {
pro cessed by the gr ound compute r and t r ens rn: tted to t he mi s s i le by means o f a ra di o (
,
li nk ; 'de ha ve al r e a dy seen t hat "pro ce s s i nq" will i nc l ude mul t i pl t cat ion by a term
pro por t iona l t o the missi l e range. and thi s i s c asily achieved i f a digita1 co mput e r
i s availdb le . In other words, the or the guidan ce loop i s esse nt i all y no
different from a beam-riding guidance l oop,
However' , nos t semi -automat ic and au t cmat i c LOS sys tems exce pt ceam r iders use feed -
fOr'da rd ter ms in orde r t o i ncrea s e ac curacy; s pe ci a l feat ure wi11 be con s idered
in det ai 1 later i n t he chap t er . ci g 7.2 -3 shows the genera l s truct ure of Q. semi -
aut omat i c guidance and con t r ol sys t em usi ng f e ed-fo i <'l a r d te rms . Si ght l i ne rates
must be me asur ed in such a sys tem. Sin ce commands are ccmputed on t he ground t he re
TA.'?GEt SIGHT uue RATES
l
MISSILE \ \- i om
TRACKfNG T
!RECEWERI L--_ _
i
! LOOR I
/ Mi ! SIL E.r LOOP !
__ _____ _..J
,- - - - --- - - - - -
i , G<
8/a IMOPERATOR !H' THUMB IJ--- .- ---I i-OTHER \ e, .
"v::Y I .... ONTnO' LERj ,COt-fPEN3ATiONH S H\lO
I ! " l.. .... . I \COk PONENTS\
1 /TA RGEi) TR AC!<I.'YG LCDP I !.
! I i
1 .J L _
. '
1
----
152 Gui de d Weapon Control Systems
must be a comnand li nk 'be tween the comp ute r and the mi ssil e ; this is of t en a wire
li nk f or ant i -tank systems but is invar iably a r a di o li nk f or sys t ems "he re t he
mi s s il e i s s upe r s oni c , Since there are two comp l ete ly se pa r ate t r ac kin g systems
t here must be some col l i mat i on e rror or dis t ur ba nce 8 .
c
LOS systems using differentiaL trackers
A diffe rentia l tracker is designed to eliminate the i nacc ur a cy due to i mperfect
target t racking. A si mpl i fi e d diagram of a diff e rential tra cker is s hown in
Fig 7. 2- 4 . The antenna i s servo cont r oll e d t o f ol l ow the target di re ct i on in the
TARGET TRACKING
RECEIVER
9,-9
0, \0 REMAINDER OF
eo
.
K, TARGET TRACKING f-..-
-
SERVO COMPONENTS
( TARGET) TRACKING LOOP
MISSILE TRACKING
SIGHT UNE RATES
IN THE MISS ILE
RECEIVER r - - - ,- -- - - - - - - - ,
-
B
m
- 9
0
K
2
COMPu TER rTRANSMITTER+ RECEIVER f- AUTOPILOT +
I ,
(MISSILE )
L __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __...J
GUIDANCE LOOP
FIG 7. 2- 4 Dif lerentiaL tracking system - tracking and gui dance Loops
usual Vlay . By mult iple beam fonning or by multiplexi ng, t he s ame ape rture i s
used t o obtain a signal proport ional to the misal ignment be tween the ant e nna bore-
s ight and the miss i le dire ct ion . Thi s s ignal i s s ubt r acte d from t he t a r get
tracker error si gnal. This gives us a signal equal to
(8
t
- Balk
l
- ( B
m
- 8alk2
and t his reduces to ( B
t
- 8ml kl if k
l
= k
2
i . e. the antenna di re ct ton i s e l imi nated .
Howeve r , even i f the s ame i s used to make the se t wo meas urements, i t is
not e asy to maintain the ga ins of these two meas urements i dent ical, and s pecial
feedbac k and cali brat i on techniques are used . It s houl d be particularly noted
that i n all other sy s tems the targe t t r a cki ng l oop acts as a low- pas s fil ter t o
t he r ma l noi s e and gl i nt . There i s no s uch f ilter outsi de the mi ss ile gui dance
loop wit h a di ffe re nt ia l tracker . Si nce extra f iltering cannot be i ntroduced i ns i de
i
t he mi s s i le guidance loop Vl ithout reducing st abil i t y margi ns one must conclude that
with diff erential trackers the ef f ec t of noi se associated with tracking t he t a r ge t
wi ll have a greater effec t on miss distance. Howeve r i t i s j us t pos s ible with a
gre at dea l of ingenuity to i ntroduce a smaLL amount of fi lteri ng of high frequency
noi se out side the guidance loop .
C7
and s i nce R ; U cos 0 he can subst i tute i n equet i or. 7.3- 1 a l ia rearcangt':: to read
m m m
si nce f
y
. U ilJ-
fij fa:
'-,
.:a

J.j
"7
T
'i!

;0
i'
I
--:-.
I

I

-r
, .
163
( 7_3- 1)
bei ng constant. Refe rrin g
te diff erentiated to rea d
- c
U..;l cos (1 ; ( f or u a
m m :n
U cos a - 8)
m m I n l
U si n a and t hi s can
m m
--- .
Li ne of Sl gnt 3ulQanC2 Loops
cos 0-
R_
m)
d
;
U cos J
"fm
;
f 0
'"
m m j In
'"
7.3 KINEMAT I C CLOSURE AND STARG.IIT OF THE GUIDANCE LOOP
- - - -- - - --- - - - ------ - -- ---- - - - ---

-. .
. c jz . -.. ' --oL..... . ".
Hence , in trans f er f unction f orm
l oop:. t he compl i cat io n i s due to t he mi s s il e range not
to Fig 7. 1- 2 we can writ e R
m
(TD + 1) e ; - / 2 (7 . 3- 2)
\ t m
where T ; R)n/ 2U C0 5 C
"m IT:
Th i s ti me const ant is t heref ore very roughly one nal f of t he t i me f rom Ie oncn if one
makes t he appro ximation that R = U : where 1" is the t i me f r o.n launch and cos om
1:1 m
is not far fr omunity . Equat i on 7.3- 2 can be arranged t o read
2U
( 0 + --:.: m:..,,_-'"
If a mi ss ile produ ces a l a. t eral ecce lerat i cn as a res ul t of a guidanc e command,
wnat is t he kin emat i c r e l at i on ship between t his ac ce leration and the change of
angle t he miss i l e pr esent s to the mi ss ile t r-acker 'Ihi ch we ass ume t o be s t at i onary?
Equat i on 7.1 -1 give s t he la teral accele r at ion requi red on the ass umpti on t hat it
is developed perpendicular t o the velocity vector; but we know t hat l at er al forces
are devel oped per pendicular to t he body. Considering the ya'l plane onl y und
assuming the body i nci dence i s 5 ,.e see that the usef ul comp onent of l ate re l
accelerati on i s t he component perpendicula r to t he beam as t he component along t he
beam i n nO way helps t o reduce an angular err or. If f
y
is t he mi ss i l e latax t hen
t he usefu l component i s f cos (0 -i- 5) . A se r i ous 105s,' 1n qui dance l oop gain \lill
y m
occur if t he body- t o- beam angle exceeds say 45
0
, and this is a very good reason
for avoi di ng l ar ge body-to-beamangles _
Up till now we have made the as sumpt ion t het t ne usef u!' mi s s i l e l at ax
by t he mi ss i le range and integrated t 'il i :t: is t nt: chanqe i n mi ss i l e angle as
by the ang ie channel receiver. This ass ump ti on i s re as onabl e for 0 stabili ty
analysi s but i s il evert hel ess rIot strictl y accurat e when si mula ti ng a guidance
I
I
I
i
\
\
\
I
;
cos "m
(s + 20 cos
m
( 7_3- 3)
In its app ro xima t e f orm we vlOul d like t o see
e
-,- ::; --ry--
T c,
Y s R
m
164 Gu ided Ccntr ol Sys terns
.- But equat i on 7_3-3 corrta i ns one in tegration and a time - va ry in g ti me cons tan t . The
cos om te r m has al r eady been dis cus se d; i t rep r esents a l oss in gui dance loop
ga in due t o ,body- t o- beam ang le . For stabili t y purposes t he refore we now have t o
. .
demon s trate that t hi s t ime cons t ant approximat es t o pur e integration i n t he
cr i t i cal fre quency range . I f the guidance open l oop ga i n crossover f r equency is
4 ra d/ s , U
m
= 500 , R
m
= 5000 and cos om = 1 then a t t his fre quen cy thi s trans f e r
functi on i s equi va l ent, i n pur e frequen cy f or m t o
instead of
1
'4J"'I\l1 C-;('7I4'J-'+'-"' 0 = R /-177
0
m
It is considered t her ef or e t hat since t he guidan ce l oop has t o be stabl e at al l
ti mes and range s , it i s a perfectly real i st ic as s umption t o r egard t he kinemat ic
clo sure of the gui dance loop from lateral accelerat ion to pos i tion to re sult i n
180
0
phase lag . We now cons ider the most des irab l e form of the compens at i on
ne cessary t o ensure an adequate stability margin i n t he gui dan ce loop. It has
al r ea dy been shown i n chapter 1 that if a closed l oop sys t em contains two in tegra-
t io ns for a given open loop ga in the min imcm noi se bandwidth is obt a ined if the
c l osed loop i s a se cond order system 'lith a damp ing r at io of 0. 5; and t his is on
the as s umpt i on t hat the compens ation is in the feed-forwa r c path . Addtional l ags
i ncrease t he equival en t noi se bandwi dth , NoVi a dampi ng ra ti o of 0. 5, for a se cond
order sys t em r eq uires a phase ma rg in of 52
0
. Si nce the au topilot must exh ib i t
some Rh as e lag at ga i n cros so ver frequen cy Vie are re all y look ing fo r at l eas t 60
0
pha s e a dvance .
Suppose now Vie (qu i t e arbitra r i ly) li mit the ampli fica t ion of nigl ' frequency noise
to a fi gure of 10 t o 1. A s in gle phase advan ce ci rc uit giv es a maximum phase
advance of 55
0
( s ee equa ti?n 6.2- 1) . A doubl e phase ne twork of t he form
1 + Ts 1 + Ts
(I + aTs)( I + al S)
Vlh e r e a = /0.1 gi ves a maximum phase adv ance of 62.6
0
. Indee a a t re bl e pna se
adv ance network where a = 3/IJ.T vii 11 gi ve a maximum phase a dvance of 64 . a
O
but we
are now i n a regi on of r ap idl y decreasing r e t ur ns . Fig 7.3- 1 shows the gain and
pha s e char ac t erist ics of a 10 to 1 singl e act i ve pha s e advance network compar ed
Vli th t hat of t wo cas cade d /TIT t o 1 network s . The phase cha r acte r i stics of the
cascaded arrangement ar e more "peaky" than tha t of t he si ngl e ne twork . Tnose of a
treb l e ne twork become even mo re peaky and therefore such an a rrangement is serious iy
det une d if the gain c r os s ove r frequency should cnanqe si gnificantl y due to a large
body- to-beam angle wh i ch reduces the gain of the loop . The r e appea rs to be no r ea i
a dvant age i n going for a treble phase advance net'lork .
- ---- - ._--_..
. !
i
\
I
I
L
, -r ....
-- _.-_._--- _._- - --
-.

,. 'L
C
... ine o f ':: i.J i Gc n Ce L O OPS 165
It i s always useful to check the a cui va l ent noise band',.; idth of 1:,0y propo se a
,-
"
or s t i f f ..
advance
K is the guidance l oop d. c. gain
10 db/decade and a 10 to i phase
. 2.5 i ror c GGiJb 1e phase advance ner.lOrk
for a si mpl e se cond system W;Ul s tab t l i sat i on in the
-
=V.:J .
w =: \1'1< \'lner e
c
i s decreas ing e t
10 db at 8axi mLw phas e advance the new gain crossover
and
compared with 7IK . 2
fe edforward path and v
'iihile insE::ti ng a sma l l fi i t e r- - l a g of (). Tc';j l! i1l l i s e ccnds - j ust
before the demand to t he autopil ot t.o fi l te r out sene, of the relatively hi g!l
Inse r t i ng these values i nto a systemwi t h t wo i nte grators and e va luating t ne
noi se bandwidths as given in Table 1 .4 -1 Vie f i nd tha t it i s
-2 lK 2.6i f or a s in ql e phas e adva nce [j etl-lur k
In pra ct i ce t he double phase edvari ce l,i::; t '.. l 'l proDiit,) ly como are rather me re
f avourab ly t ha n indi cat e d above s i rlc2 ther2 '/11 1 certainl y b e SCIT.e phase ! ag cue
to the a utopilot ( 10
0
at ga i n cr CSS 0ver f r e quen c y ?) and possibly a small pha 5 e l os s
if a di q i t s l c omput e r is incCt pc::dt e d t !12 gui dance l o op . Al s c , it may be ',,!ort;:
frequency noi s e . Our stability margi n i s , in pr ac t i ce , =. h :::''::5 less than the op t i mum
fr e q u e ncy wi l l be l,-I'[(j we i f unity gain i s to co inci de with ma ximum phase marg i n ;
t hi s argument holds for a cascaded ar rangement al so, Since maximumphase advance
occurs when wi = l / Ia t he reader will find t hat the optimum value of I is give n by
I = 1. 778/ !K for a si ngl e network , and T = l / IK for a double phase advance network .
ness . Si nce the gain
netNork has a gain of
guid&ilCe loop. two i ntegrati ens in t he loop open l cop 92. 1n cross over
frequency would occur at
\
\
!
I
\
I
i
\
\
,
I
i
1
i
166 Guided Weapon Control Systems
--
I
I
and a f ew extra degree s of phase margin obtained by the use of a cascaded network
wi ll nearly always be wor t h having .
7.4 THE CONCEPT OF FEEDFORWARD T ERMS
The t erm "f'eedforwar-d'' needs some rede f i nit ion at t his stage. We are all aware
of the f act t hat any closed loop system consis t s of a path (contai nin g
feed foruard el ements) and a fe edback path . If i nt egral con trol is used we say
that we "feedfo rua r d t he integral of the error" , mean ing of cour se that t his is
i n addition to t he proportional controll ing si gnal. In the same way we can fee d-
forwar-d the dif ferent ia l of the error . But t here i s anot her method avai l abl e of
i ncrea si ng the accuracy of a closed loop system and tha t is feed fon;ard of some
f uncti on of t he input . Suppose we wish to eliminate velocity lag in t he t rac ki ng
servo des cribed i n chapt er 1 without using i nt egr al control . Without t his extra
int egrator th e system transfer function is
(7 _4 -1)
The voltage from the receiver necessary to drive the antenna at un i t speed is
1/k
2k3
and hen ce if i t were poss ible to generate externaL to the c Losed Loop a
vol tage propor tional t o the targe t angular rate and feed it int o the
path as shown i n Fi g 7. 4- 1 all errors due to the input angula r rate would be
elimina ted . Kowever , this method i s essentially an open -loop method of compensation
and relies on bein g able to match this addit ional input to some servo component
gains . The system transfer function is now
ANG LE CHANNEL RECEIVER
OTHER SERVO COMPONENTS
k]
7.-3 eouivalent: to
1
S
S

FIG of derivative 'of

=
there is a x R_ ter m e xol i c i t v as s oc iz t ed wi t h t he guida.nce func t i on s an d a 1j R
Ii i . - Iii
t e rm ass oc iat ed wi th t he ki nern at i c c l os ure , Thi s lea ds t o t ile cur-i ous r es ul t
1
_ l
- .
- .
_ .1
:1
_ 1
- J
- l
I
-
-
-
- .
, -
- .

.C J
167
( 7. 4- 3)
( 7. 4- 2)
.
. , .:;-
. J
/y- cos ." +
s =
s: = U _ u \' -r )
11 m . i i:'! r.; :TI '
6
a
6 ;
t s /w .
n1
t hat d la teral is req ui red eveG if th e input is a constant angular
ve l ocity . For thi s rea s on t o rega rd a. loop as 0. s t raig htfoi\'iiJ.i d Ty pe 2
system can be ve ry mi s le adi ng. So we adopt a different approach an d ca l cul a te Otl
t he gro unc as a cont i nuous func tion of ti me prec i s e l y whe t deman d is req ui red t o
keep the mi ss il e iii t he LOS; assumin g the mi ss il e produces a l e te ra l acce l era t i cn
as a res ult of a comma nd t his me ans t r.a t '(l' E raqui re to kn o....' the mis si l e l e t a x
raqu t rac . I t wo ul d be conveni en t t c e r r i ve at an e xpr e s s i on f or mi s sile lata"
wh i c h invol ves terns we can eithe r meas ure easi ly or can ass ume wi th s ome deg ree
of ccnfi den ce . Firs tl y we \'li1 1 cal c ul a te th e l a t a x requi r ed due to tarcet mo t i oo
in t he f1 ypl ane . It i s clear t hat whether t he ta r"ge t flies str aight or man oe uvr es
in any manner it \-l i11 re mai n in t r.e f i y pl ane prov ided t he re is 11 0 target accelera-
tion per pend i cul a r to t he f l ypl ene , Hence t ne mi s s t Ie ve l oc i t y vector mus t
lie in t he f l ypl ane and no latax ce rpend'i cul a r to t he flypl ane is req uired . Denote
t
' ..., -0
1
", . . , -" y p'j" n h v f :lcA t he l a t e r a l e cce l e rat i on is t oe
ne m1SS1t e ;;...a x tn t rie r t ' ;;:li e ..J
J
l '
product of t he missi l e fo rward vel ocity and t he r ate of cha nge of fli ght path ( s ee
equa ti on 4. 3- 1) and i f refere nce is mace t c Fi g 7.1 -2 it is see n that
and i t i s seen th at t he coeffi c ients of II Sll i n t he il umer at or and de nominator are
nominall y equal, wh i ch is the condit ion f or zero ve l oci t y er ror , As it so happens
this technique cannot be app l i e d t o a track inq radar as the on ly physical quanti ty
availab le is the angl e channel rece t ve r output . In the case of a target tracker
ac ti n g as a director to a gun or launcher the inputs to the latter are the
angular pos itions of t he trac ker azi mut h and elevation s hafts . Tachogenerators
can be attached to the se lli nputs" to provide a signal proportional to input rate .
The use of input f eedfcrwar d i s comcon in s uch systems .
The use of additi onal fe ed f orda r d in loops i s pr e ci sel y t he same
i n princi ple except t hat one tries to be e ven rac re Dre Cise ; one tries to eliminate
, .
t he error 'l'l ha: eve t t he na ture of t he input . Si ir:pl e feedfo n-: a.rd of s ome f uncti on
of tne in pu t j us t wi l l no t do i n a guida nce loop. . This is due to the f act that
In ge ne r a l ) tne fl ypl a ne \Ii 11 be ne i the r ve r t i cal nor ho ri zon t a l , see Fig
If tacnoge ne ra t o rs are fitted to t h2 a zimut h an d e l e vati on shaf ts, : 0
meas ur e y and r es pe c t i vc ly then the t ot al a ngui a r rate 8 can ti e comp ut e o fr oi!l
I
I
I
I
\
\
There i s now a computi ng pr ob l em sincE::: the r e is no me tnoc of .re es ur inq )rr. or a m'
v . '.Jo' .C.S .-"l
- .

,
f
J
Guided Weapon Control Systems
Ii
~
i . e . sin 0
~
01
and t hi s can be differentiated to read
d . . d
crt
S lO
"01 ~ B dt
(7 .4-5)
( ?d - 6)
We can also use
But
d
s in
c
sin
dO
m
(7 . 4- 7)
Cit
(J
~
dam
"01
Cit
cos
"01 "01 m
o
, ~
2
cos c
m
~
- sin o ( 7.
a
- 8)
01
Combining the se l ast fou r equa tions we can obtain an equati on for am thus
R R
..
. d m m
e crt (u ) + (u)
e
m m
( 7. 4- 9)
am
~
(al\n/ui
Ii -
Substi t ut i nq t hi s value of
om
in equa tion 7. 4- 3 yields
. d
R R
U
{ B crt (;)
+ ( m) e)
m
U;;;
U
m
8
m
(7 . 4- 10)
; 1
~
+
(aR / U ) 2 11 -
m m
i
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ -u-__rA;
viE: t he r e f or e need to know e in ad di t i on to <3 and t his ca n be c bta i ne d by di ffere nt iat -
ing e. Si nce some no ise wi l l a l va ys be pre sent a hi gh fre quency f i l t er wi ll a l so
have to be used an d th i s :,.; ill mean i n pract i ce t hat th e computed value of G will
a l ways l ag be hi nd the t r ue va l ue , if missi le l a t ax or "b i as l ata x" as it is
cai le d i s computed ir. this it is SEen tha t t he value of Urn and Rm/U
m
as a func t i on of time must be known wi th r ee s onab I e accura cy .
If now t he t a r get s ho ul d manoeuvre perpen dicular t o the f l ypIa ne the missile 'di ll
have to manoeuvre pe rpendi cular to t he flyplane in ord e r to remain in the flypl ane
and hence 'in the LOS. The component of latax f
o
is ob t ained by tak ing t he missil e
L
fli ght pa th ra t e about the beam axis and mul t i pl y i ng it by t he componen t of miss i l e .
velocity perpendicular to the beam Urn s in am' Hen ce
--
.
--
:,, -.,/. . , . " .. - .. , . k"
--- - -- -- -----
. 0.
Line of Signt Guidarlce Leaps
f = U s in a s i n + ;, ) .
2 m " ,
- - - -
169

,
,
,

( 7. 4- 11)
i.
,
,
"
"
"
H
where sin n = and cos =y cos dnd either of t hes e t wo rela tionshi ps can
be used to give D and hence n .
The components f
1
a nd f
2
must nO'I'" be r eso Ive d in to " up- uown " and "left - r i ght"
comnands to t he missile. Unfo r t unate ly our problerns are not yet over as t he
mi s s ile's axis sys t e m'wi l l not coi nci de with th e tracl:er 's ; t he r e i s an j'o rientat ion
l
'
prob lem and th i s i s discus sed separ 2te ly . However, it is now clear t ha t in order t o
compute f eadforwar- d commands vie wi i ! need a dig ital compute r . I t should be no ted
tha t th e computation of f eedf cn/ard comman ds i s compli cate d onl y f or f ast movin g
t a r ge t s. Consi de r no,.; a semt -a utomati c anti-tank system. Le t us assume that the
mi s s i l e velocity is about 250 m/s . i t i s unl i ke l y t ha t the t a r ge t speed \': i 11
exceed 10 m/s . f'iissi 1e l atax be very 10\/ and body t o Dearn angles wi l ] be
neg ligi ble . The reader can e as il y check by re f e rri ng t o equat ions 7.1 -1 , 7. 1-3
an d 7. 1- 4 the t when the mi s s i Io sp2ed i s much qr e a tar t han tha t of the t arge t b i a s
la tax i s accura tely given by
f", 2U S
m
(7 .4 - 12)
I n fac t, i f th e missile speed i s ,"ousnly cc..s t ant ,HId It is o.SSullied t hat !.arget
moveme nt is lar gely rcs tri ct ed t o th2 hor -i zonta l plant: t he reeofon-l dr"d comman d wi l l
be proportional t o the azi muth tracking ra te v;hich can be measur ec by a t achoge ne r a t or .;.
mounte d on t he la unc her tr-ipod.
Before l eav ing t he subject of fee ,j7-o r.,'l:! rd terms it should b,:: explained hhy i n
Figs 7.2- 1, 7.2 -3 and 7. 2- 4 i t i s inf e r- re u that fec dfo('\:ard is not emp l oye d i n
bearn-r-i de rs . NO'd , one can compute en ens: ground the bias l e t.ex req uired in any
one of these systems but i n a be am i<cer t he a::9u1ar er r or s iqn s l s are der ived in
the missile i t s e l f and t here 'i s no neeri f or " corrnand li nk from gr;ound to missile.
I f a se pa r at e t rans mi t t c r anc re cei ver (in addition t o t he qui cen ce r ece iver'
already i n the mis s ile) are use d t hen feedf Cirvla rd Cull be en.oloyec , But s ucb a
complicati on i s not usually re sorted to ; al ternative methods woul d De to steer the
ri ding beam ahead of the target by an amount proportional t o t he 1atax requi red.
Conver sely one coul d modulate the beam i n some way so that t he i n t he
miss i l e knows that some latax is required even i f it is i n t he centre of the beam.
170
Guided Weapon Control Systems
7. 5 PHASI NG ERROR AND ORIENTAT ION DIFFICULTIES
We have seen i n sec t i on 6.11 that i f t he mi ssile is roll ing t her e i s mechan ica l
cross -coupl i ng between the two lateral autopilots and for a small ser vo phase l ag
s at t he r oll frequency the effect on t he autop ilot s i s to a f irs t approxi mat i on
a l oss of phase margin equal to But this is not the end of t he ma t t er ; each
autopilot is a part of one of the guidance loops and i f as a re sult of one or mo re
of se veral causes part of the demand from one angle channel re ceiver i s imp lemented
i n t he other channel we say that a phasing error exists . Ins t ead of the two
guidance loops being ent i rel y i ndependent of each other they are novi cross -coupl ed
and Fi g 6.11 -2 represents the two guidance loops if the "input s" and "output s" are
the t arget and mis s il e directions respect ively , Y
l
represents the guidance f un ctions
and the autopilot , Y
2
represents the kinematic closure of the loop and Y3 is un ity .
To il lust rate t he eff ect consider a specific example where one of the demands i s for
a lateral accelera tion of 150 m/s
2
and there is a servo phose lag of 0.1 rad at the
missi l e roll frequency assumed constant . Since sin 9
s
= 0.1 and cos s = 1.0 i t
' fol l ows that the gain of the guidance loops is not signifi cantly affecteo and that
approxi mat el y 15 m/s
2
latax is developed i n a direction perpendicul ar to the
in tend ed one i .e . in the other channel . If the guidance loop gain or st i f fnes s is
10 say then the result of this i s to cause the missile in the steady s t at e to be
1.5moff the LOS 1n a direction perpendicular to the demand. Without the stiffnes s
of t he other channel to cont end with the missile would merely accelerate out of the
LOS at 15 m/ s
2
. To a good first approximation the inaccuracy in qui dance due t o a
demand for lateral acce1eratlon f
d
and a phasing error of r adians is f
d
sin
where K is the guidance loop stiffness . In addition , again to a fi rs t approximation ,
thi s phasing error;, will reduce the guid:znce loop phase margin by;, . It i s
i mportant to no te that the effe ct of phasing error could be r eally ser i ous in
syst ems where g demands are large e.g . . surface-to-air or air -to- ai r systems , We
now cons ider the other contributions to phasing error . We rely on the angle cnannel
r ecei ver up- down axis coinciding wi th the rol l gyro vertical axi s . Any difference
here before launch will set up a phasing error. There may be a small un caging error
and t he gyr o will dr ift espec ially during boost' . Now a really good resolver
me asuring to 10 min utes of arc or so is an expensive prec i s i on in:;trument and a
small cheap and relatively crude instrument will probably be used. If an induction
resolve r is used then some electronic circuitry will be required to conve r t the
-
produce an error in a mplitude and en error in ang le . This angular error is
another contribution to phasinq .er ro r . I t i s pos s ible for cross - coupl in g t o occu r
in t he rece iver itself but usually any contribut ions t o phasing er ror from th i s
source are small compared with those just discussed . It wil l be not ed that i n
-
-
-
--
.-
171
i '[ems '''l i 11 between t hem, three addit iona1 These

signals . to c . c: .

-
-.
,ie have a lready noted the extent of t his dis tortion i n section 5.3. In ma ki ng
this a xis transformation in th e cornp ut er any toe-in from the launcher an d s uper -
a xi s t ra ns f or mati ons are done in t he compute r an additional phas ing errer wi 1l oc cur .
r:
..
elevat ion of the mis sile shou l d be el I owec for . WLat W2 really want t o know i s the
angle between the roll gyro i nner gi"bal an d the f Iyp l ar.e . It is .i mport an t to note
that it is phas i nq erro r due t o ro l l rate and f i n servo phese l ag only that tends to
unstabilise the autopil ot, since thi s OCCL; r s i nsi de t he autopi l ot cl ose d l oop. .,.
Phasing e rr -or due t o any ca use v;hat!=.:'oie r OCCur S insi de the guidance loop and therefore --
general all these contributi ons are unknown and random i n vIe do not knov ....
in which sense the mi s s i l e is r el l i nq, nor is t he r ol l r ate known : the gyro drift
i s unpredictable and unless t he cesclver plus e l e ctronics a re spe cial l y cal i brated
'de cannot knov, t his contribution ei t her . Hence since these errors are unknown i t
fo l l ows that there is not hing we can do to ell 0"" for them.
We now come to another possible contribut ion t o er ror but s ince i t is
poss ible to allow for it in the guidance comp uter i t i s someti mes referred to as a
phasir.g error due to mi ss i l e or ie ntation. It is due to t he fact that the mi ssile
axes do not coi nci de wit h t he t racker axes . Consid er now a mi ss ile l eunched
straight dewn a beam and exe cut ing snal l raenoeuvr e s about this axis . A Ief t -ri cht
signal requi res a ma noeuvre in a horizontal c irect i on perpendicular to the bea:n
and because the missile body co inci ccs "fi l t h t he beam t he latax should be deve lope d
perpe udi cu1ar to the beam. Li Ke.'{i se o.;t up- down demand does not neces ser i Iy requi re
-3. vcr-ti ccl ma ilOc:uvre ; it n:q ui res (: i et cra i acceleration in the verti ca l plane and
i rl c lined back at an angle $ due to t he e le vation of the t racker . But since ttle
.ms s i l e ox axis is i ncl i ned to the hor i zont a l by an angle this interpretat i on of
II up- dO'.om I I cause s no difficulti e s. Now, except i n the unique ca s e of a t a rg et
heading straight for th e trac ker the mi s s i l e wi 11 be puiling l etax in t he f lypl ane
and it s veloc ity vect or wi ll be at an a.ng:e urn to the LOS as already di s cus sed.
This has been a l l owec for in der i vi nq equation 7.4-6 . However if enough compu ting
f ac ilities are available '" e should e l l cw fo r t ne fa ct that l a t ax is devel oped
perpendicular to the body and not perp endi cula r to the ve l ocity vector i .e , we need
to compute t he body in ciden ce as so ci a t ed with a given la t a x; t hi s i mpl i e s t hat the
mis sile speed and he i ght must be known , In addition if the missile pitches and
yaws afte r launc h the gyro gimbal sys tem wi l l become di storted and as a result t he
roll angle v, iil be mcorract l y i nterpret ed . This means t hat unle ss the cor rect
172 Guidea ""apon Control Systems
,-

t he total phasing error af f ects the gu id ance loop.

7.6 THE EFFECT OF A DIGITAL COMPUTER INSIDE THE GUIDANCE LOOP
A relati vely si mple semi-automat ic anti -tank systemdoes not require a digital
computer in t he guidance l oop; t he "ti mes r ange" t erm.rn the missi le guidance loop
can be engi neered eas il y by analogue ci rcuits. A hi gh per f orman ce surface-to-a ir
system designed for area rat her . t han poi nt defence will almost cer tainly employ a
di gital comp uter t o work out t he fee dforward commands and si nce these have to be
added to the compensated angle channel receiver signal s the whole process of
computing th e demands f or la teral acceleration is us ua l l y done digitally .
If the comput er up - date s at intervals of T seconds t hen an anal ogue t o digital
converter is required at one interface and a di gi t al to analogue converter plus
a hol d or cl amp circuit is requi red at t he ot her . The effect on t he transmitted
in format ion is illustrated in Fi g 7.6-1 . If a sinewave of freq uency w rad /s is
updated many t i mes du r i ng a cycl e t he amp l i t ude is not sensibly affected but

FIe ? 6-1 ;. sine wave i f sampl.ed. az; an in-cel'val T s eas and hel.d untii l:
r eBults i n an ap proximate s inewave dispLaced i n phase
the re is a shift i n phase. Si nce the phase shift due to a ti me del ay , is w I t hen
it follows t hat t he mean phase shift due to disconti nuous i nf ormat i on is w1/2.
Howeve r , the comput er wilJ - ta ke some t ime to do th e necess ary calculati on s and if
this computi ng ti me is 'c t he to tal effective time delay due to t he computer is
T
C
+ , /2 = T ' . The effect on the gui dance l oop is t herefore a destabil i si ng one .
If the gui dance l oop open l oop gain -crossover f requency is W
c
radls t hen we must
add an additional phase la g of w
c
" at this frequency. For example if t he guidance
loop gain cross over fre quency i s 5 radls, t he dat a r ate is 100Is and t he mean
comput i ng ti me i s 5 mi11i secs then t he phase l ag at gai n cross over due t o t he
comput er is 5 ( .005 + . 01/ 2 ) = 0.05 rad or nearly 3. Si nce such a lo ss of phase
is barely accepta bl e i n a gu idance loop , it fol lows tha t f ast comput i ng t ime s and
high data rates ar e essential i f comput ers ar e employed ins ide cl ose d loop systems .
Consider now t he method of i mplementi ng phase advance di gi t al ly , i. e . it is
necessary t o represent the function
a-
----.-.
-
I
!
\
\
....
mus t be wher: e and u are availab le only in sampl ec form. Takin g
en _I ' u
n
_
1
and en' un to be the values of the cont i nuous s ignals e, u at t he
(n - l)th and nth sa mpli ng ins tents t hen t he s i mples t appr cximat i ons to e , Uwoul d
be
173
( 7.6-2 )
(7 .6-1)
1 -+- Ts u
e
ot Signt Gujo 011 ce LoOpS
HI discrete fo rm, Ini s iu.p l i es t hat t he equat ion
u aTu e + Te
i
, \
I
.\
i
,
To obtain a value for u we use
n
:r
:r
(7. 6-5)
- u
n-1
u
n
e - e
1 n n-
e
;
u
;
,
and hence obta i:l t he fol1o "ing recu rsive re lation
(7.6-3 and 7.6-4)
T
wh ere T is t he sampli ng in t erva l. In oract i ce , more compli cated expres s ion s are
often us e d alt hough t he si mple appr oxi ma tions used her e will serve for il lus tration .
u ;;: c- e T
n J n
( 2 e 1 + C3
n-
(7 . 6- 6)
I
i
I
wnere tne coefficients c
z
' c
3
are give n by l i e , (t/T - l ) /u, 1 - l/uT'
re spect i veiy .
In other wor ds , the cu rr ent output (un; of r.ne digital net ,,' or' !<. i s oepe ncent on t he
curren t va1ue of the input (en) and on past va lue s of Dot h t he input and the output
(e l ' U 1) can now consider the e r r or s that l r,aj ari se when i mp1eme nting a
n- n-
con tinuous network in form. All th es e errors a r ise from the fact tha t , in
pract ice , digital information can onl y be r epre s ent ed to a certain de gr ee of
accuracy whi ch is de terrni ned by the number of bits (wor d length ) t ha t i s available .
Thi s word length l i mitation affect :
( 1) The accuracy of t he sa r ol ed signals at tne inp ut ana out put ana r e s ul t s in
the s i gna1s be ing conf i ne d to a range of discret e l e vels .
( 2) The ac c ur acy wit h wh i ch the networ k ccefficients (e . g. c
1'
c
z
ana c
3
in
equati on 7. 6- 6) can be stored .
( 3) The accuracy vlith whi ch the eri thme t i c ope r a t ions can be pe r f orme d. For
exampl e , in i mple menting equation 7.6 -6, it is necess ary to multiply c
1
by 2
n

If both t hese quantities are represented by a m-bit wcrd th en the product wculc
nee d a 2m-bi t word in or de r to suscain acc uracy . T0 store t his product as am-bit
word it woul d be neces sary t o di s pens e "t/i t h t he iT! least si gnificant bits .
All the abo ve inaccuraci e s, r e s ult in g f r-orn 1i mited wo r- d I enqt h , can be cons i de re d
as cuantriea t-i on er-rors c1though t he t er ms 0: ound-of']: are us ual1y
applied t o the qu ant i s ation e rrors t hat occ ur when ar ithmetic are
perforroed .
-'
JJ
.Jl
'""
.l.
J[
J!
j
The effect of the quant i s at i on e r r ors 'Xl t he s amp l e c si gna l s is s i mila r to additi ve 'Jt
'Ihite noise and is undes i rable f or th at reason alone. Howev e r , more serious :u
:r.
-
d\
I,
174
Guided "eapon. Control Systems
consequences can occur at l ow si gnal levels where the quantisation effects tend
to dominate t he true nature of t he signal and in these ci rcumstances th e behaviour
of t he network within t he guidance loop can dive r ge conside rably from its
continuous counterpart .
The effect of inaccuracy in the network coeffici ents is dependent on the way i n
which t he network equat ion i s i mpl ement ed or pr uqr enme d. Si mila rly , the effect of
truncation or round-off error is dependent on the mode of arithmeti c used, i . e.
whether fi xed or floa ti ng point . t'lany of t hese effects are treated in deta i 1 in
the l iterature and, in particular, reference 3 is recommended for its scope and
relevance to t he guided weapon field . However , one aspect of quant isation er ror
wi l l be considered here i n greater detail i n order t o illust rate that t r ans fer ri ng
from contin uous to discrete systems is not necessar i l y a straightforward procedure
and that due accoun t shoul d be taken of li mite d word lengt h effects during the
earliest stages of system des i gn.
Foll owi ng an examp l e t reat ed i n somewhat more detail in the above reference , we
will ass ume t hat not al l t he coeffici ent s af equation 7.6-6 can be represent ed
exactly and, s pecificall y, tha t t he coef f i cient c
3
is store d as c,' wh i ch is in
error by an amount o.
i . e.
Considering s t eady state conditions , where th e i nput and output of the dig ita l
network remai n at constant values s uch th at en ; e 1 ; e 2 ' " etc and u ; U 1
n- n- n n-
;;: u
n
_
2
'; .. etc, t hen, f rom equat ion 7.6 -6 , \Ole have
un ; c
l
en + c
2
en + c
3'
un
c
l
+ c
2
; is t he steady s t age gai n of the network.
gi ves
1 r/T - 1
u
- .,.
n a a
;
1 ( 1 , / aT) e -
- - 0
n
( 1
- 1
;
-
""T/,)
Subs t i ruti ng for c
l
' c
2
;;: 1 + 801fT + .
It i s seen t nat t he st eady s tate gain (wh i ch shoul d be unity in t hi s example ) i s
dependent on bot h E and , and that far from i mproving t he accura cy , a reducti on
in t he sampling int erval t woul d exacerbate t he sit uation . This result has
arisen si mply because of t he l imited wo rd le ngt h available t o repre sent c
3

7.7 SOME NUMERICAL EXAMPLES ON THE ESTIMATION OJ'

GUIDANCE ACCURACY
A rnediwn ?>ange surface-to-air beam-riding syDtem
If ref erence is made t o Fi g 7 ,2 - 1 i t "i ll be seen t hat two cl osed l oop systems
have to be des igned, t he target tracking loop and t he mi s si l e guidan ce loo p, Let
"
-
-
-
-
-
175
huve al ready
o.
is 40 km .
2
th E:
c
, -
c
8.
'-
J reasonabl e approach t o the tracke r serve
ar.:1
- :... I
'J/ "n
L i ; ; t: dr ) :jrll Gui lla/ iCc
(0 7 .
\ < x .J .... ..) I
= r,
6000t.
C' !il a i..
t he :peC? d r ange r'1 ::; O. i to ;-1 .- ?O and t he r c i1 g2 is 6 km (largely
because the initia l dis per s i on of ni s s i i e is considerabl e due to the fact t nat
it carries discarding boosts )
es tablishe d in chapter 1 that
range is gi ven by
loop is to include an electronic and to re duce the lags due to the mot or
and load by des i gni ng a high gai n ra t e f CGdback loot:' . found that the mini mum
noise bandwidth was obtai ned when t he lags iG t he rate loop were negligible anc
t he closed loop dampirlg ratio was 0. 5. Let us determine t he track ing error in tne
elevation channel due to a consta nt -3 peed s t r ai gh t - f l ying target at minimum ra nge
assuming t he maximum anS: :: of el eve t i on is 45, see Fig 1.5 -1 an d equation 1. 5- 5 .
A part icular tracker- cl osed l oop fu nc t i on 'dell to :
Since
o
and s i nce ':h2 S1g !"H 1ine J.r:gu l e. :'"' te, ::,p2t: d}!"
t hi s is 8 .58 et t ne f cr the = 2 t a r ge t . We note hOl'lev/2 r that s ince
s i oht line acceierati on a; 1/ 2..
2
r:11 be i no equa l we woul d expect t r.c
- ,
accuracy rne t.rs s at i.h .:.: :0 ii;1prove ra nge . OO\"! cQ;1siC:er
th e effect of t he rma l noise. For a r-ece j ve;- Vie find t ha t for a non-
glinting 4 m
2
e choin g a re a t al"get the s pec:ral de nsity of t he noi s e at 40 km
I
I
i
I
d
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
i
I
1
s uch a is r aG
- n
is t herefore gi ver. by
beam j i tter at t his range
f a r' o
a reduction in range .
40
2
,.
;.;
"
10"
HI
?
'.-I i 11 of noise
target such a missi le with
In met res at t he 'tar ge t 1S : s
srna ) i
othe r hand the effect
'/
This is for a 4 m- ec hoi ng
'_' 76
Guidea Con ero l Systems
ra nge t he signal to noise power should have i mpr oved by a f actor of 44 reduci ng
t he r . m.S . beam jitter'by a fa cto r of 4
2
; in met re s t his is an i mprovement by a
factor of 4
3
.
If the target : i s gl i nt i ng t he r .m.s . .beam j i t t er due t o glint is li kel y to be cl ose
to t he r .m.s . va1ue of t he glint its elf unless t he servo bandwi dt h i s very l ow
indeed or frequency agility is used, see Table 1.7- 1. Summarisi ng we are saying
t hat accur ate t rac king is a diffi cul t probl em with f ast ta rgets ass ociated with
short ra nges due to t he hi gh angular accelerat i ons , and as t he ra nge i ncreases
t hermal nois e te nds to take over as the ma jor source of inacc uracy . Tracking
inaccura cy (in me t res) due t o glint i s not a f unct i on of range .
We now cons i der t he des ign of the guidance loop . Sinc e . t he mi s sile is desi gned for
medi um range it i s li kely to be heavy, 1000 kg or more . For geometr i cally si mi l ar
" 1 . . 5 d 1 . 3
ml SS1 es , rner t t as <.t 2. an contra surface momen t s 0: i . He nce large mi s s i l es
wi ll tend t o have lower wea thercock frequencies . Suppose it is fe as ibl e t o
desi gn a l ateral autop il ot whose dynami cs appr oxi mate to t hat of a quadr ati c lag
defi ned by w = 12 and u = 0.6. The maximum phase l ag permissi ble at gui dance loop
n .
(open loop) gain cros s-over f r equency has been di scus sed in secti on 6. 2. If we
rest r ict this t o 15
0
as suggested it mea ns that the maximum d. c. gain we can use 1S
about 3; t he open loop gain cros s -over frequency i s al ways gre at er than ehe square
root of t he gain when t here are two integrat ions, due t o t he effe ct of ehe phase
advance networks on gain . Let us ehere for e consi der t he sort of miss ehae woul d
be i nvol ved if t he guidance open loop gain is set to 3. One t ypi cal engagemene
will suffi ce t o highl ight the problem. As sume U
t
= 250 m/s and tha t the t ar get is
f l yi ng s trai ght such t hat t ne crossing dis ta nce i s 6 km . If the mi ssil e is gather ea
at a sla nt ra nge of 5 km at a t i me when the t ar get slant range is 13.5 krn and t he
mi ssil e speed is ,onstant at 500 mi s , some geomet ri c mani pul at i on reveals t hat
int erception shoul d occur at a slant range of 10. 86 km , 12 s afte r gath ering . The
reader may wish t o ver ify that the correct mi ss il e 1atax ' at i mpact i s 18.2 m/s
2
.
Si nce t he l oop gain is 3 i t- means t hat the mis s due t o "?i as 1at ax" i s approxi matel y
18.2/ 3 = 6m . Accurate shows t hat thi s ass umpti on res ults in a s light
overes ti mate of t he miss if t he l atax is i ncreasi ng. We have noted t ni s eff ect wnen
esti mat i ng t he error of tracki ng ser vos in Figs 1. 5-2 and 1. 5- 3. If in t ercept i on is
at a shorter range than t his or the t arget speed i s greater t he mi ssile 1atax wi ll
have t o be greater , r esul t ing i n a larger miss . Can we s t ructure the loop i n a
differ ent way t o reduce th is bias mi ss? Conside r now the use of propor t ional pl us
integr al control rather than proporti onal control . This wi 11 result in a loss of
phase margin so let us reduce the d.c . gain to unity say . If an i ntegr at i ng t ime
con st ant of 2 i s adopted it means that if the missile error off t he beam i s cons tant
at x metres the autopilot output i s inc re as ing at a rate of x/ 2 m/s
3
. The rate of
:1
i -


i -

..i,.
t
'l7 "7
..,
reduced
'd1 t h
R S2
m
Loop
\
I
___ _ __-..J
A U TOPI LOT
. . . .
caG..>;;- .:. ';..Q1..::2j
f a t u x
I d emarvd
I
I
differ ciltia ti ng equation 7. 1- 1
be 0.75 x 2 = 1.5m; hence we
GUI DA NCE FUNCTi CNS
R
m
ll-I S}] 12s _1)
0 - 0. 316 s / 2 s
FIG 7. 7-2 3ade
The mi ss shoul d nov..
This is eas i ly det ermi Ged by

L- .-.-J
-=-=--- - - - -

25
FIG 7. 7-1 _. gui0.:Je loop , 3I.c:::k
diagrc" anaZysis
Ir .e kt r.eme t i c c l os ure i s s nown to be t..o in t ec r e t i ons a nd a 1/R term as I'l l::: ha ve
m
a l ready es t abl i s hed irl s ect i or, 7 .3 t t.e t this is a re esonabl e e ss ump t i on for s tabil ity
calcul ations . The Bode diagram for guid ance loop is given in Fi g 7.7-2 and
t hi s reveal s a phase margin of 35 arId a gain ma!"gin of ,10.5 dbs .
th e bia s l atax mi ss by a factor of ':t to ' . In ecct t icn ..... e have reduced t he
guidance c . c . gai n by a fa ctor of 3 an;: nave ther efore r educed t he effective noise
bandwi dt h; t he r . m.s . noi se into t he iil1s s i l e s er vos i s al so decreased consider abl y .
If a double phas e advance network is csed to stabilise t he loop comple t e
guidance loop in t rans f er f unction form is in Fi g 7. 7-1.
res pect t o ti me .
J
.,.. 3
, . 1 :;1 m/s .
I
I
i
!
i
I
,
178 Guideo "eapon Co nt rol Systems
The actual miss of the missile due to thermal noise can be eva luated by multiplying
the t racker t ra nsfer f unct i on by the guidance loop transfer funct i on and calculati ng
t he equi val ent noise bandwidth to thermal noise of t he combi nation. Integrals f or
transfer f uncti ons up to tenth order ar e giv en by Ne"ton Gould and Kai ser (4) . We
go t hrough the same pr ocedur e for gl int except t hat "e inc lude an addit ional first
order fi lter t o accoun t for the fact t hat glint i s not "wh i t e" noi se but is "col oure d"
noi se . De tail ed anal ys i s shows t hat t he r .m. s . mi ss due to noi se is not much less
t han t he beam j itter . This is because the damp ing i n t hi s guidanc e loop is on t he
low side the equiva lent noise banmlidth i s surpr i singly high . An i mpor t ant feat ure
of a gui dance loop with an ext ra in tegrator is tha t any bias i n t he autopilot due
to fin bias , or instrument biases results i n zero miss , provi ded of course t hat
t he biases rema in constant or change only slowly .
The above examp1e is a good ill ustrat i on of t he compromi se t hat has to be made in
al l gui dance lo op designs . We requi re high gain for steady state accuracy but l ow
gain fo r s t abi l ity and 10" mi ss due to noi se , and 10" gain and not t oo mu ch ph ase
advance t o avoid sat ur at i on of t he missile servos . In this par t i cul ar design
because engagement times are t ypi cal l y in t he range 15-80 se conds t he addition of
a s l o" i ntegrator in t he loop has i ncreased t he s teady s tate accuracy cons ide rab ly;
nevertheless some 15
0
of phase margin has been sacrif iced by usi nq propor tional
plus in teg ra l control lea vi ng uS " i t h a rather underdamped guidance loop.
A shorz rar.ge surface - t o-ai r CLOS s ystem
In t his case we assume t he human operator tracks t he target with tne help of a
s e rvo- cont roll ed optica l sys t ern . The que s t i on It/e now ask is , how accurat el y can
a tra ined opera tor t rack an aircraft? It is generally agreed that a vel oci ty
ser vo gives him most assistance ; a given controller posi tion will result in a
constant angular vel oci t y of the sight . But an approac hing target res ults in an
accelerating signt line . If t herefore the system is specifi cal ly des igned for
appr oaching t argets i t wi l l hel p the operator t o add an i nt egrator " ith a low gain
so that a constant input wi ll produce a sio"ly accelera ting output . In any
particular engageme nt gai n will be either too high or t oo low; an
extensive progr amme of realistic si mulations "ill be necess ary t o arrive at t he
best compromise . Al so some phase adva nce wi ll tend t o offset t he servo and human
operator lag . Several systems have been designed "hi ch cl aim a t racki ng accuracy
of about 0.2 t o 0. 3 milliradi ans r . m. s . in the fl ypla ne and bet t er t han th is
perpendicular t o t he f lyplane at ranges of 2-6 km , but much wi l l depend on how near
t he ta rget speed and crossi ng range are mat ched to the control l er t ime cons tan t s .
If th e tracked "i th t he aid of a vidicon and a fi are en t he miss i l e
I
I
I
\
!
!
I
I
a col l i mat i on problem "ill exist . Colli mation errors
of differential expansions due t o te mperature changes
will ar ise not only because
but also due to a drif t i n
--
I
\
\
*
.
_____ _'__
179
t he el ect rical null axis of the target tracker . Co11i mat ion must De cap301e of
being checked in the fieid . Several systems employing two quite separate tracking
syst ems have been designed wnich can keep collimation er rers t o 0.2 mil1 iradians
or less .
, i
.,
-,
i
:1
i
-I
.\
q
,
:I
".;
i
' I
"
' !
usually be the same f ig ur e for each pl ane fo r a
This bias divided by the guidance loop gain will oe
It is cus tomery to est imat e the t otel 1ikel.!' bi as in tne loop .
and thi s \1i 11
synme t r i cel cruciform missile .
t he mi ss due to t hi s cause .
An d f i nal Iy , t here will be the miss due to 'Sher""11icl noise in tr.e qui oence loop wnicn
integrator in t he
aut opi lot in m/s
2
I n a s hort ranqe sys t em missile 9 recui rement s can be ve ry hi qn ; many s ys t ems are
desi gned for a ma ximum of 259 or even grea t er . If the i mpact r ange i s from 1 km
t o 6 km and t he engagement t ime is anything rrGm 2 t o 12 seconds i t is clear t hat
mi ss il e 9 requirements ccn be changing very rapidly during flight . To keep th e
bi as l at ax mi ss to say 2m t he missile latax i s 200 m/s
2
requires a guidance loop
gain of 100 or alternatively a lower d.c . gain pius a fast integrator . The first
opt ion would pose severe stab il ity probl ems and would al mos t cer tai nly r esul t i n
t he fi n se rvos being sa turated "ith noise . The second option would probably be
equally due to the nature of integrator . The
al ter nat i ve , we have seen , is to use feedfo rward terms . Any bi as lat ax miss is now
due t o any imperfections in computi no and imp l ern ent i nq .the s e feedforward conunancs ,
In other words , if vie adopt a ,guidance loop gain of say i s an error of x m/ s
2
i n
comput ing and implementing this corrsne nc \"iil1 r esci ; in a. miss in the r l yp l ane of
x/15 m. I f th e achieved latax due to feedforwdrd 15 than the correct
i t will fly ahead of the LOS and vlce-versa , Put in another way if t ne feedforward
ccrma nd re sul t s in 90% or liO% of the ccr rect comnano being imp l ementec t he
qui dance loop provides the other or respecti vely . In ei t ner case u.e
guidance accuracy on this account is incredseG a factor of 10 to 1.
the use of feedfon"ard ccmmands makes no diffecence to the mi ss due to phasi nq e r rcr,
Any biases in t he autopilot will cause a miss unle ss tnere is an electrJnic
,
1
,
!
I
1
I
i s usuaily small at such short ranges . If now che individual contributions t o
gui dance i naccura cy are uncorr-c l at ed and can be as sumed to have a norma l di stribution
we can es timate the total mean square miss by a mean square This
as sumpti on i s perfe ctly valid for an input of wh i t e noise ; provided t he sys t em can
be rega r ded as a l inear filter the output will have a normal di s tributicn wi th zero
mean val ue. The as sumption is also val id if the input is gl in t and i t i s assumea
t hat i ts spectrum is wlli t e nois e passed th rough a linear fi lter . We are on les s
certain ground when considering biases in say the autopilot . However, an assumption
often made i s that the bias from a 1arSe of accelerome ters , rate gyros et c
has zer o mean value and the of indi vidJal biases is nonha t witt.
: ;
"

Gui cec Control Systems

I
I
\
\
...,
I
,
I S
leol
._1
I
I
i
h
I R

I ar
I R
r
I
I
i A
I
,g'
0,
j
I

I
I PI
I er
I
I
I
r
I H
L
I T
I tu
I as

L
to fa ulty feedfo rward apply equally to
However, errors due to tracking the target
be a srne l l mi ss due to the two gains not being there can
trackers . " sys t ems using differential
' _sre largely eliminated but
value equal to half the manufacturing tolerance .
tabulating the various contributions to miss distance we should perhaps
,?ns i der some autopilot i mper f ect i ons in some detail . Assume that the l at eral
Iut opi l ot parameters are those used in the example given in section 6.3 i . e .
autopilot nominal gain 1m s-2 volt -
1
accelerometer nominal gain : 0.8 volts m-
l
s2
rate gyro nominal gain 30 volts rad -
l
s
the accelerometer full scale deflection is 30g and the tolerance is , 2%of full
: cal e or 5%of the actual val ue whichever is the greater then a zer o demand would
; i ve a 10 bias of .01 x 30 x 9.81 x 0.8 2.35 volts and this in turn produces
, autopilot bias of 2.35 m/s
2
. A demand for 259 would give a 10 bi as of 0.025 x
x 9.81 x 0.8 4.9m/s
2
. The rate gyro full scale reading is 5 rad/s and the
on bias is 2% of full scale , and in addioion there is a gain t ol er ance
: ' 10%of the actual value (largely because i t is blast started and the gain var ies
:,S the gyro wheel s l ows down ) , Hence when the missile is not turning (Og latax)
bias is 3 m/s
2
and when the missile is pulling 25g there is a rate of turn of
x 9.81/500 0.49 rad/s if the velocity is 500 m/s . Hence there is likely to be
additional bias of 5 x 30 x 0.05 x 0.49 = 3.7 m/s
2
. A fin bias (10 value)
';"'en Loop woul d result in a bias of 11 .4 m/s
2
at the nominal velo city of 500 m/s
; 'ut with instrume nt feedback this is reduced to 1.3 m/s
2
. Table 7.7-1 therefore
-' ummar i ses the position for zero and maximum latax being pulled in the f l ypl ane.
: rhe 10 latax error in m/s
2
has been divided by the guidance loop gain of 15 to give
10 miss in metres . It has been assumed that impact occurs at 4 km. A somewhat
contribution to miss distance due to tracking the target has been shown as
: t hi s wilf depend on many factors as already indicated . However if the missile is
: pyl l i ng high latax.it means that the sight line rates and accelerations are high;
: t arget tracking tends to be less accurate under t hese conditions .
i s seen that in this hypothetical systema maj or contribution to miss distance
the inaccuracy in t ar qet . .fracking. At high g's there is a large contribution
phasing error in the plane perpendicular to the flyplane ; also under these
: condi t i ons there is a significant contribution to miss distance in the flyp lane due
"t o the variation in the autopilot d.c . gain . One way of improving this system
': as pect would be to vary the autopilot forward path gain as a function of missile
- speed and height . In any case systemaccuracy is bound to degrade somewhat if the
- mi ss il e is puliing high g's .
: A system a differentiaL tracker
The contributions to miss distance due

_I
:Ii
J
1
-'

-,
:r
18i
, 00
1.24
0.20
0.4 0
i !
I i
I I
, I
! I
I I
I I
I
I
i
\ C.SO
,
0.20
0 .4 0
, o miss
perpendicular t o
Itvpl ane-metres
O.3C
0.09
0.10
09
G.is
0,16
0.40
; .2'J
0.02
O.C9
0.24
0.10
259
0.33
0.8 2
0.41
0.16
0.57
1
! .
,
,
cos
0.1 0
1cr miss in
trvntancmcucs
0.1E
09
0.16
0.08
I
--L---
i
I
1
,
1
i
I'
Wi l! with
: ,; ,r
! iO% 0 1 : he
aC:1Ja! value .
2'?'; of fui! scare
t 5% of the
nomina l 9<111\
actual va lue or
t 2% of b !l
scare
t SGoQ 0: ac tual
vetue
2% 01 act ua l
vatuc of 1% ct
ton scare
vanes wrt h range.
: ! ight !ine -e:e.
I accet.
i er auon
i
I0. 2 m,I!""j" m
Li ne of 51gb: Gui dance Loops
7%of actual
I
i
I
I
,
-.
-
J
-J
1 I
. 1 I
1 I
! I
1 I
.1 I
l' I
l' I
l: I
'1
1" I
! I
r I
.'1 I
I I
.1: I
,rr I
1 1
'[ I
!.l I
1i I
]I 1
11 I
;). I
'Ii J
CAUSE OF
i:RROri
I
I Pesorvcr
,
IGyro m();J:111ng
I and
I
Varrauon in gain
due to cbeoqcs 1(0
I hci(jht Jnd
r-
I
I ncccrero-nctcr bias
I and gain to tcr ancc
I
I and
cornoo ncnt
tct c-eoces
T...:..t:d:: ).7- , :crMISS C0NTR1SUTlO S OUe: TO t= AULTY
SOl\1PUTATlON AND EXECU
7!ON
0 ;= '!="[EDFORWARD COMMANDS. TRACKI NG
ERRCnS, ERROR ETC
Cit curtv
Resolve-
and
Receiver
1
I Tr ack inq I
hl' 3d Co li im,;t iCfl
I I
Ooeraror
i
I
i ?hcslng
I
I
I
i
I
1 SYSTEb1 I
!" O' r,po,'! - ro-r I
1.... ; ,. oi t:." I I
I '
I
,
I
I
\
I
i- i
I
\
, !

,
,
- ,
,

182 Guided Weapon Control Sys tems
i
-
,...
precisely equal) see Fig 7 . 2- 4 . Collimation error does not ari s e , but t here wi ll
now be a cont ri buti on due t o glint . Also, as has ment ioned in section 7. 2
t he t arget tracki ng .l oop now does not act as a l ow pass filter to nois e originating
at t he ta rget.
7.8 SOME GENERAL CONCLUSIONS ON ACCURACY
..., .
I. :' -
-I
,
There ar e many techni ques availabl e to track ta rgets and missil es , and t he contribu-
tions t o miss di s tance will clearly vary from system t o system. For i nst ance , if
t he infra -red emi ssion of the target i s sensed by a s ui table detector, t he phenomenon
of gl int will not ari se . Howeve r , the see ker may now "see " t he target well away
fro m its cent re , e .g . to the rear of t he j et exha ust in t he case of a j et aircraft,
and special te chniques may have to be employed t o bi as the guidance command.
Nevertheless, it is COmmon practi ce to make f irs t est i mates of systemaccuracy on
the l i nes indi cat ed in the previou s section , and t o check t hese r esults by a detailea
si mul at i on. If t he si mul at i on is a two-dimensional one , t he aerodynami cs are
reasonably linear , and no serious saturat ion occurs i n any of t he s ub-systems , t he
results are l ike ly t o be very simi l ar t o t he or i ginal esti mat es. However , if
the fi n se rvos should become sat urat ed by noise near in t ercept ion, or if t he
aerodynamics are very non-l inear , or if there i s much aerodynami c cr oss - coupl i ng,
and a comple t e th r ee-dimensiona l simulation is car rie d out , t he res ult s may be
qui t e different ; t he mi ss is usually much greater . The re ason is that the pr incipl e
of super pos i t i on cannot be applied ,men any serious non -lineari t i es are present .
However , designers are well aware of these danger s and seek t o min imise the i r
effect s, e .g . by r ol l position cont r ol , by using feedback round t he mi ss il e control
system to reduce t he effects of non -linear or var iabl e aerodynamic s , and by sui t ably
gains and compensat or s t o avoi d serious satura tion . Le t us t heref ore
consi der whether we have designed the "best" sys t em , and by t hi s is mean t t hat
systemwh i ch the minimum r .m .s . miss . It is clear from the exampl e in
Tabl e 7.7-1 t hat th e system coul d be improved Dy calling for a bet ter roll gyro
and a better reso lve r or by specifying roll position cont rol. Or we could t ry to
improve colii mati on etc . But any one of tne se opt ions will cost money and ma y not
resul t i n a more cost - ef f ect i ve weapon; and t o define precisely what a cost -
effect i ve weapon is , i n the author 's opinion, cordering on t he i mposs i bl e . ror
in stance, i f a cheaper sys tem re sults i n a giv en re duct i on in the chance of a kill ,
how less effect ive i s say a of the se sys tems agains t a giv en number of
targets arriving at different times? A reduced chance of a kill may significantly
reduce t he chance of the sys tem being able to t o make a ki l l event ually .
What can be sa i d however , is that the prelimina ry analys i s i n Tabl e 7. 7- 1 clearly
indicates which cont ributions are real l y s i gni f ic ant. If improvement s are t o be
,
oj
"
3.'
l
.i
,
i ;
.i ;
I .
"
J
,,
I'
I
-.. "
-- _ ......-:-
vu ln era ble areas are self-ev ideilt .
If tn i s definition of "best:' is accept ed t hen t nere is cni , One t ra ns r'e r f ur.ct io n
which is bes t . The design process is now dir"ect one and i s no lo nger ad hoc.
control theory goes furt her t her, t his . Usuall y the obje ct is t o mi ni mi s e
an integr al of the form:
\
I,
,.
I
!
r
"
I
I
i
\
i
133
or ) ct

J =j i el tdt
o
I t i s i nst ruct i ve to consider just hm( many st s res a r e us i ng pe r gu1oan:.:: eloop
in Co LOS sys tem using t erms . The qui dance recei ver giv es us angular
er r or, and if a complex phas e advancE network i s used we esti mate er ro r rate and
t he s econd deri vative of err or . :'iissil e body ancul ar rate and l at er ai accel era-
t i on ar e measured i n t he mis s il e . The t arget angular ra t e i s measure d and th e
anguiar acc e le r ation i s e ither measured 0;" es t i mat ed by a smoot he d diffe r ent i a t i ng
network . Missi le nomin al range and velocity ar e us ually stored i n the ground
I
computer . Thi s is a total of ni ne sys t em states . Wh at othe r i nf or mati on could
De used? We have al ready noted in section 7. 5 that addi tiona l er r or s can exist
due t o mis s i l e ori entat ion and that a knowledge of mi ss il e i ncidence is also needea
to compens ate f or this . Sureiy , witn mor e and subje ct less
noise and bi as e s VIe can go on improvi ng t he system eccui-acy .
it i s relevant t her ef or e to ask, no'!' ! car. mcder il cont r ol t heory nei p t re syst em
engi neer? We have seen in chapter 1 t hat we can achieve bet t er accuracy
- . -
by eltering the gains of t he t arg et trac ki ng loop a s a fun ct i on of the t r ac king
e r r or . But t he me thod of des icn in; : he s t r uct ure QT tne over all lcop , and the
des i gn of t he filters used in t he adaptive mechanism was es sent i ally a trial and
error ( pl us pr ocess ; and i n we can't j e cer t ai n t hat we have
th e best soluti on . We also found i n chapter 6 t hat we could design a "best "
autopilot if we used 2 criterion of The "best" autopi lot transfer
func tion was defi ned as that which mi nimi s ed t he integ ra1 of the ti n,e x abso lute
er ror ITAc t o an input step i .e .
is the distance of f the t r ue !..GS at th e 2"d of Al' Xc etc
r
are cert ai n system states s uch as the and mi s si l e fin rate,
and ('1 ' " z etc ar e ,f act or s hhich are usual Iy but not neces sar t l y cons tan ts.
Small val i.es of these cons tants i ndi cat e t na t t il e or pnys i cal constrai nts
on the solut ion are r e l at ivel y not very th e converse wuuld indicat e
that i f the demanded acc elerations , f ir. f a t es etc "arqe t hen t he mi s s i l e i s ve ry
expens ive . The di fficulty, of cour sE, is t o 'be ab12 t o to
' I
.'
\

--
184 Guided heapon Control Systems
t he s e "'ieighting factors, and some experience in operating ;.:ith modern con tro l
t heory i n conjuncti on wi th r ealisable har d'dare is necessary i n order to arri ve at
rea lis tic solut ions . However , what must be stress ed is t hat mo dern control t heory
wi ll, gi ven t he overal l system and constraint s , produce t he bes t fi lter desi gn a n ~
\;ill calc ulate th e bes t way in I'hi ch th e various gai ns must be var ied with t ime ;
an on-Li ne di gital comput er is necess ary . It is no t surpr is ing th at , in pract ice ,
syst ems des i gned with the aid of modern control t heory have often turned out to be
only marginal ly superior t o t hose des i gne d by or dinary clas si cal methods . Ne ve r-
thel ess, when one considers th at modern control t heory can be applied to any system
(and t his could i nclu de a nel' problemwh ere the cont rol system structure is not
apparent f rom pr evious exper i ence), and t hat computers are smaller, qui cker , more
powe rf ul and cheaper than ever befo re , i t seems i nevitable t hat mo der n control
theory wi l l be used more extensively in the next decade or so (5) , (6) .

REFERENC ES
1. GRIDL EY D.O .A. An analogue computer study of t ne int.er cept i on kt nematt c
properties of boost - coast line of sight mi ssi l es . Royal Ai rc ra ft Es tablis hment
Technic al Report 562 74 Sept ember 1965 .
2. FLI GHT Int er nat i onal 22nd April 1971 .
3. FOX J . E. An introduction to the effect of "lOr d l ength on dig i t al networks .
Briti sh Aircraft Corporation report ST 71 35 May 1972.
4. NEHTDN C.J . , GOULD L.A. , .and KAISER J .F. Analytical design of li near f eedback
controls . John ~ i 1 e y and Sons Inc 1957 .
5. HEAP E. 11ethodology of research into comma nd-l ine -of -sight and homi ng guidance .
AGARD l ec t ure seri es no 52 on guidance and cont rol of tact i cal mi ssi l es , May 1972.
6. HOFI1ilNN ',I. and JOOS D. t'lissi1e guidance techniques . AGARD l ect ure se ri es no
101. Guidance and cont r ol for t act i cal guided weapons wi th emphas is on s imu l ation and
tes ti ng June 1979 .
-
.to
8., L'TRODUCliON
"XI
11
11
CHAPTER 8
HEltDS AND SOME
STABILITY PROBLEMS
HOMING
ASSOCIATED
"homi nq eye" or a " se eker" . In hcnri r.q sy s t ems the s ight l i ne is de f ined as the
direct i on of t he line joini ng and ta(get ;lith respect t o a. space da t um.
Since \,:e wi l l J(: cc ncerneo only lyr:t n ci f f e r en ce s or '(J ; t h rates , any space datum ',, 111
S'JTTlCr: . For convenience Fi g 3.1-i i s to defi nE: t he angles ir: one plan e on ly
1i ne rate and th i s 15 do::e by i nc) udi;;g 2 homi ng head in the mi s s il e . homing head
i s a target t rac ker ; '..t hen mcuntec in an a. i r bo r ne m1S S i 1e i t is sOiiie't..i rr.:s called a
In the next cna pt er we cons ice r the behav iour of sy stems us i ng nOilling guidance dnG
it is pointed cut t hat the of t hese sys tems use a particul ar kind of
guidance 1a...: ce l l ec "pro por t i cnal na vi qat icn'' "/hien call s for a (ate of change OT
f l i ght path k ti mes the rete of change of si ght l i ne wher e k ; s call ed the
navigation con: t ant. Before t hi s can be in:p1 emente d we have to compute the s ignt
I
' I
,
I
,I
\
\
\
I
I
\
1
I
.1
' I
\
i
,I
j
I
but in pra ctice we will be concerned two of si ght line rates. One
ar i s es when che t a rg et trac ker i s Daunt Ed i n the mi ss i l e is
t he t no ron re solut i on is re q'J1 red s i r; e t ne mi s s t l e cont ro l axes (pi t ch and yaw)
can be made to coin cide wi t h t he t r acker up-cown and le ft - righ t axes . In de ed if
t he missile s hould r ol l the and ccnt ro l axes roll l: oge: ner. There wi ll De
no loss of general i t y if we co nf i;;E drSLlnent s to mot ion one pl dne .
;J
.,
,
,
,
The eccurecy of 2.1 ; t c. r' gC: t t r acke rs ; 5 a i:f ec"C 2c.: to SOlT:e extent 'Jy mo t j cn Dr t ne
mount i nq . Since t he hOmi ng heoc is ':,-' tlf1 t ec or: tri e mi s s i ie fr ame'...c rk , it t o l l ows
t ne t t here cc ul d be a tendency ,!l:-! t i0i: t o contaminate : h2 o f
sight line rat.e . I t appears thz t SO{'t of <;: yr os c ope in the hea d is re qui r e d to
1h5
186 Guided Control Systems
;>,
I
;::::;

is
<.u '-" '"
r;;
TRACKING l!l
SPACE DATUM
Urn
FIG 8.1-1 of angZes
t ar get is tracked and illumi nated by a special tracker (usuall y on tne ground) and
t he homing eye detects some of t he ref lected energy . t he boost per iod the
excess ive mot or efflux prevents the r ear reference signal gett ing through and no
guidance signals are possible .
Si nce t he homing eye i s mounted in a set of gimba ls in t he mi ssil e th ere i s going
t o be li mited angula r freedomwith respect to th e mi ssi l e. It is shaNn i n the next
chapter t hat i n a we l l designed homing system t he mi ssil e aut omat i cal ly devel ops a
l ead angle and, un less the target star t s manoeuvr ing , t he mi ss i l e tends to fl y
straight near in terception . . Fig 8. 2- 1 shows t he cl osi ng st ages of an engagement .
POINT OF IMPACT
Urn
FIG 8.2-1 stafes of a homing tnjectory
,
,
137
ThE: homi ntj nccc l ook- out c.il gl e ro:-' zero Lac)' ir. ci dsn ce i s the di f f e r ence between
t he fi ight path the s i ght t he t r acki ns er ror is a
fracti on of a degree. This look-cut ang1 2 (L} for const an[ mi ss i l e and t arget
speeds U and can bc f r om
iii ':..
sin L = si n
."
whe r e If is angl e the VEl ocity vector rnai\.E:S 'Ii i tn l ine: jo i ni ng t he
mi ss i l E and t ar get i .e.
s i n L = s in ; /n
',.;he r e n =- Um/U... . For a gi ve;') speed r ati o t he look-out angl e is a n.axi mun if
, c
1> = 90 I f a sys t ern i s designed for near- head- on engageme nt s or tail chases only,
1> cannot approach 90 i n pract i ce , but on t he ass umpt i on t hat any geometry of
engageme nt ha s to be ac cept ed and we al l ow :: I So say body i nci dence (i .2.
+ t he mi nimumangl e t hat must be avai l able mechanical ly in t he gi mbal
I II I
arrangeme nt i s gi ven Tabl e 8. 2- 1.
TABLE 8.2- 1 rmn :IUM GIMBAL ;O,'; GLE"NECESSARY
FOR t. SPEED RAT I O
-
-

-
: 1
:. "1
- I
", 1
-,
"': n
: !l

- I
: ;1
:. I
:. n
- : 11
: 11
- : !
I

L
L
angle
J
!
I
i
!
I
35
41
45
30
53
33
50
45
t 5
60
"' )
possi bl e in
"i OS }
poss ib l e a speeo advantage of de
30
26
18
90
, _ I
I 30 :
! I
I 45 I
I l
60 i
+
i
, ....' I
JV I
" 00 I
-"....
L _45_ _ -1_-=-::... -i
1 15 'I
2,
I
I
90
is nQ: pra ct i ca: l e to de s ig,1 heads wi th 9.iU1bal
Hany des i qns are l imi t ed t o about _ 40. It is seen
90
o
120
90
135
150
135
12.0
150
135
: 20
150
1
I
\
I
2
,

I !
! 1
I I
It has been found : hat it
angles
--- -::--
t herefore that if br oads: de ensa ge me nts ar e to be
l east .;z is esserrti al .
F.nd f inally t r,e homing head s e r vos ke e p the ent snna point ing at t he tc::.rset
mus t ha ve a s uf f i ci cn t l y hi gh DJ.r.cd idth . It is a!'gu:= d in the ne xt chapt.e r t hat a
homi ng head of 1 and 2 Hz bt adequate for most pur poses ,
Hovie ver i f there i s l i kely to a an d, s uddsn di st urbar. ce dus t o t he rr.i ss i le
r ol l i ng and ,:h::;e is rr;uch mechr:n:cc -i octveen the and t he rni ss i le body
---''''0 --- -
188 Guideo Control SysLenl s
a high bandwidth servo is essential to keep t he tra ck in g accu racy we l l wi tn i n the
antenn a beamdidth. Wi t h fas t crossing tar get s t he si ght line rate may be
considerable and t he servos mus t be able to move or "precess" t he head at least at
t his r ate.
8.3 SOME ELECTRO- MECHANICAL ARR...... NGEMENTS
A target tracker attempts to keep itself aligned with its boresight pointing at the
centre of ref l ect i ng are a of t he target. \I ith a stai onary mo un ti ng the accuracy
will be limit ed by noi se , bi ase s an d f r i ct i on. If there is some base mot ion which
t ends t o dist ur b t he ant enna the servos wi ll always dri ve in an at t empt t o bri ng
t he dis h back t o its ori ginal positi on . In the absence of any base motion the
supply voltages to the mo to r s could be used as a mea sure of t he anten na steady
state angul ar rat es , and for perfect servos th e anten na rat es wi l l al ways be equal
to the sight line rates . In prac tice of course there will be a dynamic l ag i n the
antenna f oll owi ng t he s ight line . In the next chapt er des i r able homing head ser vo
bandwidths will be discussed . fl is si l. mo t ion in pitch and yaw hovever , poses a
problem. De pending on the degree of mechani cal coupl i ng between t he drive mo to r
and the head itself , mi ssile mo t ion will t end to di st urb the head. The results of
t he servo res t orin g efforts \ti l1 no-, be interpre ted as due t o t arge t mo t i on and
spuri ous steer i ng s i gnal s will be ge nerated. Clearly it is desi rabl e f or t he di sh
t o be 100%decoupled from body mot i or. .
The electro- mechani cal arrangemen t of a naming nead aesigned at the Royal Aircra ft
Establis hment is shown in Fig 8.3-1 . Tile detector is space-stabi l ised by a gyro
wheel which i s spun up by re leas ing hi gh press ure ai r f rom a small bot tle. Pre-
cessin g t or ques. i n the pi t ch and yo" planes are provided by two pai rs of servc -
operated sol enoids. Tne c.g . of the detecto r and gyro ass embly li es at t he
intersection of th e gi mbal axes . Sucn a system is very well decoupled from the
body . There wil l be Stfay t orques from the leads t o t he dete ctor and some
..
frictional f or ces fr omthe bearings but t hese wii l be very small compared wit h tne
gyrosco pi c r i gid i ty Jw. An objection to the use of solen oi ds is t hat forces and
resulting torques, and hence prece ssional rat es are propo r t i onal t o cur rent squar ed
and are a non-linear f uncti on of t he ai r gap. To produce a steeri ng signal
proportional t o sight li ne rate would need some non-li near compen sati ng circuit s.
Amore conventional homin g head design ed by Space and Defence Systems Ltd
is shown in Fig 8. 3- 2. Convent i onal permanent magnet d.c. mot ors and a tota l gear
reduct ion of 200 t o 1 are used t o drive th e head, but t his arrangement leads to
some dis h-to-body coupl ing . Imagine an angular accele rat i on of t he body. Since
the mot or is geare d t o t he body if f'o l lows t hat if t he head is to remain
stati onary the motor mus t accel e rate . Als o , i f t he re is any rel at i ve vel ocity
-
lIIREAIRfiO ll C[

-'
._---_.-
r ---
, , , '" ( f;,- '-", I / I I
I(
\ j tJl n I ".,1 ---.... \
\ ' c";' 'I <,
. -,- /" ::J Ii " . ---r _'I
(
I : I '\.1
;: \. -. :' . I
.. - \, I ' " II d
\ I' ft I J II
\
I
\\ : -I;, \ \ tiI;,3...!- ''''-'>':)j' ,_. _
'\: . _-.1_
.=:==-= ==----=-=::rLJJ1- ==
I
f
t
I
I.
,
I
I i
I

I
I'
I.
"',
o
'"
ro
"'
n.
)0.
v '
v ,
o
n
c,
r'
n-
o
:"l
lCJ
: c.
ro
c,
ci.
'"
:c
o
"

V I
r'
n
U
-o
C
C'
c

V'
M' PLIFI ER .
STAllT VAt i !
1H[RMM Bt.T TfRV
3l nm/ rn
. - y
H(IJUC!NG VALVE Ctl ARf,J)lG VAi.VE
ML mlQ!Y Au


1 TT -e=--' --- 1
/ ' . ) )1 I j r:- iC--f---r
p I
/ ltW/ f(j fi // I '\ I
r .,.tc=" , =1. '
-,- ))1 i
'-----==..'-_.. .
, 1
.
WH[El ,
MASS . 7 Kg
INERTI A. 1020 Kg, mrn 2
MOMENTUM. , 107 Kg m2/ S
SPEED . 1O.000 1.p m
RUH UP mi t. 1 SEC
1HECESIIOH RAil . lO'IS Ee
l OOK M' Cli . . = O
> iOSEC
[[ ECTRICAI POWE" 80WAIL IMAXJ
SYS LUI 38 Kg I, PPROX ,
SERVO DEVElOP S fOR1 MIS.lllGtlM( HT
SERVO rWOUCES 50' PHASE C'G AIIO Hm Om IS
. 306 f GRA JI:WSOWtl mllUl or ! rAI
I ?HI
l
!
I
,,,. , I , "'t (..
,-<{ r"

co
co
'.-f ,"' f y.
L_
y
FIG 8 , :i - l II . A, E. prototype gy ro-stabi lised homing head
.. ..., ' -. .... _ .......... ..... ... .:..;;.;.:::.::... '.::': - .
nl '.J !-! !J1l ! kl ,.tIlMf )cf .1''Ill(.. ..IIt ( ....;,..l9r ,...( l
W
nUlf:. ' .;',,:1"'f;;.f--;:i-;;-f ,.'( rut ,.( ,. ( I
0

geli
oR
L.\
,
I{ "1'1-{-"1''1</

p
".;..
A- -
G.U . HOfllH G. HEAD
SHOWIHG AERIAL, MECHAH ISM,
M/ W UHII AHO RAiE GYROS

<D
o
G)
C

0-
ro
o,
::- =
rn
ru
-o
0
"
n
0
"r>
-t
0
'"
'<
, j
V>
0'

ro
3
V>
ll' _ ... 1 SfffOIIDl'W
UOm",

L..
I I I I
, I
_______J

Ill! tUG ,,/
t i le
10 1sma

jj;.!I , ,Il\lr\ 1L,.
[
PRECESSING RATE
oCPERMAHEHT MAGNET SIZE11 SERVO MOI ORS
MINIATURE RAIE GYROS fROM HORTlIROP OR
ELLI OTT IYPE IGRH
APPROX. wmll Of PART S SIIOWH H kg
SERVOERROR fORMAXIMUM TRACKINGRhlf . 0 1'
HOMIHAL SERVO OAHOYl IOlH . > 10HI
--_..-------_.__.__._- - -
A-

1[}=O\f
/' C' _ _ .<
' ,-- --.
..,." J@
AlIMUIK 10101 0\
1
g [\!ilH_ AA.II' IIH tRAHSfORMER RE MOVEO
VIE W Yl IIH GYRO CHOl( REMOVED
. __ . -" ---_ .. ----
FIG 8. Mar'c oni Spac e and Defence Syst em::; Ltd homing head using d . c . mot ors and r-at e gy r o8
ti on of t he sigh t li ne rate .
It 'dill be noted that the si gh! line r..t E: S crt as seen D}' t he !1omir'9 and
excep t when eri e l ooks s traight ahe ed t.he 0.) ' ::' axes ':-i i i: no t cou.c i de ',d t h t he
mi s sil e axe s . IF t he oute r gi li1ba l is mounte d iti t :-( i-t s exi s or rot at ten i ii th e
error s i qna l vl1th the ra te gyro signal t h?. t t ne re s ul t arr t i:; the best repre sent a-
Homi ng neec s (In 'J .. ;;,i':: Associated St eoi l i t y Ptoblc:!ls 191
between the mo t cr rotc!' and t he bccy =. voltage wi l i bs genEr ated i n the mot or
windings . The desi gn pri nciple is akin tc t hat shown in Fi g 1. 4- 1 in that one
relies on hi gh ga i n inner ra te loops us-ing ra ce gy r os to de coupl e he ad
f rom body motion. In SOi:1e large homing heads hydr aul i c jacks are used to move t he
heed and th e me chani cal coupiing problem can becorae me r e se vere. The additi onal
techniques of "rni s s i l e cornpens at i on" an d "I ine of sight i s ol a t ion" a re di s cus s e d
It can be argued that rat e gyro out put s are nct the s ignal s
t o repr esen t sight li ne rates as i n additi on t ney conta irl t he signals
i"/h i ch we do not want to know eo out . Ingen i ous s cheme s ha ve been de vised t o mix the
I
I
I
I
\
\

I
\
I
I !
I
,
ahE.::d aos i t i on, the re sol ut i ons 'nhich are are
,
!
i
i
\
8
mz
-
6
h
?
ccs P
, -
c:. f1 C iJ B. co.:;
- -=.
:;;. In
-
;
if:
"
l7' ,j" r.y 'i":
where s uf f i ce s in anc h refe r- t o :;t; c-':: This ri::qi...i rcs t wo
r esol vers e nd tfh=se a n.: 5.;';;,. ; pos t t tr, n 'in F i g 8.3-2. Iue r e i s a
f:..: r the r compl i cet ion in t he gyro i'if:2 t: ! . ers i on s i ncc th e s ceady pr ecess ion
rate abo ut the outer gimba l ax i s 15 l; j -:h.: ,;OS1rI (;- of arl l::jle o f r otati on of
t he t orque axi s , To obt ain an aCCUI"'?, r. e of tr.e pre cess t onal ra t e one has t o
at.tenuate the si gnal prcpcrt ior.a l t o cur rent "-J y cos 0. , some
systems wh i ch expect t o have J. CU not CG t ni s resolution ,
if t he angl es a and 6 are small snOrl S t he accuracy of
homin g is not si gni fi cant l y affected.
A'1d f inall y ) heM does _ homing eye ecquir-e c. e n ? There are t "G di s ti nct
me t bcds . If t here i s ::. s urve i l lence ra dar ha s acqu i r e d a target as e re s ul t
of an ang ul ar s earch and has s tored its angu ljr posi t ion t he homing head ca n De
t hat t he s ur-vai l l ence .radar and mi ss i I e have to lJ2 al i cned. The al te rns t i ve
met hod is t o make t he hea d sea rch rc :" 6. t,;;'get . The two precess ing mo tc rs (i r e fe c
"
with signal s 90
v
of ',ii t.il oth?r cers inc the head to des cr ibe of':
el li pse. I f the incoliiing energy 12'-,i (;1 r e3.chcs a ce rt a i n lE; ve1 t he s e si gna ls a r e
inh ibited ; the (.ead s hould t hen \' lock on" .
192 Guided We apon Cont rol Sys t ems
8.4 THE EFFECT OF RADOME ABERRATION
Consider a homi ns missile with t he t arget tracker i nside a protective cover cal led
a radome, t he ext er nal shape of whi ch is det ermi ned mainly by aerodynamic considera-
tions . The r adome causes an angular di s pl acement of the tracking aer ia l polar
diag ram and the angular difference between the apparent s ight - line and the act ual
si ght - l i ne is called radome aber r at i on. For a given radome thi s aberrat ion i s a
function of the angle of look 6 - , see Figs 8.4-1 and 8.4-2 . If the abberat ion
m
is not constant any mi ss i le motion wil l change th e angle of l ook and apparent
sight- line rates vlill be genera t ed, which in t urn wi ll affect mi ss i l e att itude .
Sma ll diameter mis s i l es ar e at a di sadvantage her e si nce aber rat i on i s a functi on
of wavelength-to-diameter . We have to ask
(a) Can th is apparent di sh-body coupling unstabilise t he gui dance loop?
(b) Can it degrade t he sys t em performance?
(c) How can one specify what sor t of r adome aberrat i on can be t ol erat ed?
For any value of 6 - the aberrati on angle can be defi ned by
in
(8 .4 -1)
wher e c is not necessar i ly a cons t ant and y is t he aberrat i on slope at tha t poi nt.
The value of y is al so not a constant, but the f ol l owi ng analys is is jus t i f i ed On
the grounds t hat i t is often apprOXimately constant over a range of ang l e . Hence
the angle 6 ' as see n by t he homing eye i s given by
O'OO+Ob o+c+y (o
<1
- 6(1 T y) + C (8 .4 - 2)
If the homing head produces a signa l proport ional to s ight l i ne r at e and the
autop ilot a r ate of change of flight path as a result of a corrrnand and bot h t nes e
subsystems are adequately model led as quadrati c lags then t he bl ock di agram i s as
shown in Fig 8. 4- 3. The effe ct ive f orward d. c . gain nas been combi ned as one
number , k t he navi gat ion This number f or satisfactory intercept ion of
targets is us uall y i n the ra nge 2-6. Si nce t he quant i t y c is an effective in put
or dist urbance t o t he sys tem' ra t es wi ll be generated if it is not a constant . This
wi l l clearly aff ect sys tem accuracy; a realistic si mulati on wi t h a real homing
head and rea l source inco r por ated i n t he syst emsi mulation is the only satisfact ory
way of assessi ng its af fect . However , the aber r at i on slope factor y now provi des
a new feed back path and its ef f ect on gui dan ce loop stability will now be considered.
The transfer function i s now
(1 + Tsh
1
s
w
na
2 s
lJ
a
,
- T 1)
sk
1
2
+
to
na
2 2 s
s lJh
(--;0; + -- +
c W
W , nh
nn
-
I
ril e;;;;;
GIA
s'"
IY
D-1

'------------.
FIe 8 .4-] Redone aberrati on.
193

______
c
, .
.., .
,..
.., .
r-
.: I
.., I
.
'-
r
..,
, _' I
':' I
- I
" I
'i I
- I
,"
,'" I
E'
' !-i I
it I
w I
:nI
,,., I
I
I}- '
i"'"'r-
iw 1
i;-r
i
b
tJ
St.abi 1i ty Pr oo1e rjiS
- ----3'- - - -
/
I
_--,-_I , _
!V_ I
<:
I
I ,
\
I
- v e
FIG e . -;d-2 Abel ':.: 'ut-ion (Ingle us Q
of' anql.e
IT
;1
']
:J
;-r
...
194
which simplifies to
wnere
Guided Weapon Con t rol Sys t ems

k 1
+
y
,
1 + ky
;
4 3 2
e a
4s
+ a
3s
+ aZs + a1s + 1
a
4
(
1
2) / (1 + ky)
2
wnh
W
na
a
3
(
ZUh
ZU
a
2) / ( 1
+ ky)
;
2
+
w, W
Ul na wnh
nn na
(8. 4- 3)
The si mp lest possib le s ituati on arises when t he autop\lot is very much faster than
the homi ng head and its dynamics can be neglec ted . In this li miting case margi nal
s tab il ity i s when a
l
; 0, i . e.
- k T. y ;
1
or - ky ;
( 8. 4-4)
It is seen that only negati ve aber ration sl opes re duce stabi lity margi ns ; positive
aberrati on sl opes increase the ef fect ive damping. If uh ; 1.0 , wnh ; 10, T
i
; 1.0
and k ; 4 t hen the negative sl ope must not exceed 0.05 Or 5%. Homing heads are
normally designed to be at leas t cr i t i cal ly damped to hel p i n this res pect . The
other extreme cas e is when the homi ng head and autopilot have equal undamped natural
fre quencies . The conditi ons for stabi l ity by the cr i t eri on are
a
l
(a
Z
- a
l
a
4/
a
3)
> a
3
With a more rea listic model of the system i t is seen from Fig 8.4-4 that both posi t ive
and negat ive aberra t ion slopes can be harmful but that i n general the negat ive
slopes are much mo re criti cal . The reader should note tha t at l east one wri t er
def ine s aberration as a function of - e, not e - In such a case posit ive s l ope
m
cor responds to our negative slope . If bot h t he homing head and autopilot are heavi ly
damped the chance of radome aberration r esult i ng in i nst abil ity or near - ins t abil ity
is greatly reduced . In addition it is seen that the i nci dence lag is al l - impo rtant .
Typ i cal ly th i s is about 0.5 s or less f or a s upersonic mi ssi l e f lying at l ow
alt itudes but can eas ily be Z s or more at near-super soni c speeds and at altit ude .
If a missile oper at es over a range of speeds and/or hei ght s and radome aberra t ion
is present, the homing head bandwidt h has to be very low indeed say i n the range
4-6 rad/s . The reader is r ef er r ed t o a paper by Jac kson (1) which deal s more fully
with this and other alli ed topics .
\
.
.'
--_.. -- - -
_ _=_ _ __.......w....:4___'__._. , ..L
nu!o; ng Heads and Some Associated St abi li t y Probl ems
195
30
I
J
wnh = w
n a
J1. h =J1.
o
=1.0
]
wnh = w
no
Il h = 1.0 Il o =0 .5
J
wno =00
}l h = 1. 0
__ ,= au:. a::= ......
---
- - -
- --
2 0
!
-
-
10
I
\
\
\
,
FI G 8 . 4,-.;1 irni :.-;'n9 vc.Zu.es Qf abe s-rati on s l ope
t -:,rnee navigation conc tant:
o
'1
\
- 1
2 ,
k l
1ne re is a t encency for homing mi ss i le diameters to be smel le r than obtained a
generation age. This increases t he aberr-a t i on probl em as t he aberration s l ope is
approxi mat e l y propo rt ional to the numb er of R.F. wavelengt hs i n t he diamet er of
t he ra dome. Thus if the s l ope is 4% fo r a 24 em di ameter ra dome at 10 GHz, it
s houl d i ncr eas e t o 6% if we go to 16 cm diameter . If we go t o 15 GHz and retain
t he origi na i di ameter the slope is reduced to about 2.7%. But changing the
also changes th e and t his in i s af fe:ted by a change in
fr equency: Also, t he s lope i s very s ensi ti ve t o the fineness ra t i o of t he radome
( LID) . The s har per t he nos e the larger the aberra tion . The ty pi cal fi gures above
r ef er t o LI D rat io of 2.5 . For an LI D r atio of 1, i . e . a hemi sph er e , the aberra t i on
i s nea r ly zer o . However this lat t er cour s e increas es th e aerodynani c dr ag
consi der abl y es pec i ally at superson i c speeds, and t he maj or ity of homi ng systems
ar e super sor. i c. Anot her techn ique of redt.:c;-lng the aberr at ion and hence aber r ati un
slope is t o taper the wall t hicknes s very sl i qht i y . Frequency c.g i l i t y el s o reduces
the effe ct i ve aber ration . th e ac ver.t of cncap mic roproces sors: it has bee r.
ser iousl y s uggested tha t as t he fo r gi ve n head i s knOWll

196 Guiued Cont r ol Systems

bef oreha nd (or can be measured after ma nufacture) , and the angle e - can be
cont inuous l y meas ur ed 'by two pote ntiometers on the gimbal s , t hen the aber ra t ion
can be allowed for in a microprocess or .
8.5 ISOLATED SIGHT LINE AND MISSILE COMPENSATION
If valve -controll ed hydraulic j acks are used for the dish servo actuato rs the
dish-body coupli ng i s a maxi mum since a hydra ul ic servo is very sti ff i ndeed wh en
t he val ve is i n the mi d posi t ion . It is a fair approxi mat ion t o regard t he ser vo
as producing a dish movement relative to the body; the detect or di s pla cement is
the servo displacement plus t hat due to t he body. The coupl ed situati on f or a
conventional rate gyro itabilised head i s as shown in Fig 8. 5- 1.
FIG 8.5- 1 The of Line of s i qiu: i.solat i on
't'm
AUTO PI LOT
Yo
d
RATE GYRO
Yg
AMPLI FIER AK0 I- ..,...-, --,--(+ .
ACTUATOR Yh d- 'fm
KAV FILTER
Vi
k
r-- - -,
I LOS I
r - -; IS0LATI OM...
I 1 Y I
l _ _ C_ _ .J
where Y
r
is t he receiver transfer function plus any network consi dered necessary .
Y
h
is the' se rvo ampl i f ie r and actua to r t . f .
Y
g
is the r ate gyro t .f ,
k is the navigation, cons tant.
Y
i
is an coupling fil ter t .f . ( not always used) .
Yo i s the autopil ot t .f . for an output of body posi tion.
Con sidering the t ransf er function die algebraic man ipulat ion yields :
d 1 + kY iYo/YrY
h
6 = 1 + Yg/Y
r
+ I/Yr Y
h
+ kY
1
Y
o
/7h
If one put s k = 0 t hen the tra nsfer funct ion is f or t he s imple uncoupled head
servo. The effect on the ser vo can be seen to be small if Y
h
is very large; tnis
i s not surpris ing since a servo a very large gain wipes out disturbances
effi ci ent ly . For mo derate values of Y
h
(and/or l arge values of Yo) t he eff ect can
be unstab ilis ing, In practice addi tional feedback as shown cal led "l ine of s ignt
o
I i
,
II
!\:
\:
,
' . '
H
..
\. :'
,-
1
\
\
\
l
I
,
,
1
I
I
\
I
I
I
I
,
\
I
I
I
r-
, i
;
I ,
" I,
j :

"

I:
11
H
; ,

I'
' j

'\
,I
]
,

I
j
!
\

c
,
I

!
-
-
C
-,
197
...
r-_ --iI HIPLl F1ER AKO
1 AmmR Yh Y:Y
s
'--__... RH E GYR 0 I--------i d
I Yg
COn STAMT . FILTER AMD L
/ k Yi Yo I y
m
AUTOPi l OT RATE GYROAHD
ll Yn
... .-. l"C
RECEIVER
Yr
homi ng Heads a nd Some Associ at ed Stability Pr oblems
body coupling i s so weak ,
is o l ati on" is use d . By chcos i nq t he transfer f unction Y
c
carefully one can reduce
t he effect of changes i n rece i ve r axi s fro:n aff ec t in g meas ur ement s of si ght li ne
rate .
A second t echni que for improvi ng the degree of sys tem stabi lity ove r and above t hat
obta inable wi t h is olated line of si ght i s t o at tempt to nullify the effect of body
mo t ion by f eeding back a n addi t ional proces sed s ign al f rom t he a utopi lot rate gyro
(as suming the re is one) as shown i n Fig 8 . 5- 2 . Thi s me thod is us uall y called
"nr i ssi l e ccmoens a t i on" The reason ing behind this method i s as f'ol l ows . In the
absence of any missile body a t t i tude coupling the trans fe r func t ion dl o is gi ven by
d 1
= I /Y y, + j IV ,1
r n ' g r T
Howe ve r t he r e is an addi tional feedfon'lard path f r om tne- poin t " X' whos e tra ns f er
func ti on i s kY iY
o
' Nm'/ the a utop ilot rate gyro output ca n , wi th proces s ing , me as ure
body at ti t ude . If , \'1; til further process; ng the trans fe r fu ncti on f rom <li m t o th e
poi nt t1XII c a n be mace equal to I/ Yh whicn is the ampl i f ie r and ac tuator t ransfer
funct i cn t his add i t ional negative feedback has a t ransfe r functi on of kYiYoYh / Y
h
::
kYi Y
o
' In prac tice of cour se t here i s not 100% body coup l ing an d t he se rvo is
pro ba bl y non- l i near, Up to 80% cance l l e ticn of body moveme nt ha s been cl aimec by
the us e of missi le compens at ion when hydraulic actuators have been US20 . The
me thod is us ual ly not necessary wi t h s eekers mount e d on a s pi nni ng rotor as the
FIG 8 . 5- 2 The Of missiZe compen$at i cn
REFER::NCE
1 . JACKSON R.F . The ch oice of autopilot banC,;ic t r: i n a h Oill iflg u.i s s i l e . Br'1t isn
Ai rcr- af t Cor pora t i on r epo r t 5"1 7
i
i ()g . 197 2..
I
\
\
i
I
\
' I
\
\
I
i
I
i
I
I
I'
!
!
I
CHAPTER 9
PROPORTIONAL NAVIGATION AND
HOMING GUIDANCE LOOPS
9. 1 INTRODUCTION
We have seen that command are designed t o ma int ai n a near -const ant guidance
open loop gai n. We have also seen that there are th ree points which are rele vant
to the gUidance loop, the stationary tracker On the ground, the mi ssi l e and the
target . In homing systems the target tracker {s in the miss ile and the ult imate
source of the energy entering t he missile homing head i s i rrel evant as fa r as any
of the arguments or discussions in this chapter are concerned , i .e. we are concerned
wi th the behaviour of t he missile wi t h respect to the ta rget as a res ul t of energy
emana ting f rom the target. Homi ng guidance is some t imes called "t wo -point gui dance".
It f ol l ows tha t as the missile approaches t he target i n homing systems t he gai n of
the angular error detector in the missile increases as l /r where r i s t he i nst ant aneous
range of the missile to t he target ; a gi ven lateral displacement off th e tracker
axis appears as an ever-i ncreasing angle as the engagement proceeds . Wh en consider-
i ng homing guidance one must keep t his si mple fact const ant l y i n mind as i t i s a
source both of great strength and great weakness . Si nce there must be a number of
la gs i n t he loop i t appears the refore that the sys t emmust eventual ly go unst able .
However , it wi ll be two -point guidance allows one to use sight - line
rate not sight-l ine angle as a guidance sign al and hence one can regard the guidance
loop as cont ain ing one inherent differentiat ion which wil l off-set one of t he
inherent integrations . There are no i mme di at e concerns over gUidance loop stabili ty
at l ong ranges ; but thi s will have to be examined i n deta i l for shor t ranges .
9.2 A PARTICULAR CASE
In order to obtain some feel -for t he proble mbefore resorting to ma t hemat i cs it is
worth consi dering the speci al case of an intercept ion when missile and t ar get
speeds are constant and Um/ U
t
= 2 say. The ta rget is assumed to fly st raight and
initially ve ai mat th e t arge t i n th e saIT>2 way as we would with a CLOS or beam-
198
I

- ,
-,
- ,
. ,
199
( 9 . 2- 2)
(9 .2-')
U
m
. - h"

__....... .L-
Pr-oport iona l Na'/i ';at1an ar:d Huming Gui dance Loops
0"'-.t:.::', - -'J
I
guidance law automa t i c all y es t abl i s he s a lead angl e . Indee d, one can ta ke th e
arg ume nt furth er . Consi de r mi ssil e and t ar ge t flying s t ra i ght at cous t ant s pee c:::)
U_ and U. respective ly and in t er ce pt i ng at I, rig 9 .2 -2 . Since
:, 1 t,
rl I
o
V = U
t
Two cases are cons idere d (a) k = 1 and ( b) k = 4 and lags On the system are
neg lected. In Fig 9 .2 -1 t1
0
' 11
1
, fl
Z
and To, '1' Tn are pos itions of t he mi ssil e
and target at launch and at s uccessi ve intervals of t i me afte r l aunch. Dotted
lines repre sen t t he s igh t line . If t he navigation constant is un ity then it is not
difficult t o s ee t hat as t he t raj ect ory direction changes at t he same fat e as the
sight line and one ai ms at the target i n the f irst place then t he l i ne drawn
t angent i a l t o the mis s i le fli ght path mus t s t art and rema in coincident with t he
sight line . Since a tangent to the fl ight path i ndicates t he i ns t ant aneous
direct ion of t he fli ght path such a t rajectory is often. refe rred to as a "purs ui t
cours e" as it is t he sort o f traj ect ory a dog might conceivably follow i f chasing
a rabbit . He al ways hea ds t he "t ar qet" and never attempts to aim ahead. If
a navigati on constant of say fo ur is used , initially the s igh t line rate must be
t he same as i n t he firs t case, but th e mis s il e st eer i r.c commands are four t i mes as
great; as a re s ul t the mi s s il e veers off much mo re to the left . Surely , if one
manoe uvres energeti cally ear ly on, theri? \rill be less and le ss. to do as tne
engagement proceeds ? Examin at i on of the diagram shows t hat the si ght 1ine re ce doe s
reduce as th e engageme nt procQeds. It i s mos t i mportant to realise that such a
ridi ng sy stem . The guida nce lo op is erlgineered to produce a rate of change of
trajectory Vihi ch is k t ure s the rat e of change of sight line (e) and k i s
called t he navi gation const ant , i. e .
-
I
!
I
,
I
!
'I
i
\
\
;
\
JS
1
i
!
1
G)
c
ca,
rn
CL
ro
o
o
,-
ro-
00
D
o
"
n
o
" rt
-s
o
~
~
" m
3
~
U
m
-2
Ut
NAVIGATI ON CONSTANT"
" ,
I I I I
/ I / I / J
I I I I / J
I I I J / J
I I I / J /
I I I I / I
I I I J I /
I I I I J /
I I I J J /
I I I J J I
I I I J / /
I I I J / /
I f I
I I I / J /
/ I / / I /
I If/ i /
If f / / /
I ' / / / /
f { I / /
( f /
I I f / I
I ! / I /
f f I / /
4 ~ I I I /
I / / /
f I / /
I J / /
3 ~ I / I
J / I
I / I
1/ 1
2 ~ I I
/ /
//
l J/
I
I
,
I
I
,
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\f
6
M
O
7 6 5 4 3 2 1 TO
I
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
/
I
I
"
7
8 9 10
FIG 9 .2-] Proportional navigation
t rajector ies
5 " 3 2 1 TO
I ' I
I I / I I I
\ I I I / I
I I I / / I
I / / / I I
I I I / I
, I If/ I
\I / r/II
'\ 1' 1 / / /
I I I /
. ... \ I I J / I
6... 1 I I J I /
I J I / /
I { I J I
5 ~ f / / /
I I / I
{ / / I
I I I /
44/ / / /
I J /
I / /
/ I /
3t" /
/1/
/1
II
2r
l
I
,
,
10 9 8 7 6
Um - 2
Ut
NAVIGATI ON CQ'-6!ANTI
M
O
-- -- - -
"
-- - -- - ----- - -
Prcpor t i ana1 Na'li gati on and Horr: i ng G'Jl dance Loops
201
- I
- ,
. I
_ r I
- , I
:' ,
--
-' '.
I
- .
-' .

: j
: ' .
': .
':' .
: n
: .
-, ..
- I
- .

- ' ,
: I
-= I
: - I
I
CASE 2
r
I
\ LAi' E:::7I.A L
/
t' l ' '

I- - - - - - -,-- -,_"-,'_,,,
:HS?L AC.EME NI _ "" ...""" _
I ./ : vH..OClTY
I / $
i /" / / 1
\
CASE
TI M E \
LA; c."' Al Ace EL ERAT!-::n..
-:

\
\
then is clear tha t the t;;angles HoTol , et c are si mi l ar t r i anql es and
therefore s ucces sive si cnt li nes ;'11 11 etc are paralle l i . e . t he sight line
does not rotate . Thi s very fact i s the basi s of propcrt ional navig at ion.
i f th e si ght line does not rJtcte in spac e then no st eeri ng commands are necess ary
as one is on a collis ion course. 1;- the sight line dces rotat e (i . e . e exi sts )
t hen a change of trajectory direction i s required and it must be in such a sense
as to reduce e, Clearly t he plane of the manoeuvre must be in t he pl ane of e,
Imagine t he missile t o be roll pos i t ion stabil ised. The homin g head measures t he
vertical component and t he hor i zont a l component of s ight line f ate and passes
thes e signal s suitably sca le: to t he e l e veto r anc rudder servos re spect ively . Even
if t he missile i s not roil posit ion stabilised no r e soi ut i on is nece$s ary as t he
homing head rotates 'tIit h mi s s -;le and mi ss i l e s er vos; so no vert i ca l r efere nce
i s neces s ary either .
i he concept of proporti onal navigat i on originated with ma r in er s wno must
have knc\-m for centuries t hat if any object , moving or stat ionary , appears
s t at i onar y and looms larger and l a r ger t hen a col li sion is i r evi t abl e unls s a
change of cours e is ma ce . I t will be s honn t hat in a well designed homing sy stem
l at e r a l accelerations t end t o decreas e as one nears t arget (provi ding t he l atter
cces not manoe uvr e) . In cccmand sys t erc f or aoproac hinq targets this can never be
$ 0; l a t e r al eccc l crat tons tend t o ir cre as e towar-d s impuct . Con sider iJ. si mpl ified
sit uation as s hown i n Pi g 9 .2-3. Suppcs e the mi ssile maxi mum i ate r al acceleration
an of durat icn I seconds is f i n both cases , but assume it
de creases l in earl y with t iwc in c as e 1 and i ncre ase s l inear ly with t ime i n 2.
I f no al l owance is made thE fact tha t the di r ecti on of l at ax is cont i nuous ly
changi ng t hen:
I
\
\
\
I
I
- .

-.
202 Guided Weapon Co ntrol Systems
Case 2
=f t iT
= Jt dt + C
2
= t
2
/ 21 + C
2
f t 3 .
= or + C
2
t + C
4

reduce to :
n
z
""l)
Th i s is not surprlsl ng as lateral is the moment of area of t he l ateral
acceleration/t ime gr aph and the moment of area about the point t =T for case 1 is
twi ce that of case 2. Put in another way if a lateral displ acement has t o be made
by th e missile because the target velocity i s not di rected t owa r ds th e miss i l e
la uncher then a homing missile using proportional naviga ti on wi ll require le ss
l atax t han one usi ng CLOS or beam- riding guidance. pf course, i n homing systems
given some comput i ng facilities one can aim off in the first place t o reduce 1at ax
requi rements st i ll further . We now proceed to a mo re general analysi s .
Case 1
missile la teral acceleration f f (1 tiT)
l at er al velo city =
f J( 1 t i T)dt + C
1
= f (t - t
2/2T)
+ C
1
l at eral displacerent
. t
Z
t
3
f (---z - bTl + C
1
t + C
3
and f or zero init ial conditions , putti ng t = T these expressi on s
,
n
z
and

3
9.3 THE MATHEMATICAL MODEL
There i s a formidable difficulty i n arriving at a general soluti on of the equat ions
describing the behaviour of homing systems using proportional navigation . One can
assume a. linear model for the homing head and aut opilot and l inear ity of the
kinematics can be ob tained by assumi ng t hat the effect of target manoeuvre , noi se ,
Or a error of the missi le from t he ideal direction whi ch would l ead to a
constant bearing collision course , as a small perturbation from t hat collis ion
cours e. This a1iows one to make small angle approximati ons . If one's at t enti on is
di rected to the closing stages of t he engagement thi s coul d be argued t o be a fai r
approximation as the is usually on a near - constant bear i ng t r aj ect ory just
before i mpact . The assumption is less valid if the target makes a l ar ge evas ive
manoeuvre during this period as our simplified geometry could undergo a good deal
of di st ort i on. Fig 9.3-1 defines t he inte rception geometry .
The t arget i s f lying at 9
0
to t he original sight line MoT
o
whi ch i s regar ded as
a refe rence direction , and t he mi ssi l e i s flying at a smal l angl e to t he
corre ct f light path to obtain a collison at I . The correct f li ght path angle
i s gi ven by:
9
0
(9.3-1)
th e paper parall el to MoT
o
at
miss i l e and t ar get perpendi cul ar
The re lat ions hips
U
m
si n 9f co =U
t
sin
The re is i n fact an imaginary line whi ch travels up
a veloc ity of U
m
s i n 9f co' Any perturbat ion of the
to th is line i s denoted by z and z. respe cti vely .
m c
I
I
I
I
l.
l
I
!
203
Ut
Line Ii to
Mo To
Ur "t=r
I . 0
I
FIG 9 . 3- 2 Iritercept-i on geor:e t T'";j
for the stages of engage ment
Pro portional Navigat io n and Homi ng Gui dance Loops
e
__JM!t)
Urn

I foll ow :
(9 . 3- 3)
(9 .3-2)
I = t an e
(z. - z )/ r = (z. - zm)/U
r, l" m \.,
e = t an
and for angles
where G = si ght l ine engl e
r = the l anse f rommi $s i l e t o targe t "
U
r
= t he relati ve or closi ng velocity = Urn cos - U
t
cos c
and r = t he ti me t o go consi dered zero wh en r = O.
The oe thod used by t he author te comp ute mi s s di s t ance i n one plane is to cOffipute
Zt - zm at r = O. This is not th e t rue vec to r mi s s distance but it can be shown
t hat this is very nearly s o pr ovi ded t hat th e concept of smal l ps r-t urb at i ons s ti ll-
hol ds .
HOI! does such a model look i n t he convent ional closed loop r epras ent at ion? If
i
i
and
is sma ll we can regard = Yf co because
" f = 'iJ
f co
:: 'iJ
e
cos wf =cos (Yf co :: "e) =cos "fco cos " e
51 n
" f co s in We
vaits rad-
l
(9 .3-4)
(9 . 3-5)
Fi g 9 .3-2.
---- i
I
,
204 Guided Weapon Control Systems
Navig ati on
Lat er a l
con s t ant
Ho ming head
'ct
Autopi l ot
acceleration f
G
t I
s
Cos 4J fco
Zm
K
r=
S 2
2" h S
s 2
2}Ja s
s 2
+ --+ 1 - +
__+ 1
Ur T
W2nh .
Wnh
2
Wna W no
..
FIG 9 .3-2 Smal l: perturbation closed Loop repreeent atri on of a homing head
Si nce t he t i me to go T = T - t , ,,here T is t he t ime to go for t he init ial posi t ions
l.l
o
T
o
' i s common t o all systems and engagement s , all syst ems wi l l , for t he same
dynamic l ags, be identical if
K
U; cos = a constant = a , say. (9. 3-6)
Thi s const ant n has no dime nsions and is usually known' as the kinemat i c gai n or
ki nema t ic stiffness ; it i s not t he open loop ga i n: The open loop gain i s a/T o If
an opt imum value for a exists t hen it follows that one should adopt a navigat i on
(9.3-7)
K
U
r
a
cos "' f co
It wi l l be shown that i n most cases a shoul d lie i r. t he r ange 3. 5 t o 4. Now , IjI f co
cannot exceed about 45
0
because of mechani cal angle of l ook consi derati ons and in
mos t cases i s li kel y to be much less th an this . We can deal wi t h this var iable i n
const ant such th at
r eal systems i n one of three ways :
(a) negl ect it al t oget her as is the usual case i n CLOS and beam-r iding syst ems .
Its exis t ence resul t s i n a small loss of open l oop gain . OR
(b) make t he approximat ion t hat 0.707 < cos IjI fco < 1 an d t herefore cos IjI f co = . 85.
OR
(c) comput e or IjI f co' The author knows of no systemwhere t hi s has been done.
The computati on or ot herwi se of U
r
wi l l be dis cussed l ater .
Suppose now that t he mi ssile autopilot uses rate gy ro feedback only , and t hat t he
feedback i s lagged by a t ime const ant whi ch approxi mates t o t he inci dence
l ag; such an autopil ot produces a fl i ght path rate as a result of a demand . For
s uch a syst emden ot e t he navigat ion cons tant as k (dimens ions ar e r at e of change of
fl i ght path/rate of change of sight li ne i . e. no dimensions) and s i nce
f
y
= U
m
(9. 3- 8)
t hen this system is equi valent to one vlit h a lateral accel erat i on autopilot i f
-
- - - - --= __c:-- _....,...:::
,-
- ,
_I
: I
: I
-:1 I
- I
- : I
:'11
:1
: r
: 1.

: 1
: r
: I

_ i
c
-
-
-
: !
205
(9 _3-10)
(9 .3-9)
k :: K/ ll
.... in
i . e.
Proportional ;:avigJtion Homing Guidance Loops
-
must be four s e conds , threa seconds , t wo s econds , one second to go etc _ So a
si tuati on '",he r e the rc l at i ve ve lcci ty is 10,tI a tail chase, 'res ul t s in a large
ga in fer a long ti me due tel the pffect ; t herc f cr e the na vigat ion constant
s hould be reduce d. \J1::n t he r e is o. head-on att ack, a short range and therefore
hi gh gai n) exists f or a short time only end therefore t he navigati on constant s hould
be s et highe r . We are ce al in c ylith a s ituation where t he open lOOP gain is time
varying, an d al l systems have the s ame open leop gain at the same time t o go i f a
is a cons tant . I f u = 4 , then ':he open l oop ga i n is unity f or T = 4 , it is 2 for
T =2 , it is 4 f or T = l and 3 for T " 0.5.
U ""0('" '!J
ill '-'''' . fcc
It i s perhaps ea s ie r, t o env i s aqs such 2 sy stem rat he r than t he acceleration system.
Suppose = 2. Then ;
I " I..
( a) for head on at t ac k U /U = 1.5 an d ccs Of = I
, r m . co
( b) fo r broads ide at tack U /U ;; 0 .266 and cos '!J
r
::: . 866 an d
rill'iCO
( c) for a t ail chas e U jU ::: 0.5 and cos ::: l .
r m "TeO
For cas e (a) therefore one should demand a f light path rate six times the sight
li ne ra te fo r e to be 4 . For case (b) the demand s hould be f our times t he sight
l ine r ate and f or cas e ( e) the demand fcr fli ght path rate s hould be reduced to
twice t he si ght line rate .
There is a s i mpi c ?hys i cal explanat ion why t he navi gat j cn constant should be
proportional to t he re lative vel oci ty , In any gi ven system t he gai n of t he homing
he ad inc r ease s i nve r s ely wi th ranqe t c go ; and t his is the s ame ,thi ng as s aying
as inversely 'dith t i me to go times relative ve l ocity. But i n ali sit uations there
,I
i
\
I
:
.\
i
;' j ;
I
\ .
i
\
i
I
I
,
9.4 A SUMMARY OF PP,EVIOUS WORK
All publ i sh ed wor ks known t o t he author have made use of the simplifying assump tions
of small pe r turb at i ons ab out a cons t ant bear in g t raj e ctory . Co r nford and Bain ( 1)
obtain c. generai s ol ut i on for thp t r aj ect ory of a rai s s t ie . Due t o the comple xity
of a gene r al s ol ut i on sys tems by Co s in gl e t i me constant only are
consider ed. Nevertheless fundamental work est abli s hed t he si gnificance of
the kinemat ic gain a and el l s ubs equen t 'dorks i n t hi s f iel d have poi nted out that
it is this quantity \'ihich is f undament a l and not the nav igation constant itself.
Bai n and Trebbl e (2) extend t he ena lys i s to sys tem rep r esented dynami cal l y by a
quadrat i c lag and obtain general solutions fo r mis s di stance due t o a t a r get
ev as ive manoeuvr e , l inear noise 2nd anSJlar' noi se , va l ues of 1' 1 of 1: 2
and 3 are cons i der ed. (3 ) this work in cludes an analys is of miss
distance due to an initial miss ile error . ...iertki ns (4 , 5) .cons i oor-s t he mi s s
I
:,J
- I
- I
- I
_ 1
1
- 1
- I
- 1
206
Guided Weapon Control Syste ms
distance due to a error , a target evasive manoeuvre and a target
weave. l at ax li mits are pl aced on the mi ss il e for t he first two cases .
Again, t he syst em i s represent ed by a second order lag . Heap (6) produces some
inte resting trajectories for noi se- f ree systems and discusses , i n general terms ,
t he effect of noise and opt imum fi lters . And f inally" Ni cho ll s (7) has determi ned
t he accuracy of a systemmode ll ed as fifth order (an additional f i rs t order f il ter
between t he homing head and autopil ot ) with various i ni ti al condit ions and
disturbances .
Ii
I!
n
!
9.5 THE EFFECT OF A MISSILE HEADING ERROR
It i s instructive t o obta i n a general solut ion for t he l at eral accel erat ion of
the missile if it has a sma ll i nitial aiming (i .e . headi ng) ' er ror 1J' e' A s i mpl e
solution is available if al l t he l ags in the systemare This may seem
to be too unre al ist ic t o be of any value; never t hel ess t he reader wi l l f ind that
the sol ution i s significant and provides usef ul i nformation concerning t he
behaviour of homing systems when t he engagement time is long compared ,li th the
systemreaction t i me. The reader is reminded of t he mat hemat i cal model; if th e
mi ss i l e i s fly ing at const ant vel ocity in t he directi on (i . e. t he "correct"
f light path directi on) in Fig 9. 3-1 and t he ta rget con tinues to f l y st rai ght at
constant veloc ity i n t he direct ion 6 then z = Zt = i = i t = 0 for all values
0 m m
of t . If however t he i ni t i al f li ght pat h direction is i n the direction 1J' f t here
is an aimi ng or headi ng er ror equa l to 1J' f - A very common heading error
is for 1J' f to be equal to zero ,ffi i ch me ans of course t hat we ar e in it ially aiming
at target . If is negat ive t he initial launch is usually tenned a "l ag"
launch since we are ai mi ng beh ind t he t arget . If wf is positive the initial
l aunch is usuall y tenned a "l ead" la unch; clea rly a lead launch reduces t he latax
required by t he missi le . There f or e for a small ai mi ng error the missile
e
velocity perpendicular to t he collisi on cour se is U and the compon ent perpendicular
_ m e:.
to the " ref erence" si qht vl ine is Urn 1J' cos The block diagram f or a lag-free
system i s shown i n Fi g 9.5- 1. It is perhaps eas ier to see nowwhy a headi ng error
\
\
_______ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 4
l\J fco
I--...
s
1
s
1
sa.
T-t
FIG g . 5-1 Lag-free s ys tem with step ve locit y i npl ;t
....... ... , _ _
. - - -"
Propcrt io na l enc Hosins Guidance Loops
207
is not a step position input . err-or i n pcs i t icn , in th e absence of guidance
will i ncre ase l inearly 2nd is why a heading error is
of t en called a s t ep velo ci ty i nput .
8y inspect ion , t ho out put zm due to t he i nput can be wr itt en down thus :
or , i n diff ei"er.ti al
Zm
cos l-vfco
equati on form:
( D .,. zm

I - t
u,,) cos
m' e co
(9 . 5-i)
(9 .5 -2 )
-.
i
I;
,
I
This can be di f fe rent i at ed twi ce to aive z . _. m:
The sol ut i on to thi s equatiou i s :
i
I
!
!
!
(9 .5 -4 )
(9 .5 -3)
be ncn -diffiensior.aily thus : thi s ':r..n
(I - t)
Z = U '" cos 'p & (a _ I)
m m e , eo
= '
m
cos ?f co
and sin ce: zm
" v.'. I (9 .5 -5)
For t , 2
5
3, 4 eq uat icn 9 .:; -5 sal 02 shJIt-: n Fig 9 .5-2 :
sr

/ To <:P
I
/
;---0. =1
i .o . S
0. =2
.0 . 4
. 2
1
- -e.._--
3
- f T
m'
tiT
FIG 9 .5-2 Mic3iZe ratc= f or a JaZocity ;ree
It is seen t hat i f a = 3, the miss ile lateral decreases linearly
t i me ; i f a = 4, t he i ni t i al val ue is Sr"2<J.t2r of course but the miss i le l at er-al
accel erat ion towards t He ene of t he very smal l; the t r ajectory
208
Guided Heapon Cont rol Systems
approxi mates t o a constant bearing course eventually. When a = 2 t he lat eral
accel er ati on r emains const ant i . e. the trajectory i s an arc of a circle . The
val idity of t hi s, sol uti on can easily be checked. The value of zm at t = T due to
a headi ng err or with no steer i ng is :
z = U cos tf T
m me co
(9. S-6)
If t he mi ssi l e lateral accelerat ion f
m
=a constant, t hen the l at eral displacemen t
perpendicula r t o t he init ia l sight line at t =T is gi ven by ,
zm= f
m
cos t
f co
T
2
(9. S- 7)
The value of f is gi ven by substituting
a = 2 i n equation g. S- S and i s :
m
f
= -
2 Um1)ie/T (9.S-8)
m
Subst i tu ting t his val ue in equation 9.S-7 yields :
z = - U1)i cos
1)ifco
T
(9 . S-9)
m me
Thus t he t otal di spl acement of t he missi le at t =T i s zero. Inspection of equati on
9. 5-5 shows that i n general lateral accel erat ion i s inver sel y proport ional to t he
t ime of t he engagement and t hi s cl earl y i ndica tes t hat mi ssi l e lateral accele ration
l imi ts may rest rict t he system coverage for short ra nge engagement s; in this one
sense there i s a si mi l ari t y between 3 point (LOS) and homing systems .
Wh at i s t he opt imumvalue of c? Suppose we wi sh t o minimi se t he in te gral wi th
respect t o time of t he missile squared lateral acceleration with a the variable .
To eval uat e this we can use equation 9.5-5 and make the substi t ut i on
T = 1 - tiT
such that
(9.S-10)
this subst i tut i on we find Using
2
(Zaa _ 3)
T = 1, and when t = T 7 = O.
U 2 t 2
roT f 2 dt = m e
J , m I
f
m
2
dt 0 from which 0. = 3
For opt imum a
"
Hence when t ; 0
Before looking at resul ts. per t ai ni ng to a more real is t ic model of t he systemwe
shoui d consi der wh at woul&'happen if 0. is le ss than 2. inspection of equati on
9. 5-5 shows t hat with a l ess than 2 the demand for lateral accelerati on t ends to
inf in i ty j ust before i nt ercept i on and therefore the le9itima t e steeri ng commands
cannot be i mplemented at th is crucial stage of the i nt erce pti on. Ami ss mu st
result and this could be large . If a is set high (5 say) a large la t eral accel era -
t i on wi ll be dema nded in the early stages and the mi ssile may s t ay on limi ts for a
whil e . In t hi s res pect homing syst ems are compl et el y di fferent from3 point
systems. If the missile I inri ts on accelerat ion for more thz n a very short period
in the latter case i t will rapidly move out of the line of sigh t or beam and this
means an abortiv e miss ion . Homing systems are far more flexi ble .
Pr ocor ti or.a 1 ga t io n and Hora i ng Gui dance Loops 209
homing head , f or practi cal
hi gh s ides and
( a)
(b) w = ( aut opi l ot infi nitely fast er than homing head and th erefor e
na
effectively onl y one lag in t he system) .
Results have been s hown for a b?-dly and ?- "eii damped
values of a of 2.5 and 4 .5 t hese bei ng OG t he low and
to results pe r t ei ni nq to a mo r e r ce l i s tf c model of a system. Fiss 9 .5 -3 to
9 .5 -6 she mi s s i le latera l acce Ierat i on/ t i n.e for a heading error . The resul ts
nave be en obtained by t he author on an ICL 1903A dig ital computer using an analogue
s i mul a t i on program. It is ass umed that the homi ng head i s the ma in l ag in th e
and t hat Joih head and autopilot can be represented by second order
lags . I f t his i s accepted then all s ystems must lie be twee n t he two ext remes of
w
na
= (autopilo: and homing head iags equal )
I
\
I
Imagine two si t ua t i ons :
( a) A gi ven homi ng t i me 7 , a <; i\1I2n l!) nh and a give n w
na
'
(b) A homing t i me equel t o T/2 s ay , and w . and to _ t wi ce t he value as in ( a) .
.. nn net
The va lue of wnhl is t he s ams i n both cas es , and s o is the value of wnh!w
na
I f
equation 9 .5-11 is by T - t: then it is easy tc see t ha t t he coeffici en t
of D in situati on (b ) , f or a given val ue of t (\olE have r; t i me vary i ng gai n) is one
half of that i n s t tua t i on The coe1": t icier:t of 0
2
i s one quarter of t hat in
( a) , t he coeffi cient of u
3
i s one eighth of tha t in (a) etc .
In other wor-ds i f t he het:d and autopil ot are mede t wi ce as f as t and the
for relatively "shor t " and 111oTl g
l1
engageme n::.s def i ned by (,;.1 T = 10 and 30
nn
respectively . For cOT: parison th e results for a lag free system ar e also included .
I t will be see n short inadequate dampi ng and high values of a
result in osc i ll at or y responses . The autopil ot-damping ratio has been set to 0 . 5
in all cases .
Fi gs 9 .5 - 7 to 9.5-9 sh ow gr aphs of miss di stance t\ .due to a head i ng er ror .
These gr aphs have been plo tted agains t c lengtr. of engagement
all point s on a ll graphs have bee n plotted f or t = T. In other wor ds , these graphs
ar '2 l oci of t he di s tan ce for all po ss ib l e lengths of enqaqement less t han
i = 30/:;.l h Despi te tne fact t r::: .t t he non- dime ns iona l miss and the non-di mens i onal
n,
engagement ti me are arri ved at very si mply by ... ";;"I :;i ona1 ana l ys i s , nevert heless
it i s i nst ruc t i ve to jus tify tne me thod of pr ese nt et i on , have seen i n sect i on
6 . 3 t hat the normali sed t i.ne (or fr equency ) re sponse of td? systems wi l l be
icentical if t he i r differ en t i al equati ons are identical . The ti me
t o the normal i s at ion
Nov: i r.trod ce the
sy stem and t h2 charac t eristi c equ ati on reads
of t he r e:;pons es will differ i n proport ion
the defi ned i n equati on 9. 5-2.
scaLe.
fre quency
t wo dynamic lags i n the
or fre quency
\
\
\
\
I
210 Gui ded Weapon Controi Systems
,
LAG FREE SYSTEM I
SI NGLE QUADRATIC .LAG
BIQUADRATIC . LAG W
na
=Wnh
5
3
a
!
6
4] [
1mT '.
Um4J E:
0. = 25
.,
0. =45
3 4 5
~ .
,
I
/
,9.
lIT
I
I
10
I
\
I
I
I
\
I
I
\
I
- ]
] . . : 3
\ \'
\ \
\\
'V
\
\
7
.
I
/
8 9
tIT
10
FIG 9.5-3 Missi le Laxercl: Aocel-er at-iori /Ti me FoT' a Heading E:rrol'
wnhT =10 ~ h =0.25 u =0.5 No Lata= Limit o
. a
-- ---- - _ .._-
.. " +A' :--
Proportiona l tlavigat ion and Homi ng Gui dance Loops 211
! I
L
---- LAG FREE SYSTEM
SiNGLE QUADRATIC l AG
BIQUI',DRATIC l AG W
na
= Wnh
)
9
t IT
\
\
\
e 9
1-0
\
t ! T
\
\
Cl = 4 5
. J
- 6.
- 1
I
\
\
, I
FIG 9.5-4 l',:issi Le Lateral: Acce Lerat.i.ori/Time For a "Fieadir.;; 8rr'o l'
w .T = 10 ~ . = 1.0 ~ =0. 5 No Latax L i ~ i t s '
nit It a
,
\
I
21 2
Guided
Weapon Cont rol
Systems

LAG FREE SYSTEM

- -- - --
SINGLE QUADRATIC LAG
r'
r
\
--- -- --
BIQUADRATIC
LAG
Wn a =
Wnh
,
\
r-:
\
I '
\
J
I
\
\
I
\
a. = 2- 5
U
r
.r'
1/
" ' -,
1
m
T 1 .....
U
m4JE -- - : ~ --
-
, I
/
<,
,
,
,
0
-I -1 -J -4
-5 -6
-7 -s -9
1 0
tIT
- 1
~
I \
\
I
\
1\
\
\
\
\
I
\
\
I
r.
0. = 4- 5
J
I
I
_ 1
m
T
I
Um4JE 1
I
, I
I
J
I
I
<:>
I
0
/
r
-1 -1
3 -I.
-\
1-0
1 \
FIG 9. 5-5 Missile Late ral Acceleration/Time For a Heading Er ror
wnhT = 30 Uh = 0.25 u
a
= 0. 5
110 Latiax Limits
~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ ~ . ; .

213
10
"
I
f
I
I
.!
t IT
(1 = 4 5
~ . ~ .
-
\
~ \
-,
\\
\ \
\
/-
I \
, \
I \
r:
\
\
Proportional Navi gat i on and Hemi ng Guidanc e Loops
FIG 9.5-6 Mi3 3i l e LateraL Accglerat i on/Time Fop a Headi nc Epr or
w .T = 30 uh, = 1.0 ~ . ~ = 0.5 ~ o &atax Limits ~
nil u:
- i
~ I
I
. ,
,
J
I
~ ~ : 2
l
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
/
0
I /
1 2
- - - -
LAG FREE SYSTE M
q -
-- _ . -
SI NGLE QU ADR AT IC L A G
J
- -- -- -
BI QU A DRAT IC LAG
W
na
=Wnh
---
/ '
(1 =2 5
f
m
T
Um4JE:
?
//
,-
,
/
0
/
L
1
., ., .,

'7
.!
9
\
' 0
,
I tn
c
- 1 ~
I
!
I
. i'
,
i
I
\
I
I
\
I
\
214
Gu i ded Weapon Control Sys tems
a = 2.5
20
>L h =1 .0
>L h =0. 5
>L h =0 .25
a =3. 5
10 /
/
/
/
30 WnhT
.
\v.
\
\
.\
\ ,.
\\.
'\\ /
, /
'J
2
2
6
FIG 9 .5-7 Niss Di.s zan ce Due To a Headina Error
Bi quadrati c System w - w ~ ; 0. 5 Yo. Lat axLimits
na - .nh' a
.'
r I i!
.c
215 Gui dance Lcops

=1.0

=0. 5

=0. 25
a 2 5
Propor t iona ; ':avi g,- t i:J il
j
I
I
Mh wilh
U d
m +'E
u. rt '
-._..',
- I
, i
1 ;
"
i\
I
, \
J
i \

"I
I .
. I
Mh Wr.h
1(\\
.'\
u
rn
'1J
E

I ',
Ii \
I \
:V' \
! \
I ,
i i
. I \
I
I I \
t / ..... !
,
t :
. ,
20 WnhT I\; :
1 \
7
J
,\ I! I
I \
/f
I\J/
I \
<, ..-- ' / J
I
I \
-01 \
I
'\ t /
!
-r
\\jj
\
I
\
I

\ I
\)
\ /

FI G 9 .5-8 !,'i s s Due Tc a Error .
BiQuadratic Sustem = 0. 5 No Lata= Limits
. na r'-'1 a.
G.W.C.S.-P
216
Guided Control Systems
2
- i
- ----
- - ' - -
a = 2 5
>'h =1 .0
Uh =O. 5
uh =0. 25
.--
a = 3.5
Mh Wnh
0
- - --- UmlJi
E
\\
,
.:--
30 WnhT
/
20
.\

\\ -./
.J
Q=4.5
3 f-
2
'\
Ii\',
Mh W
nh
r>
,"\. urn lJi
E
I' \
' \
__ I
\.
/ . \
I \ , .
0
\10
/
, I
30 W
nh
T
\ I ' ....
..... /
....
:J
\ !
\ '
,J
, /
"--.:
FIG 9 . 5-9 Miss v.. : s t c:r.ce Due To a Headi ng Error
System w 5w = 0 .5 No Latax
. r..a nit a
C",

h
I
I
- I
- I
_ J
H w
= 2.7 , from fig 9 .5 -7
U .1'
ill e
gi ven by
Proportional Navigation and Homing Guidance Loops 217
engagement ti me is halved the n in s ituat i on ( b) we have a t ransient whi ch occu pi es J
one hal f of the t i me t hat obt ai ns in situation (a) ; t heir normal i s at i on frequenci es
differ by a fa ctor of 2 t o 1. Put in another \<ay in situat ion (b) t he f as t er
mi ss il e is starti ng at one hai f of the missi l e-to-targe t range and start s off with
to: i ce t he ope n loop qai n as de11 .
jim; consi der t he 1i near; sed mi ss . are st i 11 deal i ng 'iii th a 1; near sys tern
despite the time -varying ga i n. Therefore th e mis s M
h
sh ould be proport i onal to
t he si ze of t he pos ition input '" hich is U T. There f ore t-lh/U T i s t he cor rect
m E m E
nor malised miss . However since for any point on th e gr aph wnhT is a gi ven number
then i nstead of di viding by T ;:e can multi pl y by W h ' ,' I n t his way the graphs s how
n ' .
the normalised mi ss for a gi ven ai mi ng e:fCi etc as a function of lengt h of
engage:nent ; the ti me of t hs 2ngag2Tle nt does not figure .i n the cal culation of t he
ordinates . For c 2. 5 t o 3.5 and r eas onabl e damping i t is seen that t her e s houl d
be a very small miss if " naT > 25 or t hereabou ts fo,' e qual dynamic lags, and i f
"nhT > 15 if t he autopilot is much faster t han t he homing head . Ne verthe less with
a ; 4.5 and poor damping of the domi nant lag the sys tem t akes a long t ime t o
settle and t hi s effect is "are pr onounce d when t he lags are equal . In genera l
wh i ch is en t he si de is to light damping but the response
can be r a ther sl uggis h <lith I-I ell da'r.eed sys tcms and 1 0;; values of c . The general
concl usion i s t hat a navigation law wil l te nd t o produce a zero mi ss
due to a headi ng error i s f or the t ransient to decay and thi s
ti me depends on t he nature of the lags in the system and t he value of o . For
equal lags , a = 3.5 and J-!h = 1.0 the ma xi mim mi s s wi l ] occur if to , T ::: 3 and is
nn
If U
m
500, 0. 3 and "nh = 5 th en !.i
h
57. 5m. Si nce t he t ime of engagement i s
cn l y 2/6 0.5 s it f ol l cws t ha t the mi s s would hav e beer. 500 x 0 . 3 x 0. 5 = 75m
i f t here had bee n no reacti on at al l. Thes e graphs illustrate why an as s umpti on
of "at least three seconds homi ng time is recu i red" is often made in preli mi nary
studies on the coverage of homi ng syst ems . I f missi l e homi ng head and autopi lot
of 6 and rae! s respect i vel y are adopted then three se conds homing
ti me rneans t hat t he no rme l i sec encacement t i rne i s by W hT = 18 and. th i s is
- ... 01
j ust about a mi nimum engaS2ment fer such a sys tem. Af as t er system needs less
ti me of course _ A of a = 4. 5 is seen t o be unnecess arily hi gh for
t he sy s t em to dea l 'ditr. e err-cr ; the is os ci l l atcry .
Cons i der now t he eos sible effe cts of the sys t em becomi ng uns table at a s hcrt range
to gQ wh en the open l oop gai n i s if ins t ab.i l i ty se ts in sa y half J. second
bef ore nomi nai i mpact, the control f ins go hard ever and 159 is
develo ped 0 .25 s late r , t hen th e mi ss due to this effect is 0.5 x 15 x 9 .81/16 = 4 .6m.

218
Guided Con trol Systems
(9.5- 12)
The aut hor considers t hat most well designed syst ems go unstable rather later than
t his and t he effect of ins ta bili t y on accuracy is usual l y very small . To convince
t he reader tha t homing sys t ems can easi l y go unst able in pr actice is, oddly enough ,
not easy . In the absente of nois e (no real sys te mis ever entirely free f romnois e)
a long engagement resul ts in the transient decaying before instability sets in, and
t he effec t is not apparent . If the engagement is very short osci llations do not
have enough ti me to build up . Consi der the graphs i n Fig 9. 5-9 whic h have been
computed for "nhT = 20 and an under damped homi ng head; tn is engagement is neither
"shor t " nor "l ong" . The res ponse of a lag-fr ee system is shown for comparis on . Any
response of a r ea1 syst em .,hi ch diverges from thi s wi th ti me can be regarded as
unstable. It i s not possib le to di scern i nst ability f or a =2.5 , but for a = 3. 5 a
system re prese nted by a si ngle quadrati c l ag coul d be argued t o be unstable l at er
than t iT = 0. 75 say. For a = 4. 5 instab ility set s i n at about tiT = 0. 6. By
inspect i on of Fig 9.3-2 we can wr i te down the t r ansfe r f unction f or a system with
an i nf initely fast autopi l ot (i .e. only one quadrat i c lag effecti vel y) :
zm = _"-_.,,.- '-- _
z.
,
It is realised t hat t he Routh-Hurwitz criterion of stability applies t o pol ynomial s
wi th constant co-e f fici ents and t hat there are other s t ability criteria wh i ch are
appl icable here. Neverthel ess wha t would th i s cr iterion predict i f (er r oneousl y)
the coefficients .,ere "frozen" at a gi ven value of r ? Such a syst em is unstable
\
\
I
I
(9.5-15)
The r efor e
(9 . 5- 13)
"h = 0.25 .
(9 .5- 14)
3. 5 i nstabi lity is
= 0.55; and the agreeme nt
instabi lity for systems
appears to give an approxi mate
that the homogenous
WL
nh
1" < o. /2 '.J ' co h
n n
,IT < a/ 2"h " nh
T
r,
The gr aphs in Fig 9.5-9 have been comput ed f or "nhT 20 and
i n t his context equati on 9 .5-13 can be s impl ifi ed to :
, IT < a/lO
i t is seen that f or c = Since , = T - t and , IT = 1 " tiT
,-
predi ct ed to set in at t iT = 0:6 5, and for c = 4.5 at t iT
appears t o be good . It is very easy to demon st ra t e ear l y
wi th hi gh kinema ti c gai ns of 5 or more .
Never th el ess , even t ho ugh t he cr iterion
guide to i nstability i n such a case i t is poi nt ed out
equation for z obt ained f r omequati on 9. 5-12 i:e .
m
0
2 2u- 0 (T t )O
+ _ n_ + 1) - + l} zm = 0
" nh "nh a
i . e .
i .e .

J
-
]
J
j
[
.,--
219
c "
r
t

l
t
_I
r:
:J
.s
a = 2-5
,
-,
LAG FREE SYSTEM
SI NGL E QUAD RATI C SYSTEM
6 1QUADRATI C LAG wno =wnh
.'....../. .. ...
,
\
\
\
\
\
\
Lat er al, a Heading Erro r
= O. 2S u = 0. 5 No Lat x=
r: :::z
Proportional Navigati on and Homi ng Gui dance Loops
?IC 9 . 5-9 gi s s iZe
w . T = 20
ntz.
1
j
. ,
. \
S 7 , 1-1
. ,
liT
,
,
,
\
1
I
I
\
r\
\
\
\
\
. ./ \
I
\
fmT
I
Cl =3' 5
U
m
<1J
c I
/
G4/"-'
: r I ,,-
I
,r '
. 1\ .
. , V , "
,V-,/ .
\
I
, I --
! ,
.,l
. ; ,
\
, ,
H
-,
,
--
,
\
\
I
\
r-;
/'
1
-v
/ \
. "\
\
,
. \
\
I
\
i
I
\
I
\
I
, I \
Cl =4 5
I
I \
1
m
T
I
1

Um\jJ
/
; '\,
,
I
\
1\\
I
I
,
/
/
1
. !

-I
\

220 Gu ided Weapon Con tr ol Systems

differs f rom t hat f or zm and Zm due t o ti me appearing 10 t he equat i on i.e. t here
are different criteria for the instability of displacement , veloc ity and accel era -
tion: Cornfor d and Ba; n (1) poi nt ed th i s out and virtually dismi ssed the subject.
of instability. As far as i s known t he possibility of homing systems going unstable
has not been discussed si nce.
The ef f ect of missi le latax li mits is now discussed . Since for a > 2 ma ximum
demands occur early rather t han late, if limiting occur s the miss i l e wi l l stay on
l imits for a while but may come off limi t s later and a hi t may re sul t . Consider
therefore a systemwith a set to 3 and t he "g" 1i mi te rs se t to a hypothe tical but
conveni ent value of 2 U
m
The mi ss i l e will try i nitially t o accelerate
laterally to 3 U
m
see equat i on 9.5-5 and being unab le to do so wi l l remai n
on limits f or t he "hole of t he engagement . Si nce in any real system there "ill be
a ti me lag before full latax is develop ed it f ol l ows t hat a miss must re sul t.
Hence , for an engagement t o be successful a mus t al"ays be set to > 2 and the "g"
l imi t er s must be set t o a value i n excess of 2 U
m
A number of computer runs
have been done with this in min d; i n each s uccessive r un t he value set on t he
li miters was reduced. Each series of runs was vm en, as a result of
prolonged limi ting , the mi ss di s tance was seen to increase suddenly and appreciaDly .
Clearly t he longer t he ti me of t he engagement t he mo re near ly does t he critical
value of li mits approach 2 U IT. I f t he achi evab le lateral accelerat ion f . is
m e ma
gi ven by:
f " ; C U
me m
(9 .5-16)
J.
- , ,
.-
"h
; 0. 25
"h
;
0. 5
i-l h
;
1.0
2.5 3.5 4.5 2.5 3.5 4.5 2.5 3.5 4.5
10 2.7 2.6 2.5 2.8 2.7 2.6 3.0 2.8 2. 7
15 2.5 2.4 . 2.3 2.5 2.5 2.4 2.7 2.5 2.3
. "
2.4 2.3 20 2. 4 2.3 2.3 2.4 2.4 2.3 2.5
30 2.3 2.2 2.2 2.3 2. 3 2.2 2.3 2.2 2.2
then Table 9 .5 -1 give s tne minimum value of c for a oumDer of pos s ibl e system
par amet er s such that li mit ing wi ll not contribute to mi ss distance .
TABLE 0 5 1 I' INIMUMVAl Uf S OF c
"a ; 0. 5 and "'na ; 2 "'nh in ali cases
A note of cauti on " hen consi der i ng transient ef f ect s , whe ther it is i n connecti on
with miss distance or mini mum acce l era t ion re quireme nts . It is usually quite
accurate to assu me a constant f igure t o re pre sent t he homing head dynami cs , but
th is cannot be so f or t he re sponse of t he aut opil ot . If t he mi ss i l e is l aunched
from rest it may take t"o or t hree seconds t o attai n full speed. Ou r ing the earl y
par t of th i s boosting per iod i t "ill have an appreciably sl ower response t han at full
.
221
~ '"
Proport i onal Navigation and Homing Gu ida nce Loops
speed due to t he very 101' aerodynami c gain . However fas t we make t he homing head
res ponse, t he act ual t i me tha t has t o el apse bef ore t he auto pi lo t can respond
quickly must , in practi ce , l i ~ i t the absolut e minimumhomi ng ti me for a given miss
t o a heading error . Mo r eover , f i gur es ouoted in Tabl e 9. 5-1 are for w 2w h'
, na n -.
These values wi l l certainly be optimistic i f the aut opil ot has a low bandwi dth and
takes a long t ime in atta ining it . In this r2spect , air to "ai r mi s si l es have a
sl i ghtly bet ter t r ansi ent per formance , si nce th ey are l aunched wi t h a non - zero
velo city . Further insight on t he kinematics of homing can be obtained by considering
the f light path of a lag free system with a heading error ~ E i nterce pting a
sta t io nary t arget at To wi t h a set to 2. Ref er r i ng back to Fig 9.3-1 and equati ons
9.3-2 and 9.3- 3 we can, wr i t e
..
o - ( z
" - .
-
(9 . 5-17)
For a headi ng error Zt' 0 fe r all val ues of t for a st at i onary te rqet . Hence
- z
m
U
r
( I - t )
(9 . 5- 18)
r
.
This is rea dily diff erentia t ed wi th re spect to t ime to gi ve
(
Put ting t o and noting
U (T -
.' ( i ) - z U -) -
6
r m m r
C.
d
U (T -
r
z 0
m
(9 . 5-19)
u 'v U ~
m Em:
u.r :' -
r k
o
,,,here R i s the initial ranqe . In othe r wor ds t he initia l s i ght I i nc rate i s not
o
affected by the actual value of the relat ive velocity. Fi g 9.5- 11 clearl y shaws
t hat for a const ant fli ght pat h rate (or l at er al accel e,' at ion) t he total change in
FIG 9.5-11 A homing :rajectory uit h ~ ~ 2
U / 3
m'
f act or
f l ight pa th angle f rom the launch to intercept io n i s twic e the total change in
sight line angle ( ~ . ) . Now cons ider a movi ng target and assume say tha t U
t
and i t s velocity i s in the directiGn MT . In t his case U is reduced by a
o 0 r
of 2:3 and the time of engagement has been, i ncr eased by 3:2. But fo r the same
headin g err or the i ni t ia l si ght li ne ra te wi l l be t he same, Since now the inter -
cepti on will be at a point "ell tc the r ight of '0 we do not need s uch a l arge
222
Guiaed Weapon Control Systems
demand if tne accelerati c.m is to re main cons tant t hroughout tr.e t raje c t ory .
Co nverse l y i f t he target i s comi ng t owards us such t hat U is i ncr ease d we nave
r
less s pace (or ti me) i n wh ich to change t he mi ss ile f l ight path; hence the
command t o t he mi ssil e must be greater . This clea rl y demons t rat es that if t he
demand t o the autop i lot is propor t io nal to sight line rat e times th e r elative
velocity then t he general shape of the t raj ectory as a function of time is
invariant .
And finally we should note anoth er f orm of "headi ng error " . flhatever t he initi al
conditi ons, t he homing head i tself mus t be poi nti ng very near ly at t he target;
certai nl y with in one half of its beamdidth . If t here is a dish poi nt i ng
,
error at t = 0 t hi s " ill i nt roduce a transi ent i nto t he trajectory . It is a
s tep po sition input t o t he homing head . The eff ect s of th i s i nput are not shown
gra phical ly but t hey ar e approxi mately twice t hat f or a headi ng error . The
transie nt takes exact l y the same t i me t o di e away as that for a heading error;
however , s ince t he dish point ing error i s at mo st'l ikeiy to be two or t hree
degree s, the ef fect On mi ss dis tance must be smal l except f or extremely shor t
engageme nts .
9.6 MISS DISTANCE DUE TO A TARGET LATERAL ACCELERATION
In t his case it has been ass umed t hat t he perturbation from the const ant bear ing
t r aje ct ory is due to t he t ar get executing an evasive manoeuvre equal t o a constant
g t urn T se conds before i nt ercept i on. I f the target la teral accel era t i on is f
t
t hen the component per pendicular to the original signt l ine is f
t
cos o' and t he
comp onent of veloc i ty perpendicular t o t he or iginal s i ght l i ne is f
t
cos '0 t. When
consi der,jng headi ng errors we said t hat there was an i nput velocity equal to
U cos . Since t he system res ponds to relative mo t ion it mat t ers not wn ether
m e - co
we regar d th is di s'turbance as a missile l atera l veloci ty or t arget lateral veloci t y .
Hence , t he differenti al equ at i on mus t be of t he same f ormas equat i on 9.5-2:
Hence :
cos
2,
f
m
f
t
0
{ (l ,
{1
- ( 1 -

(9.6 -2 )
--ZJ
J
cos

(l -
i n it is seen t hat if a < 2 then f
->- 00
as t - T. If t he ef fect of t he cosi ne
m
The soluti on to this equation is
f t cos ' ( T - t )T
1,
'0
t i T)" -
z
=
(a - I )(a - 2)
{(a -
1) t IT
-
1 -t- ( 1
-
J
m
This can be differenti at ed t" ic e t o yi eld
z:
zm= f
t
cos
o
{ a }
{l -
( 1 -
t IT)c - 2)
a-:-z
'(v+ _
a
_ ) Z
T - t m
= f
t
cos t (9.6-1 )

c
-
223
c
te rms is neglig-ible (e .g . head on or tan cnas e ) i t is also se en th at if a = 3 the
i ni ti al mi ss il e acceleration is zer o e?Jer; in a Zc.q-free s ys t em and t he ter mi nal
l ata x is three ti mes the targe t i a t ax ; i f v; = 4 te rm-inal l ata x is tw i ce th at of
the t a r get . The limiting case foY' 0. = <;:> is fo r the effe ct i ve mi s s il e latax t o
equal the t ar get latax t hr oughout the engagemen t .
c
Fi g 9 .6- 1 s hows mi ss il e lat era l accel era tion as a fu nction of non-di mens ional t i me
tiT for wnh T = 20 and for a bi quadrati c re presenta tion of the system; the full l i ne
in eac h figure shows the r esponse of a lag free 'sys t em as given i n equat ion 9.6- 2.
The t r ajec tory th erefore i s quite different from t nat due t o a heading er r or . If
a > 2 t hen the missile lata x decre.ses as the engagement proceeds for a heading
c
c
c
r:
-
-
error ; in t he caSe of a target lateral accelerat i on the mi ss ile latax increases
from zero tc a ma ximum at i mpact. In the l atter case li mi t i ng wi l l occ ur , if it -
occurs at all , near and at the end of the engagement . - "If t his occur s f or a second
or so the effect on system accuracy can be di sa strous .
The miss distance H_ due to a t ar ge t latera l acceleration commenced at T secor. ds
a
before impa ct i s shown i n Figs 9 .6-2 to 9.6 - 4. It wa s though t des i r able t o put
SOIT: 2 "i"imits On demanded latEral eccelcret i on. For a;:; 2. 5 t he l ag- free effect i ve __
termi nal miss ile l at ax is five ti mes the targe t effec ti ve and s i ;nul at io n has
sho-,n tna t i n a sys tem wi th dynamic the limits are set to about 25% in
exces s of thi s then limiti ng does not r es ult in any seri ous degj'adation of accurdcy.
keep engagement ti lT12 out
di vi di ng by T
2
t i me cue t o t he homing
"j aqs
become re 1at i ve1y
and a = 4.5 the 1i mi ts
The ma in reason for this addi t i onal mi ss il e l a tz x being necessary i s the " Tost"
head and aut opi l ot dynanr i c lags ; as "", i t h he ali ing errors th es e
less significant fo r longer engagemen t t imes . For a = 3.5
have been s et to l ower val ues 'but i n both cas es th ey ar e
25% i n excess of the respective terminal l ag-free value . Si nce setting th e li mi t s
appre ciably below these wo uld have resul ted in la rge mi ss distances i t was
consider ed better to set them at the minimum accept abl e val ue f or an accurate
i ntercepti on t o be poss i bl e . Setting these limit s any higher woul d have had onl y
a very minor effec t on the shape of t hese graphs. The j ust i fi cat i on f or t he
normali sation of the miss is as follows. If t he ta rs et manoeuvre corrrnences at T
seconds bef ore nominal i mpact t hen it has r:.ano2uvred a dis tance of 0.5 f
t
cos o T
2
perpendi cul ar to the again ignorin g any si gni f ica nt di s t or tion
of th e or ig ina l interception geometry. So th e normali sed mi ss could Ma/f
t
cos
2
.0 T . (Had t he figure of 0.5 been incl uded t he or di nat es would have been plot t ed
t wice as la r ge.) For any giv en poi nt on a graph 0.)01/ i s def ined and in or der t o
2
of the ordt nates one; has to rr:ul t i pl y by l0
nh
in stead of
It i s seen from the figures t hat u ..; 2. . 5 is net goud f or intercept ing manoeuvring
especially if the main l ag i n the sys tern is VI(;l1 damped . : The response is
c.
c,

224
Guided Weapon Control Systems
6
5
4
3
2
3
2 3 5 6 7 8
9 '0
tIT

= 20 " =0 .5 No
c
ecce Lera t i on
' 0
' 0
\
\
8
8 9
t I T
7
7
6
6
9
tiT
due to a target
Latex lin; i ts
5
5
.,
4
3
3
2
a 35
//>
. /
/
/
. /
!/
. /
./
.,
.,
2
lateral,
w ..1'
nn.
2
1m cos <jl , co
It coo 0
1
m
c:oa "" f co
't coo '1> 0
FIG 9 .6-1 MissiLe
I
,
I
i
I
I
I
i
!
,
'1
;!
ii
1\:
I
,
j
I
!!
:
,.
, j
\
P
; :
:1
i
"
0 ,
J
1
.,
; ;
:!
i:
"
-
,
___ c*
(
,
.
2 0
Propor t iona l Navigation ilnd Homing Loops

11 h =5
Il
n
= 25
225
(
c
15 .
1
m
=5 25 It cos
cos 4> IcC:
r
-
It cos c :
cos tV
ft cos1>o
cos (\J leo
0. =3 5
1
m
=225
";.Ia "= 0 .5
= w

""
/ -,
", "
r ," '\--"
\ \ ,/ \ \
\ -, / \ /"
\ \/ /\ <,
\ / ,
I' - i" I
10\ 1 ' /'
\.-. -
?IG 9 .6-2 tfies di3:C7:Ce Cl...e to a. :ar'ge -c ecce Lci-az ion
1 0
M a
Wnh
2
f t cos o
15
226
Gui ded Weapon Control Systems
It cos o
cos t.Pfco
ft cos o
cos \jJI
co
30
i
m
= 2 25 It cos o
cos q,f co
i
m
= 3
20
c = I. 5
Cl = 3.5
Cl =25. i
m
= 6 .25
- ----11 0 =,
- --- - -110 = 5
---- - llo : 25
"
/ '
1 '
I \
",-\ \
I, \
" '\
~ \',
. "-
\
<, <, - --- - - - - - - -
--
--
''-...-. ...------ . - - - - . . . . . ~ .--------- _ - - = : ~
2
I.
10
8 r
6
I.
Me W
nh
2
It cos o
2
0
- 2
8
6
,--
Me W
nh
2
~ "
,
--- /- ,
It cos <;to
I.
' \ \
f '\
\'
, ~ . \
. ,
, \
\ \,
, .,
10 "
FI G 9 .6-3 Niss distance due t o a tarqe t: lateral: acceleration
biquad:ratic sys tem w
nh
;; 2w
nh
lla ;; 0.05
-
""'\SO.
-- -- - - - -
0' c
i
Navi gat i on and Homing Gui dance Loops 227
, 30
,
. /
.
WnhT
!m= 2 25 :t co:; Sllo
cos fcc
frIl '::' 3 It cos o
cos !.Vl co
a 2-5
11.l .::. 6 25 It cos i/Jc
cos 4J fco
--- - - , - 0
-- ---- - 5
------- I'
h
-25
6
I

\ ,
2 ./ .\"'> _
'-.... / --....... ._ -- --
o - , ,- - - .- - -- - ,
l
10 20", T 30
. > nh
r\
,l !
. ; \
I ,/ \
2' r. \. \
\ I ' \ __ \
1 r / \ \ ">\
\ \h! .ro, . 2.0 /"-,
l 10 7 __ 30
\ '\ " - W hT
\ , , / n
-1 ' , )
5r r \
'l I. . \
.: \
L\ . \ .,\\
\
\ i v:
l' \ 1,- \
. \ V
o! \ r \"
_,\ \ i
-2 t \ !
,_J
-3
/t o Wnh Z
f t cos 'Po
FIG 9.6-1 Miss due to a tar'geG acceLeration
system w
na
; 5w
rA
va = 0.5

228 Guided "eapo n Contro l Syst ems
too s luggis h. Also, of course, t he missile terminal latax is very high , A
val ue of a between 3,5 and 4 appears to be best. Val ues much above this result
i n an excessively oscillat ory res ponse espec iall y if the mai n lag is underdamped
There is a nice balance betwee n good damping to reduce oscillations in the res ponse
and t oo much damping whi ch del ays t he especially with low val ues of a ,
hence f avour ing the target which manoeuvres a second or so before impact . The
opti mum ti me for t he target to s tart a manoeuvre against a homing sys t emwhose
autopi lot is between two and five times as fast as t he homing head is T seconds
bef or e i mpact wher e w
nh
T " 8, If w
nh
= 4 this is 2 seconds bef or e i mpact. If
t he autopilot re sponse is about t he same as t he homi ng head t he target has mo re
latitude i n ti me to make a s uccessful manoeuvre and t he result ing miss distance
auto -
a sudden targe t
homing head and
Wnh = w
na
" 5 and "h = 1,0 ,
at about W, T = 10 (i ,e ,
nn
t he target started manoeuvr i ng at 2 se conds to go) ; t he numerical val ue i s 17. If
t he engagement is head-on or t ai l chase cos o = 1 and t he perturba tion of t he
t ar get f or f
t
= 10 say is 20m. The actual mi ss is 17 x 10/ 5
2
= 6. 8m. This coula
be a very large mi ss i ndeed if t he t arget pull s severa l g. For smal l er val ues of
wn hT t he gra phs show t hat t he mi ss appears to i ncrease approximatel y parabolica lly
Vlith ti me i ndicati ng t hat , as yet , t he missile react ion is small . Consider wnhT = 5
i .e. T = 1. The normal i sed mi ss i s now about 10 and for f t " 10 as before, th e
actua l mi ss is 10 x 10/5
2
= 4m. The per t urbat ion of t he t arget at t his t i me is 5m,
i ndicati ng that t he mi ss i l e guidance- cont rol systemis only jus t rea cti ng,
The difference betVleen homi ng guidance us in g s imp l e propor t i onal navigat i on
and command guidarce should now be apparent . The latter systemneeds a great
deal of sophis ticati on and cOmput ing in orde r t o re duce mi ss distance for f as t
approaching targets to a met re or so . In t he abse nce of noi se, homing systems are
capable of reduci ng mi ss to zero because the loop gain approac hes a hi gh
val ue towar ds the end of t he t ra j ect ory, alVi ays aSS Uming t hat the systemhas enough
t i me for transie nts to decay . The great s t r engt h of t hi s type of guid ance i s t hat
mi ss i l e latax te nds t o zero at t he end of th e engagement due t o a headi ng error
leaving t he missi le 's f ul l 9 capabi lity to deal wi th tar get evas i ve manoeuvre ,
The weakn ess of si mpl e propor t ional navigati on homin g i s t hat even wi t h a Vlell
des ig ned systemt he guida nce law i s not clever at deal in g with a targe t evasive
manoeuvre . In a conventi onal comnari d syst em th e effect of a target manoeuvre of
ng is l i kely to i ncrease or decrease t he existi ng mi ssi l e l at ax by approxi mate ly
t hat amount . Proport io nal naviga t i on requires th e mi ss i l e to execute more or much
can be mu ch grea ter .
Cons i der now the magnitude of the mi ss that can occur due to
manoeuvre . The mos t pessi mi st i c results will occur when t he
pilot dynami c lags are equal and a is 10Vl ; say a = 2. 5,
Fig 9 .6- 2 shows t hat t he maximum norma l i sed mi ss' occurs
,
I '
; ;
;
Ii
I!
Ii
Ii
Ii
\1
Ii
II
Ii
,\ 'i
\ i
! (I
>"
Iii
'I I
"
, :
il
Ii
I!
, i
"
!l
11
"
u
I ,
Ii
.q
II
H
.,
if
.,
I I
;!
!I
i l
ii
i
!i
ii
' ; 1
' I
,I'
!;
-1!
"
.' ,I
r:
]I
,
,
,-... c t ,
. u

c
Pr opor t i one1 ;'iavi sa t i on c:1d Hom; ng Gu: dan: e Loops
more t ha n thi s t o',.:2. r ds t he e nd of the e nga g::; me nt .
229
{
9.7 MISS DISTANCE DUE TO ANGULAR NOISE
(
SiGHT liNE ANGLE
AS SE EN BY THE
HOMI NG HEAD
I
SIGHT liNE
ANGL E
l ANGULAR'. NO IS E
,'$J\
----1'0J---J\ UriT - ; j 11vy._-
I
I Zm
Z.

In s emi - acti ve systems v/hite noise due t o z. given s i qnaI -Ec- nots e ra tio and t he
re cei ver character i sti cs in general can be assumed to r emai n sensi bly constant a
feld second s bef ore i mpec t ; th is cou l d be t her mal noise in t he receiver or the
res ult of stand- off jamming . I t s spect rvm is o_{w) = K_
2
r ad
2
/rad/s = a constant .
a a
Si nc e nO'd the " j npu t " t o t he sys t em i s angu1c:r noi s e , i n any si mul ati on i t mus t
enter t he closed loop at a point ,mich is the analogue of si ght l ine angle, see
Fig 9. 7-1 .
FI G g . 7-] ;.... r.;;:A.'La...'" noise enxer-inq a ri.Or.: i ng sys c2m
The cont r'ol engi neer se es thi s as part of a bl ock diagram where lIn is t he
and the f eedback t r ansfer function is l / U (T - t) i .e. as t T the feedback gai n
r
This means provided th e sys t em remai ns sta ble and the sys temspeed of
res ponse i s high t he outpu t shoul d + 0 as ti me -to-go O. However , since for any
given ti me -to-go , t he fe edback gai n i s inversely proportional to the missile -
target relati ve velo ci t y it f ol l ows tha t t he output mus t be pr opor t i onal to
rel ati ve vel oci t y . Clearly t he mean square mi ss mus t also be propor t i onal t o the
no is e spectra l density K
a
2
Di men siona l anal yses suggest th at the nor malised mi s s
M
n
i s M
n
IWnh/ Ur K
a,
f or given da", ping r at ios in the homi ng head and autopilot and
for a ci ven rat i o w . f w ; t hi s me ans t hat a 10'1'/ bandwi dth systemwi l l have a bigger
- nn na
mi ss t han a hi gh band1idth on e . Put in anot her way, when t he range to go is larg2,
a gi ven angula r i nput can be i nter pre t ed as a large appare nt linear move",ent of the
tar get . As t he ra nge decre ases t he appar ent linear movement decreases also_ Indeed
at zer o r ange to go the apparent target and r eal target will coi nci de. He nce, since
a zer o lag system is capa bl e of avai l i ng i tsel f of i nf ormati on ri ght up t o zerO t i me
to go , one would expect an i nfi ni t el y fa s t system-t o exhi bi t zero mi ss due to angular
noi se . In real systems t here mus t bG due t o ang ul ar noise because t here
are lags in t he and instabi l i t y must set in i mpas t ; t he nl i s s is
usuall y small si nce the signal-to-i:cise r at i o j ust before impact is 'genera il y very
230 Guided Control Systems
good in homing sys t ems . Indeed i n both active and passive systems the t ota l
distance between ener gy source and receiver i s virtu al ly zero at i mpact; in bo th
cases t he miss due t o t hermal noi se i s usual l y ins i gnificant . In semi -active
systems the si gnal:-to-noi se rat i o is usual-ly good at i mpact si nce for approaching
targets t he distance f rom il l uminator to target is a mi ni mum and the reflected
path le ngt h is zer o. If a zero l ag sys t em exhi bi ts zero miss t hen one would
expect a zerO bandwidth sys te m t o exhib i t in fi nite mi ss due t o angular noise .
Ba in ( 3) comes t o t his concl usion using a generalised ma th emat"i cal approach .
Howe ver one notes that in the general solut ion he obta i ns it is i mplied t hat the
t i me of engagement is much longer t han the effect i ve ti me constant of t he system.
This wo uld i mpl y an (inf ini ty) 2 t ime of engagement , a difficult Si nce at
very l ong ti me s to go the open l oop gain i s vi r tua l ly zero i t can be visualised
t hat t he devi at i on of a banaHidt h mi ss i l e from t he cor rect t r ajectory due to
angular noi se would t end. t o i ncr ease to a very la rge val ue , fromwh i ch it cannot
ef fecti vel y recover . The r es ul ts shown i n Fig 9.7- 2 have been obt ained on an
analogue computer f or 10 second engagements and f or hpmi ng head bandwidths in the
range Z-8 r ad/ s ; Ni cholls ( 7) has th at when th e normal i sed l ength of engage-
ment is s hor t, th e mi ss due to thermal noise is cor respondi ngly less. In other
words t he mi ss distances are for normali sed ti mes l onger t han
def ined by "'nhT = ZO. I t is seen th at with i n t hese li mits t he r . m.s. miss due
to angul ar noise 1"0 is proportional t o the relati ve velocity , is proportional t o
t he squar e root of t he spe ctral density of the noi se , and is inversel y
t o the bancHidth of th e dominant lag . Poor damping, as ever with noise i nputs,
has a bad ef f ect on system performance ; i n fact , if th e damping rat i o of t he
dominant mode i s reduced mu ch below 0. 5 the ef fe ct t ends to be catastrophic, and
t his has al ready been no ted by Sa in ( 3) . It will be seen th at wi th a slow auto-
pil ot t he miss is further increased . This is to be expected since t he overall
sys t em bandwidth is decreased . However , careful inspect ion of th e computer runs
s uggests t hat t he i ncr ease i n mi ss i s par t ly due to t he decrease d stability of
such a sys t em. Res ul ts obt ai ned for c 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and t hree valu es
of wnh' One hundred runs were made for each po i nt on a gra ph i n order to obtain a
reasonabl e approxi mati on to t he r . m. s . mi ss , a t otal of si x t h9usand compute r runs
in all.
A fig ure often quot ed for K
a
Z
i n many des ign studie s usi ng radar i s 10-
7
radZ/rad/s .
If U
r
is about M= Z.5 (850 m/s) t hen the r. m.s . miss due to angula r noise for
c =4 and =8 can be i n th e ra nge 0.4 to Zm dependi ng on damping and autopilot
bandwi dth .
- -- -- - -
r:.:..
,f
i
I
! .
Propor tional Navig2. tion and homin g Guid ance Loops
231
r:
,
c
.,
-
--'
.-
C
..i
/
,
:: 1.0
llh= 0. 5
, .
Wn ... :>..... 5 W nh

!l a = 0.5
I
20 i-
,
30
o 2 3
a
5
PIe; 9 . 7-2 ::iS2 di s tance due "vo anqul-ar noise
9.8 MISS DISTANCE DUE TO GLINT
c
,.
We have already seen t hat glint is an appare nt mo vement of a t ar gEt aue to mot ion
causi ng differential phase changes at :he rece i ver . As command systems
ideal l y we require the missile to fil ter out all t his spur i ous i nf ormat i on.
Unfor t unat el y it is mainly a bandwidth is
t ypi cal l y equa l t o or l s s s t han t ha t of our sys t em. This means that in command .>1 .'
sys t ems prcvided t he qui dance loop i s r eas onacl y we l l damoed t he r . m S mi s s is not _
l ikely to be oreater t han t he r .m. s . va1ue of t he gl i nt itself . In.homing systems
we have seen to- changes i n WQ .--- -
theref ore a given apparent j i nea r movement of th e ..targe.t _.resUu..s_tn_eser__
-- - --- - -- --_ _---_.-- -._--- - - _ ._-
noi se due t o 91 int as range t c mi s s then \-1;11 t end t o in crease
c
(
..
(
G...... .c.s.-Q
(
c

232 Guided Weapon Contro l Systems

K2
n g
= "Z ,----
g
T 2
g
T
g
is a constant typlcally about 0.25 s
glint as
c
+ w
dw
2 L
+ w T
g
t he di nensi ons m
2/
r ad/s and
L
g
, the r.m.s . value of t he
\,here K 2 nas
g
'.... e can def i ne
",lith the band'.... i qth of fee dfor../ard gain .... < as r ...... 0 , not the feedback
gain , as with thermal noise . If now t he gl i nt spectrum is defined by
K2
g
--
Since the ratio of the systembandwi dth to the noise bandwidth i s clearly relevan t
we can define th is as "'nh/ l /Tg = wnhT
g
; a val ue of "'nh' g \'Ihich is mo re than unity
means tha t t he system bandwidth is l arger than the noise bandwidth, and vi ce-versa .
With the se parameters in min d a number of anal ogue comput er r uns have been ma de
and the r .m. s. val ues for mi ss distance are shown in Fig 9.8-l . These results
cl early show t hat i n homing systems t he r .m.S. mi ss due to glint tends t o be
greater than the r .m.s . value of t he gl i nt itself. Ahi gh ki nematic gain and l ow
damp i nq will increase t he mi ss . A sl ow aut opilot wi 11 also increase t he mi ss
despite the redu ction in effective banoNi dth ; again t his is al mo st certainly due
t o an ea rl i er onset of lo op i nstabi lity . The two sets of graphs also show that if
the system bandwidth is less t han t he noi se bonGNidth considerable filt ering wil l
occur re sul ting in a smaller mi ss . Fi g 9. 8-l(b) coui d well be typical of a
sys t emwhere w. = 8 say and T has been effecti vel y re duced to 1/16 second due to
nn
freq uency agaility in the receiver . However i t mus t be pointed out tha t in practice ,
the behaviour of a rea l sys temhomi ng on to a real glinting target is often more
comp l i cat ed t han depicted above. If the glint is severe , limi ting may well occur
somewhere in the system a second or so bef ore impact; t his wi l l t end t o reduce t he
mi ss but coul d inccease t he miss if t he mi ss i l e is al ready trying t o pull maximum
g i n order to catch a manoeuvring ta rget. Also in some s i mul ati ons when a real
homing head has been used plu s an illuminator and a physical mode l of the target ,
an i ncrease i n the bandwidt Q.of the systemhas act ually resulted in a reduction in
the mi ss due to gl int ; and t he characteristics of t he automatic gain control have
als o been found to be relevant . Appare ntly a hi gher bandwidt h systemspends more
of i t s homing time i n areas of high s i gnal strength and t his affect s accuracy.
Nevertheless , the above arguments must indicate general t rends . Wh at is not
i n doubt i s that in systems using radar, glint is ofte n the mai n cont ributor to
mi ss dis t ance i n homina systems and that t he use of f requency agility can
si gni ficant ly reduce its effect.
'"
Proportional cHIG h0I111 n g Gui ca nce Loops
233
5 4
a.
3
(0)
2
a = 0. 5
5
4
Wnh
T
g
s: 2
M
9
L
g

I
I
2
/'
/
,/ -:
/ ' / /
/ :-:
/

0
0
3

' 0 _
'.
FIG 9.6-1 Miss distance due t o gl int
234
Gui ded Wea pon Control Systems
9.9 THREE-Dl MENSI Oi': AL HOMING
Sure i y i n any r eel enqaqeme nt t he probl em is a thr'e2- dimens i onal one? When con-
s i de ri ng mo t ion due to a headi ng error we have considered the problem as a two-
dimens i onal cne . , This is cl ea r l y so if t he mi ss i I e and ta rge t velocit i es l i e i n
t he same pl ane ; but thi s is obviously Q s peci al case. Cons ide r now t he rotat i on
of the s i ght l ine . This must li e in a gi ven p1ane of rot at ion . If t he plane of
t he paper is this pl ane and the miss i le veloc ities have compone nts U
m1
,
U
t l
i n t his plane and U
m2
, U
t 2
perpendicular to this pl ane , then i t is the
diffe rence between U
ml
and U
t l
wh i ch cause s the sigh t line to rotate, s ee Fig 9 .9 - 1.
"
-,
translate the plane.
the ir ef f e ct wi l l be
r
(
(
(
(
i
.(
Hefl ce U " a/ld U
t 2
mus t be equal and. their a.nly effect i s to
111 .(
S
. , 1 . f - h - U d 11 . 1
trm i ar t y 1 t ner-e are ccmoonents ml anc U,;." i n ... ni s n doe
I 1..1 .
t o change t he sight line rate in t his pl an e as time pr?ceeds . In such a case we
can trea t the problem as two-di mens i cnal . rk;\': ever , if there is any relative
to this pl ane a compcnent of si ght line rate
t o this plane will star t t o build up. The situat ion no" is : mot i on due to a
heading e rr or in one pl ane and moti on due to an accelerat ion i nput perpendi cular
to thi s plane; t here is no headin g e rror in t his latter plane . In thi s s ense the
situation i s s i mi l ar t o that in LOS systems . If the target fl i e s s t rai ght, once
t he mi s s ile i s gathered , a fl yplane e xi st s and t he probl em is two-di me ns tonel . If
t he targ et manoeuvres perpendi cular to the f lypl ane , t he mi ss il s traj ecto ry is now
t hree -di mens i onal .
FIG 5 .9-1 Missil e and tiaxqe t: velccir:ies iin r:e of
t he paper and perpendicular t o thi:.; pZ-ane
;
i
i
'!
"
j[
: !

Proport iona l NavI gat i on and Homing Guidance Loops 235
'-
I
I
I
Movements of the missile due to thermal noise will have no preferred direction
and movements due to a glinting target will be largely confined to the yaw plane
of the target . Hence the engagement could be analysed as the result of
(a) mot i on in one pl ane due to a heading error and possibly miss ile forward accelera -
tion and/or target lateral acceleration in this plane .
(b) target lateral acce lerati on per pendi cul ar to this plane with al l other initial
conditions in this pl ane set t o zero .
(c) disturbances due to t her mal noise equally in both planes .
(d) disturba.nces due to gli nt l arg el y i n one plane of. the target only .
As with LOS systems se parate esti mates or simulations in one pl ane will be realistic
only if there is no serious cross -c oupli ng between the planes and no appreciable
saturation anywhere in the system.
9.10 AN INTEGRATED FORM OF PROPORTIONAL NAVIGATION
We have seen that it is esse ntial to est abl ish an accurate meas ure of sight line
rate uncontaminated by mi ssi l e body mot i on; any s uch coupli ng reduces stab ility
mar gin s and .degrades the accuracy of t he homing process. Ideally we need autopil ot
to regula rise t he mi ss i l e res ponse and rate gyr os on the head to assist
in decoupl i ng the head f rom mi ssi l e mot i on. The integrated f orm of proportional
navigati on see ks t o re duce t he number and cost of missile-borne instruments and
uses a guidance l aw of t he f orm
= k e
(9 .10- 1)
instead of t he convent ional form
=k e, see equati on (9. 3- 10)
,
Provided the initial conditi ons are t he same, the two types of proportional navigation
shoul d be i ndi s t i ngui shabl e .
Fig 9.10-1shows the angles which are relevant. The angle channel receiver produces
a si gnal proportional to (e - d) . If a pot ent iomet er is mount ed between the head
and the body we have a measure of (d - w
m
) . If a free gyro is mount ed i n the
missile we have a measure of w
m
with res pect to t he original launch direction . To
establish e we can write
(e - d) + ( d - W
m)
+ w
m
=6 (9.1 0-2 )
Thi s me anS t hat i n order to obta in a si gnal propor t ional to sight li ne angle with
respect t o a space datum we need t o fee d back positivel y a signal proportional to
( d - W) and another proportiona l t o w and add these si gnals t o the homing head
m ,m .
receiver outpu t which i s proport iona l t o (e - d).. The simplified block diagram i s
shown i n Fig 9.10-2for sma ll perturbat ions about a constant bearing course . The
s i gnal from th e recei ver is passed t hrough a filter to reduce the high frequency
noise content . This si gnal is t hen fe d to a servo whi ch dr ives the dish re lat ive
236 Gui Cleo Control Sys t erns
ORIGINAL MISSI LE DIRECT ION
FIG 9.10- 2 De fir.i=ion of angLes
'.
Fill EFl
EXP LICi T
VOl1.... GE
FEEDBACK
a '
GAl'"
ADJUS TMENT AUTOPilOT
DI SH
SERYQ
INCIOENCf
LAG
I
I
r
I
'.

GPOTENll O"E1ER
'iOLTAGE
+- a I' - <jI ml
+
INHERENl DISH ANGLE FEEDBACK
FIG 9 . 10-2 Block diccrcm Of an i.nxeqrat.ed
f or.m of navigation
VOLTAGE
a<l>m
..
Proportional i'ia vigatior, and homi ng Guidance Loops 237
to the miss ile ; i t is also used as a demand t o the autopilot f or a change in body
direc tion . The autopilot uses body angle f eedback provided by a f ree
gyro. The complete autopilot including fin servos , ae rodynamics, gyro and any
compensat i on used is shown as a bl ock wi th a trans te r f uncti on Y4 " The gyro
feedba ck used for t he autopi lot is not shown explicitly i n t he f ig ure . The gyro
s i gnal i s used aga in to provide a s i qnal proportiona l t o di sh angl e when summe d
',{ith the potentiometer s ignal , so al t hough the gyro is used in th e autop i lo t bl ock
i t is shown separ at el y wi t h a transfer funct ion Y
8
. The reade r should have no
difficuity in verifying that t here is no feedback of di sh ang l e or body an gl e
provided Y
l
= Y
7
=Y
S
' Hence t he system i s vir tua l ly l oop from e t o t
f
( except of course for the gyro fee dback in the autopi lot) and therefore we can
wri t e :
.-
'-
ftie navigaLion constant be adjusted by adjusting Y3 ' If tne d.e. gai n of Y i s
see ( 9 . 3-10) c; =
k U.... cos 'il
;j; "feo
U
r
The fol lowing poin ts shoul d be notnd:
(a) The complete guidance l ocp contains one i nteg ration i nstead of t wo integcations
and no inherent differe ntiation - no real change .
(b) The homing head la g not f igl Jre as one of the systcln lags ; inste ad the re
i s t he incidence l ag, t he aut opilot lag as before, and any f iltering one may design
k then
i nt o Y
2
and Y
3
(c) The difficulti es i n mat chi ng '(1 ' Y
7
and Y8 shoul d not be un derest imated . Any
l ack of li neari t y or bi as Will lea d either to some ef f ect i ve negat i ve feedback
which could reduce t he open l oop gain s ignificantly , or conversely could l ead to
some net t positive fee dback ';/ hi ch could l ead t o instabi lity .
(d) Any dr i f t in the gyro should have a negl ig ible effect . O.lo/s as soc ia te d
with a miss ile speed of 573 is an effective l ata x of only 1 ffi /S and a reasonab l e
qual ity gyro shoul d drift mu ch less th an thi s .
An obvious choice of t his type of proport iona l naviga t i on h'oul d D:: f or a sea
ski mmi ng missile usi ng a radio f or hei ght contro l a good qual ity
free gyro for mi d- course heading control . If t he end-co urse guidance is homi nq ,
then the same gyro can t hen D'-: vsed for both t he pitch ar.c ya,;; suidanc channels .
,-
...
9.11 OTHER GUIDANCE LAWS
As far as is known to t he aut hc r , all other forms of homin"g guidance both engineered
and proposed, have been mod i f i cd f orms of propert i onal naviga t ion. it ::
seems most unl ikely t hat anyone wo ul d try to i mprove on a gui dance l aw which demands
238 Guiaed Systems
a lateral acceleration given by
f
yd
= 3 e Ur/cos Yfco
(9 .11 -1)
i f t he target is rel atively s l ow moving and the si9nal -to-noise ratio i s l ikely to
be 900d near i nt erception . The miss 1';;11 be very small (unles s the engagement t ime
i s ext remel y short) and we have seen t hat such a gui dance laws minimises t he
integral of the mean squared lateral accelerat ion ; and since induced drag i s
approximately proportional to the l at ax squared th e traject ory can be rega r ded
as opt i mum .
Let us now consider some situations where simpl e proportiona l navi gation shows up
l es s f avourably . Consider a short range engagement of say 3 sec onds during which
time the mi ssile is boosting at 20g . If the target is fairly fast and i s mo re
or l ess crossing we may easily establish a lead angle of 30
0
. This means that
there is a component of acceleration relative t o t he sightline of 20g s in 30
0
= 109.
If t he ki nemat i c gai n is 3, th is means that t he miss il e wi ll have t o pull mo r e
th an 309 at the end of the engagement just to overcome system "bi as" .
Equat i on 9.6-2 is applicable as we have already argued that i n homing it is th e
rel ative mo tion which deterwines the trajectory . The situation is the same as a
constant speed miss ile and a target pulling 109 perpendicular t o t he si ght line .
We have al so argued that l ate accelerations gr eat l y i ncrease t he mean accel erati on
and hence mean squared acceleration . This undesirable situat i on can easil y be
remedi ed. In rig 9.11-1, if the lead or look-out angl e i s L and the mi ssil e
t
y
T
(9.11- 2)
me ans of potent iometers an th e homi ng
a function of t ime or measured by an
If th e missile enj oys a good speed

FIG 8.11 -1
longi tudinal accele ration is f
x
' then the demand f
yd
should be modified to
f
yd
= 3 e Ur/cos $fco - f
x
s in L/cos L
Now t he angle of look i s easily me asured by
head gimb als and f
x
can either be st or ed as
addit i onal fore and af t axi s accelerometer.
c i
_. .... - -- 1
. " ",. __.L. :-"_-J:;'

. .... -
Proportionc1 Homing Guidance Loops
239
1
1:
1:
1
1
' ;1
.1
j
T
:r
.1
T
I
-1
I
I
I
I

I
_1'
1
1
},
T K f
3 m
x, r
t t.
K
1
Ur e
:= - - -- +
cos ,1)_
<rcc
f .
yC
super i ority L wi ll be a sma ll angl e and f or si n L can rea d L (i . e . a si mple
l inear potentiometer output) and cosine effect s can be i gnore d. This fo nn of
gui dance law is usua-l ly called "acceleration compensated proportiona l navigation".
Beca use i t is not necessary t o keep homing mi ss il e in a narrow beam or LOS it
is eas y t o devi se schemes for increasing t he r ange of a homi ng missile especially
f or attacki ng l ow-J evel ta r gets. For a med ium range system (e .g , missile launched
when the ta r get is at a range of 50 km or more) , th e mi ss i l e can be launched at
a f ixe d el evat ion of about 55
0
and a very 10'" navigation constant emp loyed until
about 10 seconds t o go. The induced drag will be l ow because of t he low level of
gu idance demands , and the ze r o i nc i de nce dr ag wi l l be,.ex tremely low because of the
high altitude. Some pr ior computation is necessa ry to' ensure t hat t he angle of
look does nat become excessive just before homing pr oper commences. Si mi larl y t he
t r aj ectory can be ver y si mpl y "Shaped'; if one wi shes to hit a gr oun d level target
such as a tank at a fairly steeply descending angle. One can i nj ect an upward bi as
ac celeration i nto the system wht ch will result in a fa i r ly large cownwa r d mi s s i l e
accel eration towards t he end of the trajectory . Or , one r.ou l d fl y at a set height
and inhib i t a ll guidance comman ds in t he 'fe r t i c:1 l plane unti l t he measure d si ght
l i ne rate exc eeded a given value . The defe cts i n si mple proport iona l navigati on
:;ho':-l themselves mast ..rhen it is a ppl i ad to the s hort range .:lir- - to-air s ituat ion .
The er.gagement ti me may be very Short, targets may be crossi ng re s ul ti nc in la rge
heading errors , the Ie may be boosting and the ta rget t uke a 10r ge
evas i ve manoeuvre. Thr us t ve ctor control is nearly always used in such systems.
The ideal es ti mator-cont r oil er comput es t he i mpac t ooint and turns the body as
soon as possi ble after la"nch (say in less t han 0. 5 seconds) so t hat t he body (and
hence pr opul s ion syst em) is point ing directly at t his point (8) , (9), (10 ) , (11 ) ,
(12) . Unf ortunately launching ai r cr-aft saf et y consi der ati ons usually r equire all
mi ss ile controls t o be locked for about 0.2 se conds af t er la unch. A large body
turn at low mi ssile vel ocity results in i ow i nduced drag and low mis s i l e latax.
Se veral systems usi ng llgimbai angie s teeri nq" have been engi nee re d . If t he
i nt ent i on is to establ is h a large l ead angl e as soon as possible , t he logical
method is to demand an angl e of look, not miss ile l etax, Dish angl e f eedback pl us
a limi t on the demand t o ensure that gimbal l ock does not c.ccur , can be used for
the first seco nd or s o; ord inary propc-t i onal navigati on can be used for the rest
of the engagement .
Hoy/e ver , most of th e r ef e r ences above are su gges t ing opti num gui da nce laws
approximateiy of the form
wh ere K
1
i s approxi mat el y 3 dropping t o a 10'1 value about a second Or so before
esti ma ted i mpact, depending largely on t he signal t o noi se rati o and t he
mi ss i l e dynamiGs . This can si gnifi cant ly reduce t he mi ss due t o noise .
f
t
i s t he est i mate d ta rget l at ax perpendi cular to t he sight line and K
2
i s a function of t{me to go.
f , i s t he mi ss i l e longi t udi nal accelerat ion and K
3
is a f uncti on of gi mb al
angl e and t ime t o go.
Howe ve r, t here are formid ab le di fficulties in i mpl ement i ng s uch a law i f all
situat i ons are to be cate red for . Time t o go has t o be accurat ely estimated ;
the effects of unde resti mati ng can be di sastrous as l egi ti ma t e demands near i mpact
'Ii l l not be i mpl ement ed. Al so, i n pract i ce , the esti mat i on of t arget accelerati on
is diffi cul t . The si mpl e expedie nt of di fferentiati ng si ght l i ne rate i s sel dom
possible due t o nois e considerati ons . However much work is bei ng done i n t his
fie l d, and pract i cal opti mum gui dance la"s may yet be possi bl e . Homi ng guidance
of f ers t he control engi neer great i ncentives . It i s t heoret ical l y poss i bl e to
pl an one 's t ra jectory very intelligentl y as t he mi ss il e' s flight path is not
const rai ned to lie i n the "beam" as it is i n all l OS syst ems .
.-'
L
L
240 Guiced Weapon Cont rol Syste ms
I
I
= .
ReFERENCES
1. COR;;;ORC E.C. and aM';'l\ Tile kiiler..ti cs of propcr:ional na'v'1gotiOil courses
for a mi ss i l e with a t irre lag . Royal Aircraft Est aoi i shme nt Tech No te No G. W. 85
October 195[:.
2. BAIN R.W. and F. E. navigaticn for a miss i!e with a quad-
rat i c t i rne laq . Royal Aircraft Es t abl t shme nt Tech Note No G. W. 307 Apri l 1954.
3. BAIN R.W . The anal ysis of li near homing navig ation Royal Ai rcraf t
Es t abl i shoent Tech No t e No G.W . 427 August 1956.
4. JENK.INS D. P. Proport i onal nav i q a t i cr. ' .... a q uacra t i c leg mi s s ile . Royal
Ra dar Es t abl is hment Memorandum No 1250 October 1957.
5. JENKINS D.P . Prc porti ona l navig ati on agai nst a "eovin':! t ar get . Royal Radar'
Es t abl i shment f':emorandl) ffi No J5 72 t1ay 1959 .
6. HEAP E. ogy cf. research into conma nd- ] ine-cf-s i ght and nom; ng
guidance . AGARD Seri es No 52 Gu idance and cortrcl of t actica1 mi ssiles
to',ay 1972.
7. C. A determination of the homing of a f ifth crder missile
sys t em using the adj oi nt me t hod, Air craft Ccrpcret i on 5T 7611 Nover:.tJ ;,;;
1973.
B. fOX Performaoce as sessment of homing gui dance laws . Br itis h Aircr aft
Corpor-e t i on report no ST 17076 Augus t 1977 .
9 . FOX J . E. Opt irnum guidance fer ecceIe r at i nq mi ss i i es . Bri t i s h Aerospa ce

. 241
;
- - -- -_.- _ . . -._-
Proportional Nav igat ion and Homi ng Gu idance Loops
report ST 19801 Oct obe r 1979 .
10 . GONZALEZ J . New me thods in th e termi nal gui dance and cont r ol of tacti cal
mis s iles . AGARD lecture s e ri es no 101 . Gu i dance and control f or tactical gui ded
we apons wi th emphasi s on simUlation and tes t i ng . June 1979.
11. HOFFi,t:\NN W. and JOOS D. Hissi1e guidance tec hni ques . AGARD l ect ure series
no 101 .
12 . COLEl'\AII R. The es t imation of the ,,,rget manoeuvre i n a f ight e r - i nt e r cep tor!
aircraft target engagemen t . Bri tish Aerospace report no 5T 20379 May 1978.
- ....
_ I