Journal of Computational Information Systems 11: 5 (2015) 17191727

Available at http://www.Jofcis.com

A Novel Gyrocompass Alignment Method for Strapdown

Inertial Navigation System

Wei GAO, Baofeng LU

College of Automation, Harbin Engineering University, Harbin 150001, China

Abstract

In order to avoid the nonlinear problem of error model caused by the initial level misalignment, prelimi-
nary leveling operation is necessary for traditional gyrocompass alignment. However, due to the exist of
preliminary leveling operation, the total alignment time will be lengthened. For the purpose of reducing
alignment time, a novel gyrocompass alignment method is proposed in this paper. This method is
accomplished by utilizing the dierent error propagation characteristics of two dierent level alignment
algorithms, and the procedure of azimuth alignment is performed by opening the azimuth loop. So
preliminary leveling operation can be removed and the duration of initial alignment can be shortened.
Simulation results show that the alignment speed of novel gyrocompass alignment method is faster than
that of the traditional one.

Keywords: Style Strapdown Inertial Navigation System; Nonlinear Problem; Error Model;
Gyrocompass Alignment

1 Introduction
The initial alignment of inertial navigation system (INS) is an important process performed
prior to normal navigation [1]. It is well known that the initial alignment of the system is of
fundamental importance to the resulting navigation accuracy [2]. Therefore, many researchers
have investigated the topic [3-9], mainly concentrated on gyrocompass alignment and optimal
estimation techniques. In contrast with optimal estimation techniques, the former method doesnt
need precise mathematical and noise model. And with many years development, gyrocompass
alignment based on classical control theory is very mature. As early as in 1961, Cannon presented
gyrocompass alignment method for platform INS [3], in which the initial level misalignment has
a preponderant eect on the azimuth transient, so azimuth alignment is performed only after the
system has been leveled using a preliminary leveling operation. Later, gyrocompass alignment is
described extensively in the literatures [4, 5], including alignment technique and error analysis.
In recent years, with the development of strapdown INS, gyrocompass alignment is applied to
strapdown INS [1, 6]. In conclusion, the general process of azimuth alignment in gyrocompass

Project supported by the National Nature Science Foundation of China (No. 51379042).

Corresponding author.
Email address: lu bao feng@163.com (Baofeng LU).

15539105 / Copyright 2015 Binary Information Press

DOI: 10.12733/jcis13342
March 1, 2015
1720 W. Gao et al. /Journal of Computational Information Systems 11: 5 (2015) 17191727

technique is accomplished by closing the azimuth loop. Therefore, preliminary leveling operation
is necessary in order to avoid the nonlinear problem of error model caused by the initial level
misalignment, and it will lengthen the total alignment time.
In this paper, a novel gyrocompass alignment method for strapdown INS is provided, in which
the procedure of azimuth alignment is performed by opening the azimuth loop. Then preliminary
leveling operation can be removed, and the duration of initial alignment can be shortened. This
method is realized by putting two dierent level alignment algorithms into operation simultane-
ously, and the estimate of azimuth misalignment can be obtained by the dierent characteristics
of error propagation between them.

2 Strapdown INS Error Model

Before providing algorithms for level alignment, a strapdown INS error model is necessary to be
derived. In the derivation process, we assume that the vehicle is at rest. Initial alignment is
usually performed when the strapdown INS is resting at a location whose geographic coordinates
are known almost perfectly [10]. So the position equation and the position error equation can be
ruled out.
Under the previously discussed hypothesis, the true equations of strapdown INS can be written
as
C bn = Cbn [ib
b
Cnb ie
n
] (1)
V n = C n f b + g n = 0
b (2)
where Cbn is the direction cosine matrix (DCM), related the body frame b to the navigation frame
b n
n, ib is the true angular velocity vector, ie is the angular velocity vector of earth frame with

respect to inertial frame, V denotes the true velocity of strapdown INS, f b denotes the true
n

specic force, g n is the gravity vector.

And the computational equations of strapdown INS can be represented as

C bp = Cbp [e b
ib Cpb ie
n
] (3)

n
Vb = Cbp feb + g n (4)
where Cbpis the direction cosine matrix (DCM), related the body frame b to the platform frame
eib is the angular velocity vector measured by gyros, Vb n is the computed velocity of strapdown
p, b

INS, feb is the specic force from the accelerometer output.

Comparing Eq. (1) with Eq. (3), the attitude error equation is obtained, and can be represented
by the psi-angle model [11, 12]
n = ien
n Cbn b (5)
where n = [E N U ]T is the misalignment vector, Cbn b = [E N U ]T , b is the gyro error.
Similarly, comparing Eq. (2) and Eq. (4), yields

V n = g n n + Cbn b (6)

where V n = [VE VN VU ]T is the velocity error vector, Cbn b = [E N U ]T , b is the

accelerometer error.
W. Gao et al. /Journal of Computational Information Systems 11: 5 (2015) 17191727 1721

3 Two Kinds of Algorithms Designed for Level Alignment

In this section, we design two kinds of algorithms for level alignment from the control theoretical
point of view, and look into the dierent characteristics between them. Obviously, system rep-
resented by Eq. (5) and Eq. (6) is an unstable system. In order to realize level alignment, the
signals V n need to be fed into controllers that analytically torque the strapdown INS to drive
n to zero.

3.1 Level alignment I

The rst algorithm for level alignment is designed by adding control angular velocity IpI to the
computational equations of strapdown INS. Then Eq. (3) and Eq. (4) can be rewritten as
C bpI = CbpI [e b
ib Cpb (ie
n
+ IpI )] (7)
n
Vb I = CbpI feb + g n (8)
The attitude error model and the velocity error model are
In = ie
n
In Cbn b + IpI (9)
V In = g n In + Cbn b (10)
Where IpI T
= [IE IN 0] , IE and IN are as shown in Fig. 1 and Fig. 2.

Fig. 1: East error model of level alignment I

Fig. 2: North error model of level alignment I

Where kIa = 2n , kIb = n2 /g. is usually taken as 0.707, and n is an adjustable variable.
In our analysis, we assume that the inertial sensor errors are basically constant drifts; then the
steady-state outputs of this algorithm due to constant error inputs are
E 2
IN ss = (N + IEss sin ) (11)
g n
1722 W. Gao et al. /Journal of Computational Information Systems 11: 5 (2015) 17191727

N 2
IEss = (E + IU ss cos IN ss sin ), (12)
g n
Neglecting the small deviation, we have
E 2 N
IN ss = (N sin ) (13)
g n g
N 2 E
IEss = (E + IU ss cos sin ). (14)
g n g

3.2 Level alignment II

Similarly, the second algorithm is designed by adding control angular velocity p to the compu-
tational equations of strapdown INS. The form of p is represented as p = [E N 0]T ,
where E and N are as shown in Fig. 3 and Fig. 4.

Fig. 3: East error model of level alignment II

Fig. 4: North error model of level alignment II

Where ka = 3n , kb = n2 (1 + 2 2 )/g, kc = n3 /g.

From Fig. 3 and Fig. 4, the steady-state outputs of this algorithm due to constant error inputs
can be expressed as
E
N ss = (15)
g
N
Ess = (16)
g
Comparing Eq. (14) with Eq. (16), the dierent characteristics of error propagation between
these two algorithms can be found. That can be described as follows: dierent networks designed
lead to the dierent steady-state outputs of strapdown INS, and the dierence between them
contains the azimuth misalignment information.
W. Gao et al. /Journal of Computational Information Systems 11: 5 (2015) 17191727 1723

4 Open Azimuth Alignment Scheme

The characteristics of level misalignments have been investigated in the above section. Next,
the error propagation of IU and U is necessary to be analyzed too. From Eq. (9), the error
equation of IU is
IU = IE cos U (17)
since IE cos and U are small values, they can be ignored. Then the error equation of IU
becomes IU = 0, similarly, the error equation of U also can be written as U = 0. Under
the above analysis, we can obtain IU = IU (0) and U = U (0). The specic description of
azimuth alignment scheme is provided in the following.
Strapdown INS is the modern system that has removed most of the mechanical complexity of
platform systems by having the sensors attached rigidly, or strapped down, to the body of the
host vehicle [13]. So the measurements of specic force and angular rate provided by the inertial
sensors can accurately represent the vehicle motions, without the eects of strapdown computa-
tional algorithms. In other words, no matter which algorithm is utilized in strapdown INS, the
outputs of the inertial sensors are not changed. With the development of navigation computer,
several strapdown computational algorithms can be utilized during its operation simultaneously,
and these algorithms will be uncorrelated with each other.
Here, after coarse alignment, the algorithms previously designed for level alignment are put into
operation at the same time. Therefore, the error sources of these two algorithms are completely
the same with each other. Then Eq. (14) becomes

N 2 E
IEss = (E + IU ss (0) cos sin ) (18)
g n g

From Eq. (7), we can get the attitude matrix of level alignment I, it can be written as

CbpI = (I In )Cbn (19)

Similarly, Cbp can be obtained and represented as

Cbp = (I n )Cbn (20)

Consequently,
b
Cp = Cnb (I + n ) (21)
b
Postmultiply Eq. (19) by Cp to obtain

CbpI Cp
b
= I (In n ) (22)

On the other hand, comparing Eq. (16) with Eq. (18), yields

n E E
U (0) = (IEss Ess ) + tan (23)
2 cos cos g

From Eq. (22), we can get the value of IEss Ess , and the estimate of U (0) is provided by
n
bU (0) = (IE E ) (24)
2 cos
1724 W. Gao et al. /Journal of Computational Information Systems 11: 5 (2015) 17191727

Thus, the steady error of this estimate is

E E
U = U lim bU (0) = + tan (25)
cos g
An accurate attitude matrix Cbp can be obtained by

1 bU (0) 0
p
Cbp =
bU (0) 1 0 C
b (26)
0 0 1

With the attitude matrix Cbp compensated by bU (0), initial alignment could be realized. Due
to bU (0) is not fed into the level alignment algorithms, the preliminary leveling operation can
be removed. From Eq. (24), we note that the level and azimuth alignment can be accomplished
at the same time. The steady-state alignment errors of this method aected by the sensor errors
are as shown in the following
N
E = Ess = (27)
g
E
N = N ss = (28)
g
E E
U = U lim bU (0) = + tan (29)
cos g

5 Modified Open Azimuth Alignment Scheme

In many operational situations it is desired to align the inertial system with the disturbance of
vehicle motions, and to do so on a ship or aircraft which is in disturbing motions caused by sea
waves or gusty winds. The disturbing motions can be considered to be sinusoidal [3].
Each of the level alignment systems previously designed has a strong capability of restraining
disturbance. On the other hand, the term appears in the denominator in Eq. (24), so that the
disturbing motions have a large eect on the azimuth alignment. In order to reduce the inuence
of disturbance motions on azimuth alignment, a modied alignment method is designed, and
expressed by Fig. 5.

Fig. 5: Modied open azimuth alignment scheme

From Fig. 5, we would note that a low-pass lter is added to the alignment system. The reason
for this design is to reduce the inuence of disturbance motions on azimuth misalignment. The
design law of this low-pass lter is provided in the following:
W. Gao et al. /Journal of Computational Information Systems 11: 5 (2015) 17191727 1725

1) The magnication of this low-pass lter in low frequency must be equivalent to 1, in order
to assure the accuracy of azimuth misalignment information;
2) In high frequency, for the purpose of reducing the inuence of disturbing motions, it needs
to have a strong capability of restraining disturbance.
Taking the last law into consideration, two kinds of typical minimum phase systems would meet
our demands. They are given as follows
1
G1 (s) = (30)
Ts + 1
1
G2 (s) = (31)
T 2 s2 + 2T s + 1
Where T = 1/f . is often set as 0.707, and f is an adjustable variable.
If only one of them is applied to azimuth alignment, the value of f must be smaller for larger
disturbances, and it would lengthen the duration of azimuth alignment. Therefore, the low-pass
lter is provided as follows
1
G(s) = (32)
(T s + 1)(T 2 s2 + 2T s + 1)

then the value of f can be greater, and the duration of azimuth alignment will be shortened.
By adopting the alignment scheme shown by Fig. 5, the inuence of disturbing motions can be
controlled within allowable range.

6 Simulation Results
In this simulation, gyro and accelerometer outputs are generated by the strapdown INS simulator.
We assume that the vehicle is in disturbing motions caused by sea waves, and modied open
azimuth alignment is performed by strapdown INS. The sensor errors are set as: the gyro constant
drift: 0.01 /h, the accelerometer bias: 1 104 g.
Under the disturbing motions, the vehicle undertakes angular and lineal movements. In angular
movement, the pitch x , roll y , and yaw z are controlled as

x = 7 sin(2t/5 + /3), y = 5 sin(2t/7 + /6), z = 10 sin(2t/6 + /4) (33)

In the lineal movement, the vehicle lineal movement velocities are taken as

Vx = 0.3 sin(2t/10) m/s2 , Vy = 0.2 sin(2t/6) m/s2 , Vz = 0.4 sin(2t/8) m/s2 (34)

We assume that the initial misalignments after coarse alignment are 0.2 , 0.2 and 0.5 . The local
latitude is = 45 , and the control variables are set as

= = 0.707, n = 0.02, f = 0.04. (35)

The results of this simulation are shown in Fig. 6 and Fig. 7, and in order to make a compari-
son with traditional gyrocompass alignment scheme, the azimuth alignment result of traditional
1726 W. Gao et al. /Journal of Computational Information Systems 11: 5 (2015) 17191727

Fig. 6: The level misalignments of alignment for disturbing motions

Fig. 7: The azimuth misalignment of alignment for disturbing motions

method is given in Fig. 7. Solid and dot lines are corresponding to the novel and traditional
methods, respectively.
The solid lines in Fig. 6 and Fig. 7 show the dynamic and steady characteristics of novel
method, including dynamic amplitudes of the misalignments, steady-state alignment errors, and
alignment time. In dynamic state, azimuth misalignment has a large peak mainly caused by the
initial level misalignment. Then if the azimuth loop is closed, the nonlinear problem of error model
will be produced. In traditional method, the nonlinear problem is resolved by using a preliminary
leveling operation, the starting and ending time of this operation are corresponding to point A
and point B in Fig. 7 respectively. In steady state, the mean values of these misalignments are
about 0.0057 , 0.0057 and 0.048 , correspond to the Eqs. (27), (28) and (29). The inuence of
disturbance motions is controlled within allowable range, and comparing with traditional method,
the duration of alignment is shortened.

7 Conclusions
A novel operational approach for gyrocompass alignment is proposed, and provides fresh insights
into strapdown INS. This approach shows that dierent computational algorithms lead to dierent
characteristics of error propagation, and azimuth alignment can be achieved by utilizing these
W. Gao et al. /Journal of Computational Information Systems 11: 5 (2015) 17191727 1727

dierent characteristics. The level and azimuth alignment can be accomplished simultaneously as
the vehicle is at rest. In order to reduce the inuence of disturbing motions, A modied alignment
scheme is provided. From the scheme, we get the conclusions in the following:
1) The performance of level alignment is only determined by the choice of n ;
2) The performance of azimuth alignment is determined by both the choices of n and f .
Then without changing the performance of level alignment, we can adjust the performance of
azimuth alignment by altering the value of f . That is to say, navigation computer can estimate
the azimuth misalignment more exibly.

References
[1] Park, H. W., Covariance Analysis of Strapdown INS Considering Gyrocompass Characteristics
IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems 31 (1995) 320-328.
[2] Nash, R. A. Jr., DAppolito, J. A., and Roy K. J., Error Analysis of Hybrid Aircraft Inertial
Navigation Systems, AIAA Paper (1972) 72-848.
[3] Cannon, R. H., Jr., Alignment of Inertial Guidance Systems by Gyrocompassing-linear Theory,
Journal of Aerospace Science, 28 (1961) 885-895 and 912.
[4] Pitman, G. R., Jr., Ed., Inertial Guidance, Wiley, New York, 1962.
[5] Britting, K. R., Inertial Navigation Systems Analysis, Wiley-Interscience, New York, 1971.
[6] Giovanni, C. S., Levinson, E., Performance of a Ring Laser Strapdown Marine Gyrocompass,
Navigation 28 (1982) 311-341.
[7] Hua, C. Gyrocompass Alignment with Base Motions: Results for 1Nmi/hr INS/GPS system,
Navigation 47 (2000) 65-74.
[8] Wei Gao, Baofeng Lu, The Alignment Technology of Missile-borne Platform Inertial Navigation
Under Arbitrary Azimuth Misalignment Aangle, Journal of Computational Information Systems
9 (2013) 7929-7936.
[9] Choukroun, D., Bar-Itzhack, I. Y., Oshman, Y., Novel Quaternion Kalman Filter, IEEE Transac-
tions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems 42 (2006) 174-190.
[10] Bar-Itzhack, I. Y., Berman, N., Control Theoretic Approach to Inertial Navigation Systems, Jour-
nal of Guidance, Control and Dynamics 11 (1988) 237-245.
[11] Benson, D. O., JR., A Comparison of Two Approaches to Pure-Inertial and Doppler-Inertial Error
Analysis, IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems AES-11 (1975) 447-455.
[12] Goshen-Meskin, D., Bar-Itzhack, I. Y., Unied Approach to Inertial Navigation System Error
Modeling, Journal of Guidance, Control and Dynamics 15 (1992) 648-653.
[13] Titterton, D. H., Weston, J. L., Strapdown Inertial Navigation Technology-2nd Edition, The
Institution of Electrical Engineers, London, 2004.