This paper presents a new robust design for the longitudinal autopilot of a tail-controlled, skid-to-turn missile based on equivalent-input-disturbance (EID) and generalized extended state observer (GESO) approach. Firstly, the nonlinear missile longitudinal dynamics is modeled as a linear formulation for angle-of-attack tracking with uncertainties and disturbances. Next, as a new method, EID-GESO-based control is proposed for disturbance rejection. The method regards the uncertainties and disturbances as a lumped disturbance, named as EID, and simultaneously attenuates it through estimation of linear GESO and simple feedback. Closed-loop stability of the method is also proved. The most important feature of the proposed method over the others is that there is no requirement for system transformation, differentiation of the measured output, full system state available, exact plant model or any information about uncertainties and disturbances. Subsequently, the method is applied to robust longitudinal autopilot design and the feasibility is illustrated by numerical simulations. Finally, a performance comparison with some notable designs under considerable uncertainties and disturbances is implemented to demonstrate the effectiveness and robustness of the proposed design.
HortonMP. Autopilots for tactical missiles: An overview. Proc IMechEng, Part I: J Systems and Control Engineering1995; 2: 127–139.
2.
Minjea T, Michael B and Menon P. Application of plant inversion via state feedback to missile autopilot design. In: Proceedings of the 27th conference on decision and control, Piscataway, NJ, December 1988, pp.730–735. New York: IEEE.
3.
LaneSHStengelRF. Flight control design using nonlinear inverse dynamics. Automatica1988; 4: 471–483.
4.
RomanoJJSinghSN. I-O map inversion, zero dynamics and flight control. IEEE Trans Aero Electron Syst1990; 6: 1022–1029.
5.
EnglewoodCSnellSAEnnsDF. Nonlinear inversion flight control for a supermaneuver aircraft. J Guid Control Dynam1992; 4: 976–984.
6.
SchumacherCKhargonekarPP. Stability analysis of a missile control system with a dynamic inversion controller. J Guid Control Dynam1998; 3: 508–515.
7.
CloutierJREversJHFeeleyJJ. Assessment of air-to-air missile guidance and control technology. IEEE Contr Syst Mag1989; 6: 27–34.
8.
MehrabianARRoshanianJ. Skid-to-turn missile autopilot design using scheduled eigenstructure assignment technique. Proc IMechE, Part G: J Aerospace Engineering2006; 3: 225–239.
9.
ShammaJSCloutierJR. Gain-scheduled missile autopilot design using linear parameter varying transformations. J Guid Control Dynam1993; 2: 256–263.
10.
ApkarianPGahinetPBeckerG. Self-scheduled H∞ control of linear parameter-varying systems: A design example. Automatica1995; 9: 1251–1261.
11.
BennaniSCWillemsenDMSchererCW. Robust control of linear parametrically varying systems with bounded rates. J Guid Control Dynam1998; 6: 916–922.
12.
Weehong T, Packard AK and Balas GJ. Quasi-LPV modeling and LPV control of a generic missile. In: Proceedings of the American control conference, Piscataway, NJ, January 2000, pp.3692–3696. New York: IEEE.
13.
WilliamsDEFriedlandBMadiwaleAN. Modern control theory for design of autopilots for bank-to-turn missiles. J Guid Control Dynam1987; 4: 378–386.
14.
ZhuJJMickleMC. Missile autopilot design using a new linear time-varying control technique. J Guid Control Dynam1997; 1: 150–157.
15.
TheodoulisSDucG. Missile autopilot design: Gain-Scheduling and the gap metric. J Guid Control Dynam2009; 3: 986–996.
16.
NeslineFWWellsBHZarchanP. Combined Optimal/Classical approach to robust missile autopilot design. J Guid Control Dynam1981; 3: 316–322.
Mracek CP and Cloutier JR. Missile longitudinal autopilot design using the state-dependent Riccati equation method. In: International conference on nonlinear problems in aviation and aerospace (1st), Daytona Beach, FL, May 1996, pp.387–396.
19.
Mclain TW and Beard RW. Nonlinear optimal control design of a missile autopilot. In: AIAA conference on guidance, navigation and control, Boston, MA, 10–12 August 1998. Reston, VA: AIAA.
20.
ReichertRT. Dynamic scheduling of modern-robust-control autopilot designs for missiles. IEEE Contr Syst Mag1992; 5: 35–42.
21.
NicholsRAReichertRTRughWJ. Gain scheduling for H-infinity controllers: A flight control example. IEEE Trans Contr Syst Technol1993; 2: 69–79.
22.
BuschekH. Full envelope missile autopilot design using gain scheduled robust control. J Guid Control Dynam1999; 1: 115–122.
23.
Reichert RT. Robust autopilot design using μ synthesis. In: American control conference, San Diego, California, May 1990, pp.2368–2373. IEEE.
24.
AdamsRJBandaSS. Robust flight control design using dynamic inversion and structured singular value synthesis. IEEE Trans Contr Syst Technol1993; 2: 80–92.
25.
ThukralAInnocentiM. A sliding mode missile pitch autopilot synthesis for high angle of attack maneuvering. IEEE Trans Contr Syst Technol1998; 3: 359–371.
26.
SalamciMUOslashMKZg-Ograve. Sliding mode control with optimal sliding surfaces for missile autopilot design. J Guid Control Dynam2000; 4: 719–727.
27.
BhatMSBaiDSPowlyAA. Variable structure controller design with application to missile tracking. J Guid Control Dynam2001; 4: 859–862.
28.
ChoeDKimJ. Pitch autopilot design using model-following adaptive sliding mode control. J Guid Control Dynam2002; 4: 826–829.
29.
ShimaTIdanMGolanOM. Sliding-mode control for integrated missile autopilot guidance. J Guid Control Dynam2006; 2: 250–260.
30.
Harkegard O and Glad T. Vector backstepping design for flight control. In: AIAA guidance, navigation and control conference and exhibit, Hilton Head, South Carolina, 2007, pp.6421–6431. Reston, VA: AIAA.
31.
DezfuliSSBahramiMEbrahimiB. Longitudinal control of an aerospace launch vehicle: A backstepping approach. Proc IMechE, Part G: J Aerospace Engineering2013; 7: 1188–1200.
32.
LuP. Nonlinear predictive controllers for continuous systems. J Guid Control Dynam1994; 3: 553–560.
33.
Upreti V, Talole SE and Phadke SB. Predictive estimation and control based missile autopilot design. In: Proceedings of the AIAA guidance, navigation and control conference, Providence, Rhode Island, USA, 16–19 August 2004, paper no. 2004--5331. Reston, VA: AIAA.
Kamen EW, Bullock TE and Song C. Adaptive control applied to missile autopilots. In: Proceedings of American control conference, Piscataway, NJ, September 1988, pp.555–560. New York: IEEE.
36.
CaoCHovakimyanN. L1 adaptive output-feedback controller for non-strictly-positive-real reference systems: Missile longitudinal autopilot design. J Guid Control Dynam2009; 3: 717–726.
37.
LeeKWSinghSN. Noncertainty-equivalent adaptive missile control via immersion and invariance. J Guid Control Dynam2010; 3: 655–665.
38.
XinMBalakrishnanSN. Missile longitudinal autopilot design using a new suboptimal nonlinear control method. IEE Proc - Contr Theor Appl2003; 6: 577–584.
39.
XinMBalakrishnanSNStansberyDT. Nonlinear missile autopilot design with Theta-D technique. J Guid Control Dynam2004; 3: 406–417.
40.
CaliseAJSharmaMCorbanJE. Adaptive autopilot design for guided munitions. J Guid Control Dynam2000; 5: 837–843.
41.
LinCCChenFC. Improving conventional longitudinal missile autopilot using cerebellar model articulation controller neural networks. J Guid Control Dynam2003; 5: 711–718.
42.
LinCK. Adaptive critic autopilot design of Bank-to-Turn missiles using fuzzy basis function networks. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern B Cybern2005; 2: 197–207.
43.
ChenWH. Disturbance observer based control for nonlinear systems. IEEE/ASME Trans Mech2004; 4: 706–710.
44.
ChenWH. Nonlinear disturbance observer-enhanced dynamic inversion control of missiles. J Guid Control Dynam2003; 1: 161–166.
45.
LeiGChenWH. Disturbance attenuation and rejection for systems with nonlinearity via DOBC approach. Int J Robust Nonlin2005; 3: 109–125.
46.
HallCEShtesselYB. Sliding mode disturbance observer-based control for a reusable launch vehicle. J Guid Control Dynam2006; 6: 1315–1328.
47.
FloquetTEdwardsCSpurgeonSK. On sliding mode observers for systems with unknown inputs. Int J Adapt Control2007; 8–9: 638–656.
48.
LuYS. Sliding-mode disturbance observer with switching-gain adaptation and its application to optical disk drives. IEEE Trans Ind Electron2009; 9: 3743–3750.
49.
SheJFangMOhyamaY. Improving disturbance-rejection performance based on an equivalent-input-disturbance approach. IEEE Trans Ind Electron2008; 1: 380–389.
50.
SheJXinXPanY. Equivalent-input-disturbance approach — analysis and application to disturbance rejection in dual-stage feed drive control system. IEEE/ASME Trans Mech2011; 2: 330–340.
51.
WuMLouKXiaoF. Design of equivalent-input-disturbance estimator using a generalized state observer. J Contr Theor Appl2013; 1: 74–79.
52.
XiaYZhuZFuM. Attitude tracking of rigid spacecraft with bounded disturbances. IEEE Trans Ind Electron2011; 2: 647–659.
53.
TaloleSEGodboleAAKolheJP. Robust roll autopilot design for tactical missiles. J Guid Control Dynam2011; 1: 107–117.
54.
GodboleAALibinTRTaloleSE. Extended state observer-based robust pitch autopilot design for tactical missiles. Proc IMechE, Part G: J Aerospace Engineering2012; 12: 1482–1501.
55.
Zheng Q, Gao LQ and Gao Z. On stability analysis of active disturbance rejection control for nonlinear time-varying plants with unknown dynamics. In: Proceedings of the 46th IEEE conference on decision and control, New Orleans, LA, 12–14 December 2007, pp.3501–3506, IEEE.
56.
BarmishBRLeitmannG. On ultimate boundedness control of uncertain systems in the absence of matching assumptions. IEEE Trans Automat Contr1982; 1: 153–158.
57.
LiSHYangJChenWH. Generalized extended state observer based control for systems with mismatched uncertainties. IEEE Trans Ind Electron2012; 12: 4792–4802.
