6 vues

Transféré par larasmoyo

In this paper an Optimal fuzzy logic control (OFLC) law for a
nonlinear control method is introduced. Dynamic inversion is a
nonlinear control synthesis technique in which the inherent dynamics
of a dynamical system are canceled out and replaced by desired
dynamics, selected by the designer. The output of such an inner-loop
controller is the control input, which produces the desired closed-loop
response. The accuracy of control response in dynamic inversion
method is depend on two gain which are locate before the outer loop
and inner loop. This paper attempts to find a solution to tune these
gains for a better control performance in an intelligent way. We used
Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) to optimize the membership
functions’ (MFs) parameters of the proposed design. The distribution
of the MFs is obtained by minimizing a nonlinear constrained multi-
objective optimization problem where control errors are treated as
competing objectives. The performance of the introduced control law
is compared with classical dynamic inversion. The simulation results
show that introduced method performs better than classical dynamic
inversion. Moreover, the simulations show that the fuzzy pso dynamic
inversion method that we proposed is robust on uncertainties of model
parameters such as mass.

- ijcem_072013_03
- A Two Warehouse Inventory Model for Deteriorating Items with Shortages under Genetic Algorithm and PSO
- Handling Qualiities
- k 2010003
- kumar_aee_63_3_2014
- Modelo de Dimensionamiento Óptimo de Los Sistemas de Distribución de Agua
- InTech-Particle_swarm_optimization_algorithm_for_the_traveling_salesman_problem.pdf
- CH3 Part2
- Omkar Project Report Submitted M Tec Mechanical
- A Novel Approach of Image Ranking based on Enhanced Artificial Bee Colony Algorithm
- Kcs Cmt Nmri Test Prog
- Harris Hawks Optimization (HHO) Algorithm and Applications
- Inspiration for optimization from social insect behaviour
- paper_07-019
- Taha - Slope Stability Assessment Using Optimization Techniques.pdf
- 1005.0340
- Ontiveros-perez Et Al Optimal Location of Optimized Friction Dampers in Civil Structures for the Seismic Passive Control
- 12_Deepak_Fuzzy_Logic_SVM.pdf
- 12_MT_ME_2
- s03p01

Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 21

Research India Publications

http://www.ripublication.com/aeee.htm

Optimal Fuzzy Logic Tuning of Dynamic Inversion

Flight Controller

AlirezaAbaspour 1 , Mohammad Sadeghi 2 and SayedHosein Sadati 3

Aerospace Department, Maleke_ ashtar University, Tehran, Iran.

2,3 Aerospace Department, Maleke_ ashtar university, Tehran, Iran.

Abstract

In this paper an Optimal fuzzy logic control (OFLC) law for a

nonlinear control method is introduced. Dynamic inversion is a

nonlinear control synthesis technique in which the inherent dynamics

of a dynamical system are canceled out and replaced by desired

dynamics, selected by the designer. The output of such an inner-loop

controller is the control input, which produces the desired closed-loop

response. The accuracy of control response in dynamic inversion

method is depend on two gain which are locate before the outer loop

and inner loop. This paper attempts to find a solution to tune these

gains for a better control performance in an intelligent way. We used

Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) to optimize the membership

functions (MFs) parameters of the proposed design. The distribution

of the MFs is obtained by minimizing a nonlinear constrained multiobjective optimization problem where control errors are treated as

competing objectives. The performance of the introduced control law

is compared with classical dynamic inversion. The simulation results

show that introduced method performs better than classical dynamic

inversion. Moreover, the simulations show that the fuzzy pso dynamic

inversion method that we proposed is robust on uncertainties of model

parameters such as mass.

Keywords: Fuzzy logic, nonlinear model, dynamic inversion, control

effort, Particle swarm optimization, uncertainties.

1. Introduction

Most airplanes must operate over a broad flight envelope, Which the aerodynamic

characteristics within this envelope vary widely. A controller based on classica

l control

AlirezaAbaspour et al 8

methodologies [1,2] such as root locus design, would require synthesis of many

different designs at selected operating points along the flight path. These clas

sical

methodologies can be time consuming, thereby increasing both design Time and cos

t

during control system development. Additionally, gains need to be scheduled acro

ss

the flight envelope. In contrast, dynamic inversion is a candidate methodology t

hat

seeks to eliminate gain scheduling through the inversion and cancellation of the

inherent dynamics, by replacement with a set of user-selected desireddynamics. T

he

need to gain schedule is thus reduced through the use of a high-fidelity, onboar

d

aircraft model. For these reasons dynamic inversion is a promising candidate con

trol

design methodology aircraft with extensive flight envelopes.

Within the last decade dynamic inversion has become a popular methodology for

aircraft flight controller design. Much of the literature has applied this desig

n

methodology to both the longitudinal and lateral/directional axes of high-perfor

mance

aircraft, such as the F-117A[3] the F-18HARV [4] and other modified versions of

the

F-18[5] and the F-16 [6]. The control performance of Dynamic Inversion (DI) meth

od

is very sensitive to outer loop and inner loop gains . In this paper we used fuz

zy logic

optimal control (OFLC) to tune the outer loop gain in an intelligent way to obta

in a

better control performance. FLCs are developed to utilize human expert knowledge

in

controlling various systems. It is well known that while fuzzy rules are relativ

ely easy

to derive from human experts, the fuzzy MFs are difficult to obtain. Tuning of M

Fs is

a time consuming and often frustrating exercise. To overcome these difficulties

various

techniques have been reported to automate the tuning process of MFs. An adaptive

network based fuzzy inference system (ANFIS) was introduced [7], where an adapti

ve

neural network was used to learn the mapping between the inputs and outputs and

a

Sugeno-type of fuzzy system could be generated based on the neural network. A

quantum neural network was also used to learn the data space of a Tagaki-Sugeno

FLC

[8]. Genetic algorithm has been used in the automatic design of FLCs [9,10] in t

he

areas of mobile robotics. In the current work, we introduce a fuzzy control law

with

rules obtained based upon the human experienced. Then, the MFs parameters of the

introduced design will be optimized using PSO technique. In fact, PSO is a popul

ation

based stochastic optimization technique developed by Eberhart and Kennedy [11,12

].

Based on their description, particle swarm optimization imitates human (or insec

ts)

social behavior. Individuals interact with one another while learning from their

own

experience, and gradually the population members move into better regions of the

problem space. The swarm of PSO can be envisioned as multiple birds (particles)

that

search for the best food source (optimum) by using their inertia, their knowledg

e, and

the knowledge of the swarm.

Single particles behave similarly because traditionally they share the same

configuration. While searching for food, the birds are either scattered or go to

gether

before they locate the place where they can find the food. While the birds are s

earching

for food from one place to another, there is always a bird that can smell the fo

od very

well and having the better food resource information, that is the bird is percep

tible of

the place where the food can be found, in Figure 1 you can see a flock of swarms

using

PSO.

Optimal Fuzzy Logic Tuning of Dynamic Inversion Flight Controller 9

Figure 1: The flock swarms using PSO.

Since they are transmitting the information, especially the good information at

any

time while searching the food from one place to another, conducted by the good

information, the birds will eventually flock to the place where food can be foun

d. Due

to its simplicity in implementation, PSO has gained popularities in engineering

applications, such as in image processing [13] and in system modeling [14]. A nu

mber

of publications have also been reported in using PSO to automatically tune the F

LC

parameters [15,16,17,18]. These publications are focused on tuning the parameter

s

involved in the TS-type fuzzy controllers. In general, the PSO is used to perfor

m the

learning tasks that are usually associated with the NN in the TS FLCs. Although

there

are research results in the area of automatic fuzzy MFs optimizing, most of them

are in

the area of TS type of fuzzy controllers. To the best of our knowledge, there is

no

report on using PSO for the Mamdani-type of fuzzy controller MFs tuning.

In this paper, we use PSO to automatically tune MFs of the proposed control law.

The OFLCDI then is compared with classic DI .The paper is organized as follows:

in section II we proceed with a brief overview of mathematical model of aircraft

,

whereas dynamic inversion method explained in section III, and combination of fu

zzy

and pso explained in section IV. Then in section V we proceed with the numerical

simulation of classic DI and OFLCDI, while the conclusions are provided in secti

on

VI.

2. Mathematical model of aircraft

In this paper we design a flight controller for a phantom fighter jet (known as

F_4), the

Aerodynamic coefficient obtained from [19]. In table 1 you see the specification

of the

airplane that we used. The inputs are delta aileron, delta elevator and delta ru

dder

[ ] , , a e r

.task of the controller is to track the commands of , and when

aerodynamic model uncertainties exist. The body-fixed axes, nonlinear equations

of

motion for an aircraft over a flat Earth are given by [19].

2 2

2

2

( )

[ ( ) ]

xz x y z

z aero xz aero

x z xz x z xz

z y z xz

x z xz

I I I I pq

I l I n

p r

I I I I I I

I I I I I qr

I I I

+

+

= +

&

(1)

2 2

1

[ ( ) ( )]

aero z x xz

y

q m pr I I I r p

I

= + + &

(2)

AlirezaAbaspour et al 10

2

2 2

2

( ) ( )

x y z xz x x y xz

x z xz x z xz

xz aero xx aero

x z xz

I I I I I I I I

r r p q

I I I I I I

I l I n

I I I

+ +

= + +

+

&

(3)

1

sin cos [ . sin sin ]

.

1

[ cos sin cos ]

.

p r m g

mv

Y T

mv

= + +

&

(4)

( cos sin )tan

1 1

[ cos cos ] [ sin ]

. cos . cos

q p r

L Mg T

mv mv

= + +

+ +

&

(5)

1

( cos sin )

cos

sin

tan cos cos [tan sin tan ]

.

tan cos cos

.

p r

g L T

v mv

Y

mv

= +

+

+ +

+

&

(6)

1

[ cos cos sin cos ]

.

[sin sin cos cos sin ]

.

L mg Y

mv

T

mv

= +

+

&

(7)

1

[ sin sin

cos cos ]

V D Y mg

m

T

= +

+

&

(8)

In above equations: F is aerodynamic force about the body-fixed frame, I is

moment of inertia, L , M ,N are aerodynamic rolling, pitching, yawing moment, ,

, p q r

are roll, pitch, yaw rate about the body-fixed frame, q is dynamic pressure, T

is thrust

,V is velocity, , , is angle of attack, sideslip angle, bank angle, and is flig

ht path

angle.It is assumed that the aerodynamic forces and moments are expressed as

functions of angle of attack, sideslip angle, bank angle, angular rates, and con

trol

surface deflection.

3. Dynamic Inversion

In this section, we present a feedback linearization technique known as Dynamic

Inversion. Dynamic inversion is a control design methodology that uses a feedbac

k

signal to cancel inherent dynamics and simultaneously achieve a specified desire

d

dynamic response [20].

Consider a general time-invariant nonlinear system modeled by the ordinary

differential equations.

( , , )

( , )

x f x u t

y H x u

=

=

&

(9)

Optimal Fuzzy Logic Tuning of Dynamic Inversion Flight Controller 11

There are two separate differential equations: a set of slow dynamics

x&

and a set of

fast dynamics y & .

( ) ( )

( , ) ( , )

x f x g x y

y h x y k x y u

= +

= +

&

&

(10)

Figure 2: Two-timescale inversion of slow dynamics.

TABLE 1: Phantom specification and aerodynamic coefficient in cruise flight[9]

Symbol unit Value

Measurement

B Ft 38.7 Wing Span

S ft 2 530 Wing Area

c ft 1.6 Chord Length

X cg ft 0.29 Xcg

m lbs 39000 Weight

I xx lbs. ft 2 25000 X axis Inertia moment

I yy lbs. ft 2 122200 Y axis Inertia moment

I zz lbs. ft 2 139800 Z axis Inertia moment

I xz lbs. ft 2 2200 XZ palneinenrtia moment

If the system is affine in the controls, then solving explicitly for the control

vector

yields.

1

( ) [ ( )] y g x x f x

= & (11)

Replacement of the inherent dynamics with the desired dynamics results in the

control that will produce the desired dynamics.

1

( ) [ ( )]

d

y g x x f x

= &

(12)

AlirezaAbaspour et al 12

Substituting for the linear aircraft dynamics represented as x Ax Bu = + & yiel

ds a set

of slow dynamic equations for the rotational variables(

1

[ , , ] x = ) and a set of fast

dynamic equations for the rotational rate variables(

2

[ , , ] x p q r = ).The rate variables

now form the input for the slow dynamics, while the actual control surface comma

nds

form the inputs for the rate dynamics. Inverting the slow and fast differential

equations

yields the two dynamic-inversion control laws for the outer dynamic inversion lo

op

and inner dynamic inversion loop, whose block diagram is shown in Figure 2.

The structure of the two-timescale controller is shown in Figure 3. In each

feedback loop, control laws

2

d

x and u are designed separately.

FIGURE 3: Structure of the two-timescale controller

3.1 Inner loop control for the fast variables

When designing a flight control system with the two-timescale assumption, the in

nerloop controller is designed to control the fast states

2

x using the control input u, where

the desired values of the fast states

2

d

x are given by the outer loop. Now for using

dynamic inversion based on (1-8), for the fast differential equation we have:

( )

( ) ( )

( )

p a

q e

r r

p f x

q f x g x

r f x

= +

&

&

&

(13)

With considering (13) the controller of inner loop yields:

1

( )

( ) ( )

( )

a d p

e d q

r d r

p f x

u g x q f x

r f x

= =

&

&

&

(14)

While the desire angular rates defined with following equation:

0 0

0 0

0 0

d p c

d q c

d r c

p p p

q q q

r r r

=

&

&

&

(15)

Optimal Fuzzy Logic Tuning of Dynamic Inversion Flight Controller 13

Where ,

p q

and

r

2

k , are inner loop control gains

which chosen by designer to obtain desire performance, and the subscript c

denotes the commands.

3.2 Outer loop control for the slow variables

In the outer loop, the controller is designed to control the slow states

1

x , and the output

of outer loop used as inner loop commands. The inner-loop controller neglects th

e

transient responses of the fast states

2

x . It assumes that the fast states track their

commanded values instantaneously and that the control surface deflection has no

effect

on the outer-loop dynamics.

For using dynamic inversion based on (1-8) for the slow variables we have:

1 1 2 1

( )

( ) ( ) ( )

( )

s s s s

f x p

f x g x q g x u

f x r

= + +

&

&

&

(16)

Computing the relation between

, ,

c c c

p q r

and main control surfaces is difficult, so

we neglect the small term of

2 1

( )

s s

g x

. With considering (16) the controller of outer loop

yields.

1 1

( )

( ) ( )

( )

s s

f x p

f x g x q

f x r

+

&

&

&

(17)

While the desire angular variables defined with following equation.

0 0

0 0

0 0

d c

d c

c d

&

&

&

(18)

Where ,

and

1

k ,are outer loop control gains

which chosen by designer to obtain desire performance and , ,

c c c

are pilots

commands.

By using (17), the output of outer loop derived as following equation.

1

1 1

( )

( ) ( )

( )

c d

c s s d

c d

p f x

q g x f x

r f x

=

&

&

&

(19)

AlirezaAbaspour et al 14

4. Fuzzy PSO control

Each FLC has the structure as shown in the following:

Figure 4: The structure of FLC.

The important components of a FLC are the Fuzzifier, the Inference engine, the

Fuzzy Knowledge base, and the Defuzzifier. According to Figure 4, the Fuzzifier

converts the crisp input to a linguistic variable using the MFs stored in the fu

zzy

knowledge base. By using If-Then type fuzzy rules the Inference engine converts

the

fuzzy input to a fuzzy output. The Defuzzifier converts the fuzzy output of the

inference engine to crisp one. In our design the centre of area (CoA) method, wh

ich

supplies defuzzified output with better continuity is used for defuzzification.

In

general, CoA method with the output is calculated as:

*

( )

( )

o

o

um u du

u

m u du

=

(20)

Where u is the output variable, o is the output fuzzy set and

0

m is the MFs of the

output fuzzy set. Minimum Mamdani (AND method), the most popular inference

engine, is chosen to obtain the best possible conclusion. This type of inference

engine

allows easy and effective computation and it is appropriate for the real time co

ntrol

application [21].

The starting point of a fuzzy controller design is to choose the number and the

shape of the MFs for input and output variables. Our fuzzy controller is similar

to PD

controller. It has two inputs ( , e e & ) and single output (o). So that, three

groups of MFs

are chosen for the three corresponding variables and. Each group has 7 triangula

r MFs

as shown in Figure 5. It has been found that using complex forms of MFs cannot b

ring

any advantage over the triangular ones, where this kind of MFs gives faster resp

onse

[22].

In fact, appropriate number and shapes of membership functions are usually resul

t

of different compromises among contradicting factors, such as accuracy, hardware

and

computation complexities. The ones, we are mostly concerned in this work, are re

lative

accuracy, computation time, and complexity.

Optimal Fuzzy Logic Tuning of Dynamic Inversion Flight Controller 15

Figure 5: Typical set of MFs.

Before defining the rules we normalize the input and output data of the controll

er,

the normalization procedures are required to transform performance ratings with

different data measurement units into a decision matrix with compatible unit. So

that,

the variables, , e e & and C are quantized and normalized within [-1, 1], accord

ing to the

following Equation:

max

norm

X

X

X

=

(21)

Where, the variable has to be normalized to its maximum value. The maximum

values of the controllers variables can be obtained from the engineering experien

ce of

designer and simulation results. As the absolute maximum value of e and

e&

are always

between 0 and 1(radian), there is no need to normalize and denormalize them, but

for

C we use scaling factor of 20 to denormalize it. Each normalized variable then i

s

replaced by a set of linguistic values as shown in Table 2.

TABLE2: Term sets adopted.

e ,

e&

& u LN MN SN ZE SP MP BP

Where, the linguistic values {LN, MN LP} are abbreviations of {Large

Negative, Medium Negative Large Positive} respectively as shown in Figure 3.

Now, we can obtain the rules based upon this paper conception.

4.1 Defining the rule

While model is running, we have two parameter to control, the error of controlle

r

which showed by e and its variation ratio showed by

e&

. As you can see in table3,

because our controller is similar to PD controller, the relation between e and

e&

defined

by a sum assumption.

AlirezaAbaspour et al 16

TABLE3: The entire Rules of FLCDI.

PB

PM

PS

ZE

NS

NM

NB

e

e&

ZE NS NS NM NM NB NB NB

PS ZE NS NS NM NM NB NM

PS PS ZE NS NS NM NM NS

PM PS PS ZE NS NS NM ZE

PM PM PS PS ZE NS NS PS

PB PM PM PS PS ZE NS PM

PB PB PM PM PS PS ZE PB

4.2 PSO

The PSO is a population based stochastic optimization technique, consists of a s

warm

of particles flying through the search space. Every individual in the swarm cont

ains

parameters for position and velocity. The position of each particle represents a

potential solution to the optimization problem. The dynamic of the swarm is gove

rned

by a set of rules that modify the velocity of each particle according to the exp

erience of

the particle and its neighbors depending on the social network structure within

the

swarm. By adding a velocity to the current position, the position of each partic

le is

modified. As the particles move around the space, different fitness values are g

iven to

the particles at different locations according to how the current positions of p

articles

satisfy the objective. At the iteration each particle keeps track of its persona

l best

position. Depending on the social network structure of the swarm, the global bes

t

position, and/or the local best position, is used to influence the swarm dynamic

. After a

number of iterations, the particles will eventually cluster around the area wher

e fittest

solutions are. The swarm behavior is influenced by the number of particles, the

neighborhood size, the inertia weight, the maximum velocity, and the acceleratio

n

calculation that modifies the velocity. The larger the number of particles in th

e swarm,

the more likely the swarm will converge on the global optimum, because the socia

l

information exchange is increased. The influence of the current velocity on the

new

velocity can be controlled by the inertia weight. The influence of the particles

experience and that of its neighbor is governed by the acceleration calculation.

The

acceleration limits the trajectory of the particle oscillation. The new velocity

is limited

by the given maximum velocity to prevent particles from moving too fast in the s

pace.

In particular, the velocity associated with each particle in PSO is calculated a

s:

1 1

2 2

( 1) . ( ) . ( )( ( ))

. ( )( ( ))

i i g i

p

i i

v k wv k c r k x x k

c r k x x k

+ = +

+

(22)

Where w is the momentum or inertia weight of the particle, ( )

i

v k is the velocity of

the particle i at time step k ,

g

x is the global best performing particle up to time step k

Optimal Fuzzy Logic Tuning of Dynamic Inversion Flight Controller 17

in the entire population,

p

i

x is the best experience particle has had up to time step k ,

k

i

x is the current location of particle i ,and

1 2

, c c are constants usually equal each to

other,

1 2

, r r are random numbers within [0, 1] those represent random fiction[23]. To

min max i i i

v v v . The

new location of particle can be calculated as:

( 1) ( ) ( 1)

i i i

x k x k v k + = + +

(23)

The evaluation of the particle performance is based on a problem specific object

ive

function that decides the closeness of the particle to the optimal solution. With

Figure

6, the optimization process is started with random initial values then the objec

t

function is calculated. The first positions are automatically the best values. B

ased on

(22 and 23) the PSO updates both velocity and position vectors. Object function

is

calculated again, if the new value of the object function is smaller than the ol

d one, the

corresponding position vector is replaced by the old one, else it remained. The

process

is re-run until a termination criterion, such as a limit on the number of iterat

ions or

satisfactory results, is reached.

Figure6: Flowchart of PSO.

AlirezaAbaspour et al 18

4.3 Optimization of the MFs

Each triangular MFs is determined by three parameters such as a, b and c, where

a, c

locate the "feet" of the triangle and b locates the peak (see Figure 5). Anyway

the

triangular MF has the form:

0,

,

( , , , )

,

0,

trim

x a

x a

a x b

b a

f x a b c

c x

b x c

c b

c x

(24)

The corresponding parameters have to satisfy the inequality Since there are 14 M

Fs

in the inputs and 7 MFs in the output, in addition, each MF has its three own

parameters. In total we have 63 parameters for optimization, so that, a vector o

f

dimension particles is adopted in the optimization process. The population is se

t P=50

as vectors, while the total searching iterations is set to be I=30. With the hel

p of [23],

the inertia weight w was set to be 0.9 decreased linearly to 0.4 and the weight

ing

factors

1 2

, c c were set to be 0.5 for both, while

1 2

, r r are randomized within [0,

1].Therefore, it is possible to use PSO as a global optimization search method t

o find a

set of such parameters that will produce the best control performance of the FLC

.

Throughout the optimization process we try to minimize the the miss distance , t

he

object function is defined as:

T

J x Qxdt =

(25)

In (25) x is a vector which contain the parameter that should be optimized and

Q

is a diagonal matrix which denotes the limitation and importance of errors.

[ ]

10

1 / 40 1 / ( 400 [6 ])

T

beta alpha mu

t

x E E E

Q diag

=

=

(26)

Q is a parameters which chosen by designer according to systems dynamics and

the desired control behavior. For the optimization process, we assumed the follo

wing

data:

One of the important factors in the simulation process is usually the integratio

n

time-step. This is normally chosen based on nature of the problem or experience.

Here,

we use a time step equal to 0.01 second, mainly because a typical airplane-gyro

gyrates

around 100 cycles per second.

5. Numerical Simulation

In this paper we used the combination of dynamic inversion control and fuzzy log

ic

control and PSO as we described. To find the advantages and disadvantages of thi

s

Opt

new

inve

the

com

of V

the

outp

n

=

unc

cent

outp

timal Fuzzy

w method w

ersion to a c

performanc

mmand valu

V=0.9 Mach

To make th

edges, you

put of filter

=2 , =1 to

For a better

ertainties w

ter of gravi

put were tun

a. e al

d. e alph

g. C a

Logic Tuni

we should co

certain comm

ce of control

es of , a

h, h=1000ft:

Com

d

he step inpu

can see the

depends on

make the in

FI

r compariso

which is usu

ity(c.g) is f

ned by PSO

lpha

ha dot

alpha

FIG

ing of Dyna

ompare the r

mand. Sinc

ller, we sele

and are a

:

TABLE

Time

mmand(degr

ut similar as

e filter stru

n two param

nput like rea

IGURE 7: C

on between

ually happen

fixed in ma

O algorithm a

GURE 8: Tu

mic Inversi

result of thi

e step input

ected step in

applied to th

E 4. Input co

e(s)

ree)

0 0 t <

0

0

0

real inputs

cture in fig

meter which

al pilot comm

Command f

OFLDI and

ns because o

ass uncertain

and shown i

b. e beta

e. e beta_dot

h. C beta

uned membe

ion Flight C

is new meth

t is a comm

nput for our

he aircraft in

ommands.

0.5 0.5 5 t <

10

0

50

, we used a

gure 7. As y

selected by

mands.

filter structu

d DI method

of fuel cons

nties. The M

in Figure 8

ership funct

Controller

hod with cla

mon input an

r analysis an

n a steady s

5 t

0

0

0

a command

you can see

y designer, a

ure.

d we consid

sumption. It

MFs of the

.

c

f.

i

tions.

assical dyna

nd clearly sh

nd the follow

state level f

filter to sm

e in figure 7

and we sele

dered 30 per

t is assumed

e inputs and

c. e mu

e mu_dot

i. C mu

19

amic

hows

wing

flight

mooth

7 the

ected

rcent

d the

d the

AlirezaAbaspour et al 20

In Figure 9 you can see the comparison of tracking command of , and

between OFLDI and classic dynamic inversion in presence of mass uncertainties an

d

without it, this figure denote that there is no clear difference in command trac

king

between these methods, But when we calculate the tracking cost (

2 .

e dt

) in Figure 12,

its clearly showed that OFLDI has quite less tracking cost in presence of mass

uncertainties.

FIGURE 9: Comparison of command tracking with uncertainties and without it.

Control effort is important factor in designing controller, which is in direct r

elation

with control deflection (

2 .

u dt

actuators, control deflection is a really important factor in designing controll

er.

According to Figure 10OFLDI method comparing to DI method has less control

deflection, more over it has better robustness facing mass uncertainties. In Fig

ure 11

you can see the differences in control effort between these two control methods,

from

this figure it is clear that using OFLDI pay less control effort and it is lead

to saving

more energy.

Optimal Fuzzy Logic Tuning of Dynamic Inversion Flight Controller 21

FIGURE 10: Comparison of aileron deflection withuncertainties and without it.

AlirezaAbaspour et al 22

FIGURE 11: control effort in OFLDI and DI methods.

FIGURE 12: Tracking cost in OFLDI and DI with uncertainties and without it.

6. Conclusions

A controller for a six-degree-of-freedom nonlinear flight model is proposed, The

Dynamic Inversion (DI) controller is used to track the , and commands with the

assumption that the aerodynamic characteristics are fully understood. The contro

ller

gains which effect the control performance directly tuned by OFL method, so we

named this method OFLDI. In simulations 30 percent of mass uncertainties with

assumption of fixed c.g considered. In numerical simulation it is shown that, th

e

OFLDI controller in a same command tracking situation has better performance in

presence of mass uncertainties, it has less control deflection, less control eff

ort and less

Tracking cost. So according to simulation result , its demonstrated that OFLDI

method performs better than DI method.

References

[1] Dorf, Richard, C., and Bishop, Robert, H.,Modern Control Systems, 9thed.,

PrenticeHall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2001, pp. 553630.

[2] Stevens, B., and Lewis, F., Aircraft Control and Simulation, Wiley, New Yor

k,

1992, pp. 236331.

Optimal Fuzzy Logic Tuning of Dynamic Inversion Flight Controller 23

[3] Colgren, R., and Enns, D., Dynamic Inversion Applied to the F117A,Proceedings of the AIAA Modeling and Simulation Technologies

Conference, AIAA, Reston, VA, 1997, pp. 275284.

[4] Enns, D., Bugajski, D., Hendrick, R., and Stein, G., Dynamic Inversion An

Evolving Methodology for Flight Control Design, International Journal of

Control, Vol. 59, No. 1, 1994, pp. 7191.

[5] Adams, R. J., Buf. ngton, J. M., and Banda, S. V., Design of Nonlinear Contr

ol

Laws for High-Angle-of-Attack Flight, Journal of Guidance ,Control, and

Dynamics, Vol. 17, No. 4, 1994, pp. 737746.

[6] Adams, R. J., and Banda, S. V., Robust Flight Control Design Using Dynamics

Inversion and Structured Singular Value Synthesis, IEEE Transactions on

Control Systems Technology, Vol. 1, No. 2, 1993,pp. 8092.

[7] Jang, J.S.R., ANFIS: Adaptive-Network-Based Fuzzy Inference System. IEEE

Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Vol. 23, No. 3, pp. 665- 685.

1993.

[8] Lin C.T. and Lee C.S.G. Neural fuzzy systems. Upper Saddle River, Prentice

Hall, Inc.1996.

[9] Pratihar D.K., Deb K., Ghosh A. A genetic-fuzzy approach for mobile robot

navigation among moving obstacles. International Journal of Approximate

Reasoning, Vol 20, No. 2, pp. 145172. 1999.

[10] Mucientes M., Moreno D.L., Bugarin A., and Barro S., Design of a fuzzy

controller in mobile robotics using genetic algorithms. Applied Soft Computing.

7, pp. 540-546. 2007.

[11] Kennedy, J. and Eberhart, R. Swarm Intelligence, San Francisco, CA: Morgan

Kaufmann Publishers, Inc. 2001.

[12] Clerc, M. and Kennedy, J. The particle swarm - explosion, stability, and

convergence in a multidimensional complex space. IEEE Transactions on

Evolutionary Computation, Vol 6, No. 1, pp. 58-73. 2002 .

[13] Kwok, N.M., Ha, Q.P., Liu, D.K. and Fang, G. Intensity-preserving contrast

enhancement for gray-level images using multi-objective particle swarm

optimization. IEEE Conf. on Automation Science and Engineering, Shanghai, P.

R. China, pp. 19-24. 2006 .

[14] Kwok, N.M., Ha, Q.P., Nguyen, T.H., Li, J. and Samali, B. A novel hysteretic

model for magneto rheological fluid dampers and parameter identification using

particle swarm optimization. Sensors & Actuators: A. Physical, Vol 132, No 2,

pp. 441-451. 2006.

[15] Karakuzu C. Fuzzy controller training using particle swarm optimisation for

nonlinear system control. ISA Transactions. Vol. 47, pp. 229 239. 2008.

[16] Niu B., Zhu Y., He X., and Shen H., A multi-swarm optimizer based fuzzy

modeling approach for dynamic systems processing. Neuro-computing.Vol 71.

pp. 1436-1448. 2008.

[17] Mukherjee V., Ghoshal S.P. Intelligent particle swarm optimized fuzzy PID

controller for AVR system. Electric Power Systems Research, Vol. 77, pp. 16891698. 2007.

[18] Lin C., Hong S. The design of neuro-fuzzy networks using particle swarm

optimisation and recursive singular value decomposition. Neuro-computing, Vol

71, pp. 271-310. 2007.

AlirezaAbaspour et al 24

[19] Jan Roskam Airplane aerodynamics and performance 1997.

[20] Reiner, J., Balas, G. J., and Garrard, W .L., Robust Dynamic Inversion for

Control of Highly Maneuverable Aircraft, Journal of Guidance, Control and

Dynamics, V ol. 18, No. 1, 1995, pp. 1824

[21] Werner Van Leekwijck and Etienne E. Kerre, Defuzzification: criteria and

classification. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, vol. 108, pp. 159-178. 1999.

[22] Chun Liang Lin, Hao Zhen Hung, Yung Yue Chen, and Bor Sen Chen,

Development of an Integrated Fuzzy-logic based missile guidance law against

high speed target. IEEE, Transaction on Fuzzy System, vol. 12, no. 2, 2004.

[23] Qinghai Bai, Analysis of Particle Swarm Optimization Algorithm. CCSE,

computer and information science, vol. 3, no. 1, 2010.

- ijcem_072013_03Transféré parylionkingx
- A Two Warehouse Inventory Model for Deteriorating Items with Shortages under Genetic Algorithm and PSOTransféré parAnonymous vQrJlEN
- Handling QualiitiesTransféré parjevans107
- k 2010003Transféré parNupur Pal
- kumar_aee_63_3_2014Transféré parAbdullah Çakan
- Modelo de Dimensionamiento Óptimo de Los Sistemas de Distribución de AguaTransféré parCésar Lifonzo
- InTech-Particle_swarm_optimization_algorithm_for_the_traveling_salesman_problem.pdfTransféré parFabio Barbosa
- CH3 Part2Transféré pararash501
- Omkar Project Report Submitted M Tec MechanicalTransféré parManav Mahesh Chandra
- A Novel Approach of Image Ranking based on Enhanced Artificial Bee Colony AlgorithmTransféré parInternational Journal for Scientific Research and Development - IJSRD
- Kcs Cmt Nmri Test ProgTransféré parChien Manh Nguyen
- Harris Hawks Optimization (HHO) Algorithm and ApplicationsTransféré paralih
- Inspiration for optimization from social insect behaviourTransféré parIotalaseria Putu
- paper_07-019Transféré parkeepingbusy
- Taha - Slope Stability Assessment Using Optimization Techniques.pdfTransféré parFederico Montesverdes
- 1005.0340Transféré paryohnnis
- Ontiveros-perez Et Al Optimal Location of Optimized Friction Dampers in Civil Structures for the Seismic Passive ControlTransféré parSaurabh Pednekar
- 12_Deepak_Fuzzy_Logic_SVM.pdfTransféré parkleiberts
- 12_MT_ME_2Transféré parRanjit Kumar
- s03p01Transféré parBogdan Vicol
- (Www.entrance-exam.net)-PTU MCA 3rd Semester Sample Paper 3Transféré parMangesh Malvankar
- SODTTransféré parBlueblurrr
- Ant Colony with Colored Pheromones Routing for Multi Objectives Quality of Services in WSNsTransféré parWhite Globe Publications (IJORCS)
- 10.1.1.33.5968.pdfTransféré parklawiatura123
- Pertemuan 6 TransportationTransféré parabrian123456
- Mellinger is Er 2010Transféré parvesnic1
- A design procedure for a supervisory control structure in plantwide control_Marcela_Moscoso_2014.pdfTransféré parAndrés Ceverisae
- Distribution network reconfiguration for load balancing using binary particle swarm optimizatTransféré parapi-3697505
- Flow shop 2Transféré parsagarbolisetti
- ABCD-FL-57-00 - Wing Load Calculation - v1 08.03.16.docxTransféré parAnonymous SP0wQIZ

- Oral QuestionsTransféré parlarasmoyo
- Yang Chen-missile Control AP n DynamicsTransféré parlarasmoyo
- ruijgrok flight performance tocTransféré parlarasmoyo
- Nps Future UcavsTransféré parlarasmoyo
- aerodynamics Homework 5 - SolutionsTransféré parlarasmoyo
- Caldeira Torcs APITransféré parlarasmoyo
- Fluid Mechanics SyllabusTransféré parlarasmoyo
- Initial and Final Value TheoremsTransféré parlarasmoyo
- Initial and Final Value TheoremsTransféré parlarasmoyo
- Fluidmech in Pipe Velocity Shear ProfileTransféré parlarasmoyo
- W1121Transféré parTamil Vanan
- ME582 Thermofluid Finite ElementsTransféré parlarasmoyo
- Weiland - Robust ControlTransféré parlarasmoyo
- Doyle Robust Control of Nonlinear SystemTransféré parlarasmoyo
- Caldeira Torcs APITransféré parlarasmoyo
- fluid mechanics hw_5 solutionTransféré parlarasmoyo
- fluid mechanics hw_2 solutionTransféré parlarasmoyo
- PM docTransféré parlarasmoyo
- Aero Exam Take Home 1Transféré parlarasmoyo
- A Velocity Algorithm for the Implementation of Gain Scheduled ControllersTransféré parlarasmoyo
- 543 Lecture 24 peet optimal output feedbackTransféré parlarasmoyo
- 443 Lecture 07 peetTransféré parlarasmoyo
- 04-Panel Methods(Theory and Method)Transféré parlarasmoyo
- wael Robust+Hybrid+Control+for+Ballistic+Missile+Longitudinal+AutopilotTransféré parlarasmoyo
- 16100lectre32_cjTransféré parnanduslns07
- 1 Lift DragTransféré partoyota952
- Univ San Diego Aerodynamics 1 Homework 1 - SolutionTransféré parlarasmoyo
- Vijaya Aeat 2008Transféré parlarasmoyo
- HİSAR Projeleri Kapsamında ASELSAN Tarafından Yüksek Performanslı Kızılötesi Arayıcı Başlık GeliştirilmesiTransféré parlarasmoyo

- Radius Particle Swarm OptimizationTransféré parJoel Carpenter
- Image Segmentation through Clustering Based.pdfTransféré parMarius_2010
- CUDA Based Particle Swarm Optimization ForTransféré parSuman Prasad Mehta
- WAVELET_PSO-BASED_LQR_ALGORITHM_FOR_OPTI.pdfTransféré parFilipus Ivan Denata
- 14.12101407Transféré parOlaoluwa Ayodeji Omo-Akin
- OPTIMAL PLACEMENT OF SVC AND STATCOM FOR VOLTAGE STABILITY ENHANCEMENT UNDER CONTINGENCY USING CAT SWARM OPTIMIZATION.docxTransféré parsabarullah hali
- Glowworm Swarm Optimization (Theory, Algorithms, And Applications)Transféré parmariospapa2008
- Planning and Analysis of Integrated Community Energy SystemsTransféré parVottomo
- Particle Swarm Optimization Using C#Transféré parabdulhakimbhs
- 120-1305-1-PBTransféré parAurica Daniel
- Bun Parametrii motor sincron cu magneti permanentiTransféré parتيو تيودورا
- Artifical intelligence (AI)Transféré paranand_54
- research paperTransféré parRishu Kaul
- A simplified algorithm for Implementing Swarm Intelligence in Multi robot systemTransféré parMohamed Abdulla
- 4Transféré paronlyprakhar
- Paper-4 Review of Particle Swarm OptimizationTransféré parRachel Wheeler
- Mining Web Data Using PSO AlgorithmTransféré parIJIRST
- A Modified Teaching–Learning Based Optimization for Multi-objectiveTransféré parSolenir Figueredo
- Books Catalogue2018 WebTransféré parDanial Jackson
- The Particle Swarm Optimization AlgorithmTransféré parSharmila Saravanan
- -AFSA-CLA-A New Hybrid Algorithm for Optimization Based on Yazdani-Golyani-meybodi Artificial Fish Swarm Algorithm and Cellular-IsT2010_5120.Transféré parminoofam
- IJERTV1IS4222Transféré parkeepingbusy
- PSO.pdfTransféré parIrwansyah Ramadhani
- A Survey of Various Metaheuristic Algorithms Used to Solve VLSI Floorplanning ProblemTransféré parIRJET Journal
- Swarm Intelligence Based Routing Algorithms For MANETs: A ReviewTransféré parIJSTE
- Tutorial -Hybrid EaTransféré parAmalina Zakaria
- MODIFIED MOTH-FLAME OPTIMIZATION ALGORITHMS FOR TERRORISM PREDICTIONTransféré parAnonymous vQrJlEN
- 2Vol88No1.pdfTransféré par-Ayomi Sii Sasmito-
- Cuco SearchTransféré parCarlos Andres Padilla Cardenas
- Swarm Robot Control for Human Services and Moving Rehabilitation by Sensor FusionTransféré parWarren Smith QC (Quantum Cryptanalyst)