(Publisher of Peer Reviewed Open Access Journals)

International Journal of Advanced Technology and Engineering Exploration (IJATEE)

ISSN (Print):2394-5443    ISSN (Online):2394-7454
Volume-9 Issue-92 July-2022
Full-Text PDF
Paper Title : Gain-scheduled linear-quadratic-regulator synthesis for the centre of gravity variations of Boeing 747-100 longitudinal modes
Author Name : Ezzeddin M. Elarbi, Dina S. Laila and Nadjim M. Horri
Abstract :

For the variation in the centre of gravity (CG) of Boeing 747-100 (B747-100) longitudinal flight, the gain scheduling (GS) method is proposed to manage it over the flight envelope. The full-state feedback linear quadratic regulator (FSFLQR) has been synthesised with the GS, named (GS-FSFLQR), to obtain a realistic controller for Mach numbers (M) and altitudes (H) envelope. Such a practised control law demonstrates the CG mean aerodynamic chord (MAC) shifts correlated with M-H and actuator actions. The intermediate variable responses have been accomplished at (M, H) simulations of (0.2, 0), (0.5, 6096 m) and (0.9, 12190 m). Local controllers at M and H scheduled parameters are gained using the cubic spline method of 0.2 to 0.9 and sea level to 12190 m. Swift levelled convergences illustrated the B747-100 CG variations throughout most responses for a coupled elevator and throttle-controlled flight. These findings are validated for the flying quality requirements showing the competent merits of the GS-FSFLQR as opposed to without control flight. The maximum elevator capacity transmits the CG from the 17% MAC at (0.3, 6096 m) to 30% MAC at (0.7, 3048 m), whereas the maximum throttle occurs for the CG at 25% MAC at (0.5, 6096 m). Their minimum operations lead to 22% MAC at (0.6, sea level). The dominated CG location of the elevator is fore than 25% MAC whereas the aft and fore locations of the throttle float around that. 50% actuator effectiveness due to operable elevator and throttle adequately copes with the CG longitudinal stability.

Keywords : Boeing 747-100 flight envelope, Tracking longitudinal modes, Elevator and throttle coupling, Centre of gravity variation, Linear quadratic regulator, Gain scheduling, Cubic spline.
Cite this article : Elarbi EM, Laila DS, Horri NM. Gain-scheduled linear-quadratic-regulator synthesis for the centre of gravity variations of Boeing 747-100 longitudinal modes. International Journal of Advanced Technology and Engineering Exploration. 2022; 9(92):868-887. DOI:10.19101/IJATEE.2021.875709.
References :
[1]Mclean D. Automatic flight control systems. Measurement and Control. 2003; 36(6):172-5.
[Google Scholar]
[2]Etkin B. Dynamics of atmospheric flight. Courier Corporation; 2012.
[Google Scholar]
[3]Elarbi EM, Laila DS, Ghmmam AA, Horri N. LQR reference tracking control of Boeing 747-100 longitudinal dynamics with CG shifts. In international conference on advanced technology & sciences 2017 (pp. 114-24).
[Google Scholar]
[4]Rugh WJ. Analytical framework for gain scheduling. In American control conference 1990 (pp. 1688-94). IEEE.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[5]Khammash M, Zou L, Almquist JA, Van DLCA. Robust aircraft pitch-axis control under weight and center of gravity uncertainty. In proceedings of the 38th IEEE conference on decision and control 1999 (pp. 1970-5). IEEE.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[6]Tan W, Packard AK, Balas GJ. Quasi-LPV modeling and LPV control of a generic missile. In proceedings of the 2000 American control conference. ACC 2000 (pp. 3692-6). IEEE.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[7]Shamma JS, Athans M. Guaranteed properties of gain scheduled control for linear parameter-varying plants. Automatica. 1991; 27(3):559-64.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[8]Yue T, Wang L, Ai J. Longitudinal linear parameter varying modeling and simulation of morphing aircraft. Journal of Aircraft. 2013; 50(6):1673-81.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[9]Griffiths DV, Smith IM. Numerical methods for engineers. CRC Press; 2006.
[Google Scholar]
[10]Zhou Z, Wang X, Wang S, Zhang Y, Gavrilov AI, Nagamune R. LPV active fault-tolerant control strategy of large civil aircraft under elevator failures. In CSAA/IET international conference on aircraft utility systems 2020 (pp. 976-981). IET.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[11]Hayakawa S, Hoshi Y, Oya H. Observer-based quadratic guaranteed cost control for linear uncertain systems with control gain variation. Advances in Technology Innovation. 2022; 7(3):155-68.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[12]Shaji J, Aswin RB. Pitch control of aircraft using LQR & LQG control. International Journal of Advanced Research in Electrical, Electronics and Instrumentation Engineering. 2015; 4(8): 6981-7.
[Google Scholar]
[13]Sir EA, Engin SN, Pasha AA, Rahman MM, Pillai SN. Robust control for non-minimum phase systems with actuator faults: application to aircraft longitudinal flight control. Applied Sciences. 2021; 11(24):1-23.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[14]Islam M, Okasha M, Idres MM. Dynamics and control of quadcopter using linear model predictive control approach. In IOP conference series: materials science and engineering 2017 (pp. 1-9). IOP Publishing.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[15]Yang K, Yang P, Wang S, Dong L, Xu B. Tip-tilt disturbance model identification based on non-linear least squares fitting for Linear Quadratic Gaussian control. Optics Communications. 2018; 415:31-8.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[16]Shauqee MN, Rajendran P, Suhadis NM. An effective proportional-double derivative-linear quadratic regulator controller for quadcopter attitude and altitude control. Automatika: a Magazine for Automation, Measurement, Electronics, Computing and Communications. 2021; 62(3-4):415-33.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[17]Shauqee MN, Rajendran P, Suhadis NM. Proportional double derivative linear quadratic regulator controller using improvised grey wolf optimization technique to control quadcopter. Applied Sciences. 2021; 11(6):1-30.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[18]Brizuela-mendoza JA, Astorga-zaragoza CM, Zavala-río A, Canales-rbarca F, Martínez-garcía M. Gain-scheduled linear quadratic regulator applied to the stabilization of a riderless bicycle. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part I: Journal of Systems and Control Engineering. 2017; 231(8):669-82.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[19]Wang Z, Montanaro U, Fallah S, Sorniotti A, Lenzo B. A gain scheduled robust linear quadratic regulator for vehicle direct yaw moment control. Mechatronics. 2018; 51:31-45.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[20]Okasha M, Shah J, Fauzi W, Hanouf Z. Gain scheduled linear quadratic control for quadcopter. In IOP conference series: materials science and engineering 2017 (pp. 1-7). IOP Publishing.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[21]Arif A, Stepen A, Sasongko RA. Numerical simulation platform for a generic aircraft flight dynamic simulation. International Journal of Engineering and Technology. 2018; 7(4):53-61.
[22]Bondarenko YV, Zybin EY. Functional control of the technical condition method for aircraft control system sensors under complete parametric uncertainty. Scientific Bulletin of the Moscow State Technical University of Civil Aviation. 2020; 23(3):39-51.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[23]Saussie D, Saydy L, Akhrif O. Gain scheduling control design for a pitch-axis missile autopilot. In AIAA guidance, navigation and control conference and exhibit 2008.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[24]Welstead J, Crouse GL. Conceptual design optimization of an augmented stability aircraft incorporating dynamic response and actuator constraints. In 52nd aerospace sciences meeting 2014.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[25]Garmendia DC, Mavris DN. Alternative trim analysis formulations for vehicles with redundant multi-axis control surfaces. Journal of Aircraft. 2016; 53(1):60-72.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[26]Hameed AS, Bindu GR. Gain scheduled finite horizon LQR for approach and landing phase of a reusable launch vehicle. Journal of The Institution of Engineers (India): Series C. 2022; 103:381-8.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[27]Seo MW, Kwon HH, Choi HL. Sum-of-squares-based region of attraction analysis for gain-scheduled three-loop autopilot. International Journal of Aeronautical and Space Sciences. 2018; 19(1):196-207.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[28]Colombo FT, Da SMM. A comparison between gain-scheduling linear quadratic regulator and model predictive control for a manipulator with flexible components. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part I: Journal of Systems and Control Engineering. 2022; 236(7):185-93.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[29]Ilka A, Murgovski N. A computationally efficient approach for robust gain-scheduled output-feedback LQR design for large-scale systems. IFAC-PapersOnLine. 2020; 53(2):5988-93.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[30]Obajemu O, Mahfouf M, Maiyar LM, Al-Hindi A, Weiszer M, Chen J. Real-time four-dimensional trajectory generation based on gain-scheduling control and a high-fidelity aircraft model. Engineering. 2021; 7(4):495-506.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[31]Shinners SM. Modern control system theory and design. John Wiley & Sons; 1998.
[Google Scholar]
[32]Sobester A, Forrester A, Keane A. Engineering design via surrogate modelling: a practical guide. John Wiley & Sons; 2008.
[Google Scholar]
[33]Tipps DO, Skinn DA, Rustenburg JW, Jones T, Harris DA. Statistical loads data for the Boeing 777-200ER aircraft in commercial operations. Federal Aviation Administration William J. Hughes Technical Center AR-06/11, Atlantic City, NJ. 2006.
[Google Scholar]
[34]Blight JD, Gangsaas D, Richardson TM. Control law synthesis for an airplane with relaxed static stability. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics. 1986; 9(5):546-54.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[35]Raol JR, Singh J. Flight mechanics modeling and analysis. CRC Press; 2008.
[Google Scholar]
[36]Nepomuceno L, Moura ÉA, Morales MA, Silva RG, Góes LC. An LQR-LMI longitudinal stability augmentation system for a subscale fighter aircraft with variable center of gravity position. In AIAA AVIATION 2022 Forum 2022.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]