Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T00:47:24.025Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Adaptive sliding mode formation control for multiple flight vehicles with considering autopilot dynamic

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 May 2021

W. Li Open the ORCID record for W. Li [Opens in a new window] ,
Q. Wen  and
H. Zhou
W. Li*
Affiliation:
School of Aerospace Engineering Beijing Institute of TechnologyBeijing100081China
Q. Wen
Affiliation:
School of Aerospace Engineering Beijing Institute of TechnologyBeijing100081China
H. Zhou
Affiliation:
School of Aerospace Engineering Beijing Institute of TechnologyBeijing100081China
*
[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper mainly focuses on the cooperative control of formation configuration for multiple flight vehicles in the three-dimensional space. Considering the external disturbance of the system, the adaptive non-singular terminal sliding mode control law (NTSMC) is designed based on the virtual leader-follower method, which aims to ensure that each flight vehicle reaches the expected terminal position in a limited time and meet the configuration constraints. Further considering the first-order dynamic characteristic of the autopilot, a novel second-order sliding mode control (SOSMC) law is deduced with using the estimated information of sliding mode disturbance observer. The proposed control method ensures that all flight vehicles form the required space formation configuration simultaneously at a pre-designed time, and the chattering phenomenon of the sliding mode surface and acceleration response that nears the equilibrium point is effectively weaken. The stability of the proposed control law is verified by theoretical analysis and lots of mathematical simulations. The results show that the control algorithm in this paper can be used to guidance the formation controller design of multiple flight vehicles in the mid-guidance phase to some extent, and thus the cooperative flight stability of the system can be effectively improved.

Keywords

multiple flight vehiclesspace formation configurationvirtual leader-followercooperative controlfinite time convergentchattering suppression
Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 125 , Issue 1290 , August 2021 , pp. 1337 - 1357
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Royal Aeronautical Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Wang, X., Zhang, Y. and Wu, H. Distributed cooperative guidance of multiple anti-ship missiles with arbitrary impact angle constraint, Aerosp Sci Technol, 2015, 46, (Oct.–Nov.), pp 299–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shaferman, V. and Shima, T. Cooperative differential games guidance laws for imposing a relative intercept angle, J Guid Cont Dyn, 2017, pp 1–16.10.2514/6.2017-1015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, X. and Lu, X. Three-dimensional impact angle constrained distributed guidance law design for cooperative attacks, ISA Trans, 2018, 73, pp 79–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, B., Lin, D.F. and Wang, H. Finite time convergence cooperative guidance law based on graph theory, Optik - Int J Light Electron Opt, 2016, 127, pp 10180–10188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sabol, C., Burns, R. and Mclaughlin, C.A. Satellite formation flying design and evolution, J Spacecr Rockets, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ren, W. and Beard, R.W. A decentralized scheme for spacecraft formation flying via the virtual structure approach, Proceedings of the American Control Conference, 2003.Google Scholar
Nazari, M., Butcher, E.A., Yucelen, T. and Sanyal Yucelen, A.K. Decentralized consensus control of a rigid-body spacecraft formation with communication delay, J Guid Cont Dyn. A Publication of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Devoted to the Technology of Dynamics and Control, 2016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ghommam, J., Luque-Vega, L.F., et al. Three-dimensional distributed tracking control for multiple quadrotor helicopters, J Franklin Inst, 2016, 353, (10), pp 2344–2372.10.1016/j.jfranklin.2016.04.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dong, X., Zhou, Y., Ren, Z., et al. Time-varying formation tracking for second-order multi-agent systems subjected to switching topologies with application to quadrotor formation flying, IEEE Trans Ind Electron, 2017, 64, (6), pp 5014–5024.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ghommam, J., Mehrjerdi, H., Mnif, F., et al. Cascade design for formation control of nonholonomic systems in chained form, J Franklin Inst, 2011, 348, (6), pp 973–998.10.1016/j.jfranklin.2011.03.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tai, F., Zhao, X.X., et al. Ultraviolet anti-collision and localization algorithm in UAV formation network – Science direct, Optik, 2019, 192, p 162919.Google Scholar
Huang, J. and Sun, W. A method of feasible trajectory planning for UAV formation based on bi-directional fast search tree. Optik - Int J Light Electron Opt, 2020, 221, pp 165213.10.1016/j.ijleo.2020.165213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cui, N.G., Wei, C.Z., Guo, J.F. and Zhao, B. Research on missile formation control system, Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Mechatronics and Automation, 2009, pp 4197–4202.Google Scholar
Rezaee, H. and Abdollahi, F., Motion synchronization in unmanned aircrafts formation control with communication delays, Commun Nonlinear Sci Numer Simul, 2013, 18, (3), pp 744–756.10.1016/j.cnsns.2012.08.015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wei, C.Z., Guo, J.F., Lu, B.G., Shi, Y. and Zhang, L.B. Adaptive control for missile formation keeping under leader information unavailability, Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Control and Automation, 2013, pp 902–907.10.1109/ICCA.2013.6565105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, X.F., Liu, D.Z., Tian, Z. A composite formation strategy for multiple missile, Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Control, Automation and Robotics, 2017, pp 684–691.10.1109/ICCAR.2017.7942784CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wei, C.Z., Shen, Y., Ma, X.X., Guo, J.F. and Cui, N.G. Optimal formation keeping control in missile cooperative engagement, Aircr Eng Aerosp Technol 2012, 84, (6), pp 376–389.10.1108/00022661211272891CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhao, E.J., Chao, T, Wang, S.Y., et al. Finite-time formation control for multiple flight vehicles with accurate linearization model. Aerosp Sci Technol, 2017, 71, pp 90–98.10.1016/j.ast.2017.08.018CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ratnoo, A. and Shima, T. Formation-flying guidance for cooperative radar deception. J Guid Cont Dyn, 2012, 35, (6), pp 1730–1739.10.2514/1.57112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, H., Guo, D., Liang, X., et al. Adaptive vision-based leader-follower formation control of mobile robots. IEEE Trans Ind Electron, 2017, 64, (4), pp 2893–2902.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nan, W. and Jieqiong, X. Leader-follower formation control of networked spacecraft in deep space, 2nd International Conference on Advanced Computer Control, IEEE, Shenyang, China, 2010, pp 527–530.Google Scholar
Yu, S., Yu, X., Shirinzadeh, B., et al. Continuous finitetime control for robotic manipulators with terminal sliding mode, Automatica, 2005, 41, (11), pp 1957–1964.10.1016/j.automatica.2005.07.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harl, N. and Balakrishnan, S. Impact time and angle guidance with sliding mode control, IEEE Trans Cont Syst Technol, 2012, 20, (6), pp 1436–1449.10.1109/TCST.2011.2169795CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levant, A. Higher-order sliding modes, differentiation, and out-feedback control, Int J Cont, 2003.10.1201/9780203910856.ch3CrossRefGoogle Scholar