Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T10:34:28.177Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A New Guidance Law for Impact Angle Constraints with Time-Varying Navigation Gain

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 March 2022

W.J. Zhang Open the ORCID record for W.J. Zhang [Opens in a new window]  and
B.M. Wang
W.J. Zhang*
Affiliation:
Beijing Institute of Electronic System Engineering, Beijing, 100854, People’s Republic of China
B.M. Wang
Affiliation:
Beijing Institute of Electronic System Engineering, Beijing, 100854, People’s Republic of China
*
Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this study, a new impact angle control guidance law is proposed against a stationary target in the three-dimensional (3D) plane. A time-varying navigation gain is derived to achieve the specific terminal angle in a longitudinal plane without phased or adding a bias term. A proportional guidance law is also adopted in the lateral plane to achieve an accurate strike. The monotonicity of the look angle and the convergence of the acceleration are analysed and proven to support the proposed method. For the proposed guidance law, estimating time-to-go or giving a switch strategy is unnecessary; the navigation is continuous, which would not result in sudden changes in control input, and is convenient to implement. Extensive simulations, including autopilot lag or real missile model, are performed to validate the efficiency of the proposed method.

Keywords

Impact angle constraintTime-varying navigation gainGuidance lawAutopilot lag
Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 126 , Issue 1304 , October 2022 , pp. 1752 - 1770
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. 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

Zarchan, P. Tactical and Strategic Missile Guidance, Sixth edition, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Inc., Washington, DC, USA, 1990.Google Scholar
Wang, T., Tang, S.J., Guo, J. et al. Two-phase optimal guidance law considering impact angle constraint with bearings-only measurements, Int J Aerosp Eng, 2017, 8, pp 1–12.Google Scholar
Kim, M. and Grider, K.V. Terminal guidance for impact attitude angle constrained flight trajectories, IEEE Trans Aerosp Electron Syst, 1973, 9, (6), pp 852–859.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bryson, A.E. and Ho, Y.C. Applied Optimal Control, Wiley, New York, 1975.Google Scholar
Cho, H. Navigation constants in PNG law and the associated optimal control problems (in Korean). In Proceedings of Korean Automatic Control Conference, Seoul, Korea, 1992, pp 578–583.Google Scholar
Ryoo, C.K., Cho, H. and Tahk, M.J. Closed-form solutions of optimal guidance with terminal impact angle constraint, Proceedings of 2003 IEEE Conference on Control Applications, 2003, 1, pp 504–509.Google Scholar
Qian, S., Yang, Q. and Geng, L. et al. SDRE based impact angle control guidance law considering seeker’s field-of-view limit. Guidance, Navigation and Control Conference, 2017.Google Scholar
Lee, Y.I., Kim, S.H. and Tahk, M.J. Optimality of linear time-varying guidance for impact angle control, IEEE Trans Aerosp Electron Syst, 2012, 48, (3), pp 2802–2817.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, B.S., Lee, J.G. and Han, H.S. Biased PNG law for impact with angular constraint. IEEE Trans Aerosp Electr Syst, 1998, 34, (1), pp 277–288.Google Scholar
Ratnoo, A. and Ghose, D. Impact angle constrained interception of stationary targets. J Guid Cont Dynam, 2008, 31, (6), pp 1816–1821.Google Scholar
Erer, K.S. and Ozgoren, M.K. Control of Impact Angle Using Biased Proportional Navigation, AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control, 2013.Google Scholar
Erer, K.S., Tekin, R.M. and Kemal, Ö. Biased proportional navigation with exponentially decaying error for impact angle control and path following. Control and Automation, 2016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, Y.A., Ma, G.X. and Wu, H.L. A biased proportional navigation guidance law with large impact angle constraint and the time-to-go estimation, Proc Inst Mech Eng G J Aerosp Eng, 2014, 228, (10), pp 1725–1734.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erer, K.S., Tekin, R. and Ozgoren, M.K. Look angle constrained impact angle control based on proportional navigation, AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference, Kissimmee, FL, USA, 2015, pp. 91–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, Z., Wang, H. and Lin, D.F. Time-varying biased proportional guidance with seeker’s field-of-view limit, Int J Aerosp Eng, 2016, 2, pp 1–11.Google Scholar
Tekin, R. and Erer, K.S. Switched-gain guidance for impact angle control under physical constraints, J Guid Cont Dynam, 2015, 38, (2), pp 205–216.Google Scholar
Ratnoo, A. Analysis of two-stage proportional navigation with heading constraints, J Guid Cont Dynam, 2016, 39, (1), pp 156–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Park, B.G., Kwon, H.H. and Kim, Y.H. et al. Composite guidance scheme for impact angle control against a non-maneuvering moving target, J Guid Cont Dynam, 2016, 39, (5), pp 1132–1139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Park, B.G., Kim, T.H. and Tahk, M.J. Biased PNG with terminal-angle constraint for intercepting non-maneuvering targets under physical constraints, IEEE Trans Aerosp Electron Syst, 2017, 53, (3), pp 1562–1572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, H.Q., Tang, S.J. and Guo, J. et al. A two-phased guidance law for impact angle control with seeker’s field-of-view limit, Int J Aerosp Eng, 2018, 3, pp 1–13.Google Scholar
Liu, X., Shen, Z. and Lu, P. Closed-loop optimization of guidance gain for constrained impact, J Guid Cont Dynam, 2017, 40, (2), pp 453–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kee, P., Li, D. and Chai, S. Near optimal midcourse guidance law for flight vehicle. 36th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, NV, USA, 2006, pp 583–590.Google Scholar