Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T21:33:42.324Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A new model for optimal TF/TA flight path design problem

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 February 2016

R. Zardashti  and
M. Bagherian
R. Zardashti
Affiliation:
Faculty of Aerospace Engineering, Amir Kabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran
M. Bagherian
Affiliation:
[email protected], School of Mathematics, Statistics and Computer Science, University College of Science, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper focuses on the three dimensional flight path planning for a UAV on a low altitude terrain following/terrain avoidance mission. Using an approximate grid-based discretisation scheme, we transform the continuous optimisation problem into a search problem over a finite network, and apply a variant of the shortest-path algorithm to this problem. In other words using the three dimensional terrain information, three dimensional flight path from a starting point to an end point, minimising a cost function and regarding the kinematics constraints of the UAV is calculated. A network flow model is constructed based on the digital terrain elevation data (DTED) and a layered network is obtained. The cost function for each arc is defined as the length of the arc, then a constrained shortest path algorithm which considers the kinematics and the altitude constraints of the UAV is used to obtain the best route. Moreover the important performance parameters of the UAV are discussed. Finally a new algorithm is proposed to smooth the path in order to reduce the workload of the autopilot and control system of the UAV. The numeric results are presented to verify the capability of the procedure to generate admissible route in minimum possible time in comparison to the previous procedures. So this algorithm is potentially suited for using in online systems.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 113 , Issue 1143 , May 2009 , pp. 301 - 308
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2009 

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

1. Al-Hasan, S. and Vachtsevanos, G., Intelligent route planning for fast autonomous vehicles operating in a large natural terrain, Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 2002, 40, pp 1–24.Google Scholar
2. Bodenhorn, C., Galkowski, P., Stiles, P., Szczerba, R. and Glickstein, I., Personalizing onboard route re-planning for recon, attack, and special operations missions, September 1997, American Helicopter Society Conference (Avionics and Crew Systems Technical Specialists Conference).Google Scholar
3. Hwang, Y. and Ahuja, N., Gross motion planning — a survey, ACM Computing Surveys, September 1992, 24, (3), pp 219–291.Google Scholar
4. Latombe, J., Robot Motion Planning, 1991, Kluwer, Boston, MA.Google Scholar
5. Szczerba, R., Chen, D. and Uhran, I., A framed-quadtree approach for determining Euclidean shortest paths in a 2-D environment, 1997, IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation, October 1997, 13, (5), pp 668–681.Google Scholar
6. Sharma, T., Williams, P., Bill, C. and Eberhard, A., Optimal three dimensional aircraft terrain following and collision avoidance, 2007, ANZIAM J, 2005, EMAC, pp C695–C711.Google Scholar
7. Vincent, T.L. and Grantham, W.J., Nonlinear and Optimal Control Systems, 1999, John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
8. Twigg, S., Calise, A. and Johnson, E., 3D trajectory optimization for terrain following and terrain masking, 2006, AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference and Exhibition, Keystone, CO, 21–24 August 2006.Google Scholar
9. www.virtualacquisitionshowcase.com/docs/2008/Scientific1-Brief.pdf Google Scholar
10. Bellman, R., Dynamic Programming, 1962, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
11. Cruise missile auto routing system, 2008, Transitioning Technology to the Fleet, 2-4 June 2008, Hyatt Regency, Crystal City, VA.Google Scholar
12. Betts, J.T. and Huffman, W.P., Path constrained trajectory optimization using sparse sequential quadratic programming, J Guidance, Control and Dynamics, January-February 1993, 16, (1), pp 59–68.Google Scholar
13. Hall, R., Path planning and autonomous navigation for use in computer generated forces, 2007, Scientific Report, Swedish Defense Research Agency.Google Scholar
14. Malaek, S.M.B. and Kosari, A.R., A novel minimum time trajectory planning in terrain following flight, 2003, IEEE Aerospace and Electrical System Conference, 8, Big Sky, MT.Google Scholar
15. Szczerba, R. New Cell Decomposition Techniques for Planning Optimal Paths, 1996, PhD dissertation, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN.Google Scholar
16. Hart, P., Nilsson, N. and Raphael, B., A Formal basis for the heuristic determination of minimum cost paths, IEEE Transactions on System, Science and Cybernetics, July 1968, 4, (2), pp 100–107.Google Scholar
17. Rippel, E., Bar-Gill, A and Shinkin, N., Fast graph-search algorithms for general aviation flight trajectory generation, 2004, Technion — Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel, 24 May 2004.Google Scholar
18. Cormen, T., Leiserson, C. and Rivest, R., Introduction to Algorithms, 1990, McGraw Hill, New York.Google Scholar
19. Ravindra, K., Ahuja, T., Magnanti, L. and James, B.O., Network flows, Theory, Algorithms and Applications, 1993, Prentice Hall Englewood Cliffs.Google Scholar
20. Enright, P.J. and Conway, B.A., Discrete approximations to optimal trajectories using direct transcription and nonlinear programming, J Guidance, Control and Dynamics, July-August 1993, 15, (4), pp 994–1002.Google Scholar
21. Lu, P., Inverse dynamics approach to trajectory optimization for an aerospace plane, J Guidance, Control and Dynamics, July-August 1993, 16, (4), pp 726–732.Google Scholar
22. Mitchel, E.F. The use of preprocessed cruise missile data for strategic planning, 1996, Department of Defense, United States Strategic Command.Google Scholar
23. Rodriques, L., Defense acquisitions — achieving B-2A bomber operational requirements, July 1999, GAO/NSIAD-99-97 Report.Google Scholar
24. Hargraves, C.R. and Paris, S.W., Direct trajectory optimization using nonlinear programming and collocation. J Guidance, Control and Dynamics, July-August 1987, 10, (4), pp 338–342.Google Scholar
25. Helgason, R.V., Kennington, J.L. and Lewis, K.R., Cruise missile mission planning: a heuristic algorithm for automatic path generation, J Heuristics, September 2001, 7, (5), pp 473–494.Google Scholar
26. Akram, I.M., Pasha, A. and Iqbal, N., Optimal path planner for autonomous vehicles, Proceedings of World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, January 2005, 3, pp 134–137.Google Scholar