Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T18:58:02.271Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Predictor corrector algorithms considering multiple constraints for entry vehicles

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 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

This paper proposes an online entry trajectory planning based on predictor corrector algorithm that satisfies terminal constraints, path constraints and geographic constraints for lifting-body entry vehicles. The vehicle is considered as a 3DOF point mass. A piecewise linear bank profile in the altitude-versus-velocity (H-V) plane is used to project the longitudinal trajectory and a heading angle corridor-based bank angle reversal logic is designed to satisfy the geographic constraints simultaneously. The algorithm in longitudinal plane solves the problem of the mismatch between terminal range and height and the algorithm in lateral plane satisfies the no-fly zone constraint. Simulation results with the CAV-H model show that the proposed algorithm can generate entry trajectories satisfying multiple constraints and has certain robustness.

Keywords

Trajectory planningPredictor correctorAltitude-versus-velocity profileNo-fly zoneMultiple constraints
Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 126 , Issue 1305 , November 2022 , pp. 1874 - 1896
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

Zhao, J., Zhou, R. and Jin, X. L. Progress in reentry trajectory planning for hypersonic vehicle, J Syst Eng Electron, 2014, 25, (4), pp 627–639.Google Scholar
Sarah, N.D. and Nesrin, S.K. Survey of planetary entry guidance algorithms, Prog Aerosp Sci, 2014, 68, (1), pp 22–28.Google Scholar
Shen, Z. and Lu, P. Onboard generation of three-dimensional constrained entry trajectories, J Guid Cont Dynam, 2003, 26, (1), pp 111–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhao, H.Y. Spacecraft reentry dynamics and guidance, National University of Defense Technology Press, Changsha, 1997.Google Scholar
Lu, P. Entry guidance: A unified method, J Guid Cont Dynam, 2014, 37, (3), pp 713–728.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spratlin, K.M. An Adaptive Numeric Predictor-Corrector Guidance Algorithm for Atmospheric Entry Vehicles. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA, 1987.Google Scholar
Xue, S. and Lu, P. Constrained predictor-corrector entry guidance, J Guid Cont Dynam, 2010, 33, (4), pp 1273–1281.Google Scholar
Cheng, L., Wang, Z.B. and Cheng, Y. et al. Multi-constrained predictor-corrector reentry guidance for hypersonic vehicles, Proc Inst Mech Eng G J Aerosp Eng, 2018, 232, (61), pp 3049–3067.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, H.L., Li, Q.D. and Ren, Z. Predictor-corrector entry guidance for high-lifting hypersonic vehicles, Proceedings of the 35th Chinese Control Conference. IEEE Technical committee on Control Theory, Chinese Association of Automation, Chengdu, China, 2016, pp 5636–5640.Google Scholar
Shui, Z.S., Zhou, J. and Ge, Z.L. On-line predictor-corrector guidance based on Gauss pseudospectral method, J Astronaut, 2011, 32, (6), pp 1249–1255.Google Scholar
Lu, P., Brunnerc, W. and Stachowiak, S.J. et al. Verification of a fully numerical entry guidance algorithm, J Guid Cont Dynam, 2016, 40, (2), pp 230–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fu, W.X., Liu, D.K. and Chen, K. et al. An improved predictor-corrector entry guidance method for hypersonic flight vehicle, Adv Mech Eng, 2017, 9, (10), pp 1–9.Google Scholar
Hu, Z.D., Guo, C.F. and Cai, H. Analytical predictive guidance for space-to-ground kinetic weapon in reentry, J Astronaut, 2009, 30, (3), pp 1039–1044.Google Scholar
Kluever, C.A. Entry guidance using analytical atmospheric skip trajectories, J Guid Cont Dynam, 2008, 31, (5), pp 1531–1535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hu, J.C., Zhang, J. and Chen, W.C. Analytical solutions of steady glide trajectory for hypersonic vehicle and planning application, J Beijing Univ Aeronaut Astronaut, 2016, 42, (5), pp 961–968.Google Scholar
Li, H.F., Zhang, R. and Li, Z.Y. et al. New method to enforce inequality constraints of entry trajectory, J Guid Cont Dynam, 2012, 35, (5), pp 1662–1667.Google Scholar
Zeng, X.F., Wang, J.Y. and Wang, X.H. Gliding guidance based on energy and analytical predictor corrector, Syst Eng Electron, 2013, 35, (12), pp 2582–2588.Google Scholar
Schierman, J. and Hull, J. In-flight entry trajectory optimization for reusable launch vehicles, AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference and Exhibit, San Francisco, California, USA, 2005, 6364, pp 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bollino, K., Ross, M. and Doman, D. Optimal nonlinear feedback guidance for reentry vehicles, AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference and Exhibit, Keystone, Colorado, USA, 2006, 6074, pp 1–20.Google Scholar
Wang, Z. and Grant, M. Constrained trajectory optimization for planetary entry via sequential convex programming, J Guid Cont Dynam, 2017, 40, (10), pp 2603–2615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, X., Shen, Z. and Lu, P. Entry trajectory optimization by second-order cone programming, J Guid Cont Dynam, 2015, 39, (2), pp 227–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, X. Fuel-optimal rocket landing with aerodynamic controls, AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference, Grapevine, Texas, USA, 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sagliano, M., Mooij, E. and Theil, S. Optimal drag-energy entry guidance via pseudospectral convex optimization, AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference, Kissimmee, Florida, USA, 2018.Google Scholar
Sagliano, M., Mooij, E. and Theil, S. Onboard trajectory generation for entry vehicles via adaptive multivariate pseudospectral interpolation, J Guid Cont Dynam, 2017, 40, (2), pp 466–476.Google Scholar
Jorris, T.R. and Cobb, R.G. Multiple method 2-D trajectory optimization satisfying waypoints and no-fly zone constraints, J Guid Cont Dynam, 2008, 31, (3), pp 543–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jorris, T.R. and Cobb, R.G. Three-dimensional trajectory optimization satisfying way-point and no-fly zone constraints, J Guid Cont Dynam, 2009, 32, (2), pp 551–572.Google Scholar
Zhao, J. and Zhou, R. Reentry trajectory optimization for hypersonic vehicle satisfying complex constraints, Chin J Aeronaut, 2013, 26, (6), pp 1544–1553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guo, J., Wu, X. and Tang, S.J. Autonomous gliding entry guidance with geographic constraints, Chin J Aeronaut, 2015, 28, (5), pp 1343–1354.Google Scholar
He, R., Liu, L. and Tang, G. Entry trajectory generation without reversal of bank angle, Aerosp Sci Technol, 2017, 71, pp 627–635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, D., Liu, L. and Wang, Y. On-line reentry guidance algorithm with both path and no-fly zone constraints, Acta Astronautica, 2015, 117, pp 243–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
He, R., Liu, L. and Tang, G. et al. Rapid generation of entry trajectory with multiple no-fly zone constraints, Adv Space Res, 2017, 60, (7), pp 1430–1442.Google Scholar
Xie, Y., Liu, L. and Liu, J. et al. Rapid generation of entry trajectories with way-point and no-fly zone constraints, Acta Astronaut, 2012, 77, (8), pp 167–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xie, Y., Liu, L. and Tang, G. et al. Highly constrained entry trajectory generation. Acta Astronaut, 2013, 88, (3), pp 44–60.Google Scholar
Liang, Z., Liu, S. and Li, Q. et al. Lateral entry guidance with no-fly zone constraint, Aerosp Sci Technol, 2017, 60, pp 39–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, S.Y., Liang, Z.X. and Li, Q.D. et al. Predictor-corrector guidance for entry with terminal altitude constraint, Proceedings of the 35th Chinese Control Conference, Chengdu, China. IEEE Technical Committee on Control Theory, Chinese Association of Automation, 2016, pp 5557–5562.Google Scholar
Shen, Z.J. and Lu, P. Onboard generation of three-dimensional constrained entry trajectories, J Guid Cont Dynam, 2003, 26, (1), pp 111–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liang, Z.X., Ren, Z. and Li, Q.D. Evolved atmospheric entry corridor with safety factor, Acta Astronaut, 2018, 143, pp 82–91.Google Scholar
Richie, G. The common aero vehicle: space delivery system of the future, Proceedings of the AIAA Space Technology Conference and Exposition, 1999.Google Scholar
Wang, X., Guo, J. and Tang, S.J. et al. Entry trajectory planning with terminal full states constraints and multiple geographic constraints, Aerosp Sci Technol, 2019, 84, pp 620–631.CrossRefGoogle Scholar