Design of control laws for flutter suppression based on the aerodynamic energy concept and comparisons with other design methods

The aerodynamic energy method is used in this paper to synthesize control laws for NASA's Drone for Aerodynamic and Structural Testing-Aerodynamic Research Wing 1 (DAST-ARW1) mathematical model. The performance of these control laws in terms of closed-loop flutter dynamic pressure, control surface activity, and robustness is compared against other control laws that appear in the literature and relate to the same model. A control law synthesis technique that makes use of the return difference singular values is developed in this paper. it is based on the aerodynamic energy approach and is shown to yield results superior to those given in the literature and based on optimal control theory. Nyquist plots are presented together with a short discussion regarding the relative merits of the minimum singular value as a measure of robustness, compared with the more traditional measure of robustness involving phase and gain margins.

[1]  J. R. Newsom,et al.  A method for obtaining reduced-order control laws for high-order systems using optimization techniques , 1981 .

[2]  H. J. Dunn,et al.  Application of two design methods for active flutter suppression and wind-tunnel test results , 1980 .

[3]  J. R. Newsom,et al.  Design of the flutter suppression system for DAST ARW-IR , 1983 .

[4]  Dagfinn Gangsaas,et al.  APPILICATION OF A MODIFIED LINEAR QUADRATIC GAUSSIAN DESIGN TO ACTIVE CONTROL OF A TRANSPORT AIRPLANE , 1979 .

[5]  Roger Fletcher,et al.  A Rapidly Convergent Descent Method for Minimization , 1963, Comput. J..

[6]  J. R. Newson.  A method for obtaining practical flutter-suppression control laws using results of optimal control theory , 1979 .

[7]  J. R. Newsom,et al.  Reduced-Order Optimal Feedback Control Law Synthesis for Flutter Suppression , 1982 .

[8]  G. Stein,et al.  Robustness with observers , 1978, 1978 IEEE Conference on Decision and Control including the 17th Symposium on Adaptive Processes.

[9]  E. Nissim,et al.  Active Controls for Flutter Suppression and Gust Alleviation in Supersonic Aircraft , 1980 .

[10]  E. Nissim,et al.  Application of the aerodynamic energy concept to flutter suppression and gust alleviation by use of active controls , 1976 .

[11]  E. Nissim,et al.  Development and application of an optimization procedure for flutter suppression using the aerodynamic energy concept , 1978 .

[12]  E. Nissim,et al.  Recent advances in aerodynamic energy concept for flutter suppression and gust alleviation using active controls , 1977 .

[13]  C. R. Stone,et al.  Control Law Synthesis for Flutter Suppression Using Linear Quadratic Gaussian Theory , 1981 .

[14]  E. Nissim,et al.  Comparative Study Between Two Different Active Flutter Suppression Systems , 1978 .

[15]  E. Nissim,et al.  Flutter suppression using active controls based on the concept of aerodynamic energy , 1971 .

[16]  J. K. Mahesh,et al.  Active flutter control for flexible vehicles, volume 1 , 1979 .

[17]  V. Mukhopadhyay.  Stability robustness improvement using constrained optimization techniques , 1987 .

[18]  V. Mukhopadhyay,et al.  Application of matrix singular value properties for evaluating gain and phase margins of multiloop systems. [stability margins for wing flutter suppression and drone lateral attitude control] , 1982 .

[19]  G. W. Stewart,et al.  A Modification of Davidon's Minimization Method to Accept Difference Approximations of Derivatives , 1967, JACM.

[20]  D. Gangsaas,et al.  Practical gust load alleviation and flutter suppression control laws based on a LQG methodology. [Linear Quadratic Gaussian , 1981 .