An L1 adaptive closed-loop guidance law for an orbital injection problem

Abstract The current paper presents the determination of a closed-loop guidance law for an orbital injection problem using two different approaches and, considering the existing time-optimal open-loop trajectory as the nominal solution, compares the advantages of the two proposed strategies. In the first method, named neighbouring optimal control (NOC), the perturbation feedback method is utilized to determine the closed-loop trajectory in an analytical form for the non-linear system. This law, which produces feedback gains, is in general a function of small perturbations appearing in the states and constraints separately. The second method uses an L1 adaptive strategy in determination of the non-linear closed-loop guidance law. The main advantages of this method include characteristics such as improvement of asymptotic tracking, guaranteed time-delay margin, and smooth control input. The accuracy of the two methods is compared by introducing a high-frequency sinusoidal noise. The simulation results indicate that the L1 adaptive strategy has a better performance than the NOC method to track the nominal trajectory when the noise amplitude is increased. On the other hand, the main advantage of the NOC method is its ability to solve a non-linear, two-point, boundary-value problem in the minimum time.

[1]  A. Bryson,et al.  Neighbouring extremals of dynamic optimization problems with parameter variations , 1989 .

[2]  L. Praly,et al.  Adaptive nonlinear regulation: estimation from the Lyapunov equation , 1992 .

[3]  Weiping Li,et al.  Applied Nonlinear Control , 1991 .

[4]  Padhraic Smyth,et al.  Synthesis of Optimal Nonlinear Feedback Laws for Dynamic Systems Using Neural Networks , 1993 .

[5]  Hamed Hossein Afshari,et al.  A perturbation approach in determination of closed-loop optimal-fuzzy control policy for planetary landing mission , 2009 .

[6]  Jiang Wang,et al.  Novel L1 Adaptive Control Approach to Autonomous Aerial Refueling with Guaranteed Transient Performance , 2006, 2006 American Control Conference.

[7]  Chengyu Cao,et al.  Stability Margins of L1 Adaptive Controller: Part II , 2007, 2007 American Control Conference.

[8]  Yu-Ping Lin,et al.  A fuzzy guidance law for vertical launch interceptors , 2009 .

[9]  Donald E. Kirk,et al.  Optimal control theory : an introduction , 1970 .

[10]  Lalo Magni,et al.  On optimality of nonlinear model predictive control , 2007, Syst. Control. Lett..

[11]  Randal W. Beard,et al.  An L1 Adaptive Pitch Controller for Miniature Air Vehicles , 2006 .

[12]  Naira Hovakimyan,et al.  Guaranteed Transient Performance with L 1 Adaptive Controller for Systems with Unknown Time-varying Parameters : Part I ∗ , 2006 .

[13]  Karl Johan Åström,et al.  Adaptive Control (2 ed.) , 1995 .

[14]  Naira Hovakimyan,et al.  Novel ${\cal L}_{1}$ Neural Network Adaptive Control Architecture With Guaranteed Transient Performance , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks.

[15]  Naira Hovakimyan,et al.  Are phase and time-delay margins always adversely affected by high-gain? , 2006 .

[16]  Naira Hovakimyan,et al.  L1 Adaptive Neural Network Controller for Autonomous Aerial Refueling with Guaranteed Transient Performance , 2006 .

[17]  Chengyu Cao,et al.  Design and Analysis of a Novel L1 Adaptive Controller, Part II: Guaranteed Transient Performance , 2006, 2006 American Control Conference.

[18]  Arthur E. Bryson,et al.  Neighboring optimal aircraft guidance in winds , 2000 .

[19]  Naira Hovakimyan,et al.  Novel ⅂1 neural network adaptive control architecture with guaranteed transient performance , 2007, 2007 European Control Conference (ECC).

[20]  George M. Siouris,et al.  Applied Optimal Control: Optimization, Estimation, and Control , 1979, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[21]  Seid H. Pourtakdoust,et al.  Non‐linear feedback optimal control law for minimum‐time injection problem using fuzzy system , 2005 .