Skip to main content
Search
Search
Quick Search anywhere
Quick Search fdjslkfh
Advanced search
Cart
Join AIAA Institution Login
Skip main navigation
Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics logo
Skip to article control options
No AccessFull-Length Paper

Robust Reentry Guidance of a Reusable Launch Vehicle Using Model Predictive Static Programming

Published Online:10 Jan 2014https://doi.org/10.2514/1.61615

Abstract

A robust suboptimal reentry guidance scheme is presented for a reusable launch vehicle using the recently developed, computationally efficient model predictive static programming. The formulation uses the nonlinear vehicle dynamics with a spherical and rotating Earth, hard constraints for desired terminal conditions, and an innovative cost function having several components with associated weighting factors that can account for path and control constraints in a soft constraint manner, thereby leading to smooth solutions of the guidance parameters. The proposed guidance essentially shapes the trajectory of the vehicle by computing the necessary angle of attack and bank angle that the vehicle should execute. The path constraints are the structural load constraint, thermal load constraint, bounds on the angle of attack, and bounds on the bank angle. In addition, the terminal constraints include the three-dimensional position and velocity vector components at the end of the reentry. Whereas the angle-of-attack command is generated directly, the bank angle command is generated by first generating the required heading angle history and then using it in a dynamic inversion loop considering the heading angle dynamics. Such a two-loop synthesis of bank angle leads to better management of the vehicle trajectory and avoids mathematical complexity as well. Moreover, all bank angle maneuvers have been confined to the middle of the trajectory and the vehicle ends the reentry segment with near-zero bank angle, which is quite desirable. It has also been demonstrated that the proposed guidance has sufficient robustness for state perturbations as well as parametric uncertainties in the model.

References

  • [1] Harpold J. C. and Graves C. A., “Shuttle Entry Guidance,” NASA n79-74791, May 1979. Google Scholar

  • [2] Shen Z. and Lu P., “Onboard Generation of Three-Dimensional Constrained Entry Trajectories,” Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, Vol. 27, No. 1, 2003, pp. 111–121. doi:https://doi.org/10.2514/2.5021 JGCDDT 0162-3192 LinkGoogle Scholar

  • [3] Brinda V., Arora R. and Janardhana E., “Mission Analysis of a Reusable Launch Vehicle Technology Demonstrator,” Proceedings of AIAA/CIRA 13th International Space Planes and Hypersonics Systems and Technologies, AIAA, Reston, VA, May 2005; also AIAA Paper  2005-3291. Google Scholar

  • [4] Mease K. D. and Kremer J. P., “Shuttle Entry Guidance Revisited Using Nonlinear Geometric Methods,” Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, Vol. 17, No. 6, 1994, pp. 1350–1356. doi:https://doi.org/10.2514/3.21355 JGCDDT 0162-3192 LinkGoogle Scholar

  • [5] Cavallo A. and Ferrara F., “Atmospheric Reentry Control for Low Lift/Drag Vehicles,” Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, Vol. 19, No. 1, 1996, pp. 47–53. doi:https://doi.org/10.2514/3.21578 JGCDDT 0162-3192 LinkGoogle Scholar

  • [6] Dukeman G. A., “Profile-Following Entry Guidance Using Linear Quadratic Regulator Theory,” Proceedings of AIAA Guidance Navigation and Control Conference and Exhibit, AIAA, Reston, VA, Aug. 2002; also AIAA Paper  2002-4457. Google Scholar

  • [7] Lu P., Shen Z., Dukeman G. A. and Hanson J. M., “Entry Guidance by Trajectory Regulation,” Proceedings of AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference and Exhibit, AIAA, Reston, VA, Aug. 2000; also AIAA Paper  2000-3958. Google Scholar

  • [8] Bryson A. E. and Ho Y. C., Applied Optimal Control, Hemisphere, New York, 1975, pp. 1–80. Google Scholar

  • [9] Kirk D. E., Optimal Control Theory: An Introduction, Dover, New York, 1970, pp. 329–413. Google Scholar

  • [10] Roenneke A., “Adaptive On-Board Guidance for Entry Vehicles,” Proceedings of AIAA Guidance Navigation and Control Conference and Exhibit, AIAA, Reston, VA, Aug. 2001; also AIAA Paper  2001-4048. Google Scholar

  • [11] Shen Z. and Lu P., “Dynamic Lateral Entry Guidance Logic,” Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, Vol. 27, No. 6, 2004, pp. 949–959. doi:https://doi.org/10.2514/1.8008 JGCDDT 0162-3192 LinkGoogle Scholar

  • [12] Joshi A. and Sivan K., “Reentry Guidance for Generic RLV Using Optimal Perturbations and Error Weights,” Proceedings of AIAA Guidance Navigation and Control Conference and Exhibit, AIAA, Reston, VA, Aug. 2005; also AIAA Paper  2005-6438. Google Scholar

  • [13] Rossiter J. A., “Model Based Predictive Control: A Practical Approach,” 1st ed., CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2003, pp. 40–80. Google Scholar

  • [14] Werbos P. J., “Approximate Dynamic Programming for Real-Time Control and Neural Modeling,” Handbook of Intelligent Control: Neural, Fuzzy & Adaptive Approaches, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, 1992, pp. 65–89. Google Scholar

  • [15] Padhi R. and Kothari M., “Model Predictive Static Programming: A Computationally Efficient Technique for Suboptimal Control Design,” International Journal of Innovative Computing, Information and Control, Vol. 5, No. 2, 2009, pp. 399–411. Google Scholar

  • [16] McHenry R. L., Long A. D., Cockrell B. F., Thibodeau J. R. I. and Brand T. J., “Space Shuttle Ascent Guidance Navigation and Control,” Journal of the Astronautical Sciences, Vol. 27, No. 1, 1979, pp. 1–38. JALSA6 0021-9142 Google Scholar

  • [17] Chawla C., Sarmah P. and Padhi R., “Suboptimal Reentry Guidance of Reusable Launch Vehicles Using Pitch Plane Maneuver,” Aerospace Science and Technology, Vol. 14, No. 6, 2010, pp. 377–386. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ast.2010.04.001 ARSTFZ 1270-9638 CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [18] Dwivedi P. N., Bhattacharya A. and Padhi R., “Suboptimal Midcourse Guidance of Interceptors for High Speed Targets with Alignment Angle Constraint,” Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, Vol. 34, No. 3, 2011, pp. 860–877. doi:https://doi.org/10.2514/1.50821 JGCDDT 0162-3192 LinkGoogle Scholar

  • [19] Gong Q., Fahroo F. and Ross I. M., “Spectral Algorithm for Pseudospectral Methods in Optimal Control,” Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, Vol. 31, No. 3, 2008, pp. 460–471. doi:https://doi.org/10.2514/1.32908 JGCDDT 0162-3192 LinkGoogle Scholar

  • [20] Bollino K. P., Ross I. M. and Doman D. D., “Optimal Nonlinear Feedback Guidance for Reentry Vehicles,” Proceedings of AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference and Exhibit, AIAA, Reston, VA, Aug. 2006; also AIAA Paper  2005-6438. Google Scholar

  • [21] Enns D., Bugajski D., Hendrick R. and Stein G., “Dynamic Inversion: An Evolving Methodology for Flight Control design,” International Journal of Control, Vol. 59, No. 1, 1994, pp. 71–91. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/00207179408923070 IJCOAZ 0020-7179 CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [22] Donnay J. D. H., Spherical Trigonometry, Interscience, New York, 1945, pp. 28–35. Google Scholar

  • [23] Vinh N. X., Busemann A. and Culp R. D., Hypersonic and Planetary Entry Flight Mechanics, Univ. of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, MI, 1980, pp. 19–28. Google Scholar

  • [24] Ananthasayanam M. R. and Narasimha R., “Proposed International Tropical Reference Atmosphere Upto 1000 km,” Advances in Space Research, Vol. 7, No. 10, 1987, pp. 117–131. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/0273-1177(87)90084-6 ASRSDW 0273-1177 CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [25] Gallais P., Atmospheric Re-Entry Vehicle Mechanics, 1st ed., Springer, Berlin, 2007, pp. 31–148. CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [26] Young J., “Method for Longitudinal and Lateral Range Control for a High-Drag Low-Lift Vehicle Entering the Atmosphere of a Rotating Earth,” NASA TN-D-954, 1961. Google Scholar

Previous article
Next article