Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Technological Sciences
RESEARCH PAPER
Pure proportional navigation (PPN) is suitable for endoatmospheric interceptions, for its commanded acceleration is perpendicular to interceptor velocity. However, if the target is much faster than the interceptor, the homing performance of PPN will
be degraded badly. True proportional navigation (TPN) does not have this problem, but its commanded acceleration is perpendicular to the line of sight (LOS), which is not suitable for endoatmospheric interceptions. The commanded acceleration of
differential geometric guidance commands (DGGC) is perpendicular to the interceptor velocity, while the homing performance
approximates the LOS referenced guidance laws (PPN series). Therefore, DGGC is suitable for endoatmospheric interception
of high-speed targets. However, target maneuver information is essential for the construction of DGGC, and the guidance
commands are complex and may be without robustness. Through the deep analysis of three-dimensional engagement, a new
construction method of DGGC is proposed in this paper. The target maneuver information is not needed any more, and the robustness of DGGC is guaranteed, which makes the application of DGGC possible.
differential geometric guidance commands, endoatmospheric interception, high-speed targets, proportional navigation,
robustness
Citation:
Li K B, Chen L, Tang G J. Improved differential geometric guidance commands for endoatmospheric interception of high-speed targets. Sci China
Tech Sci, 2013, 56: 518528, doi: 10.1007/s11431-012-5087-z
1 Introduction
The first proportional navigation (PN) guidance law was
actually pure proportional navigation (PPN), which was
used in the guidance of endoatmospheric missiles to intercept airplanes or other moving targets [1]. Later, based on
the requirement of exoatmospheric interception, true proportional navigation (TPN) came out [2]. Since PPN can
only be analytically solved with the navigation constant
N=1 or 2 [3], its homing performance is usually analyzed by
qualitative or quasi-qualitative methods. Guelman [46]
qualitatively analyzed the homing performance of PPN
against nonmaneuvering and maneuvering targets. Shukla
*Corresponding author (email: chenl@nudt.edu.cn)
Science China Press and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012
www.springerlink.com
Li K B, et al.
Shukla and Mahapatra [15] summarized the previous research results and thought that PPN was totally over TPN.
However, although the capture region of PPN is larger, the
effectiveness of PPN is guaranteed with the precondition
that the interceptor is faster. If the target is much faster, the
homing performance of PPN will be badly degraded.
Therefore, PPN is not suitable for endoatmospheric interception of high-speed targets.
The research results mentioned above are all in twodimensional (2D) space. Yang and Yang [16] proposed a
unified approach to the 2D PN guidance laws, which included both TPN series and PPN in a unified frame. The
closed-form solutions of TPN, RTPN, GTPN, IPN, PPN,
and a kind of optimal proportional navigation (OPN) with
an index function of time and energy were obtained.
When conducting three-dimensional (3D) analysis of the
PN guidance laws, the usual method is to decouple the 3D
relative dynamic equations in two mutual vertical planes of
the LOS reference frame [17]. Yang and Yang [1820] advanced a set of relative dynamic equations based on the
spheric coordinate system, with the advantage of decoupling
the transverse relative motion from the longitudinal relative
motion. Considering the basic requirements of capture,
Duflos [21] presented a modified 3D TPN, whose capture
capability approximated PPN. With the help of the relative
dynamic equations established in the modified polar coordinate system (MPC), Tyan [22, 23] proposed a kind of
phase plane method to analyze the capture region of TPN
and extended the unified approach proposed by Yang and
Yang to 3D space.
Based on constant-speed assumption and classical differential geometry theory, Chiou and Kuo [2426] proposed
differential geometric guidance commands (DGGC) in the
arc-length system, including a guidance curvature command
and two torsion commands. The torsion commands were
advanced to guarantee the effectiveness of curvature command. For Chiou and Kuos DGGC, the interceptor is faster
than the target. Li et al. [2732] firstly transformed DGGC
from arc-length system to time domain, and deduced the
initial capture condition with a much faster target. Li et al.
[33] proposed a new construction method of DGGC in time
domain based on the research of LOS rotation principle, and
proved that Chiou and Kuos DGGC was just a special case
of the DGGC family. According to the deep analysis of
DGGC it could be found that, the LOS referenced guidance
laws (TPN series) could be transformed into the interceptor
velocity referenced guidance laws (PPN series). Therefore,
the homing performance of DGGC will not be degraded
with a faster target and the commanded acceleration of
DGGC is perpendicular to interceptor velocity, which
makes it suitable for endoatmospheric interception of highspeed targets.
However, the target maneuver information, which is usually hard to obtain, is imported in DGGC. Simultaneously,
there are several cosines of angles between unit vectors in-
519
dn
t b,
ds
db
ds n,
(1)
(2)
Figure 1
520
Li K B, et al.
m m 2 t
nt (e er )
Nr
,
nm (e er ) nm (e er )
m t m (e er ) nm (e er )
nm er
m1 b (e e ) b (e e ) b (e e ) ,
m
r
m
r
m
r
(
)
b
e
e
b
e
m
r
m
r
,
m 2 nm (e er ) nm (e er )
(3)
(4)
(5)
e s er s e ,
e e ,
s
(6)
r rs 2 atr amr ,
r s 2rs at am ,
r a a ,
t
m
s s
(7)
am
,
Vm2 (nm e )
m (t m e ) s (nm er ) s (nm e )
m1 (b e ) V (b e ) V (b e ) ,
m
m
m
m
m
b
e
b
e
(
)
(
)
s m s m r ,
m 2 Vm (nm e ) Vm (nm e )
(8)
(9)
Li K B, et al.
(10)
if PPN is adopted, the projections of the commanded accelerations along LOS and perpendicular to LOS are
amrPPN N r s sin( ),
am PPN N r s cos( ),
(11)
am TPN N r s ,
(12)
(13)
V2
,
r
521
According to eq. (15), if V 0, the influence on the relative motion caused by amr is an infinitesimal compared with
am.
At the same time, taking the derivative of V rs ,
VV
V rs r s at am r .
r
(16)
of V could be controlled by am. Therefore, the countermeasure between interceptor and target always focuses on
the direction of e, and the capability of am to reduce s to
make a collision is much stronger than that of amr.
According to the above analysis, PPN needs a larger
commanded acceleration to obtain the same homing performance of TPN. Therefore, the homing performance of
PPN is actually weaker than that of TPN. Traditionally,
PPN is considered superior to TPN for its mighty capture
capability. However, the precondition is Vm Vt . According to Guelman [46, 15], for PPN, Vm 2Vt is usually
required to obtain a fine interception result.
The homing performances of PPN and TPN against a
high-speed target are demonstrated in Figure 3 by the ideal
numerical simulation without considerations of errors and
delays of the guidance and control system.
(14)
V
V V2
d
(atr amr ) 2(at am ) 3 r 2 .
r
dt
r
Figure 2
(15)
Figure 3 LOS rates of PPN and TPN against a high-speed nonmaneuvering target.
522
Li K B, et al.
From Figure 3 we can see that when intercepting highspeed target, the control of LOS rate of PPN is not as effective as TPN.
Since PPN is not suitable for the interception of highspeed targets and the LOS referenced guidance laws (like
TPN) are not suitable for endoatmospheric interceptions,
there is a heavy demand of designing new guidance laws for
the endoatmospheric interception of high-speed targets,
especially high-speed maneuvering targets.
(17)
where L is the normal direction of the commanded acceleration. For PPN, L=Vm. Therefore, 3D PPN could be expressed as [34]
a PPN NVm s t m ,
(18)
e t m
e t m
(19)
am
nm ,
(nm e )
(20)
(21)
where is a positive constant below 1. m1 could be deduced by taking the derivative of eq. (21). If we let
bm e ,
(22)
r rs 2 atr m (nm er ),
r
r
a
s
s
t am ,
a
rs s at m (nm e ).
(23)
Since s will not affect the final interception and the influence on r caused by aDGGCr am (nm er ) is an infinitesimal compared with aDGGC am , the homing performance of DGGC approximates that of the original LOS
referenced guidance law am.
Therefore, DGGC is actually a kind of differential geometric transformation, which transforms the LOS referenced guidance laws into interceptor velocity referenced
guidance laws. Since the homing performance of the LOS
referenced guidance law will not be badly degraded against
high-speed targets, DGGC is suitable for endoatmospheric
interception of high-speed targets.
However, there are two main drawbacks of DGGC. The
first one is that the target maneuver information is imported
in DGGC. According to eqs. (8) and (9), even when TPN is
transformed into DGGC, s (at am ) (rs ) which
contains at is needed. The second one is that the torsion
command of DGGC is complex and with some cosines of
angles between unit vectors in the denominator, which may
cause the robustness problem. Through numerical simulations it could be found that the angle between nm and e can
hardly keep constant during the engagement as required by
eq. (21).
Through the deep analysis of the geometric relationship
between concerned unit vectors, we have found that the
real-time nm could be calculated geometrically without the
introduction of torsion command. In this way, the target
information will not be needed in the construction of DGGC
Li K B, et al.
(when am does not contain any target maneuver information), and the robustness problem can be avoided.
nm e ,
Figure 4
Figure 5
(24)
523
nm e A,
e (e t m )t m
.
e (e t m )t m
(26)
(25)
Figure 6
(27)
524
Li K B, et al.
Figure 7
Through using the method above, nm accurately satisfying eq. (24) could be obtained and the target maneuver information is not needed. Simultaneously, the robustness of
DGGC is improved.
nm could also be calculated by algebraic approach, but
the precision is usually not comparable to the geometric
approach.
When nm is obtained, the curvature of DGGC could be
expressed as
b 1 (nmopt e )2 .
sin
t m (t m e )e
.
t m (t m e )e
where
(30)
(31)
(32)
Substituting eqs. (29), (31), and (32) into eq. (30), A could
be solved. Then, nm could be obtained by using eq. (25).
Eq. (30) just needs a minor modification for the solution
of nm , i.e.,
A a(cos x sin y).
(33)
(34)
A ay .
(29)
am
.
Vm2
(36)
(28)
(35)
arccos nm (k ) nm (k 1)
TVm
arccos nm (k ) nm (k 1)
(37)
angle of nm at two continuous sample instants. T is the sample period. Eq. (37) indicates that, through the maneuver
around the interceptor relocity, the direction of the aerodynamic control force could be adjusted to approximate the
real-time calculated nm.
6 Simulation results
A numerical simulation of endoatmospheric interception of
a high-speed target is conducted. PPN, the DGGC of TPN
(called DGTPN), and the improved DGGC of TPN (called
DGTPNimp) are used to guide the interceptor and compared
with each other. The navigation constant N 4 , and the
inefficient distance of the interceptor is assumed to be 100
m. The initial positions and velocities of interceptor and
target are shown in Table 1.
According to the table, the target speed is 400 m s1, and
the interceptor speed is 300 m s1. The initial distance between interceptor and target is 8 km. The initial heading
error of interceptor is 2. The target adopts two maneuver
forms. The first one is constant maneuver, viz., at
[10 2 10 2
Table 1
Interceptor
Position (m)
Z
0
Velocity (m s1)
83.654
288.103
Target
Position (m)
6928.203
4000
Velocity (m s1)
400
Li K B, et al.
525
Figure 11
Figure 8
Figure 12
Figure 10
In Figure 8, the subscript g represents the launch coordinate system which is taken as a reference frame. According to Figures 9 and 10, the LOS rate of PPN against
526
Li K B, et al.
Figure 18
Li K B, et al.
527
Table 2
PPN
16.2531
1.3859
DGTPN
3.2128
0.4345
DGTPNimp
0.4018
0.2862
7 Conclusions
From Figures 15 and 16, when the target adopts the differential geometric maneuver form, the LOS rate control of
PPN is still not as effective as those of DGTPN and
DGTPNimp, which causes the commanded acceleration of
PPN to increase in the final phase of the engagement. The
commanded accelerations of DGTPN and DGTPNimp distribute equably during the engagement, and the maximum
commanded accelerations of DGTPN and DGTPNimp are
relatively smaller than that of PPN.
The IRPL rates of PPN, DGTPN, DGTPNimp are shown
in Figure 17. Since the commanded acceleration of PPN is
located in IRPL, the IRPL rate of PPN is much smoother
than those of DGTPN and DGTPNimp. The IRPL rates of
DGTPN and DGTPNimp vibrate on large scale, but the
homing performances are hardly influenced.
According to Figure 18, for PPN, is uncontrolled.
DGTPN tries to fix at 0.7, but it fails for the robustness
problem. drops at the time of 5.5 s and stabilizes near 0.53
finally. DGTPNimp could make fixed at 0.7 during the
engagement. The curvatures and torsions of DGTPN and
DGTPNimp are shown in Figure 19, and we can see that the
curvature and torsion of the improved DGGC are smoother.
In the above two simulations, DGTPNimp intercepts the
target earlier than the other two guidance laws. The miss
distances are shown Table 2.
According to Table 2, the control of the LOS rate of PPN
against endoatmospheric high-speed target is not effective
enough, which causes the miss distance to be unacceptable.
For DGTPN, the control of the angle between nm and e is
not accurate enough, sometimes even fails, because of the
robustness problem. Then, the homing performance of
DGTPN is influenced, and the miss distance is enlarged.
For DGTPNimp, the robustness is good enough, and the
miss distance is effectively reduced.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
528
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
Li K B, et al.
gation for maneuvering targets. IEEE T Aero Elec Sys, 1989, 25(1):
8189
Becker K. Closed-form solution of pure proportional navigation.
IEEE T Aero Elec Sys, 1990, 26(3): 526533
Guelman M. The closed-form solution of true proportional navigation.
IEEE T Aero Elec Sys, 1976, 12(4): 472482
Dhar A, Ghose D. Capture region for a realistic TPN guidance law.
IEEE T Aero Elec Sys, 1993, 29(3): 9951003
Yang C D, Yeh F B. The closed-form solution of generalized proportional navigation. J Guid Control Dynam, 1987, 10(2): 216218
Yang C D, Hsial F B, Yeh F B. Generalized guidance law for homing
missiles. IEEE T Aero Elec Sys, 1989, 25(2): 197212
Yuan P J, Chern J S. Ideal proportional navigation. J Guid Control
Dynam, 1992, 15(5): 11611165
Shukla U S, Mahapatra P R. The proportional navigation dilemma
pure or true. IEEE T Aero Elec sys, 1990, 26(2): 382392
Yang C D, Yang C C. A unified approach to proportional navigation.
IEEE T Aero Elec Sys, 1997, 33(2): 557567
Chen L, Zhang B. Novel TPN control algorithm for exoatmospheric
intercept. J Syst Eng Electr, 2009, 20(6): 12901295
Yang C D, Yang C C. Analytical solution of three-dimensional realistic true proportional navigation. J Guid Control Dynam, 1996, 19(3):
569577
Yang C D, Yang C C. Analytical solution of generalized threedimensional proportional navigation. J Guid Control Dynam, 1996,
19(3): 721724
Yang C D, Yang C C. Analytical solution of 3D true proportional
navigation. IEEE T Aero Elec Sys, 1996, 32(4): 15091522
Duflos E, Penel P, Vanheeghe P. 3D guidance law modeling. IEEE T
Aero Elec Sys, 1999, 35(1): 7283
Tyan F. The capture region of a general 3D TPN guidance law for
missile and target with limited maneuverability. Proceedings of the
American Control Conference, Arlinton, VA, June 2527, 2001
Tyan F. Unified approach to missile guidance laws: A 3D extension.
IEEE T Contr Syst T, 2005, 41(4): 11781199
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
Chiou Y C, Kuo C Y. Geometric approach to three dimensional missile guidance problems. J Guid Control Dynam, 1998, 21(2): 335
341
Kuo C Y, Chiou Y C. Geometric analysis of missile guidance command. IEE PContr Theor Ap, 2000, 147(2): 205211
Kuo C Y, Soetanto D, Chiou Y C. Geometric analysis of flight control command for tactical missile guidance. IEEE T Contr Syst T,
2001, 9(2): 234243
Li C Y, Jing W X. New results on three-dimensional differential geometric guidance and control problem. AIAA Guidance, Navigation,
and Control Conference and Exhibit, August, 2006
Li C Y, Jing W X, Qi Z G, et al. Application of the 3d differential
geometric guidance commands (in Chinese). J Astronaut, 2007, 28(5):
12351240
Li C Y, Qi Z G, Jing W X. Practical study on 2d differential geometric guidance problem (in Chinese). J Harbin Institute of Technology,
2007, 39(7): 10311035
Li C Y, Jing W X, Wang H, et al. Iterative solution to differential geometric guidance problem. Aircr Eng Aerosp Tec, 2006, 78(5): 415425
Li C Y, Jing W X, Wang H, et al. A Novel Approach to 2D Differential Geometric Guidance Problem. T Jpn Soc Aeronaut S, 2007,
50(167): 3440
Li C Y, Jing W X, Wang H, et al. Gain-varying guidance algorithm
using differential geometric guidance command. IEEE T Aero Elec
Sys, 2010, 46(2): 725736
Li K B, Chen L, Bai X Z. Differential geometric modeling of guidance problem for interceptors. Sci China Tech Sci, 2011, 54: 2283
2295
Tyan F. Capture Region of 3D PPN Guidance Law for Intercepting
High Speed Target. Joint 48th IEEE Conference on Decision and
Control and 28th Chinese Control Conference, Shanghai, China, December, 2009. 762767
Wang J, Chen W C, Ying X L. Endoatmospheric interceptor fast response control using impulse attitude control motor. J Beijing Univ
Aeronaut Astronaut, 2007, 33(4): 397400