AUTOPILOT DESIGN : LATERAL AUTOPILOT

INTRODUCTION

1. Broadly speaking autopilots either control the motion in the pitch and yaw planes,
in which they are called lateral autopilots, or they control the motion about the fore and
aft axis in which case they are called roll autopilots.

2. LATERAL “G” AUTOPILOT

(a) Lateral “g” autopilots are designed to enable a missile to achieve a high
and consistent “g” response to a command.

(b) They are particularly relevant to SAMs and AAMs.

(c) There are normally two lateral autopilots, one to control the pitch or up-
down motion and another to control the yaw or left-right motion.

(d) They are usually identical and hence a yaw autopilot is explained here.

(e) An accelerometer is placed in the yaw plane of the missile, to sense the
sideways acceleration of the missile. This accelerometer produces a voltage
proportional to the linear acceleration.

(f) This measured acceleration is compared with the ‘demanded’ acceleration.

(g) The error is then fed to the fin servos, which actuate the rudders to move
the missile in the desired direction.

(h) This closed loop system does not have an amplifier, to amplify the error.
This is because of the small static margin in the missiles and even a small
error (unamplified) provides large airframe movement.
 3. The requirements of a good lateral autopilot are very nearly the same for
command and homing systems but it is more helpful initially to consider those associated
with command systems where guidance receiver produces signals proportional to the
misalignment of the missile from the line of sight (LOS). A simplified closed-loop block
diagram for a vertical or horizontal plane guidance loop without an autopilot is as shown
below: -

Rm
GUIDANCE
RXR:HORIZL OR AERODYNA KINE
VERTL ANGULAR COMPENSA MICS & MATI
θt ERROR CHANNEL TOR FIN SERVO AIRFRAME CS
θm
Unity dc K2 K3 1/Rms
K1 volts/rad m/sec2/rad
gain rad/volt 2

(a) The target tracker determines the target direction θt.

(b) Let the guidance receiver gain be k1 volts/rad (misalignment). The

guidance signals are then invariably phase advanced to ensure closed loop
stability.

(c) In order to maintain constant sensitivity to missile linear displacement

from the LOS, the signals are multiplied by the measured or assumed
missile range Rm before being passed to the missile servos. This means
that the effective d.c. gain of the guidance error detector is k1 volts/m.

(d) If the missile servo gain is k2 rad/volt and the control surfaces and
airframe produce a steady state lateral acceleration of k3 m/s2/rad then the
guidance loop has a steady state open loop gain of k1k2k3 m/s2/m or
k1k2k3 s-2.

(e) The loop is closed by two inherent integrations from lateral acceleration to
lateral position. Since the error angle is always very small, one can say
that the change in angle is this lateral displacement divided by the
instantaneous missile range Rm.

(f) The guidance loop has a gain which is normally kept constant and consists
of the product of the error detector gain, the servo gain and the
aerodynamic gain.

4. Consider now the possible variation in the value of aerodynamic gain k3 due to
change in static margin. The c.g. can change due to propellant consumption and
manufacturing tolerances while changes in c.p. can be due to changes in incidence,
missile speed and manufacturing tolerances. The value of k3 can change by a factor of 5
to 1 for changes in static margin (say 2cm to 10 cm in a 2m long missile). If, in addition,
there can be large variations in the dynamic pressure ½ ρu2 due to changes in height and
speed, then the overall variation in aerodynamic gain could easily exceed 100 to 1.

Lateral Autopilot Design Objectives

5. The main objectives of a lateral autopilot are as listed below: -

(a) Maintenance of near-constant steady state aerodynamic gain.

(b) Increase weathercock frequency.

(c) Increase weathercock damping.

(d) Reduce cross-coupling between pitch and yaw motion and

(e) Assistance in gathering.

6. Maintenance of near-constant steady state aerodynamic gain. A general

conclusion can be drawn that an open-loop missile control system is not acceptable for
highly maneuverable missiles, which have very small static margins especially those
which do not operate at a constant height and speed. In homing system, the performance
is seriously degraded if the “kinematic gain” varies by more than about +/- 30% of an
ideal value. Since the kinematic gain depends on the control system gain, the homing
head gain and the missile-target relative velocity, and the latter may not be known very
accurately, it is not expected that the missile control designer will be allowed a tolerance
of more than +/- 20%.

7. Increase weathercock frequency. A high weathercock frequency is essential

for the stability of the guidance loop.

(a) Consider an open loop system. Since the rest of the loop consists
essentially of two integrations and a d.c. gain, it follows that if
there are no dynamic lags in the loop whatsoever we have 180 deg
phase lag at all frequencies open loop.

(b) To obtain stability, the guidance error signal can be passed through
phase advance networks. If one requires more than about 60
degrees phase advance one has to use several phase advance
networks in series and the deterioration in signal-to-noise ratio is
inevitable and catastrophic.

(c) Hence normally designers tend to limit the amount of phase

advance to about 60 deg. This means that if one is going to design
 a guidance loop with a minimum of 45 deg phase margin, the total
phase lag permissible from the missile servo and the aerodynamics
at guidance loop unity gain cross-over frequency will be 15 deg.

(d) Hence the servo must be very much faster and likewise the
weathercock frequency should be much faster (say by a factor of
five or more) than the guidance loop undamped natural frequency
i.e., the open-loop unity gain cross-over frequency.

(e) This may not be practicable for an open-loop system especially at

the lower end of the missile speed range and with a small static
margin. Hence the requirement of closed loop system with lateral
autopilot arises.

8. Increase weathercock damping. The weathercock mode is very under-

damped, especially with a large static margin and at high altitudes. This may result in
following: -

(a) A badly damped oscillatory mode results in a large r.m.s. output to

broadband noise. The r.m.s. incidence is unnecessarily large and
this results in a significant reduction in range due to induced drag.
The accuracy of the missile will also be degraded.

(b) A sudden increase in signal which could occur after a temporary

signal fade will result in a large overshoot both in incidence and in
achieved lateral g. This might cause stalling. Hence the airframe
would have to be stressed to stand nearly twice the maximum
designed steady state g.

9. Reduce cross coupling between pitch and yaw motion. If the missile has two
axes of symmetry and there is no roll rate there should be no cross coupling between the
pitch and yaw motion. However many missiles are allowed to roll freely. Roll rate and
incidence in yaw will produce acceleration along z axis. Similarly roll rate and angular
motion induce moments in pitch or yaw axis. These cross coupling effects can be
regarded as disturbances and any closed-loop system will be considerably less sensitive
to any disturbance than an open-loop one.

10. Assistance in gathering. In a command system, the missile is usually

launched some distance off the line of sight. At the same time, to improve guidance
accuracy, the systems engineer will want the narrowest guidance beam possible. Thrust
misalignment, biases and cross winds all contribute to dispersion of the missile resulting
in its loss. A closed-loop missile control system (i.e., an autopilot) will be able to
reasonably resist the above disturbances and help in proper gathering.
 Lateral Autopilot Using One Accelerometer and One Rate Gyro

11. An arrangement whereby an accelerometer provides the main feedback and a rate
gyro is used to act, as a damper is common in many high performance command and
homing missiles. The diagram below shows the arrangement in a simplified form for a
missile with rear controls.

FIN SERVO
AERODYNAMIC Txfr Fn fy
ζ
fyd ks kae
s 2 / ns2  2 s / ns  1 s 2 / nae
2
 2ae s / nae  1
-
r
Ti s  1
RATE GYRO
U
kg
AERO Txfr Fn

cs

ACCELEROME
TER
ka

The simplifications are as follows: -

(a) The dynamic lags of the rate gyro and accelerometer have been omitted as
their bandwidth is usually more than 80 Hz and hence the phase lags they
introduce in the frequencies of interest are negligible.

(b) It is assumed that the fin servos are adequately described by a quadratic
lag.

(c) The small numerator terms in the transfer function fy/ζ have been omitted.
For clarity this transfer function has been expressed as a steady state gain
kae and a quadratic lag (i.e., the weathercock frequency ωnae and a
damping ratio).
 (d) Also, a stable missile with rear controls has a negative steady state gain.

(e) Similarly, if we assume that the gain of the feedback instruments are
positive and that their outputs are subtracted from the input demand then a
negative feedback situation will be achieved only if the servo gain is
shown as negative i.e., a positive voltage input produces a negative rudder
deflection.

12. Analysis. The autopilot shown in the diagram is a Type 0 closed loop system.

(a) The mean open loop steady state gain must be 10 or more to make the
closed loop gain relatively insensitive to variations in aerodynamic gain;
this open loop gain is ks*kae*(ka+kg/U).

(b) Gain and feedback will reduce the steady state gain and raise the
bandwidth of the system. Assuming that the open loop gain cross over
frequency approximates to the fundamental closed natural frequency, let
us see the requirement of servo loop bandwidth when we are aiming for a
minimum autopilot bandwidth of say 40 rad/s.

(i) Since the open loop gain cross over frequency will be at least 2 or
3 times the open loop weathercock frequency we can regard the lightly
damped airframe as producing very nearly 180 deg phase lag at gain
crossover.

(ii) A glance at the instrument feedback shows that the rate gyro
produces some monitoring feedback equal to kg/U and some first
derivative of output equal to kgTi/U. It is this first derivative
component which is so useful in promoting closed loop stability.

(iii) If now the accelerometer is placed at a distance c ahead of the c.g.,

the total acceleration it sees is equal to the acceleration of the
c.g.(fy) plus the angular acceleration (r dot) times this distance c.
This total is fy(1+cs/U+cTis2/U). Thus if c is positive, we have
from the two instruments some monitoring feedback plus some
first and second derivative of the feedback, all negative feedback.

(iv) Thus it appears that we may be able to achieve 70 deg or more

phase advance in the feedback path with this arrangement.

(v) If this is so, we can allow the servo to produce say 20-25 deg phase
lag at gain cross over frequency in order to achieve 50 deg open
loop phase margin.

(vi) This means that the servo bandwidth must be 3 or 4 times greater
than the desired autopilot bandwidth, say a minimum of 150 rad/s
for an autopilot bandwidth of 40 rad/s.
5. DIRECTIONAL AUTOPILOT

(a) Directional autopilots are generally employed in long-range missiles or

sea skimming missiles, where the guidance is provided in the terminal phase only.

(b) They maintain the direction as well as the required height in an

“autonomous” fashion.

(c) To maintain the horizontal direction required, an azimuth or yaw gyro is

used. To maintain the height, a radio or laser altimeter senses the actual height of
the missile.

(d) These autopilots have tendency not to sense the “drift” of the missiles due
to crosswinds, even though pointing towards the desired direction. Using inertial
measurements (accelerometers) purifies the autopilot performance.