• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
Copyright© 1997, American Institute
of
Aeronautics
and
Astronautics, Inc.
AIAA-97-3725
OPTIMAL EXTERNAL CONFIGURATION DESIGN
OF UNGUIDED
MISSILES
A97-37313
Omer Tannkulu*
&
Veysi
Ercant
Defense
Industries
Research
and
Development Institute
(TUBITAK-SAGE)
Mechanics
and Systems
Engineering
Research
Group
(MSMG)
PK16,
Mamak
06261,
Ankara,
Turkey
Abstract
In
this
paper a simple optimal externalconfiguration design method
is
proposed that
can be
used in conceptual and preliminary design stages of
an
unguided missile development project. Cost andconstraint functions
are
derived
from
the
results
of
linear
time-invariant
aeroballistic
theory
(constant
roll rate
and
forward
speed, de-coupled
axial
and
transverse dynamics); therefore
different
phases
of
flight
are examined separately. Curve-fitting is usedto reduce number of
trial
cases and hence workrequired to obtain aerodynamic and inertial data.Optimal configurationsaredeterminedbyusinga
modified
steepest
descent algorithm. A case study ispresented in which external configuration of anunguided light assault missileisoptimizedfor
free
flight
at low
subsonic speed. Three cost
functions
related
to
stability, range
and
warhead performancerespectively and two constraint
functions
related tostabilityareconsideredin thecase study.
Nomenclature
Drag
force coefficient.
Roll damping moment stability
,
c.
c
m
derivative.Roll moment due to fin cant stabilityderivative.Static moment stability derivative.Transverse damping moment stabilityderivative.Transverse damping moment stabilityderivative.Magnus moment stability derivative.Static
force
stability derivative.
*
Coordinator. Member
AIAA.
t
Research Engineer, Flight Mechanics Section.Copyright©1997by theAmerican InstituteofAeronauticsandAstronautics, Inc.Allrights reserved.
700
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 
Copyright©1997,AmericanInstitute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc.
d
/.(*)
*,(*)
m
Pdyn
S
V
a
Gradientvectorof
F(x).
Cost
function.
Modified
cost
function.
Inequality
constraint
function.
Equality
constraint
function.
Hessian matrix
of
F(X)
.
Axialmoment of
inertia.
Transverse
moment
of
inertia.
Non-dimensional
axial
radiusof
gyration.
Non-dimensional transverse radius
ofgyration.
Totalmass.Warheadmass.
Magnus instability
roll
rate
limit.
Yaw-pitch-roll resonance roll
rate.
Dynamicstability
factor.
Static stability
factor.
Reference
area,
;r/l
2
/4.
Speed
of
missile.Vector of
scaled
variable geometricalparameters.
Lower
limit
of
x .
Upper
limit of
x .
Adaptive
step
size
of
iterations.
A
:
Reference
length, rocket motor
diameter.
p^
:
Free stream density.
H,
v
:
Penaltyconstants.
f
:
Transverse damping
factor.
Introduction
The main objectives in
external
configuration
design of
unguided
missilesare to obtain adequate
stability in all
phases
of
flight,
short
minimum
range,
long
maximum
range, low
dispersion
and
large
payloadmass. In
practice
it is
difficult
to
achieve
these
objectives due to
complicated nature
of
unguidedmissilesas
nonlinear,
time-varying and
random systems. Significant
advanceshavebeen
made in
analysis
and
system
identification
aspects
of
flight
dynamics of
unguided
missiles
since
World
War
II. A
number
of
range, dispersion
andstability
criteria
have been determined byusing
analytical,
numerical andexperimentaltechniques. On the other
hand,
very
few
studies havebeen
published
on
external
configuration
design of unguided
missiles
1
.
The
almost
untouched synthesis problem is
challenging
due to
three
reasons:
Firstly,
design
criteria
are
functions
ofaerodynamicand inertial
parameters
which are inturn
complicated
functions
of
free
stream
flow
conditions,
missile
geometry and
mass distribution.Secondly,design
criteria
are
often
701
American
Institute
of
Aeronautics
and
Astronautics
 
Copyright© 1997, American Institute
of
Aeronautics
and
Astronautics, Inc.
contradictory. Thirdly, design
criteria
are
different
for
different
flight
phases
of a
given
type of
unguided
missile.
(Naturally,
design
criteria
are
different
for
different
typesof
unguided
missiles.
Artillery
shell,artillery
missiles,
high
kinetic
energy
projectiles,light
assault missiles, anti-tankmissiles,
soundingrockets and re-entry vehicles all
have
to be optimized
with
different
cost
and
constraint
functions.)
Nature
of the problemwillbe
discussed
by a
simple
example.
Consider
the unguided
artillery
missile
configuration with
cruciform
tail
fins
presented
in Figure
1:
Warhead
Rocket
Motor
Figure 1.
Unguidedartillery
missile
configuration.
c
and
s
arechordand span of
tail
fins
respectivelywhile/ denotes length of
mid-section
case.These are the geometrical parameters that are
easiest
to
modify
once
rocket
motor
and warhead
properties
are fixed. If
N
different
values
of
each
of
these
parameters
are
considered,
then total
number
of
candidate
configurations to be
examined becomes
N*.
Change of a
single
geometric parameter changes
all
aerodynamic
and
inertialdata.
Flight
speed
of an
unguided
artillery
missile
varies
significantly
duringflight
(subsonic, transonic,
supersonic). If
M
different
flight
speeds
are
considered,
thenaerodynamic
data
has to be
determined
MX
N
3
times.Separate
flight
dynamics analysisof all of
theseconfigurations
is
necessary
which is
difficult
and
costly. Moreover,
such
an analysis gives
information
about
configurations
with
the
selected
discrete values
of
(/, c,
s)only.
Consider
anexternal
configuration
design
analysis
where only
s
is changed. As
s
isincreased
m,
I
a
,
,
C,
r
,
C
ls
and
C
D
all
increase.
Anincreasein
s
has
both
good
and bad
results
in terms of range, dispersion and stability
performance. Good
results
are
increase
of
static
anddamping
dynamic
stability,
and
decrease
of
dispersion
due to
thrust misalignment.
Bad
results
are
decrease
of
range
and
increase
of
dispersion
dueto wind.
Increase
of
s
can
have good
or badresults
in
terms
of
Magnus
dynamic
stability since
I
a
,
I
t
,
C
m<i
and
C
m
all
increase. Increase
of
s
canhave
goodor badresultsin
terms
of thelikelihoodof
yaw-
pitch-roll
resonance since
I
a
,
I
t
,
C
m
^
, C,
and
C
lg
all increase.
One must
also
note
thatcost andconstraint
functions are
different
for
boost
and
coast
phases
offlight of an
unguided artillery
missile.
(As an
example,
most
of the
dispersion
takes place duringboost phase.
Hence,
dispersion
criteria
may not be
702
American
Institute
of
Aeronautics
and Astronautics
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...