This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

CANCEL

OK

Welcome to Scribd. Sign in or start your free trial to enjoy unlimited e-books, audiobooks & documents.Find out more

Download

Standard view

Full view

of .

Look up keyword

Like this

Share on social networks

1Activity

×

0 of .

Results for: No results containing your search query

P. 1

APL Basic Principles of Homing Guidance PalumboRatings:

(0)|Views: 176|Likes: 0

Published by Alconfi

See more

See less

https://www.scribd.com/doc/63618380/APL-Basic-Principles-of-Homing-Guidance-Palumbo

08/31/2011

text

original

JOHNS HOPKINS APL TECHNICAL DIGEST, VOLUME 29, NUMBER 1 (2010)

25

INTRODUCTION

The key objective o this article is to provide a broadconceptual oundation with respect to homing guidancebut with sufcient depth to adequately support the arti-cles that ollow. During guidance analysis, it is typical toassume that the missile is on a near-collision course withthe target. The implications o this and other assump-tions are discussed in the frst section,

Handover Analysis

.The next section,

Engagement Kinematics

, establishesa geometric oundation or analysis that is used in thesubsequent sections o this and the other guidance-related articles in this issue. In particular, a line-o-sight (LOS) coordinate rame is introduced upon whichthe kinematic equations o motion are developed; thiscoordinate rame supports the subsequent derivation o

his article provides a conceptual oundation with respect to homing guid-ance upon which the next several articles are anchored. To this end, a basic geometric and notational ramework is frst established. Then, the well-known and oten-used proportional navigation guidance concept is developed. Themechanization o proportional navigation in guided missiles depends on several actors,including the types o inertial and target sensors available on board the missile. Withinthis context, the line-o-sight reconstruction process (the collection and orchestration o the inertial and target sensor measurements necessary to support homing guidance) isdiscussed. Also, guided missiles typically have no direct control over longitudinal accel-eration, and they maneuver in the direction specifed by the guidance law by producing acceleration normal to the missile body. Thereore, we discuss a guidance command preservation technique that addresses this lack o control. The key challenges associ-ated with designing eective homing guidance systems are discussed, ollowed by acursory discussion o midcourse guidance or completeness’ sake.

Basic Principles of Homing Guidance

Neil F. Palumbo, Ross A. Blauwkamp,and Justin M. Lloyd

JOHNS HOPKINS APL TECHNICAL DIGEST, VOLUME 29, NUMBER 1 (2010)

26

N. F. PALUMBO, R. A. BLAUWKAMP,

and

J. M. LLOYD

proportional navigation (PN) guidance. Over the past50 years, PN has proven both reliable and robust, therebycontributing to its continued use. The

Development of PN Guidance Law

section presents the derivation o anddiscusses this popular and much-used technique. Thesubsequent section,

Mechanization of PN

, discusses howPN may be implemented in a homing missile. Key driv-ers here are the type o sensor that is used to detect andtrack the target, how the sensor is mounted to the mis-sile, and how the LOS (rate) measurement is developed.The next section,

Radome/Irdome Design Requirements

,briey discusses the unctional requirements imposedon modern missile radomes. This is ollowed by anexpanded section on

Guidance System Design Challenges

.Here, the contributors to the degradation o guidancesystem perormance (radome error and others) are dis-cussed. Then,

Guidance Command Preservation

presentsa technique or commanding acceleration commandsperpendicular to the missile body that will eectivelymaneuver the missile in the desired guidance direction.Although this article is mainly concerned with termi-nal homing concepts, the

Midcourse Guidance

sectionbriey discusses issues and requirements associated withthe midcourse phase o ight.

Handover Analysis

When terminal guidance concepts are being devel-oped or related systems analysis is being perormed, ittypically is assumed that the missile interceptor is on acollision course (or nearly so) with the target. In reality,this is not usually the case. For example, there can besignifcant uncertainty in target localization, particu-larly early in the engagement process, that precludes sat-isaction o a collision course condition prior to terminalhoming. Moreover, the unpredictable nature o uturetarget maneuvers (e.g., target booster staging events,energy management steering, coning o a ballistic mis-sile reentry vehicle, or the weaving or spiraling maneu-vers o an anti-ship cruise missile) can complicate thedevelopment o targeting, launch, and/or (midcourse)guidance solutions that guarantee collision course con-ditions beore initiation o terminal homing. In addition,cumulative errors are associated with missile navigationand the eects o unmodeled missile dynamics that alladd together to complicate satisaction o a collisioncourse condition. For simplicity, all o these errors can becollectively regarded as uncertainties in the location o the target with respect to the missile interceptor. Thus,i the interceptor is launched (and subsequently guidedduring midcourse) on the basis o estimated (predicted)uture target position, then, at the time o acquisitionby the onboard seeker, the actual target position will bedisplaced rom its predicted position. Figure 1 notion-ally illustrates this condition, where_

r

is the LOS vectorbetween the missile and the predicted target location;_

1

r

LOS

=_

r

/

_

r

is the unit vector along the LOS;_

v

T

and_

v

M

are the velocity vectors o the target and missile,respectively;_

v

R

=_

v

T

–_

v

M

is the relative velocity vector;and_

e

is the displacement error between predicted andtrue target position.As discussed, ideally, the relative velocity vector isalong the LOS to the true uture target position (at thetime o intercept). However, Fig. 1 depicts a more real-istic condition where the relative velocity is along theLOS to the estimated uture target position in space. Forthis case, the interceptor will miss the target unless itapplies corrective maneuvers.Figure 1 illustrates that the displacement error,_

e

, canbe decomposed into two components: one along (_

e

)and one perpendicular (_

e

⊥

) to the predicted targetLOS. This decomposition is expressed in Eq. 1:

=

e ee e

( )( ) .

1 11 1

r rr r

LOS LOSLOS LOS

:# #

==

(1)In this equation,_

x

•

_

y

represents the dot (scalar) productbetween the two vectors_

x

and_

y

, and_

x

3

_

y

representsthe cross (vector) product between the two vectors. Notethat, because the relative velocity vector,_

v

, is along theLOS to the predicted target location, the error_

e

willalter the time o intercept but does not contribute to thefnal miss distance. Consequently, the miss distance thatmust be removed by the interceptor ater transition toterminal homing is contained in_

e

⊥

(i.e., target uncer-tainty normal to the LOS).Homing missile guidance strategies (guidance laws)dictate the manner in which the missile will guide tointercept, or rendezvous with, the target. The eedbacknature o homing guidance allows the guided mis-sile (or, more generally, “the pursuer”) to tolerate some

Actual targetpositionFixed targetframePredictedtargetpositionTargetvelocityMissileMissile velocity

v

M

1

y

1

y

–

1

z

–

1

z

1

x

1

x

v

R

v

T

e

ere

Line ofsight

Figure 1.

To assist in simplifying the analysis of handover to ter-minal homing, all of the contributing navigation and engagementmodeling errors are collectively regarded as uncertainties to thelocation of the target with respect to the missile at handover.

JOHNS HOPKINS APL TECHNICAL DIGEST, VOLUME 29, NUMBER 1 (2010)

27

BASIC PRINCIPLES OF HOMING GUIDANCE

level o (sensor) measurement uncertainties, errors inthe assumptions used to model the engagement (e.g.,unanticipated target maneuver), and errors in modelingmissile capability (e.g., deviation o actual missile speedo response to guidance commands rom the designassumptions). Nevertheless, the selection o a guidancestrategy and its subsequent mechanization are cru-cial design actors that can have substantial impact onguided missile perormance. Key drivers to guidance lawdesign include the type o targeting sensor to be used(passive IR, active or semi-active RF, etc.), accuracy o the targeting and inertial measurement unit (IMU) sen-sors, missile maneuverability, and, fnally yet important,the types o targets to be engaged and their associatedmaneuverability levels. We will begin by developing abasic model o the engagement kinematics. This willlay the oundation upon which PN, one o the oldestand most common homing missile guidance strategies,is introduced.

Engagement Kinematics: The Line-of-SightCoordinate System

The development presented here ollows the onegiven in Re. 1. In the sequel, the ollowing notation isused:

X

=

n

3

m

(read

n

-by-

m

) matrix o scalar elements

x

i

,

j

,

i

= 1 …

n

,

j

= 1 …

m

;_

x

=

n

3

1 vector o scalar ele-ments

x

i

,

i

= 1 …

n

;

_

x

=

x

iin

21=

/

= Euclidean vectornorm o _

x

;_

1

x

=_

x

/

_

x

=

n

3

1 unit vector (e.g.,

_

1

x

= 1)in the direction o _

x

;

/

t

= time derivative with respectto a fxed (inertial) coordinate system; and

d

/

dt

= timederivative with respect to a rotating coordinate system.Consider the engagement geometry shown in Fig. 2,where_

r

M

and_

r

T

are the position vectors o the missileinterceptor and target with respect to a fxed coordinaterame o reerence (represented by the triad {_

1

x

,_

1

y

,_

1

z

}).Consequently, we defne the relative position vector o the target with respect to the missile as shown in Eq. 2: _

r

=_

r

T

–_

r

M

. (2)The relative position vector can be written as_

r

=

R

_

1

r

,where

R

=

_

r

is the target–missile range, and_

1

r

is theunit vector directed along_

r

(we reer to_

1

r

as the LOSunit vector). Dierentiating the relative position vector,_

r

=

R

_

1

r

, with respect to the fxed coordinate system, weobtain the ollowing expression or relative velocity_

v

:

v r

.

tR Rt

1 1

r r

/

= +

o

(3)From Eq. 3, one can see that the rate o change o therelative position vector (i.e., relative velocity) comprisestwo components: (

i

) a change in_

r

as a result o a changein length (.

R

) and (

ii

) a change in direction (a rotation)as a result o the rate o change o the LOS unit vector.

Fixed coordinateframeLOS coordinateframeMissileTarget

T M

1

=

1

r

1

n

LOS

rr

t t

=

1

n

=

rr1

r

rr1

y

1

x

–

1

z

r

Figure 2.

In the LOS coordinate frame, the LOS rate is perpen-dicular to the LOS direction and rotation of the LOS takes placeabout the–

1

.

We defne this change in direction by the vector_

n

asgiven in Eq. 4:

n

.

t

1

r

/

(4)Consequently, a second unit vector,_

1

n

, is defned tobe in the direction o _

n

as shown:

nn

//.

tt

111

nrr

= =

(5)Finally, to complete the defnition o the (right-handed) LOS coordinate system, a third unit vector,_

1

,is defned as the cross product o the frst two: _

1

=_

1

r

3

_

1

n

. (6)In general, the angular velocity o the LOS coordi-nate system with respect to an inertial reerence rame isgiven by

1 1 1

rrnn

= + + ,

oo o o

where the compo-nents o the angular velocity are given in Eq. 7:

.

111

rn

rn

:::

===

oooooo

(7)Thus, upon reexamination o Eq. 4, we note that theLOS rate,_

n

, can be expressed as shown in Eq. 8:

n

.

dtd

1 1

r r

#

= +

o

(8)On the right-hand side o Eq. 8, the expression

d

_

1

r

/

dt

represents the time derivative o the LOS unit vectorwith respect to a rotating coordinate rame, and

o

is

Journal of Aerospace Technology and Management 01 v3

Journal of Aerospace Technology and Management 02v 01

VO-209

VO-210

VO-211

VO-212

VO-213

Dynamic Failure Behavior of Naval Structural Steels

APL Guidance Filter Fundamentals Palumbo

OtoMelaratecnologie

Submarine Power and Propulsion BMT Defence 2008

Oto Melara Strales

Fundamentals Valves

OW2003 Platform Inspection

OW2002_Pressurized Rescue Module

Marotta IR Missile Seeker Cooling

- Read and print without ads
- Download to keep your version
- Edit, email or read offline

APL Guidance Filter Fundamentals Palumbo

Palumbo Homing

performance of a radome

Class 39 - 41 Introduction to Missile Dynamics

Tactical Missile Autopilot Design

Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

CANCEL

OK

You've been reading!

NO, THANKS

OK

scribd