Journal of Discrete Mathematical Sciences and

Cryptography

ISSN: 0972-0529 (Print) 2169-0065 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tdmc20

Analysis of autopilot system, integrated with

modelling and comparison of different controllers
with the system

Bharat Singh, Shabana Urooj & Sudhakar Singh

To cite this article: Bharat Singh, Shabana Urooj & Sudhakar Singh (2020): Analysis of autopilot
system, integrated with modelling and comparison of different controllers with the system, Journal
of Discrete Mathematical Sciences and Cryptography, DOI: 10.1080/09720529.2020.1718282

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/09720529.2020.1718282

Published online: 16 Apr 2020.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 4

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tdmc20
Journal of Discrete Mathematical Sciences & Cryptography
ISSN 0972-0529 (Print), ISSN 2169-0065 (Online)
DOI : 10.1080/09720529.2020.1718282

Analysis of autopilot system, integrated with modelling and

comparison of different controllers with the system

Bharat Singh *
Department of Electrical Engineering
Bharati Vidyapeeth’s College of Engineering
Paschim Vihar
New Delhi 110063
India

Shabana Urooj †
College of Engineering
Princess Nourah Bint Abdulrahman University
PO Box 84428
Riyadh
Saudi Arabia

Sudhakar Singh §
Department of Biomedical Engineering
Lovely Professional University
Jalandhar 144411
Punjab
India

Abstract
In this paper, we study an airplane for incorporating Auto Pilot setting in it. The basic
approach includes controlling the pitch angle by controlling the angle of deflections that
occur at the elevator of an airplane. For the, different controlling techniques have been
used. These include, integrating the system with a PID Controller, Fuzzy Controller, Fuzzy
plus PID Controller and a Robust Controller. It is observed that steady-state error is quite
significant in the system without any control mechanism; therefore, different automatic
controlling methods have been integrated with the system. The results of simulated systems
reduce the steady-state error with the use of different controllers. We observe the results of

*E-mail: singh.bharat10@gmail.com (Corresponding Author)

†
E-mail: shabanabilal@gmail.com
§
E-mail: sudhakarsingh86@gmail.com

©
2 B. SINGH, S. UROOJ AND S. SINGH

the different controllers to compare the overshoot and rise-time parameters. Therefore, we
can achieve an Auto Pilot system with optimum efficiency and robust mechanism.

Subject Classification: Adavanced Control System

Keywords: Flight Dynamic, PID Controller, Fuzzy Controller, Fuzzy plus PID Controller, Robust
Controller

1. Introduction
An airplane can carry out movements in the three dimensions. These
are roll, pitch and yaw as shown in fig 1. These three are used for flight
control. For providing control; roll motion is controlled by ailerons, the
pitch motion is regulated by elevator and the yaw motion is decided by
rudder control [1].
The Forces which affect the flight are thrust, weight, drag and lift.
For ease in control operation, we assume the aircraft to be moving with
a steady motion. These results the thrust and drag to be negligible while
the lift and weight will be in equilibrium. Thus, the Forces acting on
aircraft will be negligible and allow ease in control operation [1], [2]. In
the proposed system, the input parameter is the angle of deflection and
the pitch angle is defined as output parameter. With any change in the
input, the output also changes and thereby, we can achieve pitch control
action [3]. For control, four different types of controllers have been
used. Initially the autopilot system is mathematically derived as transfer
function. Different controllers are implemented to achieve the optimum
result. A basic PID Controller is used wherein there are three input errors

Figure 1
Axes of Autopilot System [2]
ANALYSIS OF AUTOPILOT SYSTEM 3

i.e. proportion, integral and differential aspect. The integral aspect lowers
the errors and ameliorates the performance of the system statically,
while the differential and proportion aspect ameliorate the performance
dynamically. A fuzzy controller is also designed to reduce the steady-
state errors. Then, a controller is designed that is the combination of both
PID and Fuzzy. Lastly, a robust control method is developed by using
H∞ algorithm which helps in dealing with uncertainties that ultimately
provides robust performance and stability.

2. System Study
In this system, pitch angle (θ) of aircraft is varied with the changes
provided in the angle of deflection (d) of the elevator. The axes of aircraft
are shown in fig 1, where axes are defined with respect to angle of attack
(a). Mathematically, for mobility purpose, there exist a group of six
equations that are differentially coupled and are non-linear. These are a
set of extremely intricate equations which require to be decoupled and
represented in a single dimension [4]. Under certain suppositions, lateral
and longitudinal equations are derived. The assumption is considered as
the aircraft to be at sustained velocity and altitude [5]. Thereby, the drag
and thrust get cancelled, and balancing will be done by the weight and
lift [6]. Mathematical expression showing this relationship is shown in (1).
α = µ Ωσ [−(CL + CD )α + (1/ µ − CL )q - (CW sin γ e )θ + CL ]
µΩ
q
= {[CM − η (CL + CD )]α + [CM + σ CM (1 − µCL )] q + (ηCW sin γ e )δ e } (1)
2iyy
θ = Ω

Here, q is Pitch Rate, a is angle of attack; de is deflection angle of

elevator; pitch angle is defined by q, CD is drag coefficient, lift coefficient is
represented by CL, CW is weight coefficient, CM is pitch moment coefficient
and ge is path angle of light.
The variables in these equations can be accessed by using parameter
estimation method [7]. With reference to [1], we have taken some real-time
values from a boeing commercial aircraft [4]. By entering these numerical
values in equations denoted by (1), following equation (2) is derived.
α =− 0.313α + 56.7 q + 0.232δ e
− 0.0139α − 0.426q + 0.0203δ e
q = (2)

θ = 56.7 q
4 B. SINGH, S. UROOJ AND S. SINGH

Taking Laplace Transform of equation (2); the transform is represented

as (3):
s α ( s) =
− 0.313α (s) + 56.7 q(s) + 0.232δ e (s)
− 0.0139α (s) − 0.426q(s) + 0.0203δ e (s)
s q(s) = (3)
s θ (s) = 56.7 q(s)

The equation (3) is can be solved and represented it in output(s)/

input(s) format, it can be represented as (4):
θ ( s) 1.151s + 0.1774
= 3 (4)
δ e ( s) s + 0.739s2 + 0.921s

As equation (2) is in state-variable form, it can be converted into

state-space format, which results in (5):
α   −0.313 56.7 0 α   0.232 
     
q = −0.0139 −0.426 0   q  + 0.0203  δ e  (5)
θ   0 56.7 0  θ   0 
  

Since, the pitch angle is considered as output variable, therefore, the

equation showing the output value can be represented as (6)
α 
 
=y  0 0 1   q  +  0  δ e  (6)
θ 
 

3. Control Strategy
Control strategy is implemented here to minimize the steady-state
errors and to improve the performance of the system, different controllers
are designed. The Aim of controller is to achieve an ideal value of aitch
angle (θ) by controlling the input angle of deflection of elevator. In this
work, four different types of control techniques have been discussed i.e.
PID Controller, Fuzzy Controller, PID plus Fuzzy Controller, Robust
Controller

3.1 PID Controller

Herein two different control approaches of control have been adopted
namely: (i) Manual Tuning (Hit and Trial Method using PID tuner)
(ii) Ziegler-Nichols Method [8].
ANALYSIS OF AUTOPILOT SYSTEM 5

Figure 2
Simulation of plant using PID Controller with step input

Firstly, we deal with Manual Tuning (Hit & Trial Method). This is the
most commonly used and a conventional control method. Here the plant
denotes the aircraft system and to represent that the transfer function
is derived as stated in equation (4). For PID control action, the three
constants are tuned i.e. proportional constant (Kc), integral constant (Ki)
and derivative constant (Kd). Tuning can also be done through a graphic
user interface, PID Tuner [9].
The other technique is the Ziegler-Nichols method. This method is
derived from neural heuristic principle. First the polarity of proportional
gain is checked whether it is positive or negative. So, the step signal at
input is gradually increased; if output starts increasing, then gain will be
considered as positive value else gain will be negative [10]. The Simulink
model developed for this approach is shown in fig.2.
Secondly, proportional gain Kp is varied until output response
produces periodic oscillation at the output response and Ki & Kd are made
zero always. The gain at which periodic oscillation appears is called as
critical gain (Kg) and the time period of oscillation is called critical time
period (Tg). From system response for step input and then using above
procedure, the values of Kg and Tg that comes out to be 500 and 0.6
respectively. From Ziegler-Nichols Tuning Rule [5] integral gain Ki and
Kd can also be evaluated for PID controller. Using the Ziegler-Nichols
conversion, the gains Ki and Kd are calculated. These values are as follow:
Kp = 300, Ki = 1000, Kd = 62.5. These values are used for the PID tuning and
as a result we get a response output (as shown in fig 5), which is controlled
and stable.
6 B. SINGH, S. UROOJ AND S. SINGH

Figure 3
Simulation of Plant using Fuzzy Logic Controller with step input

3.2 Fuzzy Logic Controller

Fuzzy logic method, initially introduced by Lotfi A. Zadeh, is a control
method to deal with vagueness present in the system. The logic offers
soft computing concept with words and design a method for imprecision
and information granularity of the model [9]. The Fuzzy sets represent
fuzzy logic to design the vagueness related with model, inaccuracy and
absence of mathematical model of a plant or a system. The basis of the
fuzzy theory lies in making the membership function, where membership
function explains the fuzziness present in a fuzzy set regardless the
elements in the set. It lies from a range 0.0 to 1.0 [11]. Thereby, fuzzy logic
is different than Boolean logic, wherein apart from considering 1 and 0,
all the values between 1 and 0 are also considered. In this work, firstly a
fuzzy logic is developed using fuzzy logic designer. Herein, two inputs
are taken namely, error and the change in error with respect to time. Six
membership functions are used in designing of the input, namely; zero
error, negative small error, negative medium error, negative big error,
positive small error, positive medium error and positive big error. Output
of the logic is the Pitch Angle (θ). The rule base includes a set of forty-nine
rules. A model has been designed for the control purpose in which the
developed fuzzy logic is integrated, and the step response is plotted in
fig 5.

3.3 Fuzzy based PID Controller

Herein, a fuzzy controller is integrated with PID control parameters.
A set of two inputs are taken, error e(t) and change in error with respect to
time de(t)/dt. There are three outputs variables which are PID controller’s
parameter; Kpf, Kif and Kdf. For aggregation, Min-max method is used and
for defuzzification, centroid method is used. Kpf, Kif and Kdf. are used for
determining the optimized values of Kp, Ki and Kd. With reference to [12],
ANALYSIS OF AUTOPILOT SYSTEM 7

Figure 4
Internal representation of Subsystem

a self-tuning fuzzy based PID controller is modelled, shown in fig 4,

which includes the complete model and the self-tuning fuzzy based PID
subsystem.
The fuzzy logic system sends signals, depending on the variations
between the output and desired signals, which tune the parameters Kp, Ki
and Kd. The response of the controller is given below in fig 5.

3.4 Robust Controller

In control scheme, to deal with uncertainty of the system in an
explicit manner, a controller is designed using the robust control. Control
method is developed by robust programming which helps in dealing with
uncertainties that ultimately provides robust performance and stability.
Contrary to a dynamic approach, the robust control is based on static
principles, wherein the actual variables are not known, however they are
within bounded limits [13]. A controller is designed to work on a defined
set of parameters, but if the controller can perform with the same efficacy
for a set of unfamiliar parameters, then the controller is said to be robust
[13]. For a control system to be robust; it should be stable over a range of
parameter variations, it should have low sensitivities and its performance
should meet the specifications if there is an occurrence wherein there
is change in system parameters. To overcome such type of difficulties,
robust control method i.e. H∞ controller is used [14]. In this work, a robust
programming code has been developed which provides robust control of
the plant which is represented by (4). For the purpose of studying response
primarily and comparison with other models, the system response for
step input is studied and shown in fig. 5. With reference to [15] further
optimization can also be integrated.
8 B. SINGH, S. UROOJ AND S. SINGH

Figure 5
Comparison of various controllers

3. Analysis of Result
Comparing the result of the four controller types that we have studied
in our work, it is found that the PID controller gives the most undesirable
result with very high Peak Overshoot and Rise Time. Out of Fuzzy and
Fuzzy plus PID controllers, the latter furnishes better results with a Rise
time and Peak overshoot of 0.265 and 1.16 respectively. However, the
Robust control is best control technique for the system out of all four and
furnished the most desirable performance parameters. The following table
1 shows the performance parameters of all the control techniques used.

Table 1
Comparison Performance Parameters

Type of Controllers
Performance parameters Fuzzy
PID Fuzzy Robust
Plus PID
Rise Time (in sec.) 0.324 0.3062 0.265 0.161
Settling Time (in sec.) 3.01 0.434 2.056 0.1305
Peak Overshoot (in %) 13.3 2.12 1.16 0.33
Steady-state Error 0.000916 0.001 0.006 0.0002
ANALYSIS OF AUTOPILOT SYSTEM 9

4. Conclusion
The intent of this paper is to find solutions for problems in aviation
sector such as pitch angle control in an aircraft. The plant has been designed
using real-time data and accordingly a system is delineated. Four types
of control techniques have been incorporated namely: PID control, fuzzy
logic-based controller, fuzzy plus PID control algorithm and robust control
technique. Their performance parameters are studied for disturbances;
these observations make us conclude that robust control technique is the
best as it furnishes minimum settling time, rise time and peak overshoot
and finally steady-state error is also minimum. This provides robust pitch
angle control for an aircraft. In future parameter estimation can also be
used for other aircrafts to provide better control objective.

5. Acknowledgment
This research is funded by the Deanship of Scientific Research at
Princess Nourah Bint Abdulrahman University through the Fast-track
Research Funding Program.

References

[1] A. Elsayed, A. Hafez, A. N. Ouda, H. E. H. Ahmed, H.M. Abd-Elkad-

er, Design of Longitudinal Motion Controller of a Small Unmanned
Aerial Vehicle, Intelligent Systems and Applications, vol. 10, pp. 37-47,
(2015)
[2] J. H. Blakelock “Automatic Control of Aircraft and Missiles”, 1991, A
Wiley-Interscience Publication, Second Edition
[3] Zulfatman and M. F. Rahmat, Application of Self-tuning Fuzzy PID
Controller on Industrial Hydraulic Actuator Using System Identifi-
cation Approach”, 2 June 2009, International Journal on Smart Sensing
and Intelligent System, 2, (2009)
[4] Yoonsoo Kim, Byoung Soo Kim, Pitch Autopilot Design for Agile
Missiles with Uncertain Aerodynamic Coefficients, Aerospace and
Electronic Systems IEEE Transactions, vol. 49, no. 2, pp. 907-914, (2013)
[5] C. Lee, K. Kim and M. Tahk, Longitudinal autopilot design for agile
turn using mixed H2 / H∞ control, 11th International Conference on
Control, Automation and Systems, pp. 294-298., (2011)
10 B. SINGH, S. UROOJ AND S. SINGH

[6] M. A. Usta, O. Akyazi, A.S. Akpinar, Aircraft roll control system us-
ing LQR and fuzzy logic controller Aircraft Roll Control System Us-
ing LQR and Fuzzy Logic Controller, Int. Symp. Innov. Intell. Syst.
Appl., pp. 223-227, (2011)
[7] Bharat Singh and Shabana Urooj “Adaptive Parameter Estimation
Based Drug Delivery System for Blood Pressure Regulation” 6th In-
ternational Conference on Frontiers of Intelligent Computing: Theory and
Applications (FICTA). (2018)
[8] Richard Y. Chiang and Michael G.Simonov,“MATLAB, Computa-
tion, Visualization, Programming User’s Guide Robust Control Tool-
box Version 2”.
[9] Yun-Tien Chang and Chih-Peng, Huang Design of fuzzy PID con-
trollers using modified triangular membership functions, 2008, Infor-
mation Sciences
[10] Shabana Urooj, Bharat Singh, Fractional-Order PID Control for Post-
operative Mean Arterial Blood Pressure Control Scheme, Procedia
Computer Science 152C pp. 267-273, (2019)
[11] Stonier R.J. and Young N., Co-evolutionary learning and hierarchical
fuzzy control for the inverted pendulum, The Congress on Evolution-
ary Computation, volume 1, Page 467-473, (2003).
[12] Han-Xiong Li, Lei Zhang, Kai-Yuan Cai and Guanrong Chen, “An
improved robust fuzzy-PID controller with optimal fuzzy reason-
ing,” IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part B
(Cybernetics), vol. 35, no. 6, pp. 1283-1294, Dec, (2005).
[13] D.-W. GU, P. Hr. Petkov and M. M. Konstantino, Robust Control De-
sign with MATLAB, Proceedings, Springer Netherlands, (2007)
[14] B. Kaji, G. Chen and H. Shibata, “Designing reduced-order H-infinity
controller via genetic algorithm,” Proceedings of the 41st SICE Annual
Conference. SICE., Osaka, 2002, pp. 3183-3187 vol.5, (2002)
[15] Akaninyene Udo Udom, Everestus Okafor Ossai, Stochastic ap-
proximation results for random variational inequality problem with
monotone operator in Hilbert space and its application to optimal
control. Journal of Statistics and Management Systems, pages 1-16,
(2019)

Received November, 2019