An Improved Proportional Navigation Guidance Law for Waypoint Navigation of Airships

This article derives an improved proportional navigation guidance law by using the extended gain scheduling law, which can be used in the nonlinear six-degree of freedom (6DOF) model of an airship directly, in which the airship equations of motion based on the Lagrangian approach. Nonlinear simulations for different conditions are performed, including the effect of the wind, and results are discussed. The simulation experiments indicate that, compared with the previous one, the modified guidance law which is used in specific waypoints tracking has better robust and tracking accuracy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic €32.70 /Month

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (France)

eBook EUR 160.49 Price includes VAT (France)

Softcover Book EUR 210.99 Price includes VAT (France)

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Similar content being viewed by others

Look Ahead Steering-Based Path Following Control for an Airship

Chapter © 2023

Adaptive three-dimensional guidance of flying vehicle at fixed point with specified approach direction

Article 05 May 2017

UAV Path Planning Based on Rolling Sine-Cosine Harris Hawks Optimization

Chapter © 2023

References

  1. Khoury G, Gillett J (1999) Airship technology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 73–106, 141–209, 475–504 Google Scholar
  2. Elfes A, Bueno SS, Bergerman M, Ramos JG (1998) A semi-autonomous robotics airship for environmental monitoring missions. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, vol 4, Leuven, Belgium, pp 3449–3455 Google Scholar
  3. Wilson JR (2004) A new era for airships: lighter-than-air craft, long since mothballed by military planners, may be on the verge of major comeback. Aerosp Am 42(5):27–31 Google Scholar
  4. Hygounenc E, Jung I, Soueres R, Lacroix S (2004) The autonomous blimp project of LAAS-CNRS: achievements in flight control and terrain mapping. Int J Robot Res 23(4):473–511 ArticleGoogle Scholar
  5. Kulczycki EA, Joshi SS, Hess RA, Elfes A (2006) Towards controller design for autonomous airship using SLC and LQR methods. AIAA guidance, navigation and control conference and exhibit, Keystone, Colorado, August 21–24 Google Scholar
  6. Schmidt DK (2007) Modeling and near-space station keeping control of a large high-altitude airship. J Guid, Control Dyn 30(2):540–547 ArticleGoogle Scholar
  7. Park CS, Lee H, Tahk MJ, Bang H (2003) Airship control using neural network augmented model inversion. Control Appl 1:558–563 ArticleGoogle Scholar
  8. Shukla US, Mahapatra PR (1990) The proportional navigation dilemma-pure or true? IEEE Trans Aerosp Electron Syst 26(2):382–392 Google Scholar
  9. Lu P (1998) Intercept of nonmoving targets at arbitrary time-varying velocity. J Guid, Control, Dyn 21(1):176–178 Google Scholar
  10. Han S-C, Bang H, Yoo C-S (2009) Proportional navigation-based collision avoidance for UAVs. Int J Control Autom Syst 7(4):553–565 Google Scholar
  11. Azinheira JR, de Paiva EC, Bueno SS (2002) Influence of wind speed on airship dynamics. J Guid, Control Dyn 25(6):1116–1124 Google Scholar
  12. Jones SP, DeLaurier JD (1983) Aerodynamic estimation techniques for aerostats and airships. J Aircr 20(2):120–126 ArticleGoogle Scholar
  13. Rajani A, Pant RS, Sudhakar K (2010) Dynamic stability analysis of a tethered aerostat. J Aircr 47(5):1531–1538 Google Scholar

Acknowledgments

This work was partially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 11272205).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, 200240, People’s Republic of China Ding Han, Xiao-liang Wang, Ming Zhao & Deng-ping Duan
  1. Ding Han