Mdao

25/11/2014
ONERA-ISAE / Airbus
Presented by: Yann DENIEUL
PhD Student
Integrated Design and

Control of a Flying Wing
Using Nonsmooth
Optimization Techniques
PhD Thesis
Thesis directors: Daniel Alazard & Joël
Bordeneuve (ISAE-ONERA)
Supervisors: Clément Toussaint (ONERA)
Gilles Taquin (Airbus-EIXOG)
25/11/2014
Contents
1. Problem setup
2. Integrated Design and Control
3. Way forward
Page 2
© AIRBUS Americas. All rights reserved. Confidential and proprietary document.

25/11/2014
Contents
1. Problem setup
3. Way forward
Page 3

25/11/2014
Context and problem
Previous PhD thesis: “Handling Qualities resolution for Blended-Wing

Body” (Saucez, 2013) at the Future Projects Office in Airbus, Toulouse and
ISAE-Supaero
Flying Wing configuration very promising
Handling qualities were a major challenge and not deeply studied yet
Initial configuration:
Page 4

25/11/2014
Context and problem
Previous PhD thesis: “Handling Qualities resolution for Blended-Wing

Body” (Saucez, 2013) at the Future Projects Office in Airbus, Toulouse and
ISAE-Supaero
Flying Wing configuration very promising
Handling qualities were a major challenge and not deeply studied yet
Initial configuration:
PhD conclusions:
No major showstopper
concerning Handling qualities
Vertical surfaces needed
Multicontrol surfaces necessary
Active control mandatory
Page 5

April 2nd 2014
Context and problem
• Focus on the need for active stabilisation
Natural Aircraft
Page 6

April 2nd 2014
Context and problem
• Focus on the need for active stabilisation
Control
laws
Natural Aircraft Augmented Aircraft
• Consequences of the active stabilization:

High-rate control surfaces
create large secondary power demand
• Cost of instability on A/C design
Page 7

Use Tab 'Insert - Header & Footer' for Presentation Title - Siglum - Reference Month 20XX
How unstable is the flying wing? Longitudinal modes
• Max instability: 1,25 rad/s @ Mlight & low Mach

• Impact on actuators Bandwidth? Optimal actuators sizing?
Page 8

25/11/2014
Contents
1. Problem setup
3. Way forward
Page 9

25/11/2014
Control Problem Setup
• Aircraft Model:
𝛿𝑉
𝛿𝛼
• Longitudinal Model, 4 states 𝑋 =
𝛿𝑞
𝛿𝜃
• 11 Controls
𝛿𝛼
• Measures for control: Y = 𝛿𝑞
𝛿𝜃
Page 10

25/11/2014
Standard form for H2/H∞ control
• Standard form:
Page 11

25/11/2014
• Standard form:
• H2/H∞ control problem:
Page 12

25/11/2014
• Standard form:
• H2/H∞ control problem:
• Weighting function on pitch acceleration:
Page 13

25/11/2014
Controller structure
• Static 11x3 State-feedback
• Linear Control Allocation is performed by the compensator

• Allocation strategy is given by the optimisation
• How to mix Nonlinear Control Allocation (ie including saturations) with structured
controller is an open question for us
Page 14

25/11/2014
Co-design approach
• Co-design:
• Meaningful physical parameters are considered as controller parameters
• Physical parameters are optimised in the controller synthesis
• Example: in (Alazard et al., 2013), a delay accounting for sensor quality is

optimised conjointly with an attitude controller
Page 15

25/11/2014
Co-design approach
• Co-design:
• Meaningful physical parameters are considered as controller parameters
• Physical parameters are optimised in the controller synthesis
• Example: in (Alazard et al., 2013), a delay accounting for sensor quality is

optimised conjointly with an attitude controller
• In litterature:
• Integrated design and control (also known as plant-controller optimization) was
performed using LMI framework (Niewhoener et al., 1995)
• Full-order controllers
• Handling Qualities requirements hardly translated into H∞ constraints
• Adress this problem using nonsmooth optimization tools for structured controllers
Page 16

25/11/2014
Co-design approach
• Parametrized first-order bandwidth:
Page 17

25/11/2014
Co-design approach
• Closed-loop model for synthesis:
Page 18

25/11/2014
Co-design approach
• Closed-loop model for synthesis:
• New optimization problem:
Page 19

25/11/2014
Systune
• Why using Systune?
• Allows for mixed H2/H∞ synthesis and multiobjective optimization.
Page 20

25/11/2014
Systune
• Allows for structured parameters for the controller and physical parameters;
bounds on these variables are easily applicable
Page 21

25/11/2014
Systune
• Allows for structured parameters for the controller and physical parameters;
bounds on these variables are easily applicable
• Directly specifying closed-loop structure and tunable blocks. Single Simulink

model for linear synthesis and nonlinear simulation.
• Variety of constraints: H∞ but also pole placement constraints: more applicable

for Handling Qualities purpose
Page 22

25/11/2014
First results
• Frequency-domain response of
𝑇𝑤→𝑧𝑖𝑛𝑓 (blue) and 𝑊 −1 (yellow)
Page 23

25/11/2014
First results
• Frequency-domain response of
𝑇𝑤→𝑧𝑖𝑛𝑓 (blue) and 𝑊 −1 (yellow)
• Comparison: 𝑇𝑤→𝑢 = 0.6 for LQ 2

minimal energy control
• 𝑇𝑤→𝑢 2 = 1.26 for mixed H2/H∞
control with infinite bandwidth
Page 24

25/11/2014
First results
• Frequency-domain response of Controller:

−1
𝑇𝑤→𝑧𝑖𝑛𝑓 (blue) and 𝑊 (yellow)
• Comparison: 𝑇𝑤→𝑢 = 0.6 for LQ 2

minimal energy control
• 𝑇𝑤→𝑢 2 = 1.26 for mixed H2/H∞
control with infinite bandwidth
Page 25

25/11/2014
Co-design first results
Page 26

25/11/2014
Contents
1. Problem setup
3. Way forward
Page 27

25/11/2014
Way forward
• Control surfaces size parametrization and aero model calculation
2D Sketcher
Page 28
AVL Mesh

25/11/2014
Way forward
• LFT form of the parametrized aerodynamic model
• Co-design on the LFT form for control surfaces sizing
Page 29

25/11/2014
Way forward
• Pole placement constraints
Page 30

25/11/2014
Way forward
• Pole placement constraints
• More physical criterion: mass / energy minimization through actuators mass

models
Page 31

25/11/2014
Thank you for your attention
Questions?
Page 32

25/11/2014
Annexes
Page 33

25/11/2014
Simulink
Page 34

25/11/2014
Context and problem
• Focus on the need for multicontrol
 Internship on multicontrol allocation

 Developement of a control allocation module
Page 35

25/11/2014
Control allocation: Attainable Moments Subset
Page 36

Control allocation for multicontrol surfaces - EIXOG - Ref. PR1316811 - Issue 1Use Tab 'Insert - Header & Footer' for Presentation Title - Siglum - Reference
Direct control allocation
• Calculation of the intersection facet
Page 37

25/11/2014
Page 38

Mdao

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Mdao

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Mdao

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

25/11/2014

Integrated Design and

2. Integrated Design and Control

© AIRBUS Americas. All rights reserved. Confidential and proprietary document.

2. Integrated Design and Control

© AIRBUS Americas. All rights reserved. Confidential and proprietary document.

Context and problem

Previous PhD thesis: “Handling Qualities resolution for Blended-Wing

© AIRBUS Americas. All rights reserved. Confidential and proprietary document.

Context and problem

Previous PhD thesis: “Handling Qualities resolution for Blended-Wing

© AIRBUS Americas. All rights reserved. Confidential and proprietary document.

Context and problem

• Focus on the need for active stabilisation

© AIRBUS Americas. All rights reserved. Confidential and proprietary document.

Context and problem

• Focus on the need for active stabilisation

Natural Aircraft Augmented Aircraft

• Consequences of the active stabilization:

© AIRBUS Americas. All rights reserved. Confidential and proprietary document.

How unstable is the flying wing? Longitudinal modes

• Max instability: 1,25 rad/s @ Mlight & low Mach

© AIRBUS Americas. All rights reserved. Confidential and proprietary document.

2. Integrated Design and Control

© AIRBUS Americas. All rights reserved. Confidential and proprietary document.

Control Problem Setup

© AIRBUS Americas. All rights reserved. Confidential and proprietary document.

Standard form for H2/H∞ control

© AIRBUS Americas. All rights reserved. Confidential and proprietary document.

Standard form for H2/H∞ control

• H2/H∞ control problem:

© AIRBUS Americas. All rights reserved. Confidential and proprietary document.

Standard form for H2/H∞ control

• H2/H∞ control problem:

• Weighting function on pitch acceleration:

© AIRBUS Americas. All rights reserved. Confidential and proprietary document.

• Static 11x3 State-feedback

• Linear Control Allocation is performed by the compensator

© AIRBUS Americas. All rights reserved. Confidential and proprietary document.

• Physical parameters are optimised in the controller synthesis

• Example: in (Alazard et al., 2013), a delay accounting for sensor quality is

© AIRBUS Americas. All rights reserved. Confidential and proprietary document.

• Physical parameters are optimised in the controller synthesis

• Example: in (Alazard et al., 2013), a delay accounting for sensor quality is

© AIRBUS Americas. All rights reserved. Confidential and proprietary document.

• Parametrized first-order bandwidth:

© AIRBUS Americas. All rights reserved. Confidential and proprietary document.

• Parametrized first-order bandwidth:

• Closed-loop model for synthesis:

© AIRBUS Americas. All rights reserved. Confidential and proprietary document.

• Parametrized first-order bandwidth:

• Closed-loop model for synthesis:

• New optimization problem:

© AIRBUS Americas. All rights reserved. Confidential and proprietary document.

• Why using Systune?

• Allows for mixed H2/H∞ synthesis and multiobjective optimization.

© AIRBUS Americas. All rights reserved. Confidential and proprietary document.

• Why using Systune?

• Allows for mixed H2/H∞ synthesis and multiobjective optimization.