The Fuzzy Logic Control of Aircraft

by

HASSAN FARAH, M.%.

A thesis submitted to
the Faculty o f Graduate Studies and Research
in partial fulfilment of
the requirement for the degm of
Master of Engineering, Aerospace

Department of Mechanical and

Aerospace Engineering
Ottawa-Carleton Institute
for Mechanical and Aeros~aceEngineering

Carleton University

Ottawa, Ontario

January 24,1999

O 1999, Hassan Farah

 BiMiothque nationale
1+1 National Library
of Canada du Canada
Acquisitions and Acquisitions et
Bibliographic Services services bibliographiques
395 Wellington Street 395. rue Wellington
tawaON K1AON4 OnawaON KIAON4
Canada Canada

The author bas granted a non- L'auteur a accord une licence non
exclusive licence dowing the exclusive pemettant la
National Libmy of Canada to Bibliothque nationale du Canada de
reproduce, loan, distribute or sell reproduire, prter, distribuer ou
copies of this thesis in rnicrofonn, vendre des copies de cette thse sous
paper or electronic formats. la forme de rnicrofiche/nlm, de
reproduction sur papier ou sur format
lectronique.

The author retains ownership ofthe L'auteur conserve la proprit du

copyright in this thesis. Neither the droit d'auteur qui protge cette thse.
thesis nor substantial extracts fkom it Ni la thse ni des extraits substantiels
may be printed or othenvise de celle-ci ne doivent tre imprims
reproduced without the author's ou autrement reproduits sans son
permission. autorisation,
 Abstract
The subject of aircrafi dynamic stability and aircraft control using a f u n y lo@c
controller (FLC) is discussed. The mathematical modeling and equations describing air
vehicle motion under asymmetric ftight are also presented in this work. The solutions of
the equations of motion consisting of side force. rolling moment and yawing moment for
a step change in rudder. elevator and aileron are given. The control system for specific
condition (flight envelope) was designed and the linguistic fzzy mles and appropriate
variables are introduced throu* fLzzy set membership tnctions. A suitable
C-program were lvritten and used for simulation- FinalIy, the cornparison of the
performance of the fkq Iogic controller (FLC) and the linear controller based on linear
regulator (LQR)is presented..
The research dernonstrates that the application of the FLC Ieads to significant
improvement in aircrafl control.
Abstract .........................................................i

Figures Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv

Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "
..
List of Acronyms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vil

...
Aeronauticai Variable Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . wil

Chapterl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
DynamicsofAircraft . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1 htroduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 Literature Review. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.3 Problem Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Chapter2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Aircraft Modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.1 Detemination o f Dominant Stability Coefficients . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.2 Longitudinal Stability Denvatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.3 Longitudinal Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.4 Longitudinal Motion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Chapter 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Stability Derivative of Aircraft . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
3 Laterai Stability Denvatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
3.2 Laterd Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.3 Lateral Motion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

Chapter4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Mathematical Mode1 of -4ircraft . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
4.1 Mathematical Representation of the Dynamics of Aircraft . . . . . . 24
4.2 The Aerodynamic Forces and Moments acting on Aircraft . . . . . . 24
Chapter5 ......................................................35
LQR Control of Aircraft . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
5.1 Solution of the Linear Quadratic Regulator (LQR) . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

Chapter6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Fuuy Logic Control of Aircrafl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
61 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
6.2 Fu- Logic Control Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -41
6.2.1 Fuuy Rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
62 . 2 Operation on Fuzzy Sets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -45
6.2.3 CnspSet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
6.2.4 Fuzzfication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
6.2.5 Degree of Fulfillment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . - -48
6.2.6 Implication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -48
6.2.7 Aggregation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -48
6.2.8 Defuzzification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
6.2.9 Fu- Set . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
6.2.10 Membership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

Chapter7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
Simulation and Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
7.1 Longitudinal Motion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
7.2 Laterd Motion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57

Chapter8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84

Appendix:A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
A .1 Characteristics of Aircraft . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -88
A.2 Aerodynamics and Control Derivatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90

Appendix:B .................................................... 93
F u v y Logic Programmuig For Aircraft Motion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -93
Nurnber Figures Definition Page

Family of Cm=Cumes for Various 8,.................................................................. 60

Variation o f Longitudinal StabiIity Coefficients with Mach Number ....................60
Loss o f rudder effectiveness due to combined variations of ande of attack
and sideslip.. ...................................................................................................... -61
Loss o f aileron effectiveness at increasing angles of attack in the presence
of sideslip for a fi@ter airc& ............................................................................ -61
Subsonic damping derivatives for a \vine-body configuration at M=0.7 ............. -62
Subsonic cross derivatives for a swept wing fighter aircrafl at M=0.7 ..................62
Variation o f cross-coupling denvatives with the angle of attack..........................62
Body system o f axes and related angles.positive directions indicated by arrows ..63
Vertical flight path angle . vertical plane.............................................................. 64
Horizontal flight path ange. horizontal ......................................... ..................... -64

Fuzzy system controller .................................................................................... ..65

Membership hnctions of prernise tems ............................................................. -66
F u v y controiler ............................................................................................. 67
Output membership fiinctions............................................................................ -68
Input membership functions with input values .................................................... -69
Computationai Mechanism of a FLC.................................................................. -70
Consequent membership Nnction ....................................................................... 71
Implied fiiuy set membership fnction o f rule 2.................................................. 71
Consequent membenhip fnction....................................................................... -71
Implied fny set membership function of mle l ................................................. -71
Membership fnctions for input altitude error.................................................... -72
Membership finctions for input velocity error..................................................... 72
Membership fnctions for input heading.............................................................-73
Membership finctions for input sideslip.............................................................. 73
Angle of attack versus time in longitudinal motion with the application of LQR
and f z y loac controller.................................................................................. -74
h _ ~ u l avelocity
r (Q) versus time in longitudinal motion with the application
of LQR and f i i q logic controller...................................................................... -75
Deflection of elevator ( 6, ) versus time in longitudinal motion with the application
of LQR and f q logic conuoller *. ...........**.............*..................*..*......*........ 76
Angle of attack ( a,) versus time in lon@tudinal motion with the application of
LQR and fuzq logic controller........................................................................... 77
Angle of sideslip (P) versus time without controller. with LQR controller
and FLC controller........................................................................... .
.................78

Euler angular rotation in roll time in dynamic Iateral motion wth LQR and
fuay logic controller.. ....................................................................................... -79
Roll angular rates versus time in dynarnic lateral motion with the LQR and ft-
Iogic controller.................................................................................................. -80
Yaw angular velocities versus t h e in dynarnic lateral motion with the LQR and
fuzzy lo@c controller........................................... ............................................. -31
Angular deflection of mdder versus time in dpamic lateral motion with the LQR
and b z y logic controller.................................................................................. -82
.Angular deflection of aileron versus time in dpamic lateral motion with the LQR
and f k z y logic control...................................................................................... .S
Number Tables
Error versus cnsp logic values....................................................................... 47
Error versus fiizzy logic values...................................................................... 50
Error versus fuuy logic control action values................................................ 50
Rule base for throttle membership function setting changes............................ 52
Logic control values for throttle setting membership functions...................... 52
Rule base for pitch angle changes................................................................... 53
Logic control values for pitch angle variation of membership functions.......... 53
Rule bases for roi1 angle and rudder commands.............................................. 54
Characterstics of hypothetical aircraft.......................................................... -88-
. .
Aerodynarnic and cr~stroldenvatives............................................................. 90
Symbol List of Acronyms
rU hificial intelligence
CG Center of gavity
dot Refers to the rate of change with respect to time
FLC FU- logic controI
YB Neoative big
'CM Negative medium
!?S Negative srnail
PS Positive smali
PM Positive medium
PB Positive big
T Refers to a value at trim condition
zero Indicates a vaIue at zero time
ky.z) Illustrates the body axes (mm and cm)

List of Acronyns symbols were ordered as appeared in text

Symbol Acronautical Variable Definition Unit
Wing lift curve dope................................................................ ( e radian)

Horizontal tail lie curve dope.. ................................................ .(per radian)

Vertical tail litt curve dope..................................................... ( e radian)

Wing span............................................................................................. (m)
Wing-root chord.. .................................................................................. (ml
Wing-tip chord...................................................................................... (ml

Ratio of aileron chord to wing chord .......................................................(-1

Ratio of rudder chord to vertical tail chord.............................................. (-)

Ratio of elevator chord to horizontal tail chord....................................... (-1
Wing mean aerodynarnic chord .............................................................. (ml
Dynarnic derivative with respect to roll rate parameter ............................ (-)

Cci / C(pb / 2v), i = L, M, N

Dynamic derivative with respect to pitch rate parameter.. ...................... ..(-)

Dynamic derivative with respect to yaw rate parameter-..........................(-1

Static denvative with respect to angle ofattack....................................... (-1

Sci / d a , i = L,M,N
 Dynamic derivative with respect to a-rate of change parameter.. ..........(-)

Static derivative with respect to angle of sideslip.....................-............... (-)

cci / p,i = L,M,N,y

Dynarnic derivative with respect to p-rate of change parameter.. .............(-1

C.
'Sa Static derivative with respect to aileron deflection................................... (-1

Zci/3a,i = L, N,y

Static denvative with respect to elevator deflection.................................(4

Cci / d G e , i = M,x,z
c - Static derivative with respect to rudder deflection................................... (4
'6r

d c i / d 6 .,i = L,N,y

C,,C,,C, Basic force coefficients with respect to &y,z body axes

-
respectively (aerodynarnic force component) 1 q S ..................-...............6 )
-
Rolling moment coefficient, L / (q Sb) .................................................. (-)
-
Pitching moment coefficient, M l (q S c ) .................................................. (-1
-
Yawing moment coefficient, N 1 (q Sb) ..............-................-................
(-1
Force.-............................ -.................................................................... (n)
Acceleration of gravity....................................................................... (mls')
Altitude................................................................................................. (m)
Moment or product of inertia.......................................................... (km3
Distance between center of horizontal tail pressure tail and of

gravity center of aircraft.. ...................................................................... (m)

Distance between fin aerodynamic center and the center of the

gravity of airplane.................................................................................. (ml

Aerodynarnic rolling moment ..............................................................
Aerodynamic pitching moment, or Mach number................................
Aerodynarnic yawing moment.............................................................
.-
Body angular veloc~ties................................................................ .(rad/sec)
Horizontal taii area, .............................................................................. cm2>

Fin area--.............................................................................................. (m21

Gross wing area.. ................................................................................. (m2)
Thrust.................................................................................................. (-NI
..
Linear velocities.. ........................................................................... -(m/sec)
Velocity.. ............................................................................................ (m/s)
Body-fixed axes system.. ...................................................... -.--(mmor cm)
Earth fixed orthogonal axes with origin at origin of flight and with
. *
Z axis polnting verticaily down................................................. ( c m or mm)
Distance between fin aerodynamic center and body x-axis.. ................... (m)

Dynamic pressure.............................................................................. (dm2)

Angle of attack.. ............ .
................................................ .(deg or radian)
Angle of sideslip.. .............................................................. +.(degor radian)
Aircraft bank angle...............................................................(deg or radian)
Aerodynamic roll angle.................... .....................................
deg or radian)
 .............................................. ( d e or radian)
Difference between a and q.

Euler angular rotation in pitch .............................................. (des or radian)

- .
Euler angular rotation ln roll................................................ -(degor radian)

Euler angular rotation in yaw............................................... (deg or radian)

Density of air..............................................-...................................(Wm3)
Aileron effectiveness............................................................................... (-1

Rudder effectiveness...............................-............................................... (4

Elevator effectiveness.............................................................................. (-1

Venical flight path angle with respect to horizontal plane.. ........(rad or deg)

Horizontal tlight path angle with respect to vertical plane.. .......(rad or deg)

Subscrkts
Superscript refers to rate of change with respect to time
Subscript O refers to zero time value

* Variables were ordered as appeared in text

 Chapter 1
Dynamics of Aircraft
1.1 Introduction
One of the most important factors to investigate dunng the aircraft design process
is the longitudinal-lateral stability of the vehicle. Aircraft which are not designed to such
capabilities could suffer a loss of control in flight. The parameters of longitudinal-lateral
motion are the primary phenomena of motion to consider in the analysis of aircraft
dynamics [l].
A lateral aerodynamic reaction may occur as a result of the pitching manouevre,
while the longitudinal forces and moments may be affected by a tateral motion. This
problem is cornplex and mostly dependent on the geometry of the aircraft; its solution is
based upon the simuitaneous solution of both longitudinal and lateral dynamic equations.
Various configurations are used in many flight applications. Such configurations
generate various aerodynamic forces and moments at high angles of attack due to the
induced flow created by the vortices which are shed fiom the lifting surfaces and the body
configuration. The strength and the location of these vonices depend on the lifting
surfaces, leading-edge shapes and the geometrcal shape, and their locai altitude in relation
to the direction of the velocity vector. These aerodynamic phenomena have become the
focus of theoretical and experimental studies to achieve stability and control in aircraft at
vanous angles of attack.

It may be said that properly controlled vortex interactions enable significant

variations of the overall lift on the air vehicle with or without change of altitude. This
control of vortex interactions can be used as a fom of direct control. It is important that
the calculations of the aerodynamic characteristics at high angles of attack be
accomplished together with the evaluation of the effeas of free vortices which are shed
fiom the wing. The equations goveming these flows must account for the fact that these
vortices are present in the flow field 121.
In the evolution of flows at low angles of attack boundary layers are confined to the
surface with only smail effects on the aerodynamic characteristics. As the angle of attack
increases to moderate and high levels, the separated layers detach fiom the surface and
move into the flow vortex. For symmetric ( +=O and V, =O) configuration at zero sideslip.
the generated vortex structure is also symrnetnc up to a certain angle of attack. At higher
angIes of attack this symmetric vortex structure may be transformed into an asymmetric
( roll. sideslip and mm are typical ) structure on the syrnmetric configuration with zero
sideslip. At still higher angles of attack the cores of the concentrated vortices may burst at
a certain point on the lifiing surface. The symrnetnc vortex structure established on the
elongated wing cm be transfomed into an asyrnmetnc structure as the angle of attack is
increased at subsonic speeds. At subsonic speeds. the angie of attack at which the flow
becomes asymmetnc is relatively hi@ in cornpanson to that at supersonic speeds. For the
symmetric flow ranee, the lifi force increases with the increasing angle of attack while the
lateral forces and moments are negligible. At increasing angles of attack as the flow
becomes asymmetnc but steady. the lie is still increasing, though at a Iower rate. but a
new and very important effect is observed: the appearance of a great side force and
moment. The direction of the side force and the yawing moment may be reversed at
various ansles of attack. The relatively large size and the direction reversal of these lateral
aerodynamic coefficients is a phenornenon that is of importance for the performance of
aircrafi with a long nose section. At higher angles of attack the vortex breakdown occurs
nearer to the wins apex and then the tlow rnay break up into an unsteady turbulent wake.
Thus, we can distinguish the following flow regimes on configurations as a
function of the increasing angle ofattack [3 .4]:
1. very low angles of attack-attached .symmetnc. neady flow; linear lie variation
with angie of attack;
2, low angles of attack-attached, symrnetnc. steady flow with closed separatins
bubbles; sli&t Linear lie variation with angle of attack;
3- moderate and high angles of attack-separated, symmetric, rolled-up vortices in
steady How nonlinear lift variation with angle of attack;
4 hieh angles of attack-separated. asymmetric. rolled-up vortices in steady flow;
non-linear lifi variation with angle of atrack;
5. higher angles of attack-vortex breakdown causing loss of lie and non-steady tlow
conditions;
6. very high angles of attack--separated, non-steady. turbulent wake:. post-stall
aerodynamic characteristics.
Linear aerodynamic theories and numerical rnethods can be used to evaluate the
aerodynamic characteristics of configurations in categories 1 and 2 at low ansles of attack.
and for the calculations of the non-linear aerodynamic characteristics in categories 3 and 4.
The prima? goal of this work was to analyze and present the following:
longitudinal-lateral equations
analysis of aircrafi motion
reaction to penurbations and the effect of their aerodynamic derivatives
design control system based on LQR method for specific flight conditions. Linear
quadratic replator (LQR) method is a modem control time-domain techniques to
design stability control augmentation systems (SAS) and autopilots. This is
accomplished by regulating certain States of the aircraft to zero while obtaining
desirable response characteristics;
design control system based on FLC for an aircraft. Fuuy logic control (FLC)is a
methodolog based on the so-called intelligent control which is defined as a
combination of Control Theory and Artificial Intelligence (AI) [B.
291;
cornparison between the LQR and Fi,C [S, 61.
To solve the non-linear variation of the aircraft motion, one must consider the
longitudinal and lateral motions of the aircraft and solve them simultaneously taking into
account the non-linearties by the equations around an angle of attack where a significant
change occurs. The basic longitudinal stability requires constant iinear mornentum and
constant angular mornentum. On the other hand. dynamic longitudinal stability considers
motion about the pitch axis as a function of time after a perturbation. The pitching
moment due to alpha-dot (coefficient cm.) is created by the aerodynamic interaction
a
between the wings and the horizontal tail [22]. To solve this problem it was necessary to
create a reIevant cornputer prooram to compute the variables of both longitudinal and
lateral motions. The objective of the thesis is to develop and present the fiinv lo@c
control for aircrafi and to compare its performance wth the LQR-
1.2 Literature Review
The main fnction of the flight controi system (FCS) of an aircrafi is to contribute
to its safe and economic operation, such that the intended flight missions can be
accomplished and unexpected events can be handled.
In the early days of flight, safety was the main concern for FCS designers. Pilots needed
significant effon to maintain sorne flight conditions under al1 circumstances. Today. safety
is even more important, because many more people are transponed. higher costs are
involved in establishine safety and the reptation of airlines and aircrafi manufacturers is
paramount. in an increasing competitive market.
The unusually hazardous nature of aircrafi flying is reflected in the total accident
rates. With rninor fluctuations fiom year to year. because of the smaller accident base in
aircrafi flyine, the accident rate of military aircrafi is higher than that of U.S.general
aviation by a factor of 1.5 1521.
Most important. modem FCS have contributed to improved dynamical behavior [4. 8. 1 1.
181. Xircrafi cannot be flown without a stability augmentation system. The open loop
instability, which is related to agility of the aircrafi, is utilized to obtain better performance
and maneuverability of the closed loop 113. 17. 221. In the pas. the pilot stick was
typically comected with rode or cables to the control surfaces. Since then the increased
safety. economicai and performance demands have forced aircrafi manufacturers to extend
FCS to a high Ievel of complexity 1531.
The tremendous number of fiinctions and requirements have increased the number of
specialists areas for the FCS and makes the work challenging from a technical and
management point of view. Specialist who are responsible for mode logic, design,
software and hardware development and certification have worked closely together. In the
overall process, control laws designers assume a modest. but central position. Their task is
influenced by the design requirements, the flight envelope, the aircraft configuration
complexity, the stores carriage and weight distribution, the required autopilot modes. the
aircraft stability levels and aerodynamic nonlinearity [16. 411. Global competition forces
aircraft manufacturers to continuously improve the efficiency of their engineering
activities.
The complexity of the design task and the reiated investrnent made in the past.
explain the careful attitude from some aircraft manufacturers to replace their well-
established classical techniques [37,4 1, 531- Due to histonc reasons. the ciassicd
approach in which each mode and flight condition is treated as a separate problem has led
to mode proliferation and the need for cornplex algorithrns. Application of advanced
techniques promises a significant reduction of design time because it would remove the
time-consuming ciassical "one-loop-at -a-time" approach and reduce the number of design
points for which a controller has to be designed.
Mathematical problems that had arisen in the stabifity control systems occupied the
attention of early 2 0 century.
~ mathematicians as Liapunov [ZZ.491. Theoretical problems
of stabilizine these systems and improvins their performance engaged various
mathematicians of the period. The classical period of control theory, charactenzed by
frequency-domain analysis. is still going strong with the developrnent of vanous
sophisticated techniques for muiti-variable systems. State-space methods are the
comerstone of modern control theory [2 1, 24. 28. 531. The essential feature of state-space
methods is the characteriration of the processes of interen by differential equations
instead of transtr firnctions.
A digital computer is ail but essential for performing the calculations that must be done in
a typical applications. The demands of piloting an aircraft are considerable. invoiving the
.
guidance of its motion through varying conditions receiving instructions and
information, and managirtg the resources availabie 15, 271. Accidents are ofien the resuit
of failures in the stick-and-nidder aspects of piloting to stabilize the aircraf under
conditions such as extrerne turbulence . Many aircraft have been damaged when
turbulence (mass of air) exceeded their control capabilities or caused structural damage in
flight [42].
National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB)data indicated t hat a vonex
encounter was the probable cause of at l e m 5 1 accidents and incidents from 1983 to
1993. with loss of or severe damage to 40 aircraft. The mon frequent physical
environmental hazards to flight safety are the following:
Air turbulence ( in thunderstorm and wake turbulence fiom preceding
aircrafi)
Precipitation (rain snow. hail and sleet)
Ground objects (towers. terrain)
Airborne objects (aircrafi. birds and bdloons etc.)
Electromagnetic radiation ( sources within aircrafi).
In discussin~the controiled guidance of aircraft. it is essential to emphasize the
importance of aircrafl stability control systems in which many of the flight processes are
performed automaticaiIy by a cornputer based controller [ i , 20,431. An examination of
the aviation incident and accident data from the past two decades shows two contrary
-
trends. On the one hand. due to the application of stability augmentation systems ( SAS)
there has been a sharp decline in aviation accidents. The SAS uses sensors to measure the
body-axes angular rates of the aircraft and feeds back processed versions of these signais
to the sen~omechanismthat drives the aerodynamic control surfaces [17]. In this w a -
aerodynamic forces and moments proportional to angular velocities and their derivatives
cm be generated and can utilize an effective stable motion of the air vehicle [2, 101. On
the other hand. despite the application of stability augmented technolosg, controlled flight
still encounten serious safety problems in aviation 171.
1.3 Problem Statement
Guidance and control system technology used in the control of aircrafi has been
revolutionized by the development of the digital cornputer. The two concepts which are
central to modem control systems are the desig based directly on the state-variable
model. and the expression of performance specification in terrns of a mathematically
precise performance cntenon which then yields rnatrk equations for the conrrol @IIS.
The expected benefits of guidance control technology, which fieed the crews of newer
aircrafi ftom dependence on location-to-location systems of navigation aids. were a
reduction in hurnan error and increased safety automation. As a result there was a demand
for greater system precision and reliability.
Aithou@ many of these benefits have been realized. still serious problems arise
which result in many incidents and accidents. One must question whether the maximum
possible automation is necessary or desirable. and consider a syaem that is more
compatible wth the capabilities and limitations of the humans involved.
The answer to this question is the design of better and more efficient control
systems suited for aircrafi control. This thesis is presenting a fuzzy logic control design
process and cornparing the performance of FLC with linear quadratic replator (LQR).
 -9-

Chapter 2
Aircraft Modeling

2.1 Determination of Dominant Stability CocfTicicnts

The dyrtamk cross-coupling in longitudinal-lateral motion causes the occurrence of
aerodynamic forces and moments 181. The the-dependent effects of al1 parameters in
longitudinal-lateral motion were considered provided that the aerodynamic forces are

linearly dependent on a and & . The mathematical modeiing of the aircraft and the
consideration of al1 parameters in longitudinal-lateral motion makes it possible to solve the
problem of aerodynamic forces and moments. Primary consideration is given to the non-
lineanty motion and it's dependence of time. As these two motions are strongly coupted, it
was necessary to analyze six degree of fieedom motion.
To simpliw the analysis of motion of the aircraft, the following equations are
considered:
the external forces and moments
the auxiliary equations
. the physical charactenstics
the stability and control derivatives and the initial conditions Cg].
. The forces and moments acting on the aircrafi are determined in terms of
dimensionless aerodynamic coefficients as:

drag, D = q SC, (1)

-
side force, Y = q Sc,.

rolling moment, =i~b, (4)

- -
pitching moment, M = qSc.c,
w here :

ci = free-stream dynarnic pressure

S = wing reference area

b = wing span

c = wing mean geometric chord.

The dimensionless force coefficients have been specified for wind axes; the body-axes
forces coefficients c,, c , , and c, are also in cornmon use. The moments coefficients rnay

be specified in wind, stability, or body axes, but the same symbols will be used in each
case. The various dirnensionless coefficients c, , c , . ..., c, are the dependent on the
aerodynamic angles alpha and beta and less dependent on other variables. The dependence
on the rates of changes of the aerodynamic angles and on the components p, q and r of the
center ofgravity of the aircraft angular velocity is elaborated in equations (26) and (45).
The coefficients are dso dependent on control surface deflections and other factors such
as engine power level. configuration effects ( e.g; landing gear, extemal tanks. etc)
otherwise, the aircraft wouldn't be controlIable GO, 48. 491.
The rnost important longitudinal stability derivatives are

where:
CL. , c,. - darnping derivatives that descnbe the incrernent in lift due to the
a 4

alpha- dot (dal dt) and pitch rate. The alpha-dot-rrefers to the rate of
change of angle of attack with respect to time.
c ,,q , .,c - damping derivatives in moments equations that descnbe the increment
a

in lie due to the alpha-dot and pitch rate. The cornputer analysis study of air vehicle
motion in straight and level flight depends on the variables which determine the degree of
stability. The dynamic derivatives include the angular rotations (p, q, r), darnping
 -1 1-

denvatives ( c , c , , ~ .c ), cross-coupling denvatives ( C Lq , c ,,.- etc), and derivatives

LP

due to the time rate of change of aerodynamic angles ( a. ) . Some control derivatives

were estimated using the aircraft's physical charactenstics.

The simulation of aircraft parameten with disturbance reflects the actual stability
derivatives on the aircraft .The length of perturbation time depends on the control surface
being disturbed as for rudder perturbation and elevator perturbation. The effect of stability
denvatives on the aircraft motion is considered in order to choose the appropriate and
desired derivatives, as c, , cLa. which refer to the dynamic derivatives with respect to

pitch, alpha, rate of change: and c,,, ,and c=, , static derivatives which correspond to

sideslip and angle of attack.

When the control input depends upon the stability derivative as is the case for
c and c , . . the perturbation would be in the elevator setting and the response in p and
L,
a

Q> would be presented; but if it is for c , , ~and c,. ,then the rudder setting must be
P

disturbed and the aircraft response is recorded. The sign for aerodynamic control surface
perturbation c m be either negative or positive. The effect of dynaniic derivatives with
respect to yaw and beta rate parameters can be analyzed on the longitudinal aircraft
motion by introducing lateral perturbation of the rudder angle .
The result indicates that both longitudinal and lateral perturbations have an effect on the
aircraf? motion; the most significant is the overall effect o f perturbing the rudder for the
straight and level flight, as the pemirbation could make the air vehicle drift away ffom the
original flight path. The c,, has more effect on alpha than cMrand c,. which indicate
B

higher degrees of significance for static derivatives. The rate of roll (p) and the rate of

change of sideslip p are high cornpared to the rate of yaw (r). The rate of pitch (q) is
 -12-
relatively small. The denvatives of various aerodynamic reactions due to angular velocities
(p. q, r) represent the quasi-steady effects. These derivatives forrn part of the dynamic
results obtained during standard wind-tunnel experiments of oscillations around a fixed
axis. where the output is always an expression composed of more than derivatives such as

Nonlinear variations of stability derivatives with the angle of attack is shown in

Figure 5.1 (81. h e figure shows the variation of the subsonic damping denvatives in pitch
( c si, + cLI. ) and yaw (cYr - c ) for a wing configuration, for a range of angle of attack
a B

.
fi-om O to 40' , while Figure 5.2 shows the low-subsonic cross derivatives
( c ,p f c - c,. cosa ) for a swept wing fighter aircraft [2]. Non-linear
s i n a ).and (cLr
P B

variation of some of the cross coupling denvatives is shown in Figure 5.3. Non-linear
behavior of the dynamic cross-coupling moment derivatives due to pitching ( csq+ .c, )
u

even low angle of attack in case of yawing, where sideslip angle is non-zero [LOI.
The basic test to determine directional stability and dihedral effect is the steady,
straight sideslip flight. Directional stability depends on pnor knowledge of the control
denvatives like c,, and c, . When applying this method (steady. straight sideslip
flight) to find the denvative coefficients, it is essential to set up the maneuver as straight
Ievel flight in order to trirn the data. This means the control ofthe aircraft (speed and
altitude) should not change for at least a short time . This is an effective method as beta
( p ) is not changing rapidly - at least no more than one degree per second --and nidder
and aileron have constant track. The rudder and aileron are applied simultaneousfyto
stabilize a sideslip. The rigid-body state is descnbed by:
x = (v. a. q, 0 , h. B, r, p. cp, O)= (7)
 -13-
The first five components of x are called longitud'mal variables and the second five
represent lateral-directional variables. The rate of change of longitudinal-lateral with
respect to time ( u, u, IV ) represent the linear velocity dong the axes ( x , y, z) , while
( p, q, r ) are the angular velocity.

The ( 4 , cp. 8 ) are the parameters which determine the aircraft orientation as:
0 - illustrates the rotation on y-axis and called the pitch angle
cp - indicates the rotation on x-axis and called the roi1 angle

4 - shows the rotation on 2-axis and called yaw angle

v,a . p - components of the air-relative velocity vector
, , - the Euler-angles describing roll, pitch and yaw respectively
The forces equation of F,, F,. F, and moments L. M. N are the extemal forces.

The values of control effectiveness derivatives c,, , c,, , c,, and c, are

determined fiom the control effectiveness tests. With these values in hand cLp.c , and

c,, are determined fiom the plots of control surface deflections and forces measured at

each of the sideslip angle. The yaw rate derivatives cLrand Cs, are also calculated ffom

data recorded in steady tums initiated with aileron and rudder alone. In this fashion, al1 of
the most important lateral-directional parameters can be estimated with reasonable
accuracy.
2.2 Longitudinal Stability Derivatives
Al1 stability derivatives are essential though some are more important than others,
particularly those for defining and demonstrating the aerodynamic derivatives of the
aircraft for both longitudinal and lateral motion. The aerodynamic derivatives for aircraft
configuration and cross-coupliig derivatives were achieved on data available in references
[2, 19, 471. The non-dimensional stability derivative c, is often zero in trimmed motion,
 -14
except in cases of asymmetry which is typical in roll, sideslip and tum flight situations. Its
magnitude can dEer considerably and its sign changes in Mach nurnber and in dynamic
pressure. The change of lie coefficient with the change of angle of attack, cL , is always

positive for values of angle of attack below the stall value. The wing contributes up to 85 -
90 % of its value.
The non-dimensional stability denvative, ch,=, is related to the pitching moment

coefficient with the angle of attack and referred to as the longitudinal static stability
derivative. The vdue of this dimensional denvative is mostly affected by the position of
the aircrafi center of gravity. The non-dimensional parameter, C , , ~does not have much

influence on the aircraff motion [ I Il. The dimension less elevator derivatives provide
information about the stability and denvative effectiveness of the control surface and
rnaneuverability of the aircraft. They correlate with geometncal features of the air vehicle
and thereby Facilitate the preliminary design process.

2.3 Longitudinal Control

For the longitudinal control, the elevator deflection 6,is involved as the control

parameter. The elevator effectiveness, which is very important in aircratt design, c,, , is

the most control- related parameter in the longitudinal motion of the aircrafi. It can be
determined by maximiting the lift value of the wing and also the range of center of gravity
changes during the flight. Various elevator deflection angles are illustrated in Figure 1.
The pitching moment variation is reasonably controlled up to alpha equal20 deg.
However, as the angle of attack increases, there is a clear loss of elevator effectiveness up
to the complete loss of elevator control above a = 45' [12].

2.4 Longitudinal Motion

For better understanding of the angles and the directions of different velocities the
reader is advised to refer to Figure Sa. A complete denvation can be found in any text on
aircrafl dynarnics . See Reference [S 11 for example. Equation for longitudinal motions of
 -15-
the aircrafi. referred to the body-fixed axes are then as foliows:
.
u = F,/m-q\v+rv

w here:
dot-bears the meaning of rate of change with respect to time
F, - force on x-axes
rn- mass
u - linear veiocity
r - yaw anylar velocity
q - pirch angular velocity
The equation of rate of change of linear velocity is [ 5 11

w here:
F, - force on z-axes
dot - bears the meaning of rate of change with respect to tirne
-
w linear velocity
p - roll angular velocity
The acceleration of pitch rate is

where:
-
1, = I,, 1 , = 1, J, = 1, moment of inenia about y and z axes [22]

1, - cross product of inenia

The acceleration of anplar velocity is
The equation of the longitudinal dimensional denvatives can be calculated
The most important longitudinal stability derivatives are cr, , cbfa, c , ,~ cLfV,cxl,a -

The above dimensioniess longitudinal derivatives are the most influentid derivatives for
aircraft motion as shown in Figure 2. The derivative c,= is the L
ei curve dope which is
typically in the range 1 to 8 rad-' the linear region of the Liff curve below stall [22 1. The
c dope of the pitching moment curve which detemines the pitch stitfness for stability.

The negative value of c,= required for stability that the pilot can manage and control.

The derivatives c,, and cXhare pitch damping derivatives The cXk is usually of greater
u

magnitude than c, . It has a value in the range from O to -40 rad? The effect of velocity
a

variation on pitching moment is contained in the derivative cxl. - If this derivative is

a

positive, the aircrafi will tend to pitch up with an increase in speed. This results in
increased drag and the greater component of gravity dong the x-axis will then tend to
slow the aircraft dom. In practice, the effective center of pressure of an aircrafi may
move afi with increasing subsonic Mach number, thus creating a tendency to dive
(negative ch,, ), with associated unstable speed behavior [22].The basic aircrafi states of
a

interest are the angle of attack a,and the angular velocity, q. An additionai state is
injected by the actuator of the elevator. The general states and inputs of the plant are as
foIlows 1121:
 -18-
where:
x - state of the plant. q - pitch rate. 6,- elevator deflection

a - filtered measurement of the angle of attack

E - integrator output
u = -ky

y=cx

the state variables description ofthe plant are

where:
A, B and C are matrices.
 -1 9-

Chapter 3
Stability Derivative of Aircraft

3.1 Lateral Stability Derivatives

The side force which results from any sideslip motion of the air vehicle can be
achieved fiom the fin of the aircraft and prevents the sideslip angle, cyP. Positive value of

the c is un desirable as the reversed side force inhibits the pilot's ability to detect
'-P

sideslip motion early and makes turns difficult to achieve [13]. This parameter contributes
significantly to the damping ratio of the change in value of the rolling moment coefficient
with sideslip angle, cLB, the so-called dihedral effect. This is very important for lateral

stability and control of the aircrafi. This parameter is very effective in maneuvering
capability specifically when lateral control motion is close to the stall position by the
rudder. The negative value of this parameter is required as it improves the damping ratio
of aircraft motion [L5]. The variation in the yaw moment coefficient with changes in
sideslip angle is considered a static directional or weather stability coefficient. It depends
upon the area of the fin and lever a m . The aerodynarnic value of this parameter is
positive, though the aircraft configuration contribution is negative. For better quality of
the parameter and more stability motion, cSp, should be large, though this might affect

the disturbance fkom side gusts. Change in rolling moment coefficient with change in
rolling angular velocity is referred to as the roll damping denvative, c L pwhich
, can be

determined by the geometry of the wing. The value of this parameter is negative, though
it may become positive when the wing is stalled. The variation in the yawing moment
coefficient with a change in rolling velocity, cNP,is usually negative, although a positive

value is desirable. The negative value of this parameter reflects the smaller damping ratio
of the aircraft disturbance motion. Change in the rolling moment coefficient with a change
 -20-
in yawing velocity, c 4 , has a great effect on the spiral mode, but little effect on dutch roll

mode. The factor contnbuting mon to this parameter is the lifl force fiom the wing. Being
negative or positive depends upon the fin's geometiy. The other denvative parameter for
lateral motion is related to the yawing moment coefficient, cSr. It is cdled the yaw

damping derivative; it has a negative value and is the main contnbutor to damping of the
Dutch roll mode and to the stability of the spiral mode [16].

3.2 Lateral Control

The directional and lateral control States of the aircraft motion are ;, b, and 4 .

.
Sirnilarly, for lateral motiol the control variables are aileron deflection, 6, and rudder
deflection, g ,as indicated in Figures 3. Change in the side force coefficient with nidder

deflection, c , , ~,is very important when considering an automatic flight control system

whjch uses lateral acceleration as feedback otherwise it is negligible [17].One of the most
.
, is the
important factors for control of the lateral dynamics derivative coefficient cLoa

aileron effectiveness as in Figure 4. This denvative is essential for a low speed flight to
counter asymmetric gusts which tend to roll the aircrafi. The yawing moment coefficient,

c , , ~, which results fkom a rudder deflection, has an equal importance to that of aileron

effectiveness, is referred to as rudder effectiveness [ 181.

The coefficient of rudder deflection can calculated

where:
c - is the coefficient of rudder deflection with the change of side force
a, - vertical tail lie curve dope
r - mdder effectiveness
 S, - fin area
-
S gross wing area
The yawing coefficient with respect to the rudder deflection is

where:
c ,,r - the yawing coefficient which results from the rudder defiection
L , -distance between center fin aerodynamic center and the center of gravity of

aircraft
b - wing span

The dynamic lateral derivative is

=a$ ,SF/SZF/b

where:
c
=sr
- laterai dynamic derivative coefficient which results fiom aileron

effectiveness
2 , - distance between fin aerodynamic center and body x-axis

3.3 Lateral Motion

p = [L-(1. - I,)qr+ [,Cr+ pq)I/I,

where:
dot - refers to rate of change with respect to time
(x, y, z) refers to x, y, z body axes
L - aerodynamic of rollhg moment
4 - moments of inertia on x, y, z axes -(i = x, y and z)
p, q, r - body angular velocities
w

-
p acceleration of roll rate parameter

The acceleration of yaw parameter c m be defined as

where:
-
N aerodynarnic yawing moment

r - acceferation of yaw rate

The thmst of the aircraft is

T = (-c,tana ,-c,)q,S

where:
T- t h s t
-
q, - initial value of dynamic pressure

c, - force coefficient on s-axes: c . - force coefficient on z-aUs

a ,- initial value of angle of attack
S - gross wing area
The Euler angular rotation in yaw can be calculated as

where:
0 ,cp , - Euler angular rotation in pitch roll and yaw
-
q ,r body anguiar velocities

The Iinear acceleration can be defined

where:

v - Linear acceleration

F, - force on y-axe
 P - roll rate parameter
u - linear velocity
The derivatives cLp, cnP , c N r ,and ch are al1 damping moment denvatives.

The roll damping derivative cLpusually lies in the range -0.1 to 0.8 rad? It increases in

magnitude in the transonic region and then decreases again at higher Mach numbers. The
importance of this derivative is that it determine the roll-rate performance of a highly
maneuverable aircraft. The yaw damping derivative is csr ; it is always negative and is in

t h e near zero. This variable may increase in magnitude in the transonic region.
The denvatives cXp and ch are cross-derivatives that exist because of the

coupling of the rolling and yawing motion of an aircraft; they tend to be difficult to
measure and change significantly with mach number. cspusually lies in the range from -

0.5 to 0.1 rab' and can change from negative to positive values in the transonic region.
.
The derivative of yawing ch , lies between zero and 0.6 rad-'. It may Vary considerably

in value and is also a tnction of the lift coefficient [18].

 -24-

Chapter 4
Mathematical Model of Aircraft

4.1 Mathematical Repraeatation of the Dynamiu of Aircraft

Here the non-linear first order differentid equations which represent aircrafl
motion related to the (x. y. Z) body-futed system of axes are determined. The equations
represent Newton's Law of transition dong the rotation about the axis. As these equations
refer to the body-fixed axes, the parameters bearing a dot indicate the rate of change with
respect to time and represent the linear components dong the three body axes (x, y, z)
respectively; while (p, q, r) are the components of the body-axis angular vectors as
shown in Figure Sa. The angles (8 , yi , 4 ) are the aircrdl Euler angles which determine
the orientation of the air vehicle as roll. pitch and attitude. As a whole. aircrafk motion can
be described by the following variables: v, a, q, 0 , h, P. r, p, 4, cp . The first five

components are longinidinal motion variables, the second five are lateral directional
variables. The longitudinal and lateral motion of an aircrafl about its straight and level
flight path with perturbation can be expressed by two independent equations as follows
119, 203.

1.2 The Aerodynamic Forces and Moments acting on Aircraft

The sum of forces and moments acting on the three body axes of the aircrafi are
illustrated by the following parameters [2 11:
F.. F,. F,. L. M and N respectively.
The externa1 forces and moments acting on the aircraft are :
force due to gravity ( weight);
forces due to power plant ( thnist);
aerodynamic forces.
For the purpose of anaiysis, a symmetric aircraft is assumed-- that is, an aircral3 having the
 -25-
initial conditions which wiil reduce the number of variables needed to describe the
aerodynamic reactions in straight and level flight with respect to the instantaneous values
of the disturbance velocities u, V_ w_p, q7r and their time denvatives. The aerodyna~c
forces and moments are described as a fknction of the state variable, that is, as yaw angie,
sideslip angle, etc. The aerodynamic reaction can be expressed in the form of stability
denvatives multiplied by the corresponding variables.
The aerodynamics forces, moments and rate of change ofthe air vehicle position in
relation to a tixed point on the earth are defined by the equations shown below Also. the
initial conditions of the state of straight and level flight and the equations for angles of
sideslip, (p 1, and alpha. (a)_with their rate of change, are required to develop the analysis
of aircrafi motion. The rolling moment depends on various other variables such as beta.
the dihedral effect of the wings, pitching moment, and yawing moment. To get some
insight into the difference of ,c, . it is essential to consider the moment contributions of
the tail, wings and the fuselage. The effect of the vertical tail is to weathercock into the
wind. which is a positive sideslip and creates a positive yawing moment,

where:
F,- force on x-coordinate
T-t h s t
c, - coefficient of force with respect to x body axes

c , - derivative coefficient which results from elevator deflection

-
-
q dynarnic pressure

S - gross wing area

The sum of forces on y coordinate is
-
F, = mgcos sin4 + (c,~ + c, + cm)@
where:
F,.- force on y-coordinate

c ,,- dynamic derivative with respect to beta rate of change

C yjr - dynamic derivative coefficient with respect to rudder deflection
6,-deflection of aiieron
The sum of forces on z-axes can be defined

IV here:
x - represent subscripts of denvative coefficient on the x-mes
y - represent subscripts of derivative coefficient on the y-axes
z - represent subscripts of derivative coefficient on the z-axes
F, - force on z-coordinate
cZr- dynamic derivative with respect to p w rate

cG - dynaMc derivative of angle of attack

This equation is representing the surn of the moments on x-ues

L = [c,, 7 ch (a - aT)+ cbP + cLp(pb / ZV) + ch ( q d tv) C,

.-
(aC/ I V )

where:
L - surn of moments on x-axes
c ,,- dynamic derivative coefficient of moment with respect to thnist
c - dynamic derivative coefficient of moment resulted fiom alpha
 -27-
c,, - dynamic derivative coefficient of moment resulted from beta

LP
- dynamic derivative coefficient of moment resulted from angular roll rate (p)

cLq - dynamic derivative coefficient of moment resulted from anplar pitch rate (q)

c - dynamic derivative coefficient resulted fiom the rate change of alpha ( a)

c - dynamic derivative coefficient resulted a yaw rate (r)

C L. - dynamic derivative coefficient resulted tiom the rate of change of sideslip
O

ange
~ 6 a - dynamic derivative coefficient resulted rom aileron deflection

-
br dynamic derivative coefficient resulted fiom nidder deflection

The sum of moments on yaxis is

where:

,,c, - derivative coefficient of moment from the thntst

C %fa - dynamic derivative coefficient resulted h m the angle of attack
c,,, - dynamic derivative coefficient resulted eom sideslip angle
c - dynamic derivative coefficient resulted n o m roll. pitch and yaw rate
(where i = p, q and r)
c ,. - dynamic derivative coefficient resulted from alpha rate of
a
change

c
M; - dynamic derivative coefficient resulted from beta rate of change
 -38-

C XI, - dynarnic denvative coefficientresulted fmm the deflection of elevator

The moment on z-axis can be defined

where:
-
N sum of moment on z-axis
c,
,- derivative coefficient resulted from thmst
Csa - derivative coefficient resulted fiom alpha
c,, - derivative coefficient resulted from sideslip
cSi - derivative coefficient resulted from roll. pitch and yaw rate

(where i = p, q and r)
c,. - dynamk coefficient resulted from the change of alpha rate
a

CS.
P
- dynamic coefficient resulted from the change of sideslip rate
c,, - dynarnic coefficient resulted fiom elevator deflection

c, - dynarnic coefficient resulted from nidder deflection

s,Q - gross wing area and dynamic pressure respectively
The rate of change of aircraft position with respect to x-axis can be defined

X = ucos yr cos0 + v(cosyr sin0 sin$ - siny cos+ )

 -29-
where:
k - acceleration of aircrafk with respect to x-axis
.I V, w-
,L linear velocities on x. y and z axis
0 ,<p ,q/ - Euler angular rotation in pitch roll and yaw
The acceleration of aircrafi with respect to y-axis can be calculated
*
Y = usin y cos0 t v(sin sin0 sin4 + cosy cos4 )
= + w(sin w sine cos4 - cos^ sin4 )

where:
Y - the rate of change of aircrafi position with respect to yaxis
The acceleration of aircraft position with respect to z-axis can defined
O

Z = usine + vcos sin@+ wcos cos@

where:

-
0

Z The rate of change of aircrafi with respect to z-as

The initial value of dynamic pressure is

-
q, = m g / [c,(sina, tana, + cosa ,)SI
where:
-
q, - initial value of dynamic pressure
c , -control derivative on z-ais
a ,-intial value of ange of attack
The resultant linear velocity is
v=@+V'+w')

where:
U, V, w - are the linear velocities
 -3 0-
The angle of attack may be calculated fiom

where:
a - angle of attack
The sideslip angle can be calculated fiom
p = a r c t a n p u)
where:
p - sideslip angle
The initial value of Euler anguiar rotation in pitch can be defined
0 , = arcsin(sin@,sin p ,- cos@, sin 6 cosp ,)
where:
8 ,,,O,, .p ,, - initial values of angular rotation in pitch. bank and sideslip angles
respectively.
The initial value of EuIer rotation in yaw is
v o = arcsin[(sinO ,sincosp, - cos@ .sin4 ,) i cos8 ,]

The initial value of Euler acceleration in yaw can be defined

where:
v, -initial linear velocity

the density of air

~ ~150)
' 10
P O = 1 . 2 2 ~ 3 e -!
where:
hg- is the initial altitude
The rate of change of Euler anplar rotations in pitch and roll can be defined

where:
dot - refers to rate of change nith respect to tirne
0 -pitch agie
4 - roll ansle
The initial v e l o c i ~1-s

The initial value of roll rate is

n-here:
y ,O - "[id values of \;iw and pitch respectively

The Euler initial angular vetoci% in roll is

6 , = arcsin[(sin@ ,cosp, - cos@ ,sin6 sinBo)/cos8 ,]
The d!namic derivatives can be caiculated

where:

LT
- dynamic denvative resulted fiom thrust

C ~ P
- dynamic derivative resulted fiom fiom the roll rate
c 4 - dpamic derivative moment resulted from the yaw rate

C ~ g
- d@c derivative resulted fiom pitch rate
 -3 2-
The d?namic drivative resulted fiom the control of thnist is
,c, = c, - c,, hoc /2v, )

where:
-
c, force coefficient on z-aus

c
zq
- d>.namicderivative resulted fiom pitch rate

ivhert.:
c , - d-amc derivative with respect to thmst

c ,,r - d'mamic derivative with respect ro

-
c - ~ i n meui
g aerod>mamicchord
-
c ,, - d'mamic derivative with respect to pitch rate

rate

The control derivative of thnist is

c s T = - c S p ( p O b / 2 v 0 ) -c S r ( r O b l 2 v , ) -c X q ( q , E / 3 , )

\vhere:
cSp- d>namicderivative with respect to roll rate

c - d!namic denvative with respect to );iw rate

cSp- dynamic derivative with respect to pitch rate

The initia1 of value of angular velocity is

where:

VI 0 . 0 0 3 4 0
- initial values of Euler angular rotation in yaw*pitch and roll
n i e initial value of pitch rate can be defined

The acceleration of rate of change alphadot is

where:
-
w is the Linear velocity
The horizonta1 flight path angle with respect to vertical plane is

Y H= arctan(+/ k)
The vertical flight path angle with respect to horizontal plane is

When al1 coefficient matrices of the aircraft are obtained ,it shows that longitudinal and the lateral
equations are decoupled and can be solved separately, although the lateral equations depend on the
steady state longitudinal parameters MT. ye and le. In Figure Sb and Figure 5c shows the
horizontal and vertical path angles and y ,.
The Iateral-directional matrices are shown as:
 -3 5-

Chapter 5
LQR Control of Aircraft

5.1 Solution of the Linear Quadratic Regulator (LQR).

In this chapter the application of the LQR methud is considered. This control scheme is
accomplished t>y the non-lin= compensation of the feedback control action shaping filters and
s n i t c b g logic based on longihiduial-laterd parameters. This multivariable proportionai integeral
L Q R ) control with matrk Qains is computed by means of the standard LQ with the application of
the follonng procedure and technique. It is important in the selection of using LQ based method

to establish and assume Q and R to be diagonal matrices. It is knom that the LQR has the
folloning p roperties :
sirnplici~in the computation of the gain matrices
Ion- order of the compensator .
The problem of the aireraft stabilih may be solved bu ushg fedback application for a11 control
gains and the performance criterion. M e r selecting the above panmeters, the gains can be
computed by matris equations. As indicated above, the plant is described by the state-variable
mode1 [22. 231,

where:
x - is the system state vector
u - is the input vector
A, B, C - are matrices of the state variable mode1
With x(t) E Rn the state, u(t) E Rm the control input, and y(t) tz RP the measured output.
The controls feedback is :
u=-Ky
where:
K is an m x p matrix of a constant feedback coefficients.
 -3 6-
Sincc the reguiator problem on& involves stabiliung thc i r c r a f t and inducing good closed-loop
timc rtsponscs, u(t) \\il1 be taken as a pure feedback with no au'rili- input. In order to obtain
an adcquate response in the control stability of the closed-loop qstcm. we wiil sclect a
p r r t o r m c e critenon in the t h e Somain. The goal to drive any initial condition error to zero can
bc achieved by selecting the control input u(t) to miaunke the quadraiic perfomiancc

indcs J(t) of the hpe

ivhere Q and R are qmmetric positive weighting matrices. Positive sernidefhiteness of a square
niatris M ( denoted hl p a t e r or equd to zero ) is equivalent to d l its cigenvalues bing
nonnegtive. and also to the requirernent that the q u J d n t ~ cform x 'Mx bc nomegtive for al1
vectors. Theretire, the definite assumption on Q and R guarantee that J is nonnegative ruid Iead
a scnsible muiimizrrtion problem.

By substituting the conirol (64) into (62) the closed-lwp synem equations are detennined to be

ivhere:
A, B , C - mauices

The Performance index can be relate(

The problem is now to select the gain so that 1 is minimired subject to the d~mamicalconstraint
(66)-
where:
Q and R are synrneuic positive semidefinite weighuig matrices

1 - performance index
xT- transpose of the x-matrk
.. *
Selecting the gain value K so J is minunized subject to the dynamical constraints o f equation (73).
 -37-
To simpli- the dyimical opthkation problern we convert it h o an equivalent static. that is
a i e r to sohe the problern- It is assumeci that we can achieve a positive semidefinite-synmetric
rnatns P and J which may be expressecl as:

-.
Assuming that the ciosed-loop sysrem is aqmptoticaIly stable so that x(t) vanishes with tirne-
Supposing that the x(t) disappears with tirne as it closes to this leads to

If P satisfis the equation (65) then we may apply (66) and obtain the follo~~ing:

Since this rnust hold for al1 initial conditions, and hence for al1 state trajectories z(t) may be

g -
espressed as
A~PP
+ A , + C ~ K ~ R K CQ+ = O

This equation is known as a Lypunov Equation

(73)

in short, for any fixed value of the feedback, there is a matrix P which m e t s the requirernent for
the equation (73) with a stable ctosed hop system: the performance indes. J . is provided in
terms of P . Thjs indicates that P is independent of the state svhich is the n x n matris.
 -3 8-
Therefore only the initial condition x(0) is applicable to compute the closed loop under the
~nfiuenceof the fedback convol (64) u = -Ky . This provides us with an opportunity to
compute the gain values. Now, appiying the trace identie
tr(AI3) = tr(BA) (74)
and their dimensional matrices A and B. we may \rite (70) as the following :

It is concluded that the problem of selecting gain vdue to rninimize (67)subject to the d>mamcal
restrictions (66) on the States, is equivalent to the algebraic solution of selecting the K parameters
to minimite (75) subject to the constraints (73) on the au-uiliary matris P .

This problem is solved by using the Lagrange multiplier approach for the constraint to LQR b>-
determining the Hamiltonian
H = tr(PX) + tr(gS)
where:
-
tr is a trace identic
wth S 3 s>mmetric n x n matris of Lagrange multipliers which still needs to be detennined.
Then our consuained optimization problem is equivalent to the simpler problem o f minimizino (77)
without constraints. To accomplish this we need ody set the partial denvatives of H \rith respect to
ail the independent variables P. S and K equal to zero. in sumrnary, for any fked f d b a c k
matris K if there esists a constant, -mmetric, positive-semidefinite ma ut^ P that satisfies (73)-
and if the closed -loop ?stem is stable. the cost J is given in ternis of by (70). This is an
unportant result in that the n x n ausilia- matn-Y P is independent of the state. Given a feedback
matris K. P may be computed fiom the Lyapunov equation (73). Then only the initial condition

x(0) is required to compute the closed-loop cost under the infiuence of the feedback control(64).
That is. it may compute the cost of applyng the feedback control u = Ky before w e appiy it. It is
necessary to use this result to compute the gain K tha minimites the LQR by using the trace
identic (74).
 CHAPTER 6
Fuzzy Logic Control of Aircraft

6.1 Introduction
One of the latest methodolo@es. FLC is based on the so-called intelligent control
which is defined as a combination of Control Theory and Artificial Intelligence (AI)[28,
[29]. Among many new possible methodologies based on Ai, fzzy logic has been siven
much attention because of its relative simplicity. h e basic idea of a hzzy logic controller.
which is to imirate the control actions of a human operator- cm generally be represented
as a collection of "if-then" rules [;O, 3 11. Unlike binary (yes or no) information f u ~ y
logic is a multi-valued logic that permits certain degrees for normal versus slow, high,
and medium set membenhip, which can provide an effective way of overcorning the
problem of inaccurate data in a binary system.
Fu- logic's benefits are fault tolerance and the ability to provide accurate
response to ambiguous data. A fLzzy logic controller provides an aigonthm which
convens the linguistic control strategies, based on expert information. into an automatic
control strategy. The methodology of the FLC appears to be very useful when the flight
processes are too complex for systems analysis; LC interprets data qualitatively and
accurately. Generally. fzq logic control provides a clear application of the maximum
input and maximum output (MIMO) systems. In the FLC approach, the membership
functions are defined in order to obtain MiMo structures of longitudinal and lateral
motion adjust.
The application of fuuy logic to engineering problems represents only a fraction of
its real potential. As a method of encoding and using human knowledge, t i i q logic
systems provide the facilities necessary to break through the computationd difficulties
associated with traditional decision support and expert systems. F u z y logic systems have
not yet found their way into aircraft control due to a number of factors that range from
user unfamiliariry with this method and suspicion that there is something fiindamental-
wrong with a reasonins system that announces its own imprecision.
Fu- logic controllers are basically non-linear, and general enough to provide the desired
non-linear control actions throu& carefl adjustment [32]. Fuzzy logic seems to be a
promising method for non-linear control of the aircrafi. In the context of the general
description of knowledge based systems (KBS) FLC can be introduced to perform a
specific task of closed loop control. The applications of a knowkdge based controller can
be identified as:
a direct expen control system (DECS)and
a supervisory expert controi system (SECS) [33].
With the application of fuzry sets and fzzy operations, it is possible to implement a
design for a fzzy logic reasoning system as a controller. The structure of the fuzzy
controller is illustrated in Fig.6. The control strategy is kept in the form of if-then rules
within the rule base. These d e s actually represent the mapping of the input variables to
the output actions . The dynamic filters are utilized so as to avoid the introduction of error
and derivatives of error into the output integration. Scaling is performed to retain the
signals benveen the input parameter and the output lirnits for the fuuy process ( rules).
The membership functions produce a clear interface between the linguistic knowledge and
the numerical process variables. The fuuification defines the membership deoree of the
input. The reasoning mechanism combines this information with the rule base and defines
the fzzy output of the rule-base systern. The application of fzzy logic serves to mimic
the control behavior of human action in a direct configuration or otherwise in a
s u p e ~ s o r ycontrol environment. As the mie base indicates a mapping between the
antecedent and the consequent variable. extemal dynamic filters are utilized to introduce
the desired dynamic behavior of the controller ( Fig. 6). The supervisoiy controller is a
secondary controller which augments the existing controller for various conditions. The
advantage of this system is the duplication of the aiready existing system. The fuuy Iogic
controller may be designed according to two different methods:
1. Design the controller From the knowledge available from the domain experts
7 Develop a funy mode1 of the plan? fiorn the measurements, first pnnciples and
expert knowledge, and use this model to design a controller or incorporate this
model in a model-based control scheme 148,491-

6.2 Fuzzy Logic Control Design

Fuzzy logic is the process of solving problems with uncertain (ambiguous) data
to represent a crisp-logic system. The application of fuuy logic is based on the concept
that ail control actions are a matter of degree ( negative big, negative medium, negative
small, zero, positive small, positive medium and positive big ) In a ttny logic process, the
three logic operations - and, or, and not- retum a degree of membership that is a number
valued between O and 1.
We will only concentrate on the direct approach, which will serve as a guideline
for the design. The design of the controller is characterized by the following steps:
Determine the controller inputs and outputs
The determination of inputs and outputs, the rule base, the membership functions,
scaling factors. the inference options. stability. etc., characterize the design of the fzzy
logic controller. The determination of inputs and outputs is the prirnary step in
ascertaining the plant dynamics of the system-.The control strategy is stored in the fonn of
if-then niles in the mle base. In order to compensate for the non-linearities and other
undesired phenornena, variables other than error and its derivatives may be used as the
controller inputs. Moreover, scaling is performed to keep the signals between the inputs
and output limits for which the fwzy rules are defined. The membership fiinctions provide
a smooth interface corn the linguistic knowledge to the numerical process variables. It is
important to know that with an increasing number of inputs, the complexjty of the fuuy
controller (Le., the number of linguistic ternis and the total number of rules) increases
considerably. In this situation. rule base simplification and reduction techniques are
required for keeping the number of rules small[34].
 Determine the rule base
The rule base is a crucial aspect of the design and is based entirely on using the
fuuy mode1 of the process fiom which the fuuy control rules are denved, in combination
with good undemanding, knowledge and expenence of the system's operating conditions.
For better understanding of the expert based knowledge and theu membership functions
the reader is advised to refer to Table 6.4, Table 6.6 and Table 6-8.The expert knowledge
is presented in forrn of IF ai (input) Then ci d e s (output).
Define the mernbership fiinctions
The number of rules required to determine a complete rule base increases exponentiaily
with the nurnber of linguistic terms per input variable. On the one hand, the number of
terms per parameter should be low in order to keep the rule base maintainable. On the
other hand, with few terms ,flexibility in the rule base will be restricted with respect to
the achievable nonlineanty in the control mapping. The membership functions rnay be a
part of the expert's knawledge and much attention has been paid to the application of
knowledge based control techniques for flight control ( f u u y logic control) . In this
.
application, Nzzy systems are used a s u p e ~ s o r y expert systems. The knowledge is
captured through the use of If -Then rules and linguistic terms. Suppose that the
longitudinal task of the pilot is to control the altitude and velocity of the aircraft. For
example, if the pilot realizes that the aircraft aies too low and too slow, he will increase
thnist in order to increase the energy of the aircraft. On the other hand. if the aircraft flies
too low but the velocity is too high, then the pilot will increase the pitch angle. Thmn in
fact increases the total energy, while an exchange between kinetic and potential energy can
be achieved by pitch angle changes (via the tailplane). The computation of the FLC can be
defined assurning that the rules illustrated in Table 6.4, Table 6.6 and Table 6.8 are a part
of a f u y controller's mle base [SOI.
Based on these heuristics, the following rules base are defined for longitudinal
motion of the aircraft as throttle setting and pitch angle cornmands, respectively (Table 6.4
and Table 6.6). The labels are defined negative very big (NVB),negative big (NB),
negative medium OJM), negative small (NS), negative very small (NVS),zero (Zero),
positive vexy small (PVS),positive small (PS),positive medium (PM), positive big (PB)
and positive very big (PVB).The number of rules is chosen quite large in order to make
local modifications of the controiler possible. The linguistic terms are represented by a
f u q sets and related to series of membership ttnctions which is defined on the universe
of discourse X as a fnction between [O, 11 and illustrated in Figures IO, 1 1, I3c .13d. l3e
and 13f [3 11. The position and shape (e.g. triangdar, trapezoidal or bell-shaped) of the
rnembership functions are defined such that the initial input-output ninction of the FLC is
Iinear between the bounds. However, in our case triangular shapes are preferred because
they are related to linear actions. The membership functions for longitudinal and laterd
FLC are between [-1.11 as indicated in Figures 13c. 13d and Figures 13e and I 3 e
respectively. In this membership fnctions are paiwise overlapping and that their sum is
always 1. In an altitude and velocity errors of 0.5 belongs for 50% to the set of a positive
small error VS)and for 5074 to the set of a positive medium error (PM). In other words .
the membership degrees p ,(05) and p , are both half (0.5).
(03
Pilot heunstics are again considered for the laterai control motion of the aircraft.
The selected variables to be controlled are heading ansle, y , the sideslip angle. . rudder
deflection, 6 , . A human pilot will generally handle heading and lateral deviation by
roluaileron cornmands and sideslip by mdder deflection. As we consider the control
strateg of the pilot consists of severai subtasks, e . g roll angle control. If the desired roll
angle is positive large (roll angle "error" positive iarge), then the pilot impose a positive
lateral displacement on the stick:
If roll angle error is positive large, Then laterai stick position is positive large.
The mie describes a proportional relation between roll angle error and lateral stick
position. In Table 6.8 , a rule base is defined with heading error, yr,, and the desired
heading change, ., as antecedents, and roll angle command as consequent. The rule
base for sideslip error and rudder error are shown as well-
. Infierence options
The inference options also influence the shape of the mapping between inputs and
outputs . The most used inference method is max-min method. where the minimum
operator is used for detem-ningthe degree of nilfillment and the implication and the
maximum operator for rule aggregation. The degree of filfilment for the antecedent of
each rule is computed using fuuy operators and detemines to which degree the ith rule is
valid (Figure 1 1).
Controller Fine-tuning
The implementation of human heuristics is formalized by fu- in a systematic
way. The scaling factors. which detemne the overall gain of the fus. controller and dso
t h e relative gains of the individuai controller inputs. have mainly a global effect. The effect
of t h e modification of membership functions and rules is more localized. for example
chaneing the consequent of an individual rule. The effect of the change of the rule
consequent is the most localized and influences only that region where the rule's
antecedent holds. The stability analysis of the controller is mainiy based on time response.
Stability analysis
The analysis of the controller is mainly based on the responses.
In order to simplie the design, it is important to initialize the FLC as a linear function
between the input and the output bounds. This restncts the choice of membership
functions and operators. and the controller becomes easier to analyze. One way to obtain
linear initialization is to use pairwise overlapping and triangular membership functions
where the sum of the membership fnctions equds 1. The defzzified consequents must be
defined such that the total mapping of the FLC is a linear function [XI. The defumfied
consequents are the numerical values after defzzification of each individual mle
consequent. Secondly. product operators must be used for determining the degree of
fulfillment and implication. The aggregation and defzzification phase are then combined
in one step by the so-called funy-mean method whereby the JXC output y is determined
as a "weighted" surn of defuified consequents.
6.2.1 Fuzzy Rules
Fuzzy rules combine nuo or more input f a y sets. called antecedent sets. and
associate with them an output, or consequent, set. The antecedent sets are combined by
means of operators that are analogus to the usual logical conjunctives "and" "or,"etc. An
example of f b q rule for the stability of the aircraft motion might be "If the angle of theta
is positive and the angle rate of change (theta-dot) is positive, then apply a large force
positive force.
One method of storing and representing fwnl rules is through the use of fuuy
associative memory (FAM) Matrix. Table 6.4 shows a FAM matrix in which there are two
inputs .ve and he. Each input variable input variable has seven fiiuy sets associated with
"ZE.""PS," "PM" and "PB," for "Negative
it, whicli we labeled "NB,""NM," 'WS,"
Big," "Negative Medium," "Negative Srnall," "Zero." "Positive Small," "Positive
Medium," and "Positive Big7'(These need not be the sarne for each input variable). Each
FAM matrix entry is a n output hiuy set tht is the consequent of a fuzzy rule. "Zero" is a
t u y set tht would typically represent a range of values near 0, not just the single
numerical value O.
FAM matrices can have dimensions higher than two. The number of inputs, o r
antecedents, to the fzzy rules determines the dimension. Three inputs wouId result in a
FAM matrix that looks like a three-dimensional cube. Higher numbers o f inputs produce
"hypercube" FAM matrices.

6.2.2 Operation on F u a y Sets

Let be a set U = {x,, x,, x,, ...) where xi could be discrete o r continuous. U is
called the univene of discourse [34], xi represents a generic element o f U . Let A and B
be two fuuy sets in U with membership fiinctions p, and p ., respectively. The operation
of union, intersection and complement for furzy sets are defined via their membership
fnctions (Figure 9). Let p,,, be the area under the membership function p . In this

case, the center o f gravity method can be computed as:

where:
b - center of the membership fiinaion

Definition 1.
Union: The membenhip ttnction p .x_, of the union A, B is defined for al1 x E W by

Definition 2.
Intersection: The membership function p ,-,
of the intersection An B is defined for x

Definition 3.
Complement: The membership fnction y A of the complement of a f k q set is defined
for al1 x EU by
= I-PA(X) (82)

which convens the linguistic control strategies based on expert information into an
automatic control strategy. The methodologies of FLC appears very usefiil when
processes are too cornplex for analysis by conventional quantitative techniques. and
attractive sources of information are interpreted qualitatively, inexactly, or uncenainiy.
A funy variable is used to represent an unknown value. A variable symbol can be a single
capital Ietter, a capital letter followed by one or more digits. two capital letters followed
by zero or more characters, or an underscore followed by any character.
6.2.3 Crisp Set
The cnsp set can be descnbed according to the traditional definition of a set in
classical logic as indicated in Figure 6 . Crisp sets have strict membership criteria according
to which an object is either completely included or excluded fiom the set. For example, an
error lies between - 1 and +l. In cnsp logic, two logic values are used to define the error
as if the error where above or below zero; thus, the error is positive or negative
respectively. The mapping of the error and the cnsp logic value are illustrated in table 6.1
and Figure 7.

Table 6.1 Error versus cnsp logic values

Error Crisp logic value term description

4

- 1 .O -1 NB (negative big)

-0.6 -1 NM (negative medium)

-0.2 -I NS (negative small)
0.0 O Zero
0.2 1 PS (positive small)
0.6 1 PM (positive medium)
11.0 11 1 PB (positive big) 1
Crisp logic: name for the boolean logic to differentiate it fiom 67rv logic, in which the
three logic operations-and. or. and not--retum either to I or O.
Triangular membership finctions are defined for the tems small, medium and big
in the respective domains, see Figure 11. The computational mechanism of the FLC
proceeds in five steps: Fuzdication, Degree of Fulfilment, Implication, Aggregation and
Defiizzification.
6.2.4. Fuzzification
Fuzzification is the process for converting crisp numerical input to fuuy logic
value by combining actud input values with stored membership functions as shown in
Figure 6 and Figure 1 1. The membership degrees of the antecedent variables are
computed as follows:
tri ,,,,(e)& mc&M(e)*~m-(Ae)*~ (At))-

6.2.5 Degree of Fulfiiment

The degree of fiilfilment for the antecedent of each rule is computed using
f u u y logic operators. The degree of fulfilment Pi determines to which degree the ith rule
is valid as shown in Figure 1 1. The product operator is used:
P l = P*&P~ , & & 4
P :;li ",dm(el @ ri (-\el-

6.2.6 Implication
The degree of filfilment is used to modifL the consequent of the corresponding
rule. This operation represents the if-then implication defined as a t-norm, i-e . a
conjunction operator (e-g. product). Hence the fiizq outputs of the rules become:

6.2-7 Aggregation
The consequents of al1 d e s are combined into a single fzzy set. The aggregation
operator depends on the implication function used; for conjunctions, it is a disjunction
operator (e-g mm):
FLC ouput(u) = ;
max()i (u), p (u))
6.2.8 Defuzzification
Defunification is a process in which fuuy output is converted into cnsp,
numencal results as indicated in Figure 6. Defunification can be considered as an
operator that replaces a fuay set y a representative value.

6.2.9 Fmzy Set

An ordinary set divides the universe into those items that are completely in the set
and those items that are completely outside of the set. We c m describe this phenomenon
by assigning the value 1 to al1 those items which are members of the set and the value O to
al1 items which are not mernbers of the set. For ordinary sets, only these two values are
possible. The function which assigns these values is called the characteristic fnction of the
set. Fuzzy sets allow the possibility of degrees of membership. That is, any of the values
between O and 1 (including O and 1) may be assigned. F u a y sets are determined by their
membership fnctions. We can concentrate on a representation for the membership
function and use triangular ninctions. although, other types of functions c m be used as
membership fnctions.

6.2. IO Membership
Fuuy sets have values between O and 1 that indicate the degree to which an
element has membership in the set. At 0, the elernent has no membership; while at 1, it bas
full rnembership. The function which a s s i g s this value is c d e d the membership fiinction
associated with the f i r q set.
For anaiyzing the parameters of aircraft motion, the linguistic tenns are presented
by membership functions [36]. The position and shape of a fuuy set membership function
depends on the particular application. The variable 'error' in figure 9 ,a senes of
triangular-shaped membership fnctions is show. Notice that in this case, the membership
fnctions are overlapping and that the sum is always one. The possible mapping of error
and fzq logic value is s h o w in Table 6.2.
Tablc-6.2 Error versus f u q logic values

1 Error 1 F u z q logic 1 Temi description

1-1.0 1-1 1 NB hegative big)
1 -0.6 1 -0.3 1 N M (negative Medium)
1 -0.2 1 -0.1- 1 NS (negative srnali)
1 0.0 1 0.0 1 zero
/ 0.2 1 0.1
-- -
1 PS (positive smai~)
0.6 0.3 PM ( positive medium)
11.0 11 1 PB (positive big)

The fuuy membership functions defined for the consequents rules can also be illustrated
in Table 6.3 . In Figure 8. a senes of membership functions is shown for variable conrrol
action. The large set of consequent membership functions is required to initialize the
controiler by a linear rnapping.

Table 6.3 Error venus f u a y logic control action values

Error Fu- Iogic control values Term description

-0.1 -1 NVB (negative very bis)
-0.8 -0.4 NE (negative big)
-0.6 -0.3 NM (negative medium)
-0.4 -0.2 NS (negative small)
-0.2 -0.1 NVS (negative very smaii)
0.0 0.0 Zero
0.2 0.1 PVS (positive very small)

1
0.4 1 0.2 1 PS (positive small)
0.6 0.3 PM (positive medium)
0.8 1 0.4 1 PB (positive big)
1.0 11 1 PVB (positive very big)
In order to apply the rules. one needs to combine the mernbenhip hnctions using logical
connectives such as "and" (conjunction). or "or" (disjunction). The most comrnonly used
conjunction operators are the minimum and the product operators. Usually, the maximum
or sum operator is used for disjunction. The rnapping of error and fiiay Iogic control
action is illustrated in Table 6.3.
The following rules are designed to pave the way to introducing the f k q controller
concept to the control system of the aircrafi. Figure 9 represents the fbzq membership
fiinctions as defned for the consequents of the rules. A large set of consequent
membership functions is required in order to initialire the controlkr by a Iinear mapping.
For the longitudinal motion the mapping includes a pitch angle controller with pitch rate
damping; for the lateral motion, a roll angle holds system and yaw damper. Through the
use of 7 membership functions on the input, we derive 49 mies for each control variable
are derived usine the energy concept (considering the kinetic related to velocity, and
potential related to altitude energy of the aircraf?) [SOI. The knowledge is captured
through the use of If -Then rules and linguistic terms like small, big etc. Suppose that the
longitudinal task of the pilot is to control the altitude and velocity of the aircraft. For
example, if the pilot realizes that the aircrafi flies too low and too slow. he will increase
t h s t in order to increase the energy of the aircraft- On the other hand, if the aircrafi flies
too low but the velocity is too hioh, then the pilot will increase the pitch ansle. Thrust in
fact increases the total energy, while an exchange between kinetic and potential energy can
be achieved by pitch angle changes (via the tailplane).
The increase of thrust reflects the increase of the total energy, and pitch angle
divides the energy into kinetic and potential. Based on the above definition of the energy
principle, two mle bases for pitch angle and throttle setting can be developed. With the
rule base for throttle setting changes, the rnembership fiinctions indicated in Table 6.4 and
Table 6.5 can be obtained.
 -52-

Table 6.4. Rule base for throttlt membership function setting changes.

I NS I NB INM NS IWS [ZE 1 PVS 1 PS

Table 6.5. The logic control values of throttle setting membership functions
 -53-

The d e base for pitch angle is illustrated in Tables 6.6 and 6.7
Table 6.6 The mle base for pitch angle changes

PVS 1 ZE 1 N V S
PS 1 PSV 1 ZE
PM 1 PS 1 PVS NVS NS/
PVS
PVB ( P B ( P M PVS ( ZE
PE 1 PVB 1 PB

Table 6.7 The logic coatrol values for pitch angle variations of membenhip
functions
In Table 6.8, a rule base is illustrated with heading error yr = yr , - yr and the extra
desired heading change AV, as antecedents. and roll angle cornmand as consequent.
Table 6-8 Rule bases for roll angles and rudder commands.
 C hapter 7
Simulation and Analysis

7.1 Longitudinal Motion

An investigation of the performance of a fiiay controller and a LQR controller
was camied out. The effects of these controllers were observed with particdar attention
given to longitudinal-lateral stability control. The attitude of the fuay controller serves as
an inner loop for the longitudinal motion of the aircrafi. The simulation results of the alpha
and elevator deflection parameters are almost the same in both controllers, though the
fuzzy controller seems a little faster than LQR controller. This rnight be due to the angle
of attack measurement: the actuator of the LQR controller is quite noisy and the resulting
fiction causes a time deiay as shown in Figure 1S. On the other hand. the better
performance of the fbzzy controller over LQR is obvious on the angular velocity
simulation: It can be noted that both controllers exhibit a time delay in the control of
angular velocity q(t) but, the fuzy controller stabilizes a little faster and reaches zero as
indicated in Figure 15. The measured outputs y(t) are pitch q and angle of attack u .

However since alpha measurement are quite noisy. a low-pass filter is used to provide
filtered measurements of a ,and produces the same results as alpha is shown in Figure
17. An integrator (r) was applied to ensure a zero steady state; the output graph shows a
better performance of the fbzzy controller compared with that of the LQR controller as
elaborated in Figure 18. The integrator output is E .
In the fiizzy controller, the angle of attack, the angular velocity q(t), and the
.
integrator are used as feedback gains Ka Kq and KI respectively. The longitudinal task
of the crew is to regulate and control the total power of the air vehicle. If the velocity of
the aircraft is too low, the pilot has to take action to increase the engine thmst in order to
maintain control. On the other hand, if the aircraft nies too Iow but the velocity is high.
then the pilot should increase the pitch angle. The engine thmst increases the total power
of the aircraft, while the exchange (or the difference between potential and kinetic energy)
can be achieved by the pitch angle variations through the aircraA elevator ( tailplane).
Based on the above assessment, the rule base cornrnands for throttle and pitch angle
settings were defined. The labels of the settings are: negative big (NB), negative medium
(NM), negative small WS),zero (ZE), positive srnail (PS), positive medium (PM), and
positive big (PB). These terms are directly related to a senes of membership fnctions
between -1 and 1. The scaling factor with relative terms is transiated into the domain
between -1 and 1. The control actions are the throttle settng and the pitch angle
comrnands. Refemng to Table 6.4. if the velocity error is PM ,the aircrafl motion is too
slow and the altitude error is zero; then the pilot must take action to increase the throttle
change to apply more power as PS to the situation of the flight. The logic control values
of Table 6.4 are indicated in Table 6.5. As clearly illustrated in the simulation results of the
hzzy and LQR controllers for longitudinal motion of the aircraft, the f q control
application gives better results than those of the LQR, as the damping fiequency is much
faster and the situation is stabilized to zero more quickly. Looking at the control of
angular velocity and angle of attack, the results show that the amplitude of the f u q
controller is greater and stabilizes the situation more quickly than the LQR controller
which has a time delay interval. These encouraging results demonstrate the better
effectivenessof the fny controller over the LQR in the application of knowledge-based
control techniques for flight controllers. It is important to point out that for longitudinal
motion, the discrepancy between the linear quadratic (LQR)and tzzy logic controller
(FLC) are very smail as indicated in Figure 16 and Figure 17.
7.2 Lateral Motion
The results of dynamic simulation of lateral motion show far better performance of
the f u u y controller than the LQR.The difference in performance here was greater than
that in the longitudinal simulation. The simulation results clearly indicate the stability and
good performance of multi-variable frequency-domain techniques.
The hzqlogic controller provides a transparent interface between the
altitude control of the aircraft and a high level of human action. The EXC requires more
of human intuition than the solving of equations of multi-variables for specific formulae.
The performance of the longitudinal and lateral are evaluated by of a time responses under
the conditions of Table 6.4 ,Table 6.6 and Table 6.8..The test of the sideslip ande under
the requirement of the time response shows that the f u q logic controller is more
effective and stabilizes aster than the LQR controller (Figure 18). The results of the roll
angular velocity in dynamic motion without controller, fuuy logic and LQR with
controller are illustrated in Figure 20. In this case, it is very clear that the f k z y controller
has better performance as it has less amplitude and stabilizes faster in less than 3 seconds,
while the amplitude of LQR has a Iittle geater which results in a delay and effects its
performance. Refemng to the simulation results of the yaw rate in Figure 2 1. mdder
deflection in Figure 22 and aileron displacement in Figure 23. They indicate the nature of
the fuzzy controller and its performance provides a better results than the Iinear quadratic
regulator (LQR). The simulation results, show that the application of fuzzy logic
controller gives better performance than LQR controller in the lateral motion of the
aircraft.
 Chapter 8
Conclusions

For LQR, and fuuy logic controllen. most of the performance is predetemined
when the strategy and the design is defined. The FLC is a systematic procedure, but fine
optimiPng the t h e responses of the FLC requires a trial and error process. However.
using very restricted, clear guidelines and with a basic understanding of controller
parameter changes, satisfactory results c m be achieved. Aerodynamic derivatives for
configuration at the required flight conditions mut be considered, and great attention
should b e given to these derivatives as they have a tremendous influence on aircraft
motion.
The fuzry logic controller is considered a real-time expert system implementing
the actions of a human operator. The furzy logic controller is more effective than the LQR
as it doesn't require any explicit mathematical mode1 description; instead the actions of a
human operator are modeled. This results in a more efficient controller design, but only if
explicit operator knowledge is available in a suitable form. Fine-tuning the performance of
the controller is a trial and error process, but by using the provided guidelines and
understanding the influence of the controller parameters, a satisfactory controller can be
developed.
The controt strategy is kept in the form of If-then rules within the rule base. They
actually represent mapping of the input variables to the output actions. The dynamic filters
are utilized to input the error and denvatives of error and to introduce the output
integration. Scaling is perfonned to retain the signals between the input output parameter
and the limits for the f t q process ( rules) as defined. The membership fnctions produce
a clear interface from the linguistic knowledge to the numencal process variables. The
fzzification defines the membership degrees of the input to the antecedent fay sets. The
reasoning mechanism combines this information with the rule base and defines the firzq
output of the rule-based system. The application offuay is to mimic the control behavior
of the human action in a direct configuration or otherwise in a supeMsory control
environment. As the nile base indicates a mapping between the antecedent and the
consequent variable. external dynamic filters are utilied to introduce the desired dynamic
behavior of the controller. The supe~sorycontroller is a secondary controller which
augmented the existing controller for various conditions. The advantage of this system is a
duplication of the already existing system.
The performed simulation demonstrated that the hzzy logic controller (FLC) is an
efficient tool in control of the aircraft. More generaily, the FLC is especially usehl and
applicable to al1 non-linear dynamic systems where the mathematical mode1 is unknown or
partially known.
In this case of the aircraft, the application of the FLC improved the dynarnics of
transient responses and therefore made the control efforts more efficient.
 Fig. 1 Farnily of C,a Cuwes for Various 5, [IO]

M ~ c hN u n b e r
Fig.2 variation of Longitudinal Stability Coefficients with Mach Number 1141
 ANGLE OF A T TACK - OEG
Fig. 3 Loss rudder effectiveness due to combhed variations of angle of
artack and sideslip [15)

60
ANGLE O F ATTACK - OEG

Fig. 4 Loss of aileron effectiveness at increasing agles of amck in the presence

of sideslip for a fghter aimaA [17]
Fig. 5.1 Sub-sonic dampins derivatives for a wing-body configuration at M=0.7 [3 11

I_
' O , 50"
U
- 0.4
1
Fig. 5.2 Sub-sonic cross derivatives for a swept wing fighter aircraft a M=0.7 [12]

Fig. 5.3 Variation or cross-coupling derivatives with the angle of attack 1331
Fig. Sa Body system ofaxes and related angles, positive directions indicated by arrows
 Fig. Sb Vertical fight path angle,. vertical plane
5

Fig. Sc Horizontal fight path angle YK horizontal

 Fuz;ifTed F w
inputs aonolusions

Fig. 6 Fu- system aontroiler

 and change-in-or is possnaii "

-e(t), (rad / sec)

Fig-7 Membership fkctions ofprernise temis.

Rd'-enc xnput

c
Fig.8 Fu- controller
Fig. 9 Output membership functions
Fig. 10 Input membership functions with input values
 Aed Product lJ

Fig. 11 Computational Mechanism ofFLC

 consequent membership unction and
irnplied fzzy set membership fiinction-

Fig 13 (a) consequenl mrmbcrship fnct ion and

(6) implied iu- sct incmbership function.
Fig. 13 (c) Membership functions for input altitude error

Fig. 13 (d) Membership functions for input velocity erim

 Fig. 13 (e) ~Membershipfunctions for input heading

Fig. 13 (f) Membership functions for input sideslip

 Time (sec)
-
Fig. 14 Longitudinal motion (a Angle of attack versus Time)
 5 1O
T h e (sec)

Fig. 15 Longitudinal motion (Angular Velocity versus Time)

 -
-

-
*

-0.8 ' I t

10
I

15
O 5
Tirne (sec)
Fig. 16 Longitudinal motion (6. - Elevator deflection versus Time)
 3r

1 -

1 ",

- Futzy conuoller

-- LQR conuoller

I
O
O 5 IO 15
Time (sec)
Fig. 17 Longitudinal motion (aF- Filtered measurement of angle of anack versus T i r
 1 -
0.8 -
\
0.6-
1 - Fuzzy conuoller
--- LQR conuoller
-.- withou~ccntrollcr

- --.
-
- -- - . -

I
-0.2- 1
I
I
' /

I
J
I
1
-0.4 - \
1
I
1
i
-0 6 - I

1 I 1

O 5 10 1s
Tirne (sec)

Fig. 18 Lateral motion (Sideslip angle versus Tirne)

-2.5 l- 1 v f

O 5 10 1S
Time (sec)

Fig. I9 Laterai motion (Euleur angular rotation versus Time)

 - fuuy ~~ntrolfa
--- LQR conuoller
-- wihout conuoflcr

Time (sec)

Fig. 20 Laterai motion (Angular velocity venus Time)

 5 1O
l i m e (sec)
Fig. 2 1 Lateral motion (Yaw rate venus Tirne)
 - Fuzzy conuoiler

--- LQR conuolIer

- +mut controller

1O
Time (sec)
Fig. 22 Lateral motion (Rudder deflection versus Time)
Fig. 23 Lateral motion (Aileron deflection venus Time)
 References
Luenberger, D. G., "An Introduction to Observers," IEEE Trans. On Automatic
Control, pp.596-603, December 197 1.
Grafion S. B. & Libbey C. E., "Dynamic Stability Derivatives of Twin jet Fighter
Model for Angles of Attack corn - 10' to 1 10~,".NASA, TN D609 1, 1971.
Rom,J.. "High Angle of Attack Aerodynamics," Springer-Verlag, 1992.
Visbal, M. R."Dynamic Stall of Constant Rate Pitching Aerofoil. J. Aircrafi,"
27 (may), 1990.
Huang, Chien Y., et al., "Analysis and Simulation of Nonlinear Control Strategies
to Hgh Angle-of-Attack Maneuvers," Proceeding of AIAA Guidence, Navigation,
and Control Conference, New Orleans, Lo 199 1.
Favilla.. J., ''Fuuy Traffic Contro1:Adaptive Strateies," Second IEEE International
Conference on Fuzzy Systems, 1993.
Anderson, B. D- and Moore. J. B., "Linear Optimal Control". Prentice Hall. 1992.
Orlik-Ruchemanri, K. I., "Aerodynamics Coupling between Lateral and
Longitudinal Degrees of Freedorn," AIAA journal, Vol 15,No. 12, Dec. 1977.
Pontryagin. L .S.." Ordinary Differentiaf Equations," Addison Wesley, 1962
Orlik-Ruchemann, K. J., Hanf, E S . , Laberge, J-G. " Direct and Cross-Coupling
Subsonic Moment Derivatives due to Oscillatory Pitching an Yawing of an Aircrall
like Model at Angles of Attack up to 40' in AMES ."NRC NAE LTR-UA -38,
Nov. 1976.
Johnson, H. 1.. "Flight Testing Aircraft for Longitudinal Maneuvering
Characteristics," Vol. 2, AGARD Flight Test Manual, Pergamon Press, New
York, 1959.
Nelson, R.C., "Flight Stability and Control Automatic Control," McGraw-Hill
Book Company, New York, 1989.
Babister ,A.W., "Aircraft Dynamic Stability and Response," Pergamon
Press. 1980-
Mclean D.,"Automatic Fiight Control System" Prentice-Hall Intemational. 1990
Coe, P.L., Graham, A-B..and Chambers,J.R., "Sumrnary of Information on Low
Speed Lateral-Directional Derivatives Due to Rate of Change of Sideslip Angle,"
NASA TN D7972, Sep. 1975.
Hancock. G.J. & MAbey, D.."Unsteady Aerodynamics of Controls," AGARD CP
465,1978.
Atzhorn D.,and Stengel, R. ,"Design and Flight Test of a Lateral-Directional
Comrnand Augmentation System," J-Guid-Cont-Dyn., VoI.7, No.3. May-Jun 1984.
Hancock G .J.. "An Introduction to the Flight Dynamics of Rigid Aerosplanes,"
Eiiis Honvad Limited 1995.
"Unsteady Aerodynamics-Fundamentals and Applications to Aircrafi
Aerodynamics.," AGARD CP 386,1985.
Etkin. B.. "Dynamics of Flight-Stability and Control, ( 2nd Edition) ," John Wiley
& Sons. New York 1982.
Selson. R. C.,"Flight Stability and Automatic Control," McGraw-Hill, 1989.
Bnan, L. Stevens, Frank L-Leewis, "Aircrafl Control and Simulation7" 1992 by
John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Blakelock, J .FI.., "Automatic Control of Aircraft and Missiles (2nd Edition),"
John b'iley & sons, Inc-, New York 1991.
Smith, GA.. and G. Meyer, " Aircraft Automatic Flight Control System with
Mode1 Inversion ",Journal of Guidance, Control and Dynamics, Vol 10, No.$
May-June 1987.
Mclean D., "Automatic Flight Systems," Prentice-Hall Intemationai, 1990.
Isermann. R, LactimannJCH., Matko, D..,"Adaptive Control Systems ."Prentice
Hall, 1991.
Huang*Chien Y.,"Multivariable Control Law for Flat-Tum Strafnng Maneuver by
a Supermaneuverable Aircraft" Proc. of AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control
Conference, Aug. 1990.
Friedland Bernard, "Control System Design, " McGRaw-Hill, Inc. 1986.
 -86-

Zadeh L A . " Outiine of a New Approach to the Analysis o f Cornplex Systems

and Decision Processes." EEE Trans-on Systems. Man and Cybernetics ,1973.
Lee, C C . _" F u q Logic in Control Systems: F u z q Logic Controller- part 1."
IEEE T r a m Systems. Vol. 20, March 1990.
Bezek. .J-C.." Fuzzy Model- What are they, and Why?," EEE Trans. Fu-
System Vol. l. NO.1. February 19%.
Banks, J. and Carson J- S-." Discrete event System Simuiation" Prentice-HaiI,
1984.
Reusch Bernd. 'Computational Intelligence Theory and Applications."
International Conference. 5" Fuuy Days Dortmund. Germany. A p d 1997
Proceedings, Spnnger.
Baldwin. J. F.. Manin T.P..Pilswonh B.W.." Fnl- F u q and Evidential Reasoning
in Artificial Intelligence,", Research Studies Press LTD.,
1995. London.
Sasiadek, J. Z and Mazzawi Albert N., " Fu- and Adaptive Control of Aircrafi"
Carleton University. Ottawa Ontario, Canada 1993.
Law and DKalton-. "Simulation Modelling and Analysis." New York, hlcGraw-
Hill Inc, 1991.
-'Fixed Win9 Stability and Control: Theory and Flight Test Techniques," USNTPS-
FTM- NO. 103.Naval Air Test Center. Patuxent River, Maryland. January f 975
( Revised November 198 1).
Zadeh, L: ''F- Sets Information and Control." vol. 8 ( 1965).
McCorrnick. B.W.,'-Aerodynamics, Aeronauics. and Flight Mechanics,"McGraw-
Hill, 1979.
Tob& M.. "On the Use of the Indicial Function Concept in the Analysis of
Unsteady Motion of Wings and Wing-Tai1 Combinations." NACA Report
1 188,1954.
Meyer. G. And L. Cicolani, "Appiications of Nonlinear System Inverses to
Automatic Flight Control Design-System Concepts and Flight evaluations",
Theory and Apptications of Optimal Control in Aerospace Systems. AGARD, Juiy
1981,
Jones. J.G.. "WK Research on Aeronautical Effects of Surface Winds and Gusts."
AGARD Report 626,1974.
Roskam J.. "Airplane Flight Dynamics and Automatic Control." part 1. Roshkam
Aviation and Engineering Corportion Lawrence. Kansas. 1979.
Beaufere. Henry, et- Ai., "Controt Power Requirements for StaticdIy Unstabie
-4ircraft. Vol, I and II ." .WAL-TR-87-3018. June 1987.
Martorella P.. et al.."Controi Definition Study for Advanced Vehicle." NASA
Contractor Report 3 738. Non. i 983,
Hopkins. KR, "A Scheme of Notation and Nomenclature for Aircrafi Dyarnics
and Associated Aerodynamics." ARC R&M 3 562,1970.
Curry, W. H.and Orlik-ruckarnam. K. J.. "Sensitivity of aircrafi motion to
aerodynamics cross-coupling at high angles of attack". AG--CP-23 S. Paper
34. Nov. 1973.
Babushka R.and Verbmgger."An oveMew of fuy modeling for controf'.
Control Engineering Practices. 4( 1 1): 1593- 1606, 1996.
Daafiour J.. Anelier D..Garcia G.. and Bemusson J.."RCAM design challenge -
presentation document: the Lyapunov approach". Technical Publication TP-088-
II. Group for Aeronautical Research and technology in EUROPE G-ARTEUR-FM
(AGOS), 1997.
Larnbregts A. A.. "Vertical fli& path and speed control autopilot design using
total energy principles". Technical reports, AIAA 83-223 9, 1983.
Etkin, B., "Dynamics of Atmospheric Flight". John Wiley and Sons. Inc.. New
York. 1982.
DeHaven H.,"The relation of Injuries to Structure in SuMvable Aircrafi
Accidents." National Research Council, CAB Report no. 440, July 1970.
Bernard Friedland, "Control System Design an Introduction to State-Space
Methods", McGraw-Hill, Inc., N.Y. 1986.
 -8 8-

Appendix : A

A. 1 Characteristics o f aircraft
The aerodynamic derivatives of hypothetical aircrafi configuration based on data
available in references [2, 5, 103-
Table A.1.1

Parameter value unit

90 0.0 ( radsec)
 r

a~ 4.0 (Per radian)

1t 7.85 cm)
- -

1.2 (Per radian)

I

C,/C 0-45
A.2 Aerodynamic and control derivatives
The parameters of the control derivatives are based on data avaiiable in references [2,
471.
Ta bie A.2.1

Parameter
 Appendix: B

* *
* THE FUZZY LOGIC PROGRAMMING FOR AIRCRAFT MOTION *
* T

kdefine pi 3.14159

float calbif(float[],float.float,int);
float rnember-finction(int,int.fioat,float,float);
float rnemberJnctionG(int.int.float.float,fioat);
float fzzycontrol(fioat[]);
float ucrisp(int.float[J,float[],float.float);

void rnain(void)
{
float x[jo].xa[jO],m[jO],k 1[SOI, W[50],W [50].k4[5O].u.t,h.gO.g 1 .H:
int j,i,l,No-oceqs;

FILE *@;
if((@--f0pen("gs2~'.~'~vb"))=NULL)
{
printf("cannot open directory fiiei");
exit (1);
1
/*initiaiizations/
X[ 1 ]=. 1; x[2]=0; x[3]=0; g0=2; g 1=. 1 ; H=S;
u=O; FO; h=.OOl;
Noof_eqs=3 ;
for(j=Oa<=3 1 OOj*)

x[l]=gO*x[l]; x[2]=glfx[2];
/*The differential equations of Aircrafl by the Runge-Kutta methodi/
x[ 1]=x[ l ]/go; x[2]=?c[2]/g 1;
for(l=0;1<=3I Oit+)
{
i@-1' 10)
Fprin~Q,t'.4%d=f%f%f%fl;\n".l.t,u.x[l]);
}
for(+ 1:i<=Noo-eqs;i*)

xn[i]=s[i];
1
for(+ 1 :i<=Noof_eqs;i*)
{

1
for(+ 1;i<=Noo-eqs;i++)
C
~a[i].cn[i]-k 1 [il/':

for(+ 1;&=No-of-eqs;i*)
{
k2[i]=calbif(xau. hi);
i
for(+ l :i<=Noo-qs;i++-)
{
xa[iIq[i]+ k2[i]/2;
}
for(i= l ;i<=Noof-eqs;i*)
{
k3 [i]=cai-dif(xa~~,h,i);
1
for(i= 1 ;i<=Noofeqs;i*)
{
xa[i]icn[i]+k3 [il;
1
for(i= 1 ;i<=Nopf-eqs;i*)
{
k4[i]=cal-dif(xa,u, h, i);
 iSSTATE-SPACEEQUATION OF Aircraft*/
float cal-diqfloat xa[],float u-float h,int i)
{
fioat a,b.k[SO];
k[l]='ca[2]*h;
a=9.8 *sin(xa[ 1])+cos(xa[ Il)*(-xa[3]-0. X*pow(xa[2].?)*sin(xa[1]))/ 1 -5:
b=OS *(4/3-pow(cos(xa[ 1]),2)/3);
k[2]=h+a/b:
k[3]=h*(- 1 OO*xa[3]+100*u);
return k[i];
i
J

/*hfMN FUNCTION OF FUZZY CONTROLLER*/

float fulzvcontrol(float x[])

float xd.mfl[l l].mf2[11].w.cl.u:

int i,N;
N=lO;
for(i=O;i<=N;i*)
{
xd=-x[l]; w=pi/4; cl=w*N/2; /*xd-e and de/dt,w-the base-width of
membership*/
mfl[i]=rnember_functionG(N.i,xd,w,cl); /*fnctions,cl--saniration
point,N-number*/
xd=x[2]; w=pi/8; cl=w*N/2; /*oflinguistic values*/
mf2[i]=member-bnctionG(N,i,xd,w,cI);
1
w= 1O, cl-w
*N/2;
u=ucrisp(N,mfi,rnf2,w,cl);
retum u;
1
/*GET MEMBERSHIP FUNCTIONS*/
float mernber-function(int N.int i.float xd.float w.float cl)

fioat rnf122J;
Mi]=O;
if(i<N/2)
{
iRxdC0)

iKxd<=-cl)
M O ] = 1;
else
{
if(((i-N/2- I )*w<=xd)&&(xd<=(i-Nl2)*w))
mai]= 1-(-(i-N/2)*w+xd)/w;
else iK((i-N/2)* w<xd)&&(xd<=(i-N/2+ 1 )*w))
mfli]= 1+((i-NE) *w-xd)/w;
else
mfli]=O;
}
1
else
mqi]=O;

eIse if(i=N/2)

if((-wcxd)&&(xd<w))
{
if(xd<=O)
1nfl3/2]= 1+xd/w;
 else

if(((i-N/2+ 1)* w>=xd)&&(xd>=(i-N/2) *w))

mfli]= 1-(xd-(i-N/2) *w)/w;
else if(((i-N/2) *w>xd)&&(xd>=(i-Nl2- 1)*w))
M i ] = 1+(xd-(i-N/2) *w)/w;
else
fli]=O;

1
else
mfli]=O:
1
retum mfli];

/*FUZZEICATION AND CalcuIation OUTPUT*/

float ucrisp(int N-float mfl[],float mf2[],float w-float cl)
{
Boat prem[1 l][l l],mle[11][1 l],ucrisp.u.num.den:
int ij;
or(i=O:i<=N;i+-)
{
for(j=O:j<=N:j*)
{
:* if(& [i]>mf2D])
prem[i]~]=mf2~];
else
prem[i]u]=mfi [il; */prem[i][i]=mfl [i]*mf2fi];
ucnsp=ucnsp;
return ucrisp;
1
float member-fnctionG(int N.int i,float xd,float w,float cl)
{
float mf1221,o;
0=.4*w;
i f(fabs(xd-w *(i-N/2))>-w)
rnfli]=O;
else if (fabs(xd)>=cl)
~ i 3 1=;
else
Mi]=exp(-O. 5 *pow(((xd-w *(i-N/2))/o),2));
return Mi];
K=p;C;D;E;F;G;H;I;q;
L=K';
X=L( 1, :);
Y=L(2, :);
Z=t(3, :);
subptot(2,2, 1)
PWXY)
grid on
aXis([O 2 -5 301)
xiabel("time(sec)Gaussian 0=0.5*w')
yIabel('input forceCN)')
subplot(2,2,2)
pWX2)
grid on
auis([O 3 -0.05 O. 151)
xlabel('g0=2,g l = 1, h=5')
ytabel('angu1ar position(rad)')
V0=[0.000000 27.729303 O. 1OOOOO];
V1=[0.020000 -2.1373 18 0.0975731;
V2=[0.040000 -0.0783O7 0.09 19641;
V3=[0.060000 2.577582 0.0880721;
V4=[0.080000 O. 147573 0.083995];
VS=[O. 1O0000 1.177288 0.080054];
V6=[0.120000 0.8844 11 0.0764041;
V7=[0.140000 0.797745 0.072858];
V8=[0.160000 0.840908 0.0694971;
V9=[0.180000 0.756299 0.0662891;
V 10=[0.200000 0.736924 0.063225];
VI 1=[0.220000 0.701210 0.060304];
Vl2=[O.24OOOO 0.666650 0.0575 161;
Vl3=[O.26OOOO 0.637501 0.054857J;
V14=[0.280000 0.607036 0.0523 191;
V15=[0.300000 0.579077 0.0498981;
Vl6=[O.32OOOO 0.552 143 0.047589J;
Vl7=[O.34OOOO 0.5258 16 0.045385];
V18=[0.360000 0.50 1842 0.0432831;
V lg=[O.380000 0.478410 0.0412781;
V20=[0.400000 0.456200 0.0393661;
V2 1=[O.42OOOO 0.435023 0.03 75421;
V22=[O.44OOO 1 0.4 1479 1 0.0358021;
V23=[O.46OOO 1 0.3955 18 0.0341421;
V24=[0.480001 0.377127 0.0325591;
V2S=[O.SOOOO i 0.3 59596 0.03 10491;
V371;
D3=[V3 8;V39;V40;V4 1 ;V42;V43;V45;V46:V47;V48;V49;VSO;VS
1 ;V52;V53;VS4;V55;
VS61;
D4=[V57;VSS;V59;V60;V6 I;V62;V63;V64;V65;V67;V68;V69;V70;V71
;V72;V73;V74;
v751;
DS=[V76;V77;V78;V79;V80;VS I;V82;V83;V84;V8S;VS6;V87;V88;V89;V90;V9
1;V92;
V93];
D6=[V94;V9S;V96;V97;V98;V99;VlOO;VlO l;VI02;V103;V104;V105;V1O6;VlO7;VlO
8;V 1091;
D7=[VI IO;VI1 1 ;VII2;VII3;VII4;VII5;VII6;VI17;VI18;VI19;V120;Vi2I;VI22;VI
23;VIM];
D8=[V125;V126;V127;Vl28;V129;V130;V13 1;V132;V134;V135;V136;V137;V138;VI
3 91;
D9=[V140;V141;Vl42;V143;V144;V145;V146;V147;VI48;V149;V150];
K3=[D 1;D2:D3;D4;DS;D6;D7;DS;D9];
L3=K3';
X3=LS(l,:);
Y3=L3 (2,:);
23=L3(3 ,:);
subplot(2,2,3)
plot(X3 ,Y3)
-
rnd on
a.s([O 2 -5 301)
'clabel(? ime(sec)o=O.5 w')
ylabel('input force(h3')
subplot(2.2.4)
plot(X3.23)
grid on
aXis([O 3 -0.05 O,151)
ylabel('angu1ar position(rad)')
'dabel('gO=S,g l = 1 ,h=5')