© Copyright 2008 Rockwell Collins, Inc. All rights reserved. Rockwell Collins Case Study: Damage Tolerance June 12, 2008 Damien Jourdan, Ph.D Approved.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Principles of Engineering System Design Dr T Asokan
Advertisements

Company Presentation.
Types of Aircraft Flight Instruments Parts of an Aircraft Principles of Flight At the Airport
Model Checker In-The-Loop Flavio Lerda, Edmund M. Clarke Computer Science Department Jim Kapinski, Bruce H. Krogh Electrical & Computer Engineering MURI.
Sensors and location technologies – the front end of ISR
Flight Testing Advanced Unmanned Aircraft Michael McDaniel - AIR Naval Air Systems Command NAS Patuxent River, MD, USA DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A:
Illinois Space Society Tech Team USLI CDR Presentation.
Team 6: Autonomous Aerial Vehicle Team Members Department of Mechanical Engineering: Ken Anderson, Arielle Duen, Eric Milo, Ernandes Nascimento and Matthew.
ATMOSPHERIC REENTRY TRAJECTORY MODELING AND SIMULATION: APPLICATION TO REUSABLE LAUNCH VEHICLE MISSION (Progress Seminar Presentation - 2) K. Sivan (Roll.
AIRCRAFT HANDLING Part 7 Aerobatics and Formation Flying.
Development of Guidance and Control System for Parafoil-Payload System VVR Subbarao, Sc ‘C’ Flight Mechanics & Control Engineering ADE.
Steep Turns.
P09233 Flight Parameter Measurements Michael Skube P09233
MASKS © 2004 Invitation to 3D vision Lecture 11 Vision-based Landing of an Unmanned Air Vehicle.
AT 209 Introduction to Civil Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS)
Oculus Superne. 2 System Definition Review Mission Objectives Concept of Operations Aircraft Concept Selection Payload Constraint Analysis and Diagrams.
Softwalls, E. A. Lee 1 Preventing the use of Commercial Aircraft as Weapons Edward A. Lee Professor, EECS, UC Berkeley with Xiaojun Liu, Adam Cataldo Institute.
Softwalls: Preventing Aircraft from Entering Unauthorized Airspace Adam Cataldo Prof. Edward Lee Ian Mitchell Prof. Shankar Sastry CHESS Review May 8,
EDGE™ MAV Control System - P Management Review (MSD I) Erik Bellandi – Project Manager Ben Wager – Lead Engineer Garrett Argenna – Mechanical Engineering.
February 24, Final Presentation AAE Final Presentation Backstepping Based Flight Control Asif Hossain.
Sense & Avoid for UAV Systems
Soft Field Takeoff and Landing. Soft Field Takeoff w Before landing, will you be able to take off? w Complex and high performance aircraft often have.
Vehicle Tracking/Payload Release System For Small UAV Project Team
EDGE™ MAV Control System - P09122 Final Project Review Erik Bellandi – Project Manager Ben Wager – Lead Engineer Garrett Argenna – Mechanical Engineering.
Aviation Requirement 1 A) Define “aircraft”- an airplane, helicopter, or other machine capable of flight What are the operation of the following:  Jet.
Autonomous Flight AIAA Group 6 Mat Thompson. Autonomy- The degree to which something is subject to control from the outside  Unmanned Aerial Vehicles.
Presented to: MPAR Working Group By: William Benner, Weather Processors Team Manager (AJP-1820), FAA Technical Center Date: 19 March 2007 Federal Aviation.
Warm-Up – 1/16 – 10 minutes Utilizing your notes and past knowledge answer the following questions: Theoretically, why is the canard considered more.
A New Method for the Tele-operation of Aircraft Dr. Paul Oh James Hing.
W w w. a r c a a. a e r o AUSTRALIAN RESEARCH CENTRE FOR AEROSPACE AUTOMATION Overview of Activities at the Australian Research Centre for Aerospace Automation.
AVAT11001: Course Outline Aircraft and Terminology
Honeywell Proprietary Honeywell.com  0 Document control number Honeywell Technology Solutions Inc. Overview November 2007.
October 2006 NASA Dryden Status Aerospace Control & Guidance Sub-committee Williamsburg, VA October 2006 John Bosworth (661)
READY OR NOT THE FLIGHT REVIEW. FLIGHT REVIEW A FLIGHT REVIEW IS REQUIRED WITHIN THE PREVIOUS 24 CALENDAR MONTHS TO ACT AS PIC.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology 4 April 2003
Vision-based Landing of an Unmanned Air Vehicle
UC SANTA CRUZ, AUTONOMOUS SYSTEMS LAB, An Improved Line-of- Sight Guidance Law for UAVs R. Curry, M. Lizarraga, B. Mairs, and G.H. Elkaim University of.
Computerised Air Traffic Management Tools - Benefits and Limitations OMAR BASHIR (March 2005)
1 Adaptive, Optimal and Reconfigurable Nonlinear Control Design for Futuristic Flight Vehicles Radhakant Padhi Assistant Professor Dept. of Aerospace Engineering.
BQM-167A Advanced UAV System Architecture
WESMAR Defense Products Company WEB System Presentation By: Aziz Sonny Hakimi International Sales Manager WESMAR.
Symbiotic Simulation of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS)
UC SANTA CRUZ, AUTONOMOUS SYSTEMS LAB, An Improved Line-of- Sight Guidance Law for UAVs R. Curry, M. Lizarraga, B. Mairs, and G.H. Elkaim University of.
COBXXXX EXPERIMENTAL FRAMEWORK FOR EVALUATION OF GUIDANCE AND CONTROL ALGORITHMS FOR UAVS Sérgio Ronaldo Barros dos Santos,
1410 Sachem Place ◊ Suite 202 ◊ Charlottesville, VA Integrated Adaptive Guidance & Control for the X-37 during TAEM & A/L.
UK Aerial Robotics Team UK IDEA Laboratory Workforce Development: The UK Aerial Robotics Team and the PAX River Student UAV Competition Dale McClure (Matt.
© Copyright 2008 Rockwell Collins, Inc. All rights reserved. Proprietary Information Rockwell Collins SAE ACGSC Meeting 102 General Committee Briefing.
Introduction to IWA. The IWA is based on a patented, next generation design called the Internal Wing Aircraft. The concept brings three separate wings.
February 2007 NASA Dryden Status Aerospace Control & Guidance Sub-committee Boulder, CO February 2007 John Bosworth (661)
Aeronautics & Astronautics Autonomous Flight Systems Laboratory All slides and material copyright of University of Washington Autonomous Flight Systems.
Ship-based UAV Recovery System (SURS) Launch and Recovery of Manned and Unmanned Vehicles from Marine Platforms 2010 Symposium March 8-9, 2010.
Smart Icing Systems Review, June 19-20, Aircraft Autopilot Studies Petros Voulgaris Vikrant Sharma University of Illinois.
Take-off and the circuit. Take-off  Take-off is the phase of flight in which an aircraft goes through a transition from moving along the ground (taxiing)
© 2002 GMU SYST 495 AATMS Team Autonomous Air Traffic Management System (AATMS): The Management and Design of an Affordable Ground-Based Air Traffic Management.
1 MITRE © 2015 The MITRE Corporation All rights reserved. Approved for Public Release: Case Distribution Unlimited. For Internal MITRE Use Trustworthy.
1 Use or disclosure of this information is subject to the restriction on the title page of this document. Flight Symbology to Aid in Approach and Landing.
© Copyright 2003 Frost & Sullivan. All Rights Reserved. United States Unmanned Aerial Systems Market Aerospace and Defense “The U.S. unmanned aerial systems.
Aircraft Auto Pilot Roll Control System
Aerobatics and Formation Flying
Cloud Cap Technologies
Roadmap for the Application and Technology Development of UAVs in Japan The Public-Private Sector Conference on Improving the Environment for UAVs, 28th.
Auto Tow Conversion Course
RGS: Recovery Guidance System
Sérgio Ronaldo Barros dos Santos Cairo Lúcio Nascimento Júnior
FAA Building Blocks Leading to UAS Integration Emerging Trends
Mastering the most dreaded maneuver in flight training
Autonomous Operations in Space
Artificial Intelligence in Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV)
Future Airborne Capability Environment (FACE™) Support
UAV Navigation Using Signals of Opportunity
Presentation transcript:

© Copyright 2008 Rockwell Collins, Inc. All rights reserved. Rockwell Collins Case Study: Damage Tolerance June 12, 2008 Damien Jourdan, Ph.D Approved for public release, distribution unlimited

© Copyright 2008 Rockwell Collins, Inc. All rights reserved. Rockwell Collins Control Technologies - Formerly Athena Technologies Founded in 1998 and acquired by Rockwell Collins in April 2008, we invented, developed and brought to market new controls technology – which today is incorporated in the Athena product line of flight control and navigation systems Service military, experimental, general and business manned and unmanned aviation markets worldwide Full service provider – enabling customers to reduce time to market and program life cycle cost A few of our customers: General Atomics’ ER/MP Warrior Alenia’s Sky-X Insitu’s Scan Eagle Navy & Marine Corps AAI Corporation’s Shadow- US Army CEi’s Air Force BQM-167A Target Aurora Flight Sciences OAV-II Watchkeeper EMT Luna Raytheon’s Loiter Attack Munition Textron Systems U-ADD

© Copyright 2008 Rockwell Collins, Inc. All rights reserved. Insert pictures into these angled boxes. Height should be 3.44 inches. About Rockwell Collins A global company operating from more than 60 locations in 27 countries 20,000 employees on our team A uniquely balanced business across markets we serve —Government – 50% of sales —Commercial – 50% of sales $4.42 billion in sales (2007)

© Copyright 2008 Rockwell Collins, Inc. All rights reserved. Rockwell Collins Total Solutions for the UAS Market Ground Control Station Redundancy Architecture Engine Control Unit RF/Mode-S/IFF Front End ADS-B Protocol + ATM Algorithm & Distributed Computing Air Traffic Management IAINS – Dynamic Landmarking Mini SAR-TacVue Advanced FCS Damage Tolerance SALS Mini-CDL ARC 210

© Copyright 2008 Rockwell Collins, Inc. All rights reserved. 5 Damage Tolerance Case Study

© Copyright 2008 Rockwell Collins, Inc. All rights reserved. The Problem: Damage and In-Flight Failure Battle Damage Threatens Safety, and Security Convergence of Manned & Unmanned Aircraft in Crowded Commercial Airspace

© Copyright 2008 Rockwell Collins, Inc. All rights reserved. Inset: Ejected aileron simulating battle damage The Solution: Technologies such as Damage/Fault Tolerance Subscale F/A-18 at Philips Army Airfield in Aberdeen, MD Testing Platform: Subscale F/A-18 UAV Athena Flight Control and Navigation Systems Athena 111m

© Copyright 2008 Rockwell Collins, Inc. All rights reserved. Damage Tolerance Phase I - 18-Apr 07 Used subscale F/A-18 vehicle for demonstration –Turbo jet –Athena 111m –Fully autonomous operations: takeoff to landing Basic sequence –After takeoff and climb to altitude, right aileron intentionally released –Adaptive-control system automatically evaluates and recovers –System autoland Timeline from Start to Production: 90 Days; 4 Full time people

© Copyright 2008 Rockwell Collins, Inc. All rights reserved. Damage Tolerance Phase II – More Damage - Greater Risk 9 2 Flight Tests at Aberdeen – April 08 Basic sequence for both flights Auto take off and climb to altitude Ejection of 41% (area moment) of wing during1 st flight Ejection of 60% (area moment) of wing during 2 nd flight Introduced Automatic Supervisory Adaptive Control (ASAC) technology which reacted to new vehicle configuration Automatically regained baseline performance Continued to fly the plane System autoland using INS/GPS reference only

© Copyright 2008 Rockwell Collins, Inc. All rights reserved. Flight 1 – 41% Wing Loss 10

© Copyright 2008 Rockwell Collins, Inc. All rights reserved. Flight 2 – 60% Wing Loss 11

© Copyright 2008 Rockwell Collins, Inc. All rights reserved. Hardware and Software Athena 111m F/A-18 Avionics Bay

© Copyright 2008 Rockwell Collins, Inc. All rights reserved. Damage Tolerant Control overview (1) This block diagram shows the high-level architecture of RCCT’s Damage Tolerant Control (DTC). Key technologies include: Emergency Mission Management System (EMMS) Automatic Supervisory Adaptive Control (ASAC) All-attitude controllers Model Reference Adaptive Control (MRAC) ASAC and MRAC were demonstrated using RCCT’s subscale F-18 UAV.

© Copyright 2008 Rockwell Collins, Inc. All rights reserved. Damage Tolerant Control overview (2) DTC core algorithms: Automatic Supervisory Adaptive Control (ASAC): The entire aircraft is used as an actuator by directly controlling the vehicle attitude with respect to the wing vector  Return to trimmed and controlled flight Model Reference Adaptive Control (MRAC): The observed aircraft performance is compared to what it should be, and the autopilot gains are appropriately adapted  Recover baseline performance Baseline performance Aircraft controllable Damage 1 sec Aircraft uncontrollable ASAC recovers controllability upon damage MRAC recovers performance (e.g. precision landing) ~ 1 min

© Copyright 2008 Rockwell Collins, Inc. All rights reserved. Damage Tolerant Control overview (3)

© Copyright 2008 Rockwell Collins, Inc. All rights reserved. MRAC overview When an actuator is failed/damaged, MRAC increases the loop gain until the (observed) plant performance matches that of the original model Convergence guaranteed by Lyapunov stability theory Minimum vehicle-specific parameters for rapid deployment on a new platform Seamlessly blends into operational scenarios

© Copyright 2008 Rockwell Collins, Inc. All rights reserved. ASAC overview Use the control surfaces and the orientation of the vehicle to achieve the desired trajectory and velocity vector. Adapt the control of attitude to get to the desired trajectory: Use vehicle-specific characteristics to directly generate forces and moments from vehicle orientation Rapid response to damage for seamless recovery from damage Retain ability to perform autonomous landing with damage Maintain trajectory control with partially controllable platform

© Copyright 2008 Rockwell Collins, Inc. All rights reserved. Flight results Flight tests were performed with different wing damage: right aileron stuck to neutral right aileron released right wing lost 40% of its area moment (+ right aileron) right wing lost 60% of its area moment (+ right aileron) Results presented are from the 60% damage case, a fully autonomous flight from take-off to landing. April 2008 flight test where the right wing lost 60% of its area moment Robustness of the algorithms

© Copyright 2008 Rockwell Collins, Inc. All rights reserved. Flight results: MRAC MRAC appropriately increased the innerloop gain by 40%, yielding a 40% improvement in roll tracking with damage. Roll tracking error of the damaged aircraft before MRAC After MRAC

© Copyright 2008 Rockwell Collins, Inc. All rights reserved. Flight results: ASAC (1) ASAC responded quickly to damage, relieving the saturation of the roll control surfaces saturation damage

© Copyright 2008 Rockwell Collins, Inc. All rights reserved. Flight results: ASAC disabled (1) ASAC was briefly disabled to show that without it, the aircraft would crash.

© Copyright 2008 Rockwell Collins, Inc. All rights reserved. Flight results: ASAC disabled (2) Onboard view when ASAC was disabled. Note the 90 deg bank angle (left) and the loss of altitude(right).

© Copyright 2008 Rockwell Collins, Inc. All rights reserved. Flight results: Autoland (1) The aircraft completed its flight with a flawless autonomous landing. Views of the final approach at Phillips Army airfield, Aberdeen Proving Grounds, MD

© Copyright 2008 Rockwell Collins, Inc. All rights reserved. Flight results: Autoland (1) The aircraft completed its flight with a flawless autonomous landing. Views of the final approach at Phillips Army airfield, Aberdeen Proving Grounds, MD

© Copyright 2008 Rockwell Collins, Inc. All rights reserved. Flight results: Autoland (2) In spite of 60% area moment loss on one wing and one aileron missing, the aircraft tracked the approach profile very accurately. The cross-track error quickly converges under 1m, and the altitude tracking error is under 1 foot RMS. Cross-track (top) and altitude (bottom) errors during the final approach

© Copyright 2008 Rockwell Collins, Inc. All rights reserved. Simulation results: Autoland Monte Carlo simulations using RCCT’s flight-proven 6-DOF nonlinear simulation environment were performed under different levels of wind, turbulence and damage. Statistics on touchdown for the subscale F/A-18 are shown below. DamageSurvivabilityRMS Roll at TD RMS Pitch at TD RMS Cross- track at TD RMS Vertical velocity at TD 20%100%6.8 deg5.8 deg2.3 m-1.4 m/s 30%90%8.7 deg5.9 deg3.8 m-1.5 m/s

© Copyright 2008 Rockwell Collins, Inc. All rights reserved. The Results Military Manned and Unmanned Aircraft –Ability to reduce loss of UAVs and manned aircraft in combat –Security of US sensitive technologies –Facilitates greater use of UAVs in high threat operations – saves lives and reduces costs –Combined with flight control redundancy; improves reliability exponentially Civilian Manned and Unmanned Aviation –Can be used on aircraft for fault tolerance –Can be used by pilots for upset recovery –Can be used by pilots and passengers for panic button autoland –Combined with Rockwell Collins sense and avoid technologies, provides complete solution and facilitates convergence of manned and unmanned aviation in commercial airspace 27

© Copyright 2008 Rockwell Collins, Inc. All rights reserved. For more information, visit or contact