Department of Engineering, Control & Instrumentation Research Group 22 – Mar – 2006 Optimisation...

Department of Engineering, Control & Instrumentation Research Group

22 – Mar – 2006

Optimisation Based Clearance of

Nonlinear Flight Control Laws

Prathyush P. MenonJongrae Kim

Declan G. BatesIan Postlethwaite

Control & Instrumentation Research Group,Department of Engineering,

University of Leicester,Leicester LE1 7RH, UK.


22 – Mar – 2006

•Nonlinear flight clearance

•A general optimisation framework

•Worst case uncertainty evaluation

•Clearance over regions of the flight envelope

•Worst case input identification

•Summary

Overview


22 – Mar – 2006

Nonlinear flight clearance

• Control algorithms usually designed based on linear models

• Robust performance over the whole flight envelope

• Controller gains are scheduled for the whole envelope

• How can we effectively

“clear” the controller

over the whole envelope?


22 – Mar – 2006


• Nonlinear flight clearance criterion – Based on time response, peak overshoot– AoA limit exceedance

• SecttJ 10));(max(


22 – Mar – 2006


•The uncertain parameters define a

multidimensional (dimension ‘l’) hyper box

•The worst case need not be at the vertices (max or min

values)

•Industry needs efficient, reliable and easily portable

methods

lΔ

• Problem becomes extremely computationally expensive

• Need efficient search methods to find “worst - case”

uncertain parameter combinations


22 – Mar – 2006

ADMIRE model

• Dynamics …(1)


22 – Mar – 2006

ADMIRE model

•Control algorithm …(2)


22 – Mar – 2006

• ADMIRE

– Simulink model

– Long. controller scheduled over the flight envelope

– SAAB phase compensation rate limiter active

– Nonlinear stick shaping elements present

– Reference inputs limited to ±40 N (for this study)

– Uncertain parameters are bounded

ADMIRE model

AIRCRAFT MATHEMATICAL MODEL

u(t))h(x(t),y(t)

)w(t),u(t),f(x(t),(t)x

)Δ̂(t),yg(x(t),u(t) REF


22 – Mar – 2006

General optimisation framework

The philosophy

JMax

Reference inputs Uncertain parameters

Mach AltitudeLevel Trim

Finite time history Optimisation

Algorithm


22 – Mar – 2006

Global Optimisation Schemes

•Several algorithms evaluated:

– Genetic algorithms (GA)

– Differential evolution (DE)

– Hybrid GA / Hybrid DE

– Dividing Rectangles (DIRECT)


22 – Mar – 2006

Global Optimisation Scheme

Genetic algorithms

•Search space

•Accuracy 1e-6 •Chromosomes length 105 bits (5 genes)• Initial population 50

•Genetic operators

Roulette selection 0.6Single point crossover

0.9

Binary uniform mutation

0.005


22 – Mar – 2006


Genetic algorithms (cont.)

•Termination criteria– improvement on the solution accuracy ≤ 1e-6– for a defined number of generations, fixed at

15– stop iteration

•Each trial gives different total number of simulations


22 – Mar – 2006


GA Results

•Slow convergence to •global optimum

•No. of simulations very

high (~5000)

•Computationally

prohibitive – slow

(~ 3-4 hours for each test point)

[0.1000, 0.0750, 0.0500, 0.18309, 0.0500, 36.0908]


22 – Mar – 2006


Differential Evolution

•Random initialisation

•Mutation

•Crossover

•Evaluation and selection•Termination criteria same as that of

GA


22 – Mar – 2006


DE Results

•Better convergence to

global optimum

•Reduced number of

simulations (~3000)

[0.1000, 0.0750, 0.0500, 0.18309, 0.0500, 36.0908]


22 – Mar – 2006


Global optimisation comparison statistics

Optimisation

Trials Avg.

Max. Min.

Std. Dev.

Prob. of success

GA 100 4485 7500 2400828.364 65%

DE 100 3086 4176 1152 567.57 90%

Tri

als

Tri

als

Tri

als

Tri

als


22 – Mar – 2006

Hybrid Optimisation Scheme

•Hybrid global and local optimisation schemes

•Exploit the advantages of both schemes

•Question: When to switch between the schemes?

•Standard approach: run global algorithm, then run local algorithm

•We use a more sophisticated decision making scheme based on one proposed by Lobo and Goldberg, 1996


22 – Mar – 2006


•Probabilistic switching scheme •Weighted reward for each algorithm

–

– •Probability of algorithm being selected depends on improvement in cost function

•Initial probabilities selected to favour use of GA at beginning

•“fmincon” is the local algorithm (SQP)• Termination criteria same as previous cases

Hybrid genetic algorithm (HGA)


22 – Mar – 2006


HGA Results

• Faster convergence to

global optimum

•Smaller No. of simulations

(~2000)

•Good reliability (92%)

[0.1000, 0.0750, 0.0500, 0.18309, 0.0500, 36.0908]


22 – Mar – 2006


Hybrid differential evolution

• Global optimisation used is DE• Local optimisation is “fmincon” (SQP)• Switching scheme

– Simple method; Starts with DE – When there is no improvement from successive

iterations:– choose a random initial solution from the current

iteration set– apply local optimisation– replace solution from local if improvement occurs

• Termination criteria: same as previous cases


22 – Mar – 2006


HDE Results

• Faster convergence to

global optimum

•Significantly fewer No. of

simulations (~1000)

•Excellent reliability (98%)

[0.1000, 0.0750, 0.0500, 0.18309, 0.0500, 36.0908]


22 – Mar – 2006


Hybrid optimisation comparison statistics

Optimisation

Trials Avg.

Max. Min.

Std. Dev.

Prob. of success

HGA 100 2011 4468 1357 547.42 92%HDE 100 1106 1434 477 192.42 98%

Tri

als

Tri

als

Tri

als

Tri

als


22 – Mar – 2006

Flight envelope clearance

Mach [ 0.4 - 0.5 ]

Altitude [ 1000 - 4000 ]

Uncertainties same

as discussed earlier

Stick input now to 80N.

We apply Hybrid DE

scheme over the region

of flight envelope

Optimisation based clearance over a continuous region offlight envelope:


22 – Mar – 2006

Optimisation Performance


22 – Mar – 2006

Clearance Results


22 – Mar – 2006

Clearance Results

Worst case

Flight condition

P. P. Menon, J. Kim, D.G. Bates and I. Postlethwaite, ``Clearance of nonlinear flight control laws using hybrid evolutionary optimisation”, to appear in IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 2006


22 – Mar – 2006

Deterministic global optimisation

• Disadvantages of stochastic optimisation for flight clearance:

No guaranteed proof of convergence

Require statistical analysis of performance

Non-repeatability of results

• DIviding RECTangles (DIRECT) is a deterministic global

optimisation algorithm with a proof of convergence

• Initial results of application of this method for flight clearance

are very promising: P. P. Menon, D.G. Bates and I. Postlethwaite, ``A Hybrid Deterministic Optimisation Algorithm for Nonlinear Flight Clearance”, to appear in the proceedings of the American Control Conference, Boston, 2006


22 – Mar – 2006

Computation of worst-case pilot inputs

•Klonk inputs:

deg16.0038αmax

]t[tt,(t)y f0REF

Global Optimisation 12Xx(t)

Δ(t),yREF

FULL NONLINEAR AIRCRAFT SIMULATION MODEL

u(t))h(x(t),y(t)

)w(t),u(t),f(x(t),(t)x

)Δ̂(t),yg(x(t),u(t) REF

Mach AltitudeLevel Trim


22 – Mar – 2006

Computation of worst-case pilot inputs•Worst-case inputs: deg66.4316αmax

0.0611 0.0648 -0.0020 -0.0022 0.0418 66.4316

cgx mass

emC

alC

mC

max

Time: 3hrs. 5mins.

deg58.0721αIIAnalysis max

deg16.0038αKlonk max

deg27.066α:IAnalysis max

P. P. Menon, D. G. Bates and I. Postlethwaite, ``Computation of Worst-Case Pilot Inputs for Nonlinear Flight Control System Analysis'', AIAA Journal of Guidance, Control and Dynamics, 29(1), 2006.


22 – Mar – 2006

Computation of worst-case pilot inputs

Rudder

Input of Rate LimiterOutput of Rate Limiter

•What’s the problem?


22 – Mar – 2006

Conclusions

•Results demonstrate that the uncertain parameter

combination resulting in worst behaviour need not

be at extremum bounds

•Hybrid optimisations schemes successfully applied

to a nonlinear flight clearance problem over a

continuous region of the flight envelope

•Flexibility of the framework also allows robust

computation of worst case pilot inputs

•Improved accuracy and faster convergence due to

hybridisation could allow the use of such methods in

the industrial flight clearance process

Department of Engineering, Control & Instrumentation Research Group 22 – Mar – 2006 Optimisation...

Documents

Transcript of Department of Engineering, Control & Instrumentation Research Group 22 – Mar – 2006 Optimisation...