homing missile guidance and control at jhu/apl sae aerospace control & guidance systems...

13
Homing Missile Guidance and Control at JHU/APL SAE Aerospace Control & Guidance Systems Committee Meeting #97 March 1-3, 2006 Uday J. Shankar, Ph. D. Air & Missile Defense Department 240-228-8037; [email protected]

Upload: kody-elliott

Post on 15-Dec-2015

244 views

Category:

Documents


8 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Homing Missile Guidance and Control at JHU/APL SAE Aerospace Control & Guidance Systems Committee Meeting #97 March 1-3, 2006 Uday J. Shankar, Ph. D. Air

Homing Missile Guidance and Control at JHU/APLSAE Aerospace Control & Guidance

Systems Committee Meeting #97March 1-3, 2006

Uday J. Shankar, Ph. D.Air & Missile Defense Department

240-228-8037; [email protected]

Page 2: Homing Missile Guidance and Control at JHU/APL SAE Aerospace Control & Guidance Systems Committee Meeting #97 March 1-3, 2006 Uday J. Shankar, Ph. D. Air

UJS-SAE-030106

Unclassified

Abstract

This presentation discusses the GNC research at the Guidance, Navigation, and Control Group at the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory.

Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory (JHU/APL) is one of five institutions at the Johns Hopkins University. APL is a not-for-profit research organization with about 3600 employees (68% scientists and engineers). Our annual revenue is on the order of $670m. The Air and Missile Defense Department is a major department of APL involved with the defense of naval and joint forces from attacking aircraft, cruise missiles, and ballistic missiles.

The major thrust of the GNC group is the guidance, navigation, and control of missiles. Our mission is to Integrate sensor data, airframe and propulsion capabilities to meet mission objectives. We are involved with GNC activities in the concept stage (design, requirements analysis, algorithm development), detailed design (hardware, software), and flight test (pre-flight predictions, post-flight analysis, failure investigation).

The Advanced Systems section within the GNC group is involved with several projects: boost-phase interception of ballistic missiles, discrimination-coupled guidance for midcourse intercepts, Standard Missile GNC engineering, Kill Vehicle engineering, integrated guidance control, swarm-on-swarm guidance, and rapid prototyping of GNC algorithms and hardware.

We discuss two examples. The first is the swarm-on-swarm guidance. This framework can be used to solve guidance problems associated with several missile defense scenarios. The second is the application of dynamic-game guidance solutions. This has applications in terminal guidance of a boost-phase interceptor and the discrimination-coupled guidance of terminal homing of a midcourse interceptor.

We discuss in more detail the problem of terminal guidance of a boost-phase interceptor. The problem is formulated and a closed-form solution is offered.

Page 3: Homing Missile Guidance and Control at JHU/APL SAE Aerospace Control & Guidance Systems Committee Meeting #97 March 1-3, 2006 Uday J. Shankar, Ph. D. Air

UJS-SAE-030106

Unclassified

Divisions ofThe Johns Hopkins University

School of Arts & SciencesWhiting School of EngineeringSchool of Professional Studies in Business & Education

School of Hygiene & Public HealthSchool of MedicineSchool of Nursing

Applied Physics Laboratory

Nitze School of Advanced International Studies

Peabody Institute

Page 4: Homing Missile Guidance and Control at JHU/APL SAE Aerospace Control & Guidance Systems Committee Meeting #97 March 1-3, 2006 Uday J. Shankar, Ph. D. Air

UJS-SAE-030106

Unclassified

Profile of theApplied Physics Laboratory

• Not-for-profit university research & development laboratory

• Division of the Johns Hopkins University founded in 1942

• On-site graduate engineering program in 8 degree fields

• Staffing: 3,600 employees (68% scientists & engineers)

• Annual revenue ~ $ 670M

Page 5: Homing Missile Guidance and Control at JHU/APL SAE Aerospace Control & Guidance Systems Committee Meeting #97 March 1-3, 2006 Uday J. Shankar, Ph. D. Air

UJS-SAE-030106

Unclassified

Air & Missile DefenseAdvancing Readiness & Effectiveness of US Military Forces

Key Programs:− Cooperative Engagement Capability

− Ballistic Missile Defense

− Standard Missile

− AEGIS

− Area Air Defense Commander

− Ship Self Defense

Critical Challenge 1: Defend naval & joint forces from opposing aircraft, cruise missiles, and ballistic missiles

Critical Challenge 2: Optimally deploy & employ multiple weapons systems to maximize defense of critical assets such as military forces, civilian population centers, airfields & ports in overseas theaters & in the United States

Page 6: Homing Missile Guidance and Control at JHU/APL SAE Aerospace Control & Guidance Systems Committee Meeting #97 March 1-3, 2006 Uday J. Shankar, Ph. D. Air

UJS-SAE-030106

Unclassified

• System concept trade studies• GNC requirements analyses• Algorithm research• Real-time distributed simulation

ConceptDevelopment

DetailedDesign

• Component modeling • 6 DOF development & verification• GNC algorithm development• Stability analysis• Flight control hardware testing • Evaluation of missile electrical systems• System performance analyses• Distributed simulation

GuidanceLaw

GuidanceLaw

OtherSensorsOther

Sensors

GPSGPS

Guidance &NavigationSolution

Guidance &NavigationSolution

Inertial Sensors

Missile

Seeker*Flight

ControlFlight

ControlAirframe/

Propulsion

MissileMotion

TargetMotion

Homing Loop

Primary Responsibilities

Cooperative Efforts

* Primary responsibility for seeker dynamics and radome effects

Integrate Sensor Data, Airframe and Propulsion Capabilities to Meet Mission Objectives

• Intercept the Target• Maintain Stable Flight• Ensure Seeker Acquisition & Track• Minimize Noise and Disturbance Sensitivities

Integrate Sensor Data, Airframe and Propulsion Capabilities to Meet Mission Objectives

• Intercept the Target• Maintain Stable Flight• Ensure Seeker Acquisition & Track• Minimize Noise and Disturbance Sensitivities

Autopilot Loop

GNC Group: Roles

FlightTesting

• Hardware-in-the-loop• Preflight performance prediction• Post-flight evaluation• Failure Investigation

Page 7: Homing Missile Guidance and Control at JHU/APL SAE Aerospace Control & Guidance Systems Committee Meeting #97 March 1-3, 2006 Uday J. Shankar, Ph. D. Air

UJS-SAE-030106

Unclassified

GNC Group: Current EffortsStandard Missile

• SM-3 Development– INS/GPS analysis– Flight control improvements– 21” Standard Missile

• SM-6/Future Missile Studies– Inflight alignment– GNC studies

• Flight Test– 6 DOF replication– Failure investigation– Hardware fault insertion

Threat Launch Point

Predicted Intercept Point Uncertainty Basket

Radar Track

Terminal Homing• Optimize KV fuel usage• Satisfy hit requirements

Flyout Guidance• Fixed-interval guidance• Minimize KV handover errors

despite highly uncertain PIP

Intercept Point Prediction• Uncertain boost profile and

temporal events

Boost-Phase Intercept Studiesand GNC Algorithm Research RV, Booster, ACS,

Jammer, Decoys, …

Contain Likely RV Objects within

FOV

Maneuver to Keep Likely

Objects Within Divert

Capability

Discrimination-Coupled Guidance

Engager SwarmLethal footprint

Sensor / detector element

Asset

Sensor / detector element

TrackTrack

Designate Designate

Swarm-on-Swarm Guidance and Control Research

Expected benefit of employing cooperative missile swarms is increased performance robustness and mission flexibility

GuidanceFilter

GuidanceLaw

Autopilot

TargetSensors

Airframe /Propulsion

InertialNavigation

TargetMotion

MissileMotion

Integrated Guidance & Control (IGC)

via dynamic-game optimizationASCM

CG CVN

Mitigate Raid Attack Vulnerability via Cooperative Missiles

CVBG (Raid) Defense

G&C Real-timeImplementation

Remaining6-DOF

(real-time)

SensorSignals

Fin Commands

G&CAlgorithms

6-DOFAirframe, Sensor &

Environment Models

SensorSignals

Fin Commands

Analysis Simulation (not real-time)Rapid Prototype Testbed

Processor 1

Processor 2PC or UNIX processor

Rapid GNC Prototyping

• SM-3 Kill Vehicle- Flight test

performance assessment

- ACS design options- Advanced pintle 6

DOF, G&C design

KV G&C

Page 8: Homing Missile Guidance and Control at JHU/APL SAE Aerospace Control & Guidance Systems Committee Meeting #97 March 1-3, 2006 Uday J. Shankar, Ph. D. Air

Example GNC Research at APL

Page 9: Homing Missile Guidance and Control at JHU/APL SAE Aerospace Control & Guidance Systems Committee Meeting #97 March 1-3, 2006 Uday J. Shankar, Ph. D. Air

UJS-SAE-030106

Unclassified

Cooperative Multi-Interceptor Guidance

Threat Launch Point

Threat Trajectory

Uncertainty

Modified Aegis

Platform

Multi-KV for BPI

Manage Information Uncertainty via Increased Control Space

Swarm-Guidance: Expected Benefits

• Eased centralized control requirements- Remove “chokepoints, delays, etc.

• Reactive flexibility / adaptation to threats

• Scalability (response insensitive to #s)

• Near-simultaneous swarm negation- Minimize chaotic threat response to being engaged

- Rapid battle-damage assessment and 2nd-salvo response

Swarm-guidance: Guide multiple cooperative missile interceptors to negate one or more incoming threats (“Swarm-on-swarm”)

Sea-Surface Asymmetric Adversaries (S2A2)Mini-

Missiles

Speedboat Attacker SwarmShort time to ID & negate threat

Effect A Volume Kill Via Increased Control Space

ASCMCG

MaRV

CVN

Overhead Asset Mitigate Raid Attack Vulnerability via Cooperative Missiles

CVBG (Raid) Defense

Page 10: Homing Missile Guidance and Control at JHU/APL SAE Aerospace Control & Guidance Systems Committee Meeting #97 March 1-3, 2006 Uday J. Shankar, Ph. D. Air

UJS-SAE-030106

Unclassified

Ballistic Missile Defense Challenges

Threat Launch Point

Predicted Intercept Point Uncertainty Basket

Radar Track

Terminal Homing• Optimize KV fuel usage• Satisfy hit requirements

Flyout Guidance• Fixed-interval guidance• Minimize KV handover errors

despite highly uncertain PIP

Intercept Point Prediction• Uncertain boost profile and

temporal events

Notional Sea-Based Boost-Phase Intercept Scenario

Boost-Phase Intercept Challenges• Compressed timelines• Uncertain threat trajectory, acceleration,

staging events and burn-out times• Interceptor TVC has fixed maneuvering

time ending before intercept occurs• Kill vehicle fuel and g limitations

Information uncertainty coupled with time and kinematic limitations pose substantial challenges to ballistic missile defense

Predicted Intercept Point Uncertainty

Basket

Terminal Guidance • Contain likely objects within FOV• Volume / object commit• Maximize containment

Flyout Guidance • Cluster / volume commit• PIP refinement / IFTU• Energy / pulse management

Engageability / launch solution • Predicted intercept point (PIP)

Terminal Guidance - End Game• Aimpoint Selection• Satisfy Hit Requirements

Midcourse-Phase Intercept Challenges• Complex threat cluster(s) act to postpone

identification of the lethal object• Discrimination quality improves with time• Divert capability decreases with time• Guidance must generate acceleration

commands prior to localization of lethal object

Notional Midcourse-Phase Intercept Scenario

Page 11: Homing Missile Guidance and Control at JHU/APL SAE Aerospace Control & Guidance Systems Committee Meeting #97 March 1-3, 2006 Uday J. Shankar, Ph. D. Air

UJS-SAE-030106

Unclassified

Boost-Phase BMD: Terminal Homing

• Improve guidance law zero-effort-miss estimation accuracy− This improves KV V and g-efficiency

• Assume that the threat acceleration increases linearly− Improve on the APN concept versus a boosting threat

• Solve a dynamic-game (DG) optimization formulation− DG framework provides robustness to threat acceleration uncertainty− Couples the control components of the guidance problem to estimation and

prediction quality− Control is less sensitive to threat acceleration uncertainties

• Accommodating threat burnout− Employ a burnout detection cue (from the seeker)− Use in estimation and guidance algorithms

• Derive closed-form solutions− Prefer closed-form solutions to numerical solutions

Page 12: Homing Missile Guidance and Control at JHU/APL SAE Aerospace Control & Guidance Systems Committee Meeting #97 March 1-3, 2006 Uday J. Shankar, Ph. D. Air

UJS-SAE-030106

Unclassified

BPI Terminal Guidance SolutionBPI Terminal Guidance Solution

11 1 2

1 0 0

11 1 2 2 1

1

,

ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ

T T Tk k k k k k k k k k k

T Tk k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k

P A P C R C Q A D D P P

x A x B u A P C R C Q Q x C R y C x

Dynamic Game Filter

EstimationUncertainty

12 ˆ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )Tt t t t t tu B Z I P Z x

Control Riccati Equation Solution

General structure of the control solution

2 22 2

( )0

min max 1: ( ) ( ) ( )

2 2( ) ( )

( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )Subject to:

( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

( )ft

f R t

bJ t t t dt

t t

t t t t t t t

t t t t t

r u wu w

x A x B u D w

y C x E w

Terminal Miss

Control UncertaintiesTerminal Miss

Performance Weight

2 31 12 6

2 4

3 3

2

2 2

3 ˆ ˆ ( )

( ) ( ) ( ) ( )3

31

( )

84

go T go T go

go g

g

T

go

o

o

t t t t t t tt

t t

bt

t t

r v a j

P

u

2 31 1

2 6ˆ 1i go go got t t

GuidanceLaw

RelativePosition

RelativeVelocity

ThreatAcceleration

ThreatJerk

Page 13: Homing Missile Guidance and Control at JHU/APL SAE Aerospace Control & Guidance Systems Committee Meeting #97 March 1-3, 2006 Uday J. Shankar, Ph. D. Air

UJS-SAE-030106

Unclassified

Thank You!