Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Icing tolerance envelope protection based on variable-weighted multiple-model predictive control

  • Article
  • Published:
Science China Technological Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Multiple-model predictive control (MMPC) is a fundamental icing tolerance envelope protection (ITEP) design method that can systematically handle nonlinear and time-varying constraints. However, few studies have addressed the envelope protection failure that results from the inaccurate prediction of multiple linear predictive models when actual conditions deviate from design conditions. In this study, weights that vary with icing conditions and flight parameters are considered to develop an effective and reliable envelope protection control strategy. First, an ITEP structure based on variable-weighted MMPC was implemented to improve the protection performance with condition departure information. Then, a variable-weighted rule was proposed to guarantee the stability of variable-weighted MMPC. A design approach involving a variable-weighted function that uses icing conditions and flight parameters as arguments was also developed with the proposed rules. Finally, a systematic ITEP design method on variable-weighted MMPC was constructed with additional design criteria for other normal control parameters. Simulations were conducted, and the results show that the proposed method can effectively enhance ITEP performance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Cao Y, Wu Z, Su Y, et al. Aircraft flight characteristics in icing conditions. Prog Aerospace Sci, 2015, 74: 62–80

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Bragg M B, Broeren A P, Blumenthal L A. Iced-airfoil aerodynamics. Prog Aerospace Sci, 2005, 41: 323–362

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Lynch F T, Khodadoust A. Effects of ice accretions on aircraft aerodynamics. Prog Aerospace Sci, 2001, 37: 669–767

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Lampton A, Valasek J. Prediction of icing effects on the lateral/directional stability and control of light airplanes. Aerospace Sci Tech, 2012, 23: 305–311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Cao Y, Tan W, Wu Z. Aircraft icing: An ongoing threat to aviation safety. Aerospace Sci Tech, 2018, 75: 353–385

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Aykan R, Hajiyev C, Caliskan F. Aircraft icing detection, identification, and reconfigurable control based on Kalman filtering and neural networks. In: AIAA Atmospheric Flight Mechanics Conference and Exhibit. San Francisco, 2005. 6220

  7. Caliskan F, Hajiyev C. A review of in-flight detection and identification of aircraft icing and reconfigurable control. Prog Aerospace Sci, 2013, 60: 12–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Szilder K, Yuan W. In-flight icing on unmanned aerial vehicle and its aerodynamic penalties. Prog Flight Phys, 2017, 9: 173–188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Bellosta T, Guardone A, Gori G, et al. Uncertainty quantification for in-flight ice accretion under Appendix-C and Appendix-O conditions. In: AIAA Aviation 2021 Forum. Virtual event, 2021

  10. Falkena W, Borst C, Chu Q P, et al. Investigation of practical flight envelope protection systems for small aircraft. J Guidance Control Dyn, 2011, 34: 976–988

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Zheng S Z, Wang L X, Yue T, et al. Envelope protection reconfiguration for iced aircraft. In: The 12th International Conference on Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering. Athens, 2021

  12. Wei Y, Xu H, Xue Y. Adaptive neural networks-based dynamic inversion applied to reconfigurable flight control and envelope protection under icing conditions. IEEE Access, 2020, 8: 11577–11594

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Wang Y, Zheng H, Zong C, et al. Path-following control of autonomous ground vehicles using triple-step model predictive control. Sci China Inf Sci, 2020, 63: 209203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Zhou Y, Li D, Xi Y, et al. Synthesis of model predictive control based on data-driven learning. Sci China Inf Sci, 2020, 63: 189204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Hartley E N. Predictive control with parameter adaptation to achieve α-protection in the reconfigure benchmark in the presence of icing. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 2015, 48: 172–177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Salimi Lafmejani A, Berman S. Nonlinear MPC for collision-free and deadlock-free navigation of multiple nonholonomic mobile robots. Robotics Autonomous Syst, 2021, 141: 103774

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Eren U, Prach A, Koçer B B 1, et al. Model predictive control in aerospace systems: Current state and opportunities. J Guidance Control Dyn, 2017, 40: 1541–1566

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Gopinathan M, Boskovic J D, Mehra R K, et al. A multiple model predictive scheme for fault-tolerant flight control design. In: Proceedings of the 37th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control. Piscataway, 1998

  19. Golzari A, Nejat Pishkenari H, Salarieh H, et al. Quaternion based linear time-varying model predictive attitude control for satellites with two reaction wheels. Aerospace Sci Tech, 2020, 98: 105677

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Emami S A, Banazadeh A. Simultaneous trajectory tracking and aerial manipulation using a multi-stage model predictive control. Aerospace Sci Tech, 2021, 112: 106573

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Cao R, Wan H, He Z, et al. Multiple model predictive control of perching maneuver based on guardian maps. Chin J Aeronaut, 2022, 35: 347–360

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Tao X, Li N, Li S. Multiple model predictive control for large envelope flight of hypersonic vehicle systems. Inf Sci, 2016, 328: 115–126

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. Tan W, Marquez H J, Chen T, et al. Multimodel analysis and controller design for nonlinear processes. Comput Chem Eng, 2004, 28: 2667–2675

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Banerjee A, Arkun Y. Model predictive control of plant transitions using a new identification technique for interpolating nonlinear models. J Process Control, 1998, 8: 441–457

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Çimen T. State-dependent Riccati equation (SDRE) control: A survey. IFAC Proc Volumes, 2008, 41: 3761–3775

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Nekoo S R. Model reference adaptive state-dependent Riccati equation control of nonlinear uncertain systems: Regulation and tracking of free-floating space manipulators. Aerospace Sci Tech, 2019, 84: 348–360

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Wang Z, Li Y. Rigid spacecraft robust optimal attitude stabilization under actuator misalignments. Aerospace Sci Tech, 2020, 105: 105990

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Bragg M B, Hutchison T, Merret J, et al. Effect of ice accretion on aircraft flight dynamics. In: 38th AIAA Aerospace Science Meeting & Exhibit. Reno, 2000

  29. Hao L, Li Q, Pan W, et al. Icing detection and evaluation of the electro-impulse de-icing system based on infrared images processing. Infrared Phys Tech, 2020, 109: 103424

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Dong Y. Implementing deep learning for comprehensive aircraft icing and actuator/sensor fault detection/identification. Eng Appl Artif Intel, 2019, 83: 28–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Yu Z, Li Y, Zhang Z, et al. Online safe flight envelope protection for icing aircraft based on reachability analysis. Int J Aeronaut Space Sci, 2020, 21: 1174–1184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Du J, Johansen T A. A gap metric based weighting method for multimodel predictive control of MIMO nonlinear systems. J Process Control, 2014, 24: 1346–1357

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Chen H. Model Predictive Control (in Chinese). 1st ed. Beijing: Science Press, 2013

    Google Scholar 

  34. Keerthi S S, Gilbert E G. Optimal infinite-horizon feedback laws for a general class of constrained discrete-time systems: Stability and moving-horizon approximations. J Optim Theor Appl, 1988, 57: 265–293

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  35. Ignatyev D I, Khrabrov A N, Kortukova A I, et al. Interplay of unsteady aerodynamics and flight dynamics of transport aircraft in icing conditions. Aerospace Sci Tech, 2020, 104: 105914

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Li H, Zhang Y, Chen H. Optimization design of airfoils under atmospheric icing conditions for UAV. Chin J Aeronaut, 2022, 35: 118–133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Gondhalekar R, Dassau E, Doyle III F J. Velocity-weighting & velocity-penalty MPC of an artificial pancreas: Improved safety & performance. Automatica, 2018, 91: 105–117

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  38. Ngo T D, Sultan C. Model predictive control for helicopter shipboard operations in the ship airwakes. J Guidance Control Dyn, 2016, 39: 574–589

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Keviczky T, Balas G J. Receding horizon control of an F-16 aircraft: A comparative study. Control Eng Pract, 2006, 14: 1023–1033

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Gibbens P W, B. Medagoda E D. Efficient model predictive control algorithm for aircraft. J Guidance Control Dyn, 2011, 34: 1909–1915

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Medagoda E D B, Gibbens P W. Multiple horizon model predictive flight control. J Guidance Control Dyn, 2014, 37: 946–951

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Dong Y. An application of deep neural networks to the in-flight parameter identification for detection and characterization of aircraft icing. Aerospace Sci Tech, 2018, 77: 34–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Wei Y, Xu H, Xue Y, et al. Quantitative assessment and visualization of flight risk induced by coupled multi-factor under icing conditions. Chin J Aeronaut, 2020, 33: 2146–2161

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Aeronautic Science and Engineering, Beihang University, Beijing, 100191, China

    LiXin Wang, SiZhuang Zheng & Ting Yue

  2. China Flight Test Establishment, Xi’an, 710089, China

    Peng Zhao & HaiLiang Liu

Authors
  1. LiXin Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. SiZhuang Zheng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Peng Zhao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. HaiLiang Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ting Yue
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ting Yue.

Additional information

This work was supported by the Fundamental Research Funds for Central Universities (Grant No. YWF-21-BJ-J-935).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wang, L., Zheng, S., Zhao, P. et al. Icing tolerance envelope protection based on variable-weighted multiple-model predictive control. Sci. China Technol. Sci. 66, 127–140 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11431-022-2062-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11431-022-2062-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation