Reconfigurable Control Allocation of Multi-Surfaces Aircraft Based on Improved Fixed Point Iteration

  • Kejun Bi
  • Weiguo Zhang
  • Chengzhi Chi
  • Jingkai Zhang
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 215)


For the real-time requirement of reconfigurable control allocation problem in the field of multi-surfaces aircraft, the control allocation scheme based on max direction derivative increment (MDDI) fixed point (FXP) iteration is proposed. The increment update for current iteration along the MDD and the design steps are given. Moreover, the convergence of the improved method is also proved. Comparisons of different methods are simulated in multi-surfaces aircraft model. The simulation results show the rapidity of MDDIFXP method compared with the original one and the effectiveness of the method in solving reconfigurable control allocation problem of multi-surfaces aircraft.


Multi-surfaces aircraft Control allocation Fixed point arithmetic Pseudo-inverse method Reconfiguration Improvement 


  1. 1.
    Zhang YM, Suresh VS, Jiang B, Theilliol D (2007) Reconfigurable control allocation against aircraft control effector failures. In: IEEE international conference on control applications. IEEE Press, New York, pp 1197–1202Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Durham WC (1993) Constrained control allocation. J Guidance Control Dyn 16:717–725CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Shi JP, Zhang WG, Li GW, Liu XX (2010) Research on the allocation efficiency of redistributed pseudo-inverse algorithm. Scientia Sinica (Informationis) 40:519–525Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lombaerts T, Schravendijk MV, Chu P, Mulder JA (2011) Adaptive nonlinear flight control and control allocation for failure resilience. Adv Aerosp Guidance, Navig Control I:41–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Schofield B, Hägglund T (2008) Optimal control allocation in vehicle dynamics control for rollover mitigation. In: American control conference. IEEE Press, New York, pp 3231–3236Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Johansen TA, Fuglseth TP, Tøndel P, Fossen TI (2008) Optimal constrained control allocation in marine surface vessels with rudders. Control Eng Pract 16:457–464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ahmadia J, Khaki-Sedighb A, Ohadia A (2012) Robustification of input redundant feedback systems using robust actuator weighting in the control allocation problem. Int J Control 85:1380–1400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Härkegård O (2003) Backstepping and control allocation with applications to flight control. Linköping University, LinköpingGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Burken JJ, Lu P, Wu ZL, Bahm C (2001) Two reconfigurable flight-control design methods: robust servomechanism and control allocation. J Guidance Control Dyn 24:482–493CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Davidson JB, Lallman FJ, Bundick WT (2001) Integrated reconfigurable control allocation. In: AIAA guidance, navigation and control conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Alexander, pp 1–11Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Omerdic E, Roberts G (2004) Thruster fault diagnosis and accommodation for open-frame underwater. Control Eng Pract 12:1575–1598CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Huang HX, Han JY (2006) Mathematical programming. Tsinghua University Press, BeijingGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wang J, Longoria RG (2009) Coordinated and reconfigurable vehicle dynamics control. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol 17:723–732CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lu P (1996) Constrained tracking control of nonlinear systems. Syst Control Lett 27:305–314CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kejun Bi
    • 1
  • Weiguo Zhang
    • 1
  • Chengzhi Chi
    • 1
  • Jingkai Zhang
    • 1
  1. 1.School of AutomationNorthwestern Polytechnical UniversityXianChina

Personalised recommendations