Abstract
Common Aero Vehicle (CAV) is a high-L/D hypersonic vehicle gliding in the region of the Earth’s atmosphere with altitude of 20–100 km. CAV is sent into a sub-orbital trajectory by a launch vehicle. After separating from the launch vehicle, CAV reenters the atmosphere with initial Mach number of about 20. As the maximum L/D (L/Dmax) is up to 3, CAV can travel more than ten thousand kilometers, while its lateral maneuver range can also be up to thousands of kilometers. The flight of CAV can be roughly divided into entry and nosedive phases. In the entry phase, CAV manages the flight energy by performing proper lateral maneuvers, and eliminates the heading error by conducting several bank reversals.
Reprinted from ISA Transactions, Vol 65, Yu Wenbin, Chen Wanchun, Jiang Zhiguo, Liu Xiaoming, Zhou Hao, Omnidirectional autonomous entry guidance based on 3-D analytical glide formulas, Pages 487–503, Copyright (2016), with permission from Elsevier.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Phillips T.H. A common aero vehicle (CAV) model, description, and employment guide. Schafer Corporation for AFRL and AFSPC. (2003)
Xiong, S., Wang, W., Liu, X., et al.: Guidance law against maneuvering targets with intercept angle constraint. ISA Trans. 53(4), 1332–1342 (2014)
Yu, W., Chen, W.: Trajectory-shaping guidance with final speed and load factor constraints. ISA Trans. 56, 42–52 (2015a)
Wang, X., Zhang, Y., Wu, H.: Sliding mode control based impact angle control guidance considering the seeker’s field-of-view constraint. ISA Trans. 61, 49–59 (2016)
Harpold, J.C., Graves, C.A.: Shuttle Entry Guidance. NASA Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center, Houston (1979)
Eggers, A.J., Allen, H.J., Neice, S.E. A Comparative Analysis of the Performance of Long-range Hypervelocity Vehicles. National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics. (1957)
Gazley, C. Atmospheric entry. The RAND Corporation (1960)
Lees, L., Hastwig, F.W., Cohen, C.B.: Use of aerodynamic lift during entry into the earth’s atmosphere. ARS J. 29(9), 633–641 (1959)
Ting, L., Wang, K.: An approximate analytic solution of re-entry trajectory with aerodynamic forces. ARS J. 30(6), 565–566 (1960)
Loh, W.H.T.: Dynamics and Thermodynamics of Planetary Entry. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1963a)
Loh, W.H.T.: Some exact analytical solutions of planetary entry. AIAA J. 1(4), 836–842 (1963b)
Cohen, M. Some Closed Form Solutions to the Problem of Re-entry of Lifting and Non-lifting Vehicles//2nd Aerospace Sciences Meeting. New York, p. 46. (1965)
Nyland, F.S. Hypersonic turning with constant bank angle control. The RAND Corporation. (1965)
Bell, R.N. A closed-form solution to lifting reentry. Defense Technical Information Center. (1965)
Chen, S.Y. The longitudinal and lateral range of hypersonic glide vehicles with constant bank angle. The RAND Corporation. (1966)
Yu, W., Chen, W.: Entry guidance with real-time planning of reference based on analytical solutions. Adv. Space Res. 55(9), 2325–2345 (2015b)
Hanson, J.M., Coughlin, D.J., Dukeman, G. et al. Ascent, Transition, Entry, and Abort Guidance Algorithm Design for the X-33 Vehicle//Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference and Exhibit. Boston. 4409 (1998)
Mease, K.D., Chen, D.T., Teufel, P., et al.: Reduced-order entry trajectory planning for acceleration guidance. J. Guidance, Control, Dyn. 25(2), 257–266 (2002)
Dukeman, G.A. Profile-following Entry Guidance Using Linear Quadratic Regulator Theory//AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference and Exhibit. Monterey. 4457 (2002)
Shen, Z., Lu, P.: On-board generation of three-dimensional constrained entry trajectories. J. Guidance, Control, Dyn. 26(1), 111–121 (2003)
Zhang, Y.L., Chen, K.J., Liu, L., et al.: Entry trajectory planning based on three-dimensional acceleration profile guidance. Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 48, 131–139 (2016)
Powell, R.W.: Six-degree-of-freedom guidance and control-entry analysis of the HL-20. J. Spacecraft Rockets 30(5), 537–542 (1993)
Graesslin, M.H., Telaar, J., Schottle, U.M.: Ascent and reentry guidance concept based on NLP-methods. Acta Astronaut. 55(3–9), 461–471 (2004)
Zimmerman, C., Dukeman, G., Hanson, J.: Automated method to compute orbital reentry trajectories with heating constraints. J. Guidance, Control, Dyn. 26(4), 523–529 (2003)
Xie, Y., Liu, L., Tang, G., et al.: Highly constrained entry trajectory generation. Acta Astronaut. 88, 44–60 (2013)
Zhao, J., Zhou, R.: Reentry trajectory optimization for hypersonic vehicle satisfying complex constraints. Chin. J. Aeronaut. 26(6), 1544–1553 (2013)
Xu, B., Wang, D., Sun, F., et al.: Direct neural discrete control of hypersonic flight vehicle. Nonlinear Dyn. 70(1), 269–278 (2012)
Bu, X., Wu, X., Zhu, F., et al.: Novel prescribed performance neural control of a flexible air-breathing hypersonic vehicle with unknown initial errors. ISA Trans. 59, 149–159 (2015)
Shao, X., Wang, H.: Active disturbance rejection based trajectory linearization control for hypersonic reentry vehicle with bounded uncertainties. ISA Trans. 54, 27–38 (2015)
Tian, B., Fan, W., Zong, Q.: Integrated guidance and control for reusable launch vehicle in reentry phase. Nonlinear Dyn. 80(1–2), 397–412 (2015)
Zhao, J., Zhou, R.: Pigeon-inspired optimization applied to constrained gliding trajectories. Nonlinear Dyn. 82(4), 1781–1795 (2015)
Lu, P.: Entry guidance: a unified method. J. Guidance, Control, Dyn. 37(3), 713–728 (2014)
Yu, W., Chen, W. Guidance Scheme for Glide Range Maximization of a Hypersonic Vehicle//AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference. Portland. 6714 (2011)
Kermode, A.C.: Mechanics of Flight, 11th edn. Prentice Hall, London (2006)
Hu, J., Li, J., Chen, W. Longitudinal Characteristics of Steady Glide Trajectory for Hypersonic Vehicle//IEEE International Conference on Control, Automation and Information Sciences. Changshu. 272–279 (2015)
Chowdhary, G., Jategaonkar, R.: Aerodynamic parameter estimation from flight data applying extended and unscented Kalman filter. Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 14(2), 106–117 (2010)
Burden, R.L., Faires, J.D.: Numerical Analysis, 9th edn. Cengage Learning, Boston (2010)
Zarchan, P. Tactical and Strategic Missile Guidance, 5th ed. AIAA Progress in Aeronautics and Astronautics (2007)
Kidiyarova, V.G., Tarasenko, D.A., Schereia, I.A. Influence of Longitudinal Variations of the Structure of the Temperature, Pressure and Wind Fields in the Stratosphere and Mesosphere of the Northern Hemisphere//16 th COSPAR Plenary Meeting. Konstanz. (1973)
Zeilik, M.A., Gregory, S.A. Introductory Astronomy and Astrophysics, 4th ed. Saunders College Publishing (1998)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendices
Appendix 1: Generalized States of Motion
Before introducing the way of converting the conventional states of motion \(\{ \lambda ,\phi ,H,V,\gamma ,\psi \}\) into the generalized states \(\{ \tilde{\lambda },\tilde{\phi },\tilde{H},\tilde{V},\tilde{\gamma },\tilde{\psi }\}\), we need introduce two frames of reference: one is called the Geocentric Equatorial Rotating (GER) frame and the other is called the local North-East-Down (NED) frame [16].
The GER frame is a frame with origin at the Earth’s center E. The xe and ye axes are in the equatorial plane while the xe axis intersects with the prime meridian. The ze axis points towards the north polar. The GER frame rotates together with Earth.
The origin of the NED frame, denoted as o, is at the intersection of the Earth’s surface and the segment connecting the Earth’s center with the mass center of the vehicle, denoted as M. The x axis points to the local north, the y axis points to the local east, and the z axis points to the Earth’s center.
The coordinate transformation matrix from the GER frame to the NED frame can be calculated by
As shown in Sect. 13.3.3.2, the entry guidance updates the AGI frame once in each guidance cycle and uses the current conventional states to determine the initial generalized states appearing in the analytical glide formulas. Therefore, we have.
\({\tilde{\mathbf{V}}}\) and V are the velocity vectors of the vehicle relative to the AGI frame and the rotating Earth, respectively. Since the AGI frame is an inertial frame, \({\tilde{\mathbf{V}}}\) is equal to the sum of V and the velocity vector due to the Earth’s rotation, as follows.
where the superscript “NED” means the coordinates are with respect to the NED frame, and the superscript “T” represents the transform of vector or matrix. According to the definitions of the generalized states of motion shown in Sect. 13.3.3.2, from Eq. (13.86), we have
where \({\tilde{\mathbf{V}}}_{H0}^{{{\text{GER}}}}\) is the horizontal component of \({\tilde{\mathbf{V}}}_{0}^{{{\text{GER}}}}\) and calculated by the following equations, and \({\tilde{\mathbf{x}}}^{{{\text{GER}}}}\) and \({\tilde{\mathbf{z}}}^{{{\text{GER}}}}\) are the unit vectors along the positive directions of the \(\tilde{x}\)- and \(\tilde{z}\)-axes of the AGI frame, respectively. The superscript “GER” represents the coordinates are with respect to the GER frame.
Now we determine the desired final generalized states of motion. As the dot product of two unit vectors is just equal to the cosine of the angle between the two vectors, the generalized longitude, latitude, and altitude of the predicted collision point P, as shown in Fig. 13.4, can be calculated by.
where \({\hat{\mathbf{x}}}_{EP}^{{{\text{GER}}}}\) is the unit vector pointing from E to P, and \({\tilde{\mathbf{x}}}^{{{\text{GER}}}}\) is the unit vector along the \(\tilde{x}\)-axis of the AGI frame.
The desired final generalized speed is denoted as \(\tilde{V}_{{\text{TAEM}}}\). Apparently, due to the effect of the Earth’s rotation, there are \(\tilde{V}_{{\text{TAEM}}} \ne V_{{\text{TAEM}}}\). As shown in Fig. 13.4, since the vehicle flies to the point P approximately along the generalized equator, we assume that the desired final generalized velocity vector \({\tilde{\mathbf{V}}}_{{\text{TAEM}}}\) is parallel to the generalized equator, where the unit vector along the generalized equator at the point P, denoted as \({\mathbf{x}}_{GEP}\), can be calculated using the following equations.
where the superscript “NEDP” represents the NED frame at the point P, and \({\mathbf{T}}_{{{\text{GER}}}}^{{{\text{NEDP}}}}\) is the transform matrix from the GER frame to the NEDP frame (Fig. 13.29).
\({\mathbf{V}}_{e}^{P}\) is the velocity vector due to the Earth’s rotation at the point P. \({\mathbf{V}}_{e}^{P}\) points towards the local East and has a magnitude of
Using the assumption that \({\tilde{\mathbf{V}}}_{{\text{TAEM}}}\) is parallel to \({\mathbf{x}}_{GEP}\), we have
Then we have
Expanding the above equation yields
Solving the above equation for \(\tilde{V}_{{\text{TAEM}}}\) yields
Further, the desired final absolute specific energy can be calculated by
Appendix 2: Generalized Aerodynamic Forces
In this appendix, we show the relationship between the conventional aerodynamic forces \(\{ L_{1} ,\;L_{2} ,\;D\}\) and the generalized aerodynamic forces \(\{ \tilde{L}_{1} ,\;\tilde{L}_{2} ,\;\tilde{D}\}\). To reduce the complexity of derivation, we assume that \(\gamma = 0\). In Fig. 13.30, \({\mathbf{V}}_{e}\) is the velocity vector due to the Earth’s rotation and \(\theta_{V}\) is the angle between \({\tilde{\mathbf{V}}}\) and V, which can be calculated by
From Fig. 13.30, we have
Then we can convert \(\widetilde{{{\text{L}}_{{1}} {\text{/D}}}}\) and \(\widetilde{{{\text{L}}_{2} {\text{/D}}}}\) into \({\text{L}}_{{1}} {\text{/D}}\) and \({\text{L}}_{2} {\text{/D}}\), as follows
Conversely, we can also convert \({\text{L}}_{{1}} {\text{/D}}\) and \({\text{L}}_{2} {\text{/D}}\) into \(\widetilde{{{\text{L}}_{{1}} {\text{/D}}}}\) and \(\widetilde{{{\text{L}}_{2} {\text{/D}}}}\), as follows
Now we investigate the relationship between \({\text{L/D}}\) and \(\widetilde{{\text{L/D}}}\). From Eqs. (13.107–13.108), we have
From Eqs. (13.109–13.110), we have
Because \(\theta_{V}\) is near zero, we approximate the numerator of Eq. (13.112) by the first-order Taylor series at \(\theta_{V} = 0\), as follows
Thus, we get the approximation relation between \({\text{L/D}}\) and \(\widetilde{{\text{L/D}}}\).
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 Science Press
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Chen, W., Zhou, H., Yu, W., Yang, L. (2021). Omnidirectional Autonomous Reentry Guidance Based on 3-D Analytical Glide Formulae Considering Influence of Earth’s Rotation. In: Steady Glide Dynamics and Guidance of Hypersonic Vehicle. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-8901-0_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-8901-0_13
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-15-8900-3
Online ISBN: 978-981-15-8901-0
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)