JP3493347B2 - Automatic control device - Google Patents

Description

Detailed Description of the Invention

[0001]

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION 1. Field of the Invention The present invention relates to an automatic control device for controlling an aircraft, a ship, a robot, etc., which simultaneously realizes robust stability and desired response characteristics.

[0002]

2. Description of the Related Art FIG. 8 is a block diagram showing a configuration of a control device 1 which simultaneously realizes robust stability and desired response characteristics, which is a conventional technique. The control device 1 includes a feedforward controller 2, a robust feedback controller 3, and an adder 4. The feedforward controller 2 processes the command value and outputs it to the adder 4 so that the controlled object 5 responds to the command value with a desired observation output. The robust feedback controller 3 inputs the observation output from the controlled object 5, suppresses disturbances acting on the system, and outputs a signal that achieves robust stabilization of the system. The adder 4 inputs the operation amount obtained by adding the command value processed by the feedforward controller 2 and the value included in the signal from the robust feedback controller 3 to the control target 5. H∞
The robust feedback controller 3 is designed by using the control theory, and the feedforward controller 2 is adjusted while confirming the response characteristic, and the feedforward controller 2 is designed separately. In this way, robust stability and desired response characteristics can be realized at the same time.

FIG. 9 is a block diagram showing the configuration of a robust flight control device 11 disclosed in Japanese Patent Laid-Open No. 5-147589. The robust flight control device 11 includes a first constant gain device 12, a second constant gain device 13, and a state estimator 14.
And adder 15. Constant gain device 12, 1
3 is designed by the "Exact Model Matching method" so that the transfer characteristic of the closed loop system by the state feedback of the controlled object 16 matches the transfer function that is the desired response characteristic. The first constant gain unit 12 processes the command value and outputs it to the adder 15. The state estimator 14 is designed using the H ∞ control theory, and determines the state of the controlled object 16 and the disturbance applied to the controlled object 16 based on the manipulated variable input to the controlled object 16 and the observed output of the controlled object 16. Estimated at the same time, the second
Output to the constant gain unit 13. The adder 15 adds the value of the signal output from the first constant gain unit 12 and the value of the signal output from the second constant gain unit 13, and outputs the result to the control target 16 and the state estimator 14. To do.

In this way, the state estimator 14 outputs a signal equivalent to the state feedback to the second constant gain unit 13 to realize a desired response characteristic, and cancels disturbance to enhance robust stability. it can.

[0005]

Since the robust feedback controller 3 in the above-described control device 1 is designed by the H∞ control theory, the control law is very complicated, and the feedforward controller 2 includes the controlled object 5 and the robust feedback controller 2. Since the feedback controller 3 must be designed in consideration of both, the control law becomes more complicated. Further, the state estimator 14 in the robust flight control device 11 described above is also designed according to the H∞ control theory, so that the control law is very complicated.

As described above, in the conventional technique, when trying to simultaneously realize the robust stability and the desired response characteristic, the control law becomes complicated, and when the controller is mounted on the control device, a high degree of control is required. Not only is the computational function required, but it is difficult to associate the parameters of the control law with the control performance, and it becomes difficult to finely adjust the parameters in the final design process.

Further, when the characteristics of the controlled object change depending on the operating conditions of the controlled object, such a conventional technique causes H∞.
Robust stability of the controller guarantees a certain degree of stability against characteristic fluctuations, but it is difficult to design to clearly specify performance for multiple characteristics, and post-design analysis of control performance at points other than the nominal point is difficult. This was a factor that increased the number of trials and errors in design.

Therefore, an object of the present invention is to provide an automatic control device capable of simultaneously achieving robust stability and desired response characteristics for a plurality of characteristics by using a simple control law.

[0009]

The present invention according to claim 1 is an automatic control device having a controller that simultaneously realizes robust stability and desired response characteristics, wherein the controller comprises:
The control target P is set so as to reduce the tracking error based on the difference between the reference response output from the reference model in which the desired response characteristic with respect to the command value of the control target P is specified and the response actually output from the control target P. A controller Cw for controlling, and in order to derive a robust stability margin, the expanded control target Pw is calculated by using the dynamic systems M to N based on the control target P. And the extended controller _C is formulated as C = N _C MC ⁻¹ using the dynamic systems M _C and N _C based on the controller Cw, and is robustly stable with respect to the extended control target Pw. The control law of the controller Cw is determined by determining the parameter of the expanded controller C with the maximum margin, and the controlled object P is controlled by at least the control output from the controller Cw based on the command value and the response from the controlled object P. It is an automatic control device characterized by:

According to the present invention, the control target P is controlled so as to reduce the tracking error based on the difference between the reference response output from the reference model and the response actually output from the control target P with respect to the command value. In order to derive the robust stability margin by using the controller Cw, the expanded control target Pw is calculated by using the dynamic systems M to N based on the control target P. And the extended controller _C is formulated as C = N _C MC ⁻¹ using the dynamic systems M _C and N _C based on the controller Cw, and is robustly stable with respect to the extended control target Pw. The control law of the controller Cw is determined by determining the parameter of the expansion controller C having the maximum margin. As a result, the transfer characteristic with respect to the tracking error between the command value and the output from the controller Cw is associated with the robust stability margin, and the robust stability margin can be increased to reduce the transfer characteristic. And the desired response characteristic can be realized at the same time, and the controlled object of the controller Cw can be controlled with a simple configuration having a small number of parameters. As described above, since the control rule parameters of the controller Cw are small, it is possible to perform the calculation even by using a computer having a low calculation ability, and it is easy to perform tuning by finely adjusting the parameters.

The present invention according to claim 2 is an automatic control device having a controller that simultaneously realizes robust stability and desired response characteristics, wherein the controller is a method for obtaining a control law of the controller. , A tracking error based on a difference between a reference response output from a reference model that defines a desired response characteristic for a command value of a control target P having a plurality of characteristics and a response actually output from the control target P is reduced. As described above, the common controller Cw for controlling the controlled object P is used, and in order to derive the robust stability margin, a plurality of expanded controlled objects Pw are generated by using the dynamic systems M to N based on the controlled object P. And the extended common controller _C is formulated as C = N _C M _C ⁻¹ by using the dynamic systems M _C and N _C based on the common controller Cw, and the extended control target Pw is obtained. The parameter of the expanded common controller C that maximizes the robust stability margin is determined to determine the control law of the common controller Cw, and control is performed by the control output from the controller Cw based on at least the command value and the response from the control target P. It is an automatic control device characterized by controlling an object P.

According to the present invention, the control target P is controlled so as to reduce the tracking error based on the difference between the reference response output from the reference model and the response actually output from the control target P with respect to the command value. A common controller Cw
Dynamic system M based on controlled object P having multiple characteristics
, N ~ are used to define a plurality of expansion control targets Pw, And the extended common controller _C is formulated as C = N _C M _C ⁻¹ by using the dynamic systems M _C and N _C based on the common controller Cw, and the extended control target Pw is obtained. The control law of the common controller Cw is determined by determining the parameter of the expanded common controller C that maximizes the robust stability margin. Thereby, the transfer characteristic with respect to the tracking error between the command value and the output from the common controller Cw is associated with the robust stability margin,
Since the transfer characteristic can be reduced by increasing the robust stability margin, the robust stability can be improved and the desired response characteristic can be realized at the same time, and the control law of the common controller Cw can be easily configured with a small number of parameters. With such a configuration, the controlled object can be controlled. As described above, the number of parameters of the control law of the common controller Cw is small, so that calculation can be performed even by using a computer having low calculation ability, and tuning by fine adjustment of parameters is easy.

[0013]

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION Linear matrix inequalities
inequality; abbreviation: LMI) A procedure for designing a robust controller based on the loop shaping method will be described. In order to facilitate understanding, symbols representing transfer characteristics such as the control target and the control law of the control device are attached to the control target and the control law. First, the expansion control target Pw is represented by the following expression 1.

[0014]

[Equation 1]

The left graph of the expansion control target Pw is

[Equation 2] far. Here, G ~, M ~, N ~ indicate a dynamic system, and Expression 2 indicates that the dynamic system G ~ is represented by the linear differential equations of the following Expressions 3 and 4.

[0016]

[Equation 3]

Using the same notation, the expansion control law C is expressed by the following equation 5.

[Equation 4]

The right inverse graph K of the expansion control law C is

[Equation 5] far. Here, the element A of the right inverse graph K of the expansion control law C
It is assumed that _{K 1} and B _K are given in advance. An indefinite element in the right inverse graph K of the expansion control law C of Expression 6 is C _K1 ,
_{These are} C _K2 , D _K1 and D _K2 . Further, Q is defined as the following Expression 7 using the normalized right inverse graph K _N of the expansion control law C.

[0019]

[Equation 6] Here, * on the right shoulder of the symbol represents a conjugate transposition. Expansion control law C
Normalized right inverse graph K _NIs calculated by the following equation 8.

[0020]

[Equation 7]

Here,

[Equation 8] Is. Further, T on the right side of the symbol represents the transposition of the matrix. Formula 1
X at 0 is a symmetric positive definite solution of the Riccati equation of the following Expression 11.

[0022]

[Equation 9]

Where R in equation 11 is

[Equation 10] Is.

Using the elements of equations (2), (6) and (7) above,
Matrix A of the following Expressions 13 to 16_GK, B _GK, C_GK, D_GKSet
Mean

[0025]

[Equation 11]

Using the matrices A _GK , B _GK , C _GK and D _GK ,
A convex optimization problem expressed by the linear matrix inequality of the following Expression 17, and
Alternately solving the algebraic expression of the following equation 18 to obtain Q and K,
Indefinite elements C _K1 , C of the inverse right graph K of the optimum expansion control law C
It is possible to obtain _K2 , D _K1 and D _K2 .

[0027]

[Equation 12]

The minimization of γ in Equation 17 means that the closed loop robust stability margin b _PwC including the designed extended control law C is used.
It is known to be equivalent to maximizing, and the indefinite elements C _K1 , C _K2 , D of the right inverse graph K of the extended control law C that optimizes robust stability by the LMI loop shaping method described above. It is possible to obtain _K1 and D _K2 . The robust stability margin b _PwC is defined by the following equation 19.

[0029]

[Equation 13]

The extension control law C actually used is given in advance.
Element A_K , B_K And determined by the above method
The element C of the right inverse graph K of the expanded control law C_K1, C_K2，
D_K1, D _K2Can be obtained by the following equation 20.

[0031]

[Equation 14]

FIG. 1 is a flow chart showing the procedure for determining the parameters of the extended control law C by the above LMI loop shaping method. The procedure is started in step s0, and proceeds to step s1. In step s1, initial values of the expansion control target Pw and the expansion control law C are prepared, and the process proceeds to step s2. In step s2, the expansion control target Pw
Of the left graph G and the right inverse graph K of the expansion control law C are obtained, and the process proceeds to step s3. In step s3, the normalized right inverse graph K _N of the expansion control law C is obtained from Expressions 8 to 12,
Q is obtained from Expression 7, and the process proceeds to step s4.

At step s4, Q is fixed and the equation 13 is satisfied.
~ Equation 16 is solved using Equation 16 to find the optimum K indefinite elements C _K1 , C _K2 , D _K1 , D _K2 and γ, and step s5
Proceed to. In step s5, K is fixed and equations 8 to 1 are used.
2. Equation 18 is solved using Equation 2 and Equation 20 to obtain Q, and the process proceeds to step s6. In step s6, it is determined whether γ has converged. If it is determined that γ has converged, the process proceeds to step s7, and if it is determined that γ has not converged, the process returns to step s4. In step s7, the element of the expansion control law C is obtained from the equation 20 using the element of K obtained when γ converges, and the process proceeds to step s8 to end all the procedures.

The LMI loop shaping method described above is also effective for designing a common control law for a plurality of control objects and control objects having a plurality of characteristics. For example, a case of designing the expansion common control law C for the first expansion control target Pw1 and the second expansion control target Pw2 will be described.
The left graphs of these two expansion control targets Pw1 and Pw2 are
Similar to equation 2,

[Equation 15] far. The right inverse graph K of the expansion common control rules C and C for these two expansion control targets Pw1 and Pw2 is expressed by Expression 5 and Expression 6 as in the above description. Further, using the left graphs G ₁ to G _{2 of} each expansion control object Pw1 and Pw2 and the normalized right inverse graph K _N of the expansion common control law C, Q ₁ and Q ₂ are expressed by 23 and formula 24 are defined.

[0035]

[Equation 16]

Using the elements of equation 6 and equations 21 to 24, the matrices A _G1K , B _G1K and C of the following equations 25 to 32 are obtained.
_G1K , D _G1K , A _G2K , B _G2K , C _G2K and D _G2K are defined.

[0037]

[Equation 17]

Matrices A _G1K , B _G1K , C _G1K , D _G1K , A
_{When G2K} , B _G2K , C _G2K , and D _G2K are used, the convex optimization problem expressed by the linear matrix inequality of the following equation 33 and the algebraic expression of the following equation 34 are alternately solved to obtain Q ₁ , Q ₂ , and K. The optimum indefinite elements C _K1 , C _K2 , D _K1 , and D _K2 of the common expansion control law C can be _calculated .

[0039]

[Equation 18]

The above-described method for obtaining the common control law has been described in the case where there are two control objects, but the common control law can be obtained in the same manner even when there are three or more control objects.
As described above, by using the LMI loop shaping method, a control law that optimizes robust stability can be obtained. However, the desired response characteristic, which is another purpose of the control law design, cannot be realized as it is.

Therefore, a method for optimizing robust stability and obtaining a control law for realizing a desired response characteristic by using the LMI loop shaping method will be described.

FIG. 2 is a block diagram showing the configuration of the control device 21 according to the first embodiment of this invention. The control device 21, which is an automatic control device, includes an input unit 22 and a reference model 2.
3, subtractor 24, adjustment gain device 25, controller 26
And an adder 27 to control the controlled object 28.

The input means 22 is operated by the operator of the control device 21 and outputs a signal having the command value u. The reference model 23 is a signal processor that outputs a reference output that is a desired observation output of the controlled object 28 for a certain command value u. For example, in an aircraft, the input means 22 is a control device, the command value u is an input to the control device of the pilot, the command value u is added to the controller output v and input to the controlled object 28, and the reference model is also used. It is also input to 23. The reference output output from the reference model 23 is a desired value for a command value such as an attitude angle change and an attitude angle measured by a sensor of a body of an aircraft, for example.

The subtractor 24 is an arithmetic unit that outputs the difference between the reference output output from the reference model 23 and the observation output output from the controlled object 28. The adjustment gain device 25 is a gain for adjusting the degree of realization of a desired response characteristic, and outputs the tracking error e obtained by multiplying the difference between the reference output and the observation output output from the subtractor 24 by a predetermined constant. The controller 26 is a controller to which the control law determination method of the present invention is applied, and robustly stabilizes the control device 21 based on the tracking error e output from the adjustment gain device 25, and the observation output is standardized. A correction signal having a controller output v that is a command value to match the output is output. The adder 27 is an arithmetic unit that adds the command value u and the controller output v and outputs the result to the control target 28.

As for the closed-loop transfer characteristic from the command value u and the controller output v to the tracking error e, if the transfer characteristic of the controlled object 28 is P, the transfer characteristic of the reference model 23 is H, and the value of the adjustment gain device 25 is W. , Which is expressed by the following equation 35.

[0046]

[Formula 19]

When the transfer characteristic of the controller 26 is Cw, the following equation 36 is established.

[Equation 20]

The right sides of equations 35 and 36 are respectively

[Equation 21] In other words, the closed-loop transfer characteristic from the command value u and the controller output v to the tracking error e is expressed by the following expression 39.

[0049]

[Equation 22]

Transfer characteristic (I-PwC) represented by the equation 39
Reducing ^-1 Pw means reducing the tracking error e. That is, the response characteristic represented by the reference model 23 can be realized by reducing the transfer characteristic (I-PwC) ^-1 Pw. Further, since the transfer characteristic (I-PwC) ^-1 Pw represented by the equation 39 is included in the element on the upper right side of the equation 19, the robust stability margin b _{PwC of the} equation 19 is obtained.
Since the H ∞ norm on the right side of Expression 19 is reduced by maximizing, the transfer characteristic (I-PwC) ^{−1 of} Expression 39 is reduced.
Pw can be reduced. That is, the controlled object 28
Transfer characteristic P of the controller 26 and the transfer characteristic C of the controller 26 to be designed.
By using w and defining the transfer characteristic Pw of the expansion control target and the transfer characteristic C of the expansion controller as in Expression 37 and Expression 38, the LMI loop shaping method is applied to optimize the robust stability. , A controller 26 that realizes a desired response characteristic can be obtained.

FIG. 3 is a block diagram showing the configuration of the control device 31 according to the second embodiment of the present invention. The control device 31, which is an automatic control device, includes an input unit 32 and a reference model 3.
3, a subtractor 34, an adjustment gain device 35, and a controller 36, and controls a controlled object 37. Input means 3
2, the reference model 33, the subtractor 34, the adjustment gain device 35, and the controller 36 are the same as the input unit 22, the reference model 23, the subtractor 24, the adjustment gain device 25, and the controller 26 in the control device 21 described above, respectively. In the control device 31, the command value u output from the input means 32 is input only to the reference model 33, and only the controller output v from the controller 36 is input to the controlled object 37.

As for the closed-loop transfer characteristic from the command value u and the controller output v to the tracking error e, let P be the transfer characteristic of the controlled object 37, H be the transfer characteristic of the reference model 33, and W be the value of the adjustment gain device 35. Is expressed by the following equation 40.

[0053]

[Equation 23] If the transfer characteristic of the controller 36 is Cw, the equation 36 holds.

The right side of equation 40

[Equation 24] Assuming that the right side of Expression 36 is Expression 38,
Transfer characteristic P of the controller 36 and transfer characteristic C of the designed controller 36
By defining the transfer characteristic Pw of the expansion control target and the transfer characteristic C of the expansion controller by using w and L as shown in Expression 41 and Expression 38, respectively, the LMI loop shaping method is applied to optimize the robust stability. In addition, the controller 36 that realizes the desired response characteristic can be obtained.

In the above control devices 21 and 31, equation 3
7, when the value W of the adjustment gain units 25 and 35 included in the expansion control target Pw of Expression 41 is increased, the controller 26,
The tracking error e input to the amplifier 36 is amplified, and the controllers 26 and 36 designed in this way become controllers with an emphasis on tracking performance, but robust stability deteriorates.
Further, if the value W of the adjustment gain units 25 and 35 is made small, the tracking performance is deteriorated, but the controller emphasizes robust stability.

In the control devices 21 and 31 described above, when a common control law is designed for a plurality of control objects, the transfer characteristic Pw of the expanded control object for each control object is calculated by the equation 37
Alternatively, the controller can be obtained by using the LMI loop shaping method as defined by Equation 40.

FIG. 4 is a block diagram showing the configuration of the flight control device 41 of the third embodiment of the present invention. The flight controller 41, which is an automatic controller, controls the high-speed design point (altitude 3048 m (10000 ft), the ratio of flight speed to sound speed Mach M = 0.9) and low-speed design point (altitude 6096 m ( 20,000 ft) and Mach M = 0.45), and stabilize the airframe Pa, and make the roll rate response to roll steering and the side slip angle response to yaw steering follow the reference response. Also, the sideslip angle response to roll steering and the roll rate response to yaw steering shall be suppressed as much as possible.

The flight control device 41 includes an input means 42, a first
Reference model H _roll , second reference model H _yaw , first filter L _p , second filter L _β , washout filter L _r , first to fifth adjustment gain devices W ₁ , W ₂ , W ₃ , W ₄
, W ₅ , roll axis controller C _p , yaw axis controller C _β , aileron servo controller C _δa , yaw rate controller C _r , ladder servo controller C
_δr , first subtractor 43, second subtractor 44, first adder 4
5 and the second adder 46. Input means 42
Is operated by a pilot who is an operator of the flight control device 41 and outputs a signal having a command value.

[0059] The first reference model H _roll, the input unit 42 is operated by the pilot, for the role maneuver u _p which is output from the input unit 42, the roll rate nominal response is desirable roll rate response of the airframe Pa Output To do. The transfer characteristic of the first reference model H _roll is defined by the following expression 42.

[0060]

[Equation 25] Here, s represents a Laplace operator.

The first subtractor 43 uses the first reference model H _roll.
From the roll rate reference response output from the sensor attached to the machine Pa and the roll rate tracking error e _p , which is the difference between the values of the roll rate signal p output from the sensor attached to the machine body Pa, and outputs it to the first filter L _p . To do. First filter L _p
Improves the phase characteristics of the closed loop system. The first adjustment gain device W ₁ multiplies the roll rate tracking error e _p that has passed through the first filter L _p by a constant W ₁ and outputs the result to the roll axis controller C _p .

The second reference model H _yaw outputs a sideslip angle reference response which is a desired sideslip angle response of the airframe Pa to the yaw operation u _β output from the input unit 42 when the pilot operates the input unit 42. To do. The transfer characteristic of the second reference model H _yaw is defined by the following expression 43.

[0063]

[Equation 26]

The second subtractor 44 uses the second reference model H _yaw.
The side slip angle tracking error e _β , which is the difference between the side slip angle reference response output from the sensor and the value of the side slip signal β output from the sensor attached to the aircraft Pa, is calculated and output to the second filter L _β . . The second filter L _β improves the phase characteristic of the closed loop system. The second adjustment gain device W ₂ multiplies the sideslip angle tracking error e _β passed through the second filter L _β by a constant W ₂ and outputs the result to the yaw axis controller C _β .

The washout filter L _r is the airframe P
The stationary component of the yaw rate signal r output from the sensor attached to a is removed. The third adjustment gain device W ₃ multiplies the yaw rate signal r output from the sensor attached to the machine body Pa that has passed through the washout filter L _r by a constant W ₃ and outputs the result to the yaw rate controller C _r .

The fourth adjusting gain unit W ₄ multiplies a signal δ _a , which is detected from the displacement of the aileron control surface, which is output from a sensor attached to the airframe Pa, by a constant W ₄ and outputs it to the aileron servo controller C _δa . To do. Fifth adjusting gain device W ₅
Outputs a signal δ _r , which is detected from the displacement of the rudder control surface output from a sensor attached to the machine body Pa, by a constant W ₅ and outputs the signal to the ladder servo controller C _δr .

The first adder 45 outputs the output from the roll axis controller C _p and the aileron servo controller C _δa.
And outputs the aileron operation command value δ _ac to the machine body Pa. The second adder 46 outputs the ladder operation command value δ _rc, which is the sum of the output from the yaw axis controller C _β , the output from the yaw rate controller C _r, and the output from the ladder servo controller C _δr, to the machine body Pa. The aileron operation command value δ _ac is an operation command value for an actuator that operates the aileron control surface, and the ladder operation command value δ _rc is an operation command value for an actuator that operates the ladder control surface.

The machine body Pa moves according to the movement of each control surface operated based on the respective operation command values δ _ac and δ _rc , and the machine body Pa
A sensor attached to the sensor detects the movement.

A first filter L _p , a second filter L _β and a washout filter L _r for improving the phase characteristic.
Is determined as in the following expressions 44 to 46.

[0070]

[Equation 27]

Enlargement control target P in the flight control device 41
w and the magnifying controller C have the following formula 47,
Expression 48 is obtained.

[0072]

[Equation 28]

In Expression 47, W, H, P shown on the lower side of the right side correspond to W, H, P on the left side of Expression 41. Further, P _{1 on} the right side of Expression 47 is an element related to the roll rate and the sideslip angle in the motion characteristics of the machine body Pa, and P _1
2 is an element regarding the yaw rate and the response of each actuator among the motion characteristics of the airframe Pa.

After the formulation of Equation 47 is applied to both the high speed design point and the low speed design point of the machine body Pa, the common controllers C _p and C for the high speed design point and the low speed design point are applied according to the LMI loop shaping method. _β , C _r , C _δa , C
_{When δr} is calculated, it can be obtained by the following equations 49 to 53.

[0075]

[Equation 29] Here, j represents an imaginary unit.

FIG. 5 shows a flight control device 51 for a small aircraft including a controller to which the conventional robust design method is applied.
3 is a block diagram showing the configuration of FIG. The calculation result of the control law by the conventional method is as follows:
Nos. 767-775, the following formulas 54-67.
Is. In this conventional robust design method, a controller is designed with the airframe Pa at a high-speed design point as a control target,
The low speed design point is covered by the robust stability of the controller.

[0077]

[Equation 30]

[0078]

[Equation 31]

[0079]

[Equation 32]

In such a conventional robust design method,
As shown in FIG. 5, it is difficult to provide the flight control device 51 with a clear configuration, and the transfer characteristics of the controller shown in the equations 54 to 67 are obtained by using the invention shown in the equations 49 to 53. It is higher and more complicated than the controller. When the transfer characteristics of the controller are high-order and complicated, not only the flight control computer for calculating the control law of the controller mounted on the aircraft needs high computing power, but also there are many parameters to be adjusted. And then
Tuning the control law by finely adjusting the parameters becomes difficult. Since the flight control device 41 using the present invention has a clear configuration and a smaller number of parameters than the conventional flight control device 51, it is possible to perform calculation even by using a flight control computer having low calculation capability. At the same time, tuning by fine adjustment of parameters is easy.

FIG. 6 is a graph showing the simulation result of the response when the roll control u _p and the yaw control u _β input by the pilot are step inputs in the flight control device 41 designed using the present invention. is there. FIG. 7 is a graph showing a response simulation result when the roll control u _p and the yaw control u _β are step inputs in the flight control device 51 designed by the conventional robust design method. The flight control device 41 designed by using the present invention and the flight control device 51 designed by the conventional robust design method follow desired response characteristics, and the control law designed by using the present invention is comparable in performance. I know that there is no.

[0082]

According to the present invention as set forth in claim 1, it is possible to simultaneously improve the robust stability and the desired response characteristic, and the control law of the controller Cw has a simple configuration with a small number of parameters. The controlled object can be controlled. By making the control law of the controller Cw a simple configuration with a small number of parameters, the amount of calculation when controlling the controlled object P can be reduced, so that it is possible to use a computer with low calculation ability and You can easily tune the control law by fine adjustment,
The number of design trials and errors can be reduced.

According to the second aspect of the present invention, it is possible to simultaneously improve the robust stability and the desired response characteristic, and control the control law of the common controller Cw with a simple configuration having a small number of parameters. You can control the target. Since the control law of the common controller Cw has a simple configuration with a small number of parameters, the amount of calculation when controlling the controlled object P can be reduced, so that a computer with low calculation capability can be used and the parameters can be reduced. It is possible to easily tune the control law by finely adjusting, and reduce the number of trial and error of design.

[Brief description of drawings]

FIG. 1 is a flowchart showing a procedure for determining parameters of a control law C by an LMI loop shaping method.

FIG. 2 is a block diagram showing a configuration of a control device 21 according to the first embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 3 is a block diagram showing a configuration of a control device 31 according to a second embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 4 is a block diagram showing a configuration of a flight control device 41 according to a third embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 5 is a block diagram showing a configuration of a small aircraft flight control device 51 including a controller to which a conventional robust design method is applied.

FIG. 6 is a graph showing a simulation result of a response when the roll steering u _p and the yaw steering u _β are step inputs in the flight control device 41 designed using the present invention.

FIG. 7: Flight control device designed by the conventional robust design method
At position 51, roll control u _p And yaw maneuver u_β 
Simulation result of response when step input is
It is a graph which shows a result.

FIG. 8 is a block diagram showing a configuration of a control device 1 that simultaneously realizes robust stability and desired response characteristics, which is a conventional technique.

FIG. 9 is a block diagram showing a configuration of a robust flight control device 11 disclosed in Japanese Patent Laid-Open No. 5-147589.

[Explanation of symbols]

21, 31 Control device 23, 33 Reference model 24, 34 Subtractor 26, 36 Controller 28, 37 Control object 41 Flight control device 43, 44 Subtractor H _roll , H _{yaw reference} model C _p , C _β , C _r , C _δa , C _δr Controller Pa Airframe

─────────────────────────────────────────────────── ─── Continued Front Page (58) Fields surveyed (Int.Cl. ⁷ , DB name) G05B 13/04 B64C 13/16 B64D 31/00 G05B 13/02

Claims (2)

(57) [Claims] 1. An automatic control device having a controller that simultaneously realizes robust stability and a desired response characteristic, wherein the controller is based on a reference model in which a desired response characteristic with respect to a command value of a controlled object P is defined. The normative response that is output,
A controller Cw that controls the controlled object P so as to reduce the tracking error based on the difference from the response actually output from the controlled object P. In order to derive the robust stability margin, Expanded control target Pw using the systems M to N
To And the extended controller _C is formulated as C = N _C M _C ⁻¹ using the dynamic systems M _C and N _C based on the controller Cw, and is robustly stable with respect to the extended control target Pw. The parameter of the expanded controller C that maximizes the margin is determined to determine the control law of the controller Cw, and the controlled object P is controlled by at least the control output from the controller Cw based on the command value and the response from the controlled object P. An automatic control device characterized by: 2. An automatic control device having a controller that simultaneously realizes robust stability and a desired response characteristic, wherein in the method for obtaining a control law of the controller, the controller has a plurality of characteristics. The controlled object P is controlled so as to reduce the tracking error based on the difference between the normative response output from the normative model in which the desired response characteristic for the command value of the object P is defined and the response actually output from the controlled object P. In order to derive the robust stability margin, a plurality of extended control targets Pw are generated by using the dynamic systems M ~, N ~ based on the control target P. And the extended common controller _C is formulated as C = N _C M _C ⁻¹ by using the dynamic systems M _C and N _C based on the common controller Cw, and the extended control target Pw is obtained. The parameter of the expanded common controller C that maximizes the robust stability margin is determined to determine the control law of the common controller Cw, and the control is performed by the control output from the controller Cw based on at least the command value and the response from the control target P. An automatic control device for controlling an object P.