Dayalbagh Educational Institute (Deemed University), Agra

Department of Electrical Engineering

Control System Lab Project Synopsis

Submitted by: Mahima, Ratnanjali Satsangi (B.Tech 3rd year (Electrical+CS)), 1801641, 1801659
  AUTO-PILOT USING MATLAB

1) ABSTRACT : 
The pitch of an aircraft is the lateral axis (or x-axis) , with its origin at the centre of gravity.The movement of aircraft
achieved, when the aircraft is being tilted, by the use of elevator control is called the pitch. It makes the nose of aircraft
ascend or descend using the control, according to the prevailing situation. The stabilization of the pitch angle at the value
of 0 radians is required for the stability of an aircraft. Therefore, this project will design a control system controlling the
slope of the x-axis or pitch with the observer-state feedback to keep the aircraft always in the position setpoint. The
applied controller has to be  tested under three different conditions based on the variation of the gain value of Q and R
affecting the observed gain matrix (L gain) and the matrix state-feedback gain (K gain).  The use of an observer has a
significant influence on the pitch angle deviation of the aircraft. If the result of pitch deviation angle is larger, it will
affect the stability of the aircraft's motion and cause the slope of the movement on the x-axis become greater so that the
aircraft is prone to fall. In this idea, we are trying to implement the pitch nearer to zero i.e, it can be 0.08 to 0.2 radians
because exact zero will be impossible to achieve so the value will tend to zero.

2) INTRODUCTION:
The development of automatic control systems has an important role in the area of aircraft movement control. In most
practical cases, determining the physical state of a system is not possible only by direct observation.The knowledge about
state estimation is needed to solve problems related to the control system.On the contrary, the indirect effect from the
internal state can be observed through the output system. Therefore, a system is required which can observe the state of
the condition and the aircraft  providing an estimation of the presented internal state of the real system, starting from the
measurement of input and output system in real-time.Current aircraft is designed with an automatic control system to
view and control some of the subsystems in the aircraft. . To control the movement of aircraft there are 6 nonlinear
equations. Pitch is one of the aircraft movements to ascend or descend the aircraft's nose. Pitch can be controlled with the
elevators on the tail of the aircraft. This research will design a control system controlling the slope of the x-axis or pitch
with the observer-state feedback to keep the aircraft always in the position setpoint.

2.1) CONTROLLERS FOR SIMILAR TYPE OF PROJECT:

Similar types of projects can be used in autopilot , like as we are using the concept in aircraft, the same can be used
for marines as well. Some controllers are listed below:

1. AP70 AUTOPILOT:

AP70 is a flagship Pilot controller, embedded with the most comprehensive technology from over 60 years of
experience. This state-of-the-art, commercial grade autopilot combines an unrivalled adaptive auto-steering
system with a bright and clear, color display and a user interface designed by captains for captains.
The 5-inch screen is highly visible and easy to read due the vivid color palette.Adjust your course with ease
using the rotary controller, with push to enter functionality.It has an intuitive user interface, designed by
captains, with simple menus and dedicated keys ensures that you can alter course and find the information you
need quickly and easily.Comprehensive range of rudder support options, including dual rudder.Network the
AP70 via industry standard connectors for ease and simplicity.Made from ruggedized aluminum, the AP70 is
not only feature packed, but also highly durable.It is certified to IPX4.
 

2. AP80 AUTOPILOT CONTROLLER:

Simrad AP80 Autopilot is a state-of-the-art, type-approved modular autopilot system; providing complete
heading & course control  for vessels from 20 feet to container-ships.
With 6 individual scenario profiles, networking with NMEA2000 cabling plus key features below, the Simrad
AP80 Autopilot is one of the smartest autopilot solutions on the market.  Adapting to individual load
characteristics, and wind and wave conditions lowers operating costs and reduce risk. Like the AP70, the
slightly larger AP80 modular system design, enables customer-friendly operation & ease of installation. These
Systems are HCS, HSC, Wheelmark, US Coastguard, and CCS-approved, depending on autopilot computer.
The Simrad AP70 and AP80 represent over 60 years of experience and development in the auto steering
business. Simrad’s heritage extends back to the world’s first autopilot for fishing vessels in 1951 (the AP1) and
 we now bring you the latest generation in professional heading control systems that are guaranteed to provide
you with the highest standards of reliability and functionality.

3. AP70 Mk2 Autopilot Controller:

The AP70 Mk2 is a dedicated autopilot controller designed to meet the needs of professional mariners aboard a
variety of commercial vessels.Replacing both the AP70 and AP80 as our IMO/SOLAS autopilot controller, the
AP70 Mk2 retains much of the well-reputed platform of its predecessors, but with a brilliant new display and
modernised software interface.Engineered for responsiveness, robustness and ease of use, the AP70Mk2 pairs a
precision rotary control dial with dedicated buttons for instant access to steering modes, several custom-
configurable work modes and multiple rudder/thruster integration.The AP70 Mk2 will accommodate
installations with up to six drives. Previously only available with the AP80, this premium feature is now a
standard in the AP70 Mk2.
Replacing both the AP70 and AP80 as our IMO/SOLAS autopilot controller, the AP70 Mk2 retains much of the
well-reputed platform of its predecessors, but with a brilliant new display and modernised software interface.

Autopilot settings can be tuned for optimal performance in separate low-speed, high-speed, and Work modes. The user-
configurable Work mode allows the autopilot system to be configured for optimal response in a specific situation, such as
a fully laden vessel, configurable thruster usage.
 
 

2.2) NOVELTY OF PID CONTROLLER:

A PID controller is an instrument used in industrial control applications to regulate temperature, flow, pressure, speed
and other process variables. PID (proportional integral derivative) controllers use a control loop feedback mechanism
to control process variables and are the most accurate and stable controller.
PID control is a well-established way of driving a system towards a target position or level.
The PID controller is so successful both due its powerful performance and its simplicity. Nowadays, modern
tools exist to optimally tune such control laws. Real-life implementation of PID controllers is however a much
more elaborated process. Among others, the following important issues have to be considered when
designing flight control functionalities using PID controllers:

 The control margins of the aerial vehicle have limits and therefore the PID controller has to be
designed to account for these constraints.
 The integral term needs special caution due to the often critically stable or unstable characteristics
expressed by unmanned aicraft. 
 With the exception of hover/or trimmed-flight, an aerial vehicle is a nonlinear system. As the PID is
controller, it naturally cannot maintain an equally good behavior for the full flight envelope of the
system. A variety of techniques such as Gain scheduling are employed to deal with this fact. 
Therefore, PID tuning is essentially an engineering art that cannot only rely on automated processes but
requires the experience of the designer.
3) LAYOUT OF THE PROJECT:

3.1) System Configuration –

TERMINATOR1

X = Ax + By
θdes δ x
Y = Cs + Du
TERMINATOR

STEP STATE-SPACE
K*u θ

K SCOPE

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-

In order to understand the mechanism, we will employ the State-Space block made available in Simulink to model the
open-loop plant.

To provide an appropriate step input at t=0, set the Step time to "0". Also we are setting the Final value to "0.2" to
represent the 0.2-radian reference, entering "3" for the Number of outputs; one output for each of the three state
variables are in Demux block. Then, insert a Scope from the Simulink/Sinks library and connect the third output of the
Demux block to the scope. This will only plot the third state variable which corresponds to the system's output which is
the aircraft's pitch theta. In State-Space block, we’ll enter the system parameters as required. The matrix is entered as a
3x3 identity matrix using the eye command rather than [0 0 1] as in the original state-space equations. The reason for this
is because in state-feedback control it is assumed that all of the state variables are measured, not just the output.

3.2) Components description- An auto-pilot system has the following parameter:

Sensing Element Command Element Output Elements

Directional gyro indicator Gyroscope Aileron servo actuator

Turn-and-bank indicator gyro Flight Controller Rudder servo actuator

Altitude indicator Selected radio navigation input Elevator servo actuator

Altitude control Barometric Sensor Electro-pneumatic servo actuator

3.3) Mathematical Explanation-

From the main problem, the dynamic equations in the Laplace domain and the open-loop transfer function of the aircraft
pitch dynamics are:

(1) sA(s) = -0.313A(s) + 56.7q(s) + 0.232𝚫(s)

(2) sQ(s) = -0.0139A(s) - 0.426Q(s) + 0.0203𝚫(s)

(3) s𝚯(s) = 56.7Q(s)

(4) P(s) = 𝚯(s) ÷𝚫(s) = (1.151s + 0.1774) ÷ (s3 + 0.739s2 + 0.921s)

For a step reference, the design criteria are the following.

 Overshoot less than 10%

 Rise time less than 2 seconds
 Settling time less than 10 seconds
 Steady-state error less than 2%
4) FLOW CHART OF THE PROPOSED TECHNIQUE FOR THE PROJECT:

Open-loop plant

θdes + δ + X X θ
B I/s C
_ +

Close-loop plant

r = θdes + e C(s) u=δ P(s) y=θ

- Controller Plant

where

  = control gain matrix

  =  [∝, q, θ]’ = state vector
 θdes = reference (r)
 δ = (θdes - Kx) = control input (u)
  = output (y)
Referring back to the state-space equations, we see that substituting the state-feedback law δ = (θdes - Kx) for δ leads to
the following.
(6) X = (A - BK) x + Bθdes
(7) θ = Cx
Based on the above, matrix (A - BK) determines the closed-loop dynamics of our system. Specifically, the roots of the
determinant of the matrix [sI - (A - BK)] are the closed-loop poles of the system. Since the determinant of [sI - (A -
BK)] is a third-order polynomial, there are three poles we can place and since our system is completely state controllable,
we can place the poles anywhere we like, as we know that "pole-placement" technique can be used to find the control
gain matrix   to place the closed-loop poles in the desired locations.

Note - This feedback law presumes that all of the state variables in the vector   are measured, even though θ is our
only output.
5) RESULT: COMPARISION OF PID WITH AP70 AUTOPILOT:

Automatic tuning of PID controllers is a useful feature for any user who does not have the time, knowledge or desire to
manually tune his or her control loops. Especially in the process industry, where a factory may have hundreds or
thousands of different flows, levels, temperatures, concen- trations etc. that need to be controlled, the benefit of a fast and
reliable way of finding appropriate controller parameters is large. One such procedure that is common in industry is the
relay autotuner. Whereas in AP70 Autopilot, settings can be tuned for optimal performance in separate low-speed, high-
speed, and Work modes. The user-configurable Work mode allows the autopilot system to be configured for optimal
response in a specific situation, such as a fully laden vessel, configurable thruster usage.

5.1) Comparision based on Response:

When choosing a tuning strategy for a specific control loop, it is important to match the technique to the needs of that
loop and the larger process. It is also important to have more than one approach in your repertoire, and the Cohen-Coon
method can be a handy addition in the right situation. Whereas, AP70 AutoPilot have initialised Response time at
installing, so it can’t be changed

Response time for AP70 Response time for PID

 5.2) Comparison based on Stability:

The complete set of stabilizing parameters of the classical PID controller for the integral plant with time delay and time
constant is determined using the extended Hermite-Biehler theorem applicable to quasi-polynomials. Owning to the
difficulty in analyzing the complex closed-loop characteristic equation based on the extended Hermite-Biehler theorem, a
simple method called dual-locus diagram, is adopted to present the stabilizing region of the practical single-parameter
PID controller. whereas, in AP70 Autopilot controller, it is based on opposing theory known as Routh-Hurtwitz theorem
which also gives stale polynomial but it gives as a immediate corollary.

5.3) Comparison based on relay values:

The principle of relay autotuning is as follows. By closing the feedback loop with a relay function, that switches between
two values depending on the process output, the process is forced into oscillations. See Figure for the setup for a typical
experiment output, From the oscillations process data can be obtained and used to tune a PID controller. The original
relay autotuner uses the period time and amplitude of the induced oscillations in order to find the critical point where the
process Nyquist plot intersects the negative real axis. If a hysteresis band is added to reduce shattering due to noise, a
slightly different point is obtained. The controller parameters are then found by moving this point to give the open-loop

system specified amplitude and phase margins. Whereas in AP70 controllers no relay can be established experimentally
however if we establish a relay setup for AP70 then we will not able to get the fluctuating polynomials that is mentioned
in above topic i.e. comparison based on stability.

6) Result:

Based on the above comparison it is clear that usage of AP70 Controller doesn’t gives us any resistance in making the project but
still it is not as much efficient as PID controller is, so we are using PID controller in the project.
PID controller have better response time, which is very useful while tilting wings and taking off the plane, also its stability is
higher in comparison to AP70 controller and it can also be increased by introducing relay into the system. PID gives you
advantage to introduce relay into the system but in AP70 controller if we introduced relay then it will result in unnecessary control
malfunction which is not suitable for our project. So we use PID controller instead of AP70 Autopilot controller in our
project.
7) REFERENCES :

 Proposed method to auto-pilot control system - by Hanum Arrosida, Mohammad Erik Echsony -
https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/295172049.pdf
 By Tom Benson(NASA Glenn Research Center) - https://www.grc.nasa.gov/www/k-
12/VirtualAero/BottleRocket/airplane/pitch.html
 Research Engineer, Dynamic Systems and Control Branch, MS 308. Senior Member AIAA, NASA Langley
Research Center, Hampton, Virginia 23681.- https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7331001/

 Z. He and W. Xie, “Control of Non-Linear Switched Systems With Average Dwell Time: Interval Observer-Based
Framework,” IET Control Theory & Application, Vol. 10, No. 1, Pp. 10–16, Jan. 2016. 
 A. Tewari, "Advanced Control of Aircraft, Spacecraft and Rockets." Wiley, 2011. 
 V. V. Klemas, “Coastal and Environmental Remote Sensing from Unmanned Aerial Vehicles: An Overview,”
Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 315, No. 5, Pp. 1260–1267, Sep. 2015. 
 M. Polas and A. Fekih, “A Multi-Gain Sliding Mode Based Controller For The Pitch Angle Control of A Civil
Aircraft,” 2010 42nd Southeastern Symposium on System Theory (SSST 2010), No. 2, Pp. 96–101, Mar. 2010. 
 X. Liu, Sheng Sun, Pengjie Lan, and Lifu Du, “Dynamic Surface Attack Angle Control For Aircraft Considering
Actuator Position Saturation,” in 2016 IEEE Chinese Guidance, Navigation and Control Conference (CGNCC),
2016, Pp. 20–24. 
 F. T.Johnson, E. T. N, and N. J. Yu, “Thirty years of development and application of CFD at Boeing Commercial
Airplanes, Seattle,” Computers & Fluids, Vol. 34, No. 10, Pp. 1115– 1151, Dec. 2005.

 Josefin Berner Department of Automatic Control ELLIIT: the Linköping-Lund initiative on IT and mobile
communication.

GROUP MEMBERS:

 RATNANJALI SATSANGI – 1801659

 MAHIMA – 1801641