A Simulink Model for an Aircraft Landing System
Using Energy Functions
Dr.V.I.George1
Professor, Instrumentation and Control Engineering,
MIT, Manipal University,
Manipal, India.
vig_rect@yahoo.com
3
Dr.Ciji Pearl Kurian ,
Professor, Electrical and Electronics Engineering,
MIT, Manipal University,
Manipal, India.
Abstract—A Simulink model for an aircraft landing system using
Lyapunov function is discussed. This paper also illustrates the
concepts of the Nonlinear Energy Based Control Method (NEM)
and modifying the aircraft energy to automatically land an
aircraft. The aircraft dynamics are expressed in the form of the
Euler- Lagrange (EL) equations of motion, which are derived
from the energy functions. The structure of a controller consists
of an inner loop, energy loop and a tracking loop which controls
the aircraft model dynamics. Using Matlab, Simulink and S
functions, perform simulation for the control structure. The
system considered in this paper is a Research Civil Aircraft
Model (RCAM) developed by the Group for Aeronautical
Research and Technology in Europe. (GARTEUR).
Keywords- Aircraft Landing, Non-Liner Energy Based Control,
S-Function, PID Control, Pitch, Velocity, Angle of attack.
I. INTRODUCTION
Aeroplanes are the results of the dreams and desires of Men
who wanted to fly in the air. Maneuvering and controlling
these flying objects is a difficult and complex task which at
times has been made simpler. Landing an Aircraft in a safe
and comfortable manner is a very important task. The pilot has
to be extremely careful and cautious while landing a plane.
The flight of an aircraft culminates in a landing at an airport.
While approaching the airport, the aircraft take a path in line
with the runway and from a certain distance begin to descent
until it touches the ground at a point near the runway
threshold. That means landing is then performed under visual
flight rules condition. This condition is not satisfied, the
landing is under instrument flight rules (IFR) conditions. Both
commercial/military aircrafts should operate all weather
conditions. To achieve this goal, it must be possible to land the
aircraft without visual reference of the runway. This can be
accomplished by the automatic landing system which would
guide the aircraft down a predetermined glide slope and then
at a preselected altitude reduce the rate of descent and cause
the aircraft to flare out and touch down with an acceptably low
rate of descent.
978-1-4577-2119-9/12/$26.00 2011
c IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: National Formosa University. Downloaded on June 16,2021 at 00:59:25 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Mr.Joyson D’Souza2,
Instrumentation and Control Engineering,
MIT, Manipal University,
Manipal, India.
I.Thirunavukkarasu4,
Asst. Professor, Instrumentation and Control Engineering,
MIT, Manipal University,
Manipal, India.
There have been several instances where misjudged
calculation during landing of planes has led to disasters. While
a plane moving in a steady state can be put on Autopilot mode,
in the same manner while landing, the trajectory of safe
landing can be predetermined, measured and automatic
landing can be done. The energy of the Aircraft is modified
and used for automatic landing. NEM technique is based on
potential and kinetic energy of the aircraft. It is similar to the
concept of Total Energy Control System (TECS) concept
which is the sum of kinetic energy and potential energy. In
general dynamics of an aircraft the kinetic energy and pitch
motion are regulated as desired. The controller regulate the
kinetic energy and potential energy and modifies the energy
distribution via aircraft control surfaces and achieve the
desired objectives [1-5]. Flight path design, guidance and
control of aircraft are discussed in [7]. Total energy control
systems (TECS) are explained in [8],[ 11]. Energy controls in
complex non linear aircraft systems [9]. Singular perturbations
in control is demonstrated in [12] and design criteria’s are
illustrated in [6], [10], [13] .
The paper is organized as follows. Section II, illustrates the
objectives of the work, while section III gives the tool for
model based design, RCAM model is discussed in section IV,
and section V gives controller design. Result analysis is given
in section VI.
II. OBJECTIVES
This paper mainly presents the design and simulation of an
Aircraft Automatic Landing System using non linear energy
based control method(NEM) in order to provide automatic
pitch (pitch rate) stabilization for the aircraft in landing mode
and to achieve automatic tracking of the given flight trajectory
for landing phase. A closed loop system is modeled by using
SIMULINK and written Matlab programs for inner controller,
energy controller, PID controller, for RCAM longitudinal auto
pilot.
355
 III. TOOL FOR MODEL-BASED DESIGN
Simulation is carried out in Matlab / Simulink platform using
S-functions for the NEM Control Structure shown in fig (3).
M-file S-functions allow to create blocks with the features of
multiple input and output ports, the ability to accept vector or
matrix signals, support for various signal attributes including
data type, complexity, and signal frames, and ability to operate
at multiple sample rates.
Dynamic systems can be easily modeled either from scratch or
modify existing models to meet the requirements using
Simulink. Simulink supports linear and nonlinear systems,
modeled in continuous time, sampled time, or a hybrid of the
two. Systems can also be multi-rate having different parts that
are sampled or updated at different rates. Simulink models are
widely used for Aerospace and Defense, Automotive,
Communications, Electronics and Signal Processing and
Medical Instrumentation applications. It is possible to explore
more realistic nonlinear models, factoring in friction, air
resistance, gear slippage, hard stops, and other things that
describe real-world phenomena.
Real world problems like automotive clutch system, the flutter
of an airplane wing, the monetary supply on the economy can
be modeled and analyzed using Simulink platform.The
interactive graphical environment simplifies the modelling
process, eliminating the need to formulate differential and
difference equations in a language or program.
Once the model is defined it can be simulated using a choice
of mathematical integration methods either using Simulink
menus or MATLAB Command line. The menus are
convenient for interactive work, while the command line is
useful for running a batch of simulations. For example, in
Monte Carlo simulations or to apply a parameter across a
range of values command line is useful. The simulation results
can be put in the MATLAB workspace for post processing and
visualization.
Model analysis tools mainly include linearization and
trimming tools, which can be accessed from the MATLAB
command line. Because MATLAB and Simulink are
integrated, it is possible to simulate, analyze, and revise the
models in either environment at any point. Simulink use
MATLAB environment to define model inputs, store model
outputs for analysis and visualization, perform functions
within a model through integrated calls to MATLAB operators
and functions.
Use S-functions for a variety of applications such as creating
new general purpose blocks, adding blocks that represent
hardware device drivers, incorporating existing C code into a
simulation, describing a system as a set of mathematical
equations and using graphical animations.To incorporate a C
MEX S-function or legacy Level-1 M-file S-function into a
Simulink® model, drag an S-Function block from the User-
Defined Functions block library into the model. Then specify
356 2012 7th IEEE Conference on Industrial Electronics and Applications (ICIEA)
Authorized licensed use limited to: National Formosa University. Downloaded on June 16,2021 at 00:59:25 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
the name of the S-function in the S-function name field of the
S-Function block's Block Parameters dialog box.
The S-Function block's S-function parameters and Level-2 M-
file S-Function block's Parameters fields allow you to specify
parameter values to pass to the corresponding S-function. To
use these fields, we must know the parameters of the S-
function and the order in which the function requires them. (If
do not know, consult the S-function's author, documentation,
or source code.) Enter the parameters, separated by a comma,
in the order required by the S-function. The parameter values
can be constants, names of variables defined in the MATLAB
or model workspace, or MATLAB expressions.In this paper
the mathematical models are taken from [1] and closed loop
simulation is done using simulink.
IV. RCAM MODEL
The aircraft model used is the Research Civil Aircraft Model
(RCAM), the twin-engine civil aircraft model developed by
GARTEUR[10] [13]. The Block diagram representation of
RCAM [1] is shown in figure (1). The angle of attack and
aircraft pitch motion are controlled by a surface called
elevator. Hence angle of attack , pitch, pitch rate, changes in
speed as state variables and elevator deflection is taken as
input . Hence the eigen values of longitudinal dynamics
consists of pair of complex poles and a pair of real poles. The
complex poles represent phugoid (slow dynamics) and real
poles represent short period mode (fast dynamics). The
phugoid mode, the period of oscillation is large and relatively
low damping. It depends on pitch and speed of the aircraft and
the angle of attack is constant. It can be thought of a potential
energy changes to kinetic energy. Damping of the phugoid
depends upon drag. The natural frequency of the phugoid is
inversely proportional to the forward speed and independent of
air density.
Fig 1: Block diagram of RCAM
 Table 1: Flight Trajectory Descriptions

Segment Time, Descriptions Gamma V

t (sec) (deg) (m/s)

I 0<t”110 Level Flight 0 80

80
II 110<t”150 Descending -5
80
III 150<t”190 Diving -5
80
IV 190<t”230 Ascending 5
80
V 230<t”260 Climbing 5
80
VI 260<t”300 Levelling 0
80
VII 300<t”340 Level Flight 0
80
VIII 340<t”380 Descending -6
80
IX 380<t”420 Diving -6
80
Fig 2: Flight Trajectory X 420<t”450 Decending -3
80
XI 450<t”500 Approaching -3
Table 1 provides the trim conditions defined by the flight-path
angle Ȗ and the airspeed V, that are shown by Fig. (2) which
displays the trajectory in x-z plane. Fig 3 shows the block The energy required by the aircraft in order to achieve the
diagram of NEM control structure for RCAM longitudinal desired trajectory consists of stored and dissipated energy. The
autopilot [1]. central idea is to modify the energy distribution via aircraft
control surfaces and thrust to achieve the desired objective.

V CONTROL DESIGN

The rotational dynamics due to pitching motion is controlled

by inner loop and inner controller where by achieving the
pitch stabilization and perform the stabilization of the fast
dynamics. The fast controller u f = [δ e δ th ]T is designed to
ensure the pitch and the pitch rate reach the desired values,
θ → θd , θ → θd . The translational dynamics are
considered as slow dynamics. The energy controller performs
the stabilization of the slow dynamics via energy loop. The
resulting controller is denoted as us . The third stage, a simple
outer controller for position tracking is proposed. This is the
tracking loop. Finally, we have to consider the overall
controlled dynamics to validate the design. The composite
controller is uc = us + u f . The total energy-based controller
to achieve trajectory tracking, energy regulation and pitch
stabilization is, given by [1]

Fig 3: Block diagram of NEM control structure for RCAM

2012 7th IEEE Conference on Industrial Electronics and Applications (ICIEA) 357

Authorized licensed use limited to: National Formosa University. Downloaded on June 16,2021 at 00:59:25 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 1 ª  δ F
Iyθd + −( Iyζ + Kd )θ − Kdζθ −Mθ,δth » +
º
δe = « 
Mθ,δe ¬ δθ ¼

( )
K1z + K2 tanh 0.1³ z + K3z −−−−−−−(1)
1 ª Dr º
δ th = « + g sin(γ ) + Vd − K dsV » −
19.62 cos(α ) ¬ m ¼
K θ − K θ + K z − − − − − − − (2)
5 6 4

Where K1 , K 2 , K 3 , K 4 , K 5 , K 6 ,∈ ℜ, ζ , K d , K ds ∈ ℜ +
Control laws (1) and (2) are constructed as follows, [1] the
controller gains computed based on the RCAM nominal
operating point. (Aircraft mass = 120000 kg, airspeed = 80 m/s,
gamma = 0) are: I yζ + K d = 3.8 * 107 kgm2/s, K d ς = 2.156
Fig 5: Simulink output of Pitch angle (theta)
* 107 kgm2/s, Kds = 4 s/m, K1 = 0.005/m, K2 = 0.0003/m, K3 =
0.004 s/m, K4 = -0.005/m, K5 = -0.452, and K6 = -0.583s. The
T
initial condition: ª¬ș 0 θ 0 x 0 z 0 x 0 z 0 º¼ = [ 0 0.0284 80
0 1000 1000]T. The units are rad/s, rad, m/s, m/s, m and m,
respectively. The COG position is fixed at xcog = 0.23c , ycog
= 0; zcog = 0. No Wind Disturbances are present. The aircraft
inertia matrix is constant. The energy equation [1] is given by
W 2
E = Wh + V . Where W = mg = weight of the aircraft,
2g
g = acceleration due to gravity , h =altitude, and V= velocity.

V. RESULT ANALYSIS

Matlab programs for inner controller, energy controller, PID

controller and aircraft model [1] are developed. The simulink
model for the NEM structure of RCAM is shown in figure (4).

Simulation results of Pitch angle ( θ ), Pitch rate ( θ ), Velocity Fig 6: Simulink output of Pitch rate (theta_dot)
(V), Flight path angle( γ ), Z position of the aircraft , upward
speed z and angle of attack ( α ) are shown in the figure (5) to
figure (11). A nonlinear energy based control method is
designed for an aircraft longitudinal autopilot (on a twin-engine
civil aircraft developed by GARTEUR in landing phase). The
aircraft model used here is RCAM (Research Civil Aircraft
Model). The energy required by the aircraft in order to achieve
the desired trajectory consists of stored and dissipated energy.
The desired objectives are achieved by modifying the energy
distribution via aircraft control surfaces and thrust. Three
controllers which are used to control the automatic landing of
the aircraft are designed by modifying aircraft energy. The
entire system is designed for a certain flight trajectory. The
closed loop time responses shown in figures 5 to 11 and its
time domain specifications such as rise time, settling time, root
mean square error etc. are minimum. Therefore simulation
results are satisfactory for the landing of an aircraft.

Fig 7: Simulink output of Velocity(V)

358 2012 7th IEEE Conference on Industrial Electronics and Applications (ICIEA)

Authorized licensed use limited to: National Formosa University. Downloaded on June 16,2021 at 00:59:25 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Fig 8: Simulink output of Flight Path Angle(gamma)
Fig 9: Simulink output of z-position(z)
Fig 10: Simulink output of upward speed(z_dot)
2012 7th IEEE Conference on Industrial Electronics and Applications (ICIEA)
Authorized licensed use limited to: National Formosa University. Downloaded on June 16,2021 at 00:59:25 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Fig 11: Simulink output of Angle of attack(alpha)
References
[1] R. Akmeliawati and I. Mareels, “Nonlinear Energy-Based Control
Method For Aircraft Automatic Landing Systems,” Ieee Transactions On
Control Systems Technology, Vol. 18, No. 4, July 2010.
[2] J. E. Marsden, A. M. Bloch, and N. E. Leonard, “Matching and
stabilization by the method of controlled lagrangians,” in Proc. IEEE
Conf. Decision Contr., Dec. 1998, pp. 1446–1451.
[3] N. E. Leonard, A. M. Bloch, and J. E. Marsden, “Potential shaping and
the method of controlled lagrangians,” in Proc. 38th IEEE Conf.
Decision Contr., Dec. 7–10, 1999, vol. 2, pp. 1652–1657.
[4] R. Akmeliawati and I. Mareels, “Passivity-based control for flight
control systems,” in Proc. Inform., Decision Contr. (IDC) 1999,
Adelaide, Australia, 1999, pp. 15–20.
[5] R. Akmeliawati and I. Mareels, “Nonlinear energy-based control method
for landing autopilot,” in Proc. 15th Triennial World Congress of the
IFAC, Barcelona, Spain, 2002, pp. 1989–1994.
[6] E. J. Bass, “Towards a pilot-centered turbulence assessment and
monitoring system,” presented at the 18th Digital Avionics Systems
Conf., St. Louis, MO, Oct. 24–29, 1999.
[7] A. S. Calise, “A singular perturbation analysis of optimal aerodynamic
and thrust magnitude control,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Contr., vol. 24, pp.
720–730, 1979.
[8] L. F. Faleiro and A. A. Lambregts, “Analysis and tuning of a ‘Total
Energy Control System’ control law using eigenstructure assignment,”
Special Issue on Flight Control, J. Aerosp. Sci. Technol., vol. 3, pp.
127–140, 1999.
[9] R. Ortega, A. J. Van Der Schaft, I. Mareels, and B. Maschke, “Putting
energy back in control,” IEEE Contr. Syst. Mag., vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 18–
33, Apr. 2001.
[10] S. Bennani, J. Magni, and J. Terlouw, Robust Flight Control—A Design
Challenge. London, U.K.: Springer-Verlag, 1997.
[11] J. R. Kelly, K. R. Bruce, and L. H. Person, Jr., “NASA B737 flight test
results of the total energy control system,” presented at the AIAA
Guidance, Navigation and Control Conf., Williamsburg, VA, Aug. 1986,
AIAA Paper 86-2143CP, 1–9.
[12] H. Khalil, P. Kokotovic, and J. O’Reilly, Singular Perturbation Methods
in Control: Analysis and Design. London, U.K.: Academic Press, 1986.
[13] R. Pratt, Flight Control Systems, Practical Issues in Design and
Implementation. Herts, U.K.: IEE, 2000.
359
 Fig 4: Simulink diagram of NEM control structure for RCAM longitudinal autopilot

360 2012 7th IEEE Conference on Industrial Electronics and Applications (ICIEA)

Authorized licensed use limited to: National Formosa University. Downloaded on June 16,2021 at 00:59:25 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.