Professional Documents
Culture Documents
R=19780023164 2018-02-02T17:05:11+00:00Z
General Disclaimer
This document has been reproduced from the best copy furnished by the
organizational source. It is being released in the interest of making available as
much information as possible.
This document may contain data, which exceeds the sheet parameters. It was
furnished in this condition by the organizational source and is the best copy
available.
This document may contain tone-on-tone or color graphs, charts and/or pictures,
which have been reproduced in black and white.
Portions of this document are not fully legible due to the historical nature of some
of the material. However, it is the best reproduction available from the original
submission.
jj
i
^' 3
to the
r
on -.
NASA Grant NSG•-3048, Supplement No. 2
f
1
3
i
t
Under the Direction of
-= 3
Supplement No. 2
ABSTROT
I This report deals with progress made on the Grant NSG--3048 during the
TI I^ calendar year beginning March 1, 1977 and ending February 28, 1978. This
General goals of the research have been classified into two cate-
gories. The first category involves the use of modern multivariable. frets
r a quiescent point. The second category involves the use of nonlinear mod-
*The acronym stands for Complex Acceptability Region for IA gonal Dom-
inance. See report for details. r
i
_
a
hear thirty papers focused in the general subject area of this grant.
r In. the nonlinear category, advances have been made both in engine
modelling and in the details associated with software for deter ^xa
i tion
of time optimal controls. Nonlinear model s fo r a two spool turbofan
i' engine have. been. , expanded and refined; and a promising new approach to
t`
automatic model generation: has been placed under study. A two time scale
scheme has been developed to do two-dimensional dynamic programming, and
{< a
i; an outward spiral sweep technique has greatly speeded convergence times
in time optim" al calculations.
The details of these and other aspects of the yearns.investigations
^.` may be found in the body of the report, which covers the most active
,rant period . to date., _
;. A
i
f ` ,.
3
.. .. y^
.; :.^ ix ''--ma- :.: .-x-,• f.
m..i. .D^ s ti afsmd ,: dxw,;-e. • r
t TABLE OF CONTENTS
3 ABSTRACT. ....
Page
APPENDICES ^
1 1
i
{
Li. .1•-..^^_
F'-e, _ ... . >-.- _^.,.siZL'f'l,waiw^+1%-', {:'^ a..i L.:._sn{a,GMvcf .:^.. ! - ^ -
l . INTRODUCTION
.ts
l E r
The purpose of this section is to provide some of the broad back-
ground which underlies and clarifies the general nature of the Research
ments in the engine industry, which was be ginning to experience some lim
is
nations in the application of classical hydromechanical control tech-
pique as the primary base technology for modern engines with ever in-
r; only the opportunity'to Control more engine variables but also the peas-
were linear quadratic regulator (LQR) theory in the linear case.. For the
the linear case and to examine nonlinear modelling and optimization ap-
Context for the studies is set by the DYNGEN digital simulator [2].
!k Based upon earlier computer codes GENENG [3] and GENENG 11 [4], DYNGEN
has the combined capabilities of [3] and [4], for calculating steady-
differential equations which model the dynamics of the engine. This mod--
UY
ified Euler method permits the user to specify large time steps, for ex-
by a process of loading data for the various maps associated with a given
1 engine. The maps for the Grant NSG-3048 have been provided by engineer-
paper engine, which is not closely identified with any current engine.
' spool turbofan engines. The simulation provides for two essential con-
trols, main burner fuel flow and jet exhaust area. Portions of the en-
s
velope which can be used for linear or nonlinear experimentation are
proaches may be classified into two groups. These two groups are often
been discussed from the early days of organized control study. See,
for example, [5] and [5]. In fact, some of the earliest attempts to ex-
more than one input and output. Among these difficulties may be mentioned
a
(1) s he meaning and extent of cancellations of various types
i'
t^.
^y
quency response plots in the complex plane or versions of the root locus.
Nyquist methods. The key constituent ideas are related to three poly-
nomials:
it
(1), P C (s)- the closed loop characteristic polynomial (CLCP),
pulse response of the closed loop control system; the OLCP serves the same
purpose for the open loop system. M(s) is a matrix of transfer functions
convenient point and inject impulses. The difference between the trans-
forge of the signal injected and that which returns at the other end of
po (s) and M(s) derive their importance from the fact that they are re-
Typically, po (s) is known; and M(s) is partly given and partly designed,
A great deal of the design effort centers upon the way in which dynamical
t compensation affects the determinant which acts on M(s). There are -three 't
am
4
7
(1) direct construction of IM(s)J by any of the known methods
all these methods to jet engine design, but particularly method (3),
Plot, where the acronym stands for Complex Acceptability Pegion for DT-A-
"approximately diagonal."
^w F With respect
to nonlinear modellingg and o F timi.zationa the emphasis
F
tions from fundamental. principles. In this case, there are usually about
t r%
,.....^ .....vn-^-mi
Fr ..-y,_ Y—._5+: ; t
.+"r, v^cM. .r'-*-^iTi'?.^jT.. O-e rt4^1LYC 9`.""t^^.::..[3^kwCVLY'rXY ^3 -
the equations. These functions often have more than one argument. If
to identify the parameters. This must normally be done from the DYNGEN
ciples are not ignored but that added emphasis is placed upon general
designed' to make maximum use of the type of data which is directly avail-
sider the problem of reducin g the order of the models. Though order
ti
reduction can often be highly mathematical in nature, it is almost al-
j,
ways the case that the reduced order model depends upon the scaling of
Work on this grant has focused especially upon the first and second
upon time optimal control, and considerable effort has been invested in
_1777
t:
, Grant NSG-3048 during the period from March 1, 1977 to February 28, 1978.
5
There are two major subdivisions, according to the main thrusts of the
Section T.
T During the calendar year ending on February 28, the following results
engine models.
7
yy.r
r,
(5) About a given design point, linear models of the
standard type are obtained from the DYNGEN simulation
by the DYGABCD routine [11]. In order to use DYGABCD
at off-design points, however, modifications to DYGABCD
necessary to the research had to be accomplished. See
r: (7), Section III.
The major advances and results achieved during the past year in the
^,irT _.. ^'^^ ... :5.. .._ .-., .. _1 •__ - 17.t1.^1ti-^1f.:e6r..^^{.iZ•i::v-iTiK^.1 +t ^.]i'^cx`z ^., ti,. s.-. _, _ _
P . keeping with general interest in the industry concern-
ing improvement of compact general models.
B
Illy . PUBLICATIONS
during the year March 1, 1977 through February 28, 1978. The works are
ordered chronologically.
i±• of one or more of the letters A, M, and R. The letter A signifies that
letter R declares that the document summarizes an effort which was closely
integrated with, but not directly supported by, the activities of this
grant.
i:
Completed publications from earlier years are not included in this
list; but a total listing of all the grant documents has been provided
t 10
E.
(11) R.J. Leake and J.G. Comiskey, "A Direct Method for Obtain-
ing Nonlinear Analytical Models of a Jet Engine", Proceed-
ings International Forum on Alternatives for Linear Multi-
variable Control., National Electronics Conference, Chicago,
pp. 203--212, October 1977. (A) i
(12) J.A. Ortega and R.J. Leake, "Discrete Maximum Principle
with State Constrained Control", SIAM Journal on Control
and Optimization, Vol. 15, No. 6, pp. 109-115, November
1977. (R)
' (15) M.K. Sain, "The Theme Problem", in Alternatives for Linear
Maltivariable Control., M.K. Sain, J.L. Peczkowski and J.L.
Mel.sa, Editors. Chicago: National Engineering Consortium,
1978, pp. 20-30. (A)
• 1.3
s -
z
{ (16) R.M. Schafer
Sc er and M M.K.Sain "Input Comp
"ICompensation
np for
Dominance of Turbofan Models", in Alternatives for
Linear Multivariable Control, M.K. Sain, J.L.
Petzkowski, and J.L. Melsa, Editors. Chicago: Na-
tional Engineering Consortium, 1978, pp. 156-169. (A)
t
t
Al
F ;'
i'
x `
12
rr _'
1
IV. LOCAL 11ULT1VARIABLE FREQUENCY DOMAIN NETHODS
achieved during this grant period in the areas of Low Interaction Design,
studies.
are currently being called CARDIAD plots, was only being tentatively con-
sidered in October, 1976 when the continuation proposal for NASA Grant
USG-3048, Supplement No. 2, was being written. Based upon favorable pre-
was made to investigate further the use of CARDIAD plots as a design aid
4.
maining time period of Supplement No. 1 and has continued through Sup-
plement No. 2.
A great deal of the power of the CARDIAD plot arises from its sim-
Data for the center and radius of this circle is obtained from the com-
plex: transfer function matrix of the plant. The circle may be solid or
dashed. If solid, the inside of the circle defines the acceptable com-
3.3
i
••.-- - „ter-.^;^ _.,_.-_.. ....._^..- --- _^. __-----------'^..__......e..:..E^..^.,._-^
fines the acceptable region. As the frequency follows a standard Nyquist A
J^
pattern, these circles result in a CARDIAD plot. (Complex Acceptability
Eegion for DIAgonal Dominance). This plot has been shown to speak con-
,
structively to the issue of compensator choice to reduce interaction.
output engine model in which the inputs are fuel flow and nozzle area,
the states are compressor speed, fan speed, burner exit pressure, after-
burner exit pressure, and high turbine inlet energy, and the outputs are
thrust and high turbine inlet temperature.
Typical examples of CARDIAD plots for such engine models may be seen
in Figures 2-5 of Appendix r. The investigators involved in this study
have seen the same type of plots arising from a variety of engine data.
This has raised the interesting question of whether there may be a-mean-
ingful concept of "engine interaction footprint" in the sense of the
CARDIAD plot.
14
dominance at all frequencies on typical engine models. Moreover, only
sible to apply the same degree of credibility to the model itself at all
ures 6-8 are characteristic locus plots for the plant, after it was com-
y the CARDIAD plot and the characteristic locus, has been quite helpful
perience gained with the characteristic locus on the original grant NSG-
low a standard Nyquist pattern. This tool really underlies all the mod-
' ern frequency domain ideas; but it is Usually handled obliquely, as for
15
It
^^'."^•^.^^' :'. ^.. ..'..- :. _.•: i'. :... _. ..., _._:...._^'.^e^).....^...._... w• . , .. .: h s•a^!Si.HL•zN.l4)»La?ikM•F•^l.Ma.=..1::'M•Wdiw--)Y.^.^.. h-..0 _ _ ___ __ ^_^^ ^ , ^
^ g -
FYI of the type of Figure 11 can be drawn without any regard of plant size
in terms of inputs, states, and outputs.
Efforts to use the direct approach for design, as well as for anal-
u.
ysis, have posed nontrivial algebraic questions. Some insight has been
w gained, but no breakthroughs have occurred as yet.
V Pol-_momial- Design
I@ design techniques to the turbofan engine control problem have been re-
During the present grant period, a paper on this work was presented
qa
resurgence, grant work an polynomial design has pointed out the necessity
The transfer function has a number of key properties which have long
16
apace.
under this grant, in the frequency domain, was made at the 1977 Midwest
All the work so far mentioned in regard to the CARDIAD plot was
} a carried out for plants having two inputs and two outputs. In this sit-
uation, it is certainly true that the plots have many interesting prop-
erties.
rt
e+ based on a linearized model of a modern turbofan engine. See Appendix
i^-
r..
I. Assistance in the theoretical extension of CARDIAD to the three-in-
the National Science Foundation under Grant ENG 75-22322. NASA support
1 17 I
t
T
put, three-output case involved the use of a bound which provides suf-
way that the bound will extend to the case of a plant having p inputs
ware to extend the CAEDIAD idea and to establish viewpoints for studying
the plots in more complicated cases. The CARDIAD analysis was divided
into two phases. The first phase assumed one off--diagonal compensator
ti
element to he zero. An advantage of such a phase lies in its conceptual
The secondhase g
P assumed both off-diagonal P
compensator elements to be
nonzero, but drew the plot in such a way that the designer could as-
- certain what would happen when one of those elements was zero. This sec-- '=
and phase approach was successful in completing the aesign for the Theme
Problem.
L,. f:
u f
k.
extension research.
(1) These CARDIAD methods have been successful without assuming a fixed
i'
form of the compensator. The importance of this fact can scarcely
} j[n be overemphasized. If a fixed fora is assumed, it-may happen that
is ,lost,
side of the plant, as . for example the input, can be used to affect
outputs that are not measurable. Other methods that use compensation
both at plant input and plant output often depend upon moving the
,.a sible unless those outputs drive the loop. It would seem that this
F
T^ 1^.
could be quite important_ in the case of •key outputs such as high
SirJ
f.
turbine inlet temperature and thrust.
(3) In cases studied so far, and there have been over a dozen of them,
f
t^
Jm
the CARDIAD plot has achieved dominance over all frequencies, even
when the plant has (A, D, C, D) form and transmission does not roll
t.
}
off to zero at high frequencies. This design power has been ac-
f'
^.i
gains available.; and does not leave the choice indirectly to an op--
19
f
a
os.
timization program.
Because of these features, the investigators feel that the CARDIAD plot
3 Multiple Setpoints
rr
Frcim the outset, the CARDIAD plot has offered much promise for the
c general control problem which involves linearization at multiple set-
gins model over a more globsl operating regime. The investigators be-
^n
lieve that such studies can be helpful in selecting setpoints for design
W6ek has been proceeding along these lines, with the aid of set-
. points involving two inputs and two outputs from NASA's DYNGBN engine
2.31., 2.x'75, 2.64, and 2.75 LBM/SBC. Figures 1-10 of the appendix con-
which focus on the first column. rota their clear similarity. Next con-
sider Figures 2, 4, 5, 8 and 10. Again note their clear similarity. Be-
LL
20 ,f
y,-
project.
^Y
^t
° -
5? -
^Yr
^^
21
IT
V. GLOBAL NONLINEAR OPTIMAL METHODS
This section is concerned with some of the details of the thirdY ear of
two-spool engine.
e
The DYNGEN simulator, equipped with DYGABCD, has been useful in
? ever, it is costly and has limitations. Two such limitations are the fact
that it is difficult to get convergence at low rotor speeds, and that only
44 been invaluable. It is felt that our work has contributed to the overall
In the early stages of the work, DYNGEN was of primary concern, but
rt
^s
^..
F-^
.22 E
s
—..._-._-- ._.... _.....
.r^.^:..—sue,.
^^^'•^^.._a;.c-: — -._ . --
Turbine rigine Modelling
This phase of the work began with analog computer studies of a single
spool engine. Then a considerable effort was spent to obtain a good ana-
lytical model for a two sD- ,) l model using fundamental physical. consider-
ati.ons. This study resulted in a hierarchy of models as reported in W.B.
use an approximation of
x = f (x,u)
place, there is always a unique equilibrium point for a given fixed con-
trol u, so
x = g(u)
is the equilibrium equation which is all important for steady state anai-
ysis. In the second place, jet engine A matrices rarely have poles
23
i
This is a great help in computing such models. Suppose then that
L
f(x,u) A(x,u) (x-g(u)),
r. T and let
(X
e
u e)
S r X g(u
e e
Then
af
(X u A(x u
ax e e e e
and
Rf
(X e s a A(x u
e e au(ue)
e
af
A key point is, however, that corresponds to the system B matrix
DU
3- B(x u
e A(X u e Du (ue}
e
e
or
(u A73- N u B (x U
au e e e e e
24
A(x,u) 9 g (u), and (u).
a
model from control to state. To see this, consider the transfer func-
tion relation
-AIB.
It follows from the above discussion that use of the model form pre-
Equilibrium Values
A Matrices
B Matrices..
"he Chicago paper, Appendix G, was a first attempt to use the ap-
r,
j' 25
26
} x.
T
Vl. SPECIAL INITIATIVES RELATED TO GRANT 14ORK
Tvo special initiatives were carried out during this year. The first
was a special session at the 1977 .joint Automatic Control Conference, and
-
the second was an entire meeting, the International Forum on Alternatives
R-
A session "Turbofan Engine Control" was put together for this con-
See Appendix C.
KIP
1.
27
`l
In October, 1977, Dr. Sain was Program Chairman for an entire meeting
_
s^G
fo-used in the general subject area of this grant. Approximately two hur-
E
LI persons attended from industry, laboratories, and universities. About
those contributed papers which best fit in with the Forum Theme.
The Forum Program appears on the next two pages. More information
^n
i•:
i^
28
Thursday, October 13
SESSION 1. Origins of the There Problem
Chairman: M. K. Sain, University of Notre Dame
8:00 Engine Criteria and Models for Multivariable Control System Design
R. D. Hackney and R. J. Miller, Pratt-Whitney Aircraft Group, and L. L. Small, Air Force Aero--Propulsion
Laboratory F`
8:30 A Practical Approach to Linear Model Analysis for Multivariable Turbine Engine Control Design i.
C. A. Skira, Air Force A e ro-Propulsion Laboratory, and R. L. DeHoff, Systems Control, Inc. (Vt.)
10:30 BREAK
11:00 Multivariable Design Problem Reduction to Scalar A New Frequency Method for Multivariable Systems
} Design Problems R. DeSantis, Universite de'Montreal
B. D. 0. Anderson and N. T. Flung, University of
x Newcastle, Australia
' 11 :30 The Multivariable Nyquist Array: The Concept of Performance Analysis of Stochastic Linear Control
Dominance Sharing Systems: A New Viewpoint
G. G. Leininger, University of Toledo S. R. Liberty, Texas Tech University
12:00 Input Compensation for Dominance of An Automatic Depth and Pitch Control System for ?^
Turbofan Models Submarines ? ;{
R. P!. Schafer and M. K. Sain, University of V. Nitsche, K. Luessow, and G. J. Thaler, Naval r ':''
e Notre Dame Post - Graduate School i
i
^- 12:30 LUNCH
2:00 Complex Variable Methods for Piultivariable Feedback Systems Analysis and Design
A. G. J. MacFarlane, B. Kouvaritakis, and J. H. Edmunds, Cambridge University, England
3:00 The Characteristic Frequency and Characteristic Gain Design Method for Multivariable Feedback Systems
_ B. Kouvaritakis and J. M. Edmunds, Cambridge University, England
3:30 BREAK
s -
Friday, October lk ?^
Px
SESSION 6. Theme Session C: RegteZator etfothods gjdG11
Chairman: S. Brods".y, Office of Naval Research 'RQQg V AT .
10:30 BREAK
SESSION 7-1. Modalling SESSION 7-2. Modet FoZZowing SESSION 7-3. Comparisons
Chairman: II. Wozny, Chairman: W. R. Perkins, Chairman: T. E. McDonald,
National Science Foundation University of Illinois Las AL mos Scientific Laboratory
11:00 A Direct Method for Obtaining Active Maneuver Load Control Quasi.-Upper Triangular Decomposi-
Nonlinear Analytical Models of for a Control Configured tion Applied to the Linearized
a Jet Engine Airplane Control of a Turbo-fan Engine--
R. J. Leake and J. G. Comiskey, N. C. Weingarten and E. G. Preliminary Results
University of Notre Dame Rynaski, Calspan Corporation W. E. Holley, Oregon State
University
11:30 A Multi-Time-Scale Design A Parameter Optimization Method Reliability Considerations in
Approach for Jet Engine Control Applied to Engine Control Decentrally Controlled Multi-
Systems System Design variable Systems
A. J. Calise and B. Sridhar, Y. Cheng, NASA Dryden Research F. N. Bailey, E. B. Lee, and M. K.
Dynamics Research Corporation Center 4undareshan, University of Minnesota
12:00 BLS as an Alternative to Linear Model Algorithmic Control On Alternative Methodologies for
Control Systems A. Rault, J. Richalet- and J. the Design of Robust Linear
R. R. Mohler and V. R. Karanam, Papon, ADERSA/GERBIOS, France, Multivariable Regulators
Oregon State University and R. Mehra and W. C. Kessel, H. G. Kwatny and K. C. Kaluitsky,
Scientific Systems Drexel University and TASC
12:30 LUNCH
SESSION 8-1. Output FeetMack SESSION 8 -2. Addittional SESSION 8-3. Design:
Chairman: E. M. Cliff Approaches Chairman: E. C. Tacker
Virginia Polytechnic Institute Chairman: I. Rhodes, Wash. Univ. University of Houston
2:00 Output Feedback Regulator Optimal- Open Laop Compensator A Conceptual. Design Approach
Design for Jet Engine Control Combined with Riecati Feed- Using Feedforward Plus Forward
Systems back Compensator Control . Compensation
Wi, C;. Merrill, NASA Lewis R. Froriep, D. Joas, G. Kreis- N. H. McClamroch, University of
Research Center selmeier, DFVLR, West Germany Michigan
2:30 A Classical Root Lov.:3 Design Observing Partial States for Computer Aided Design of Control
4 Method for Multivariable Systems with Unmensurable System via Optimization
Systems in State Space Form Disturbances David Q. Mayne, Imperial College,
G. K. Lee, University of S. H. Wang and E. J. Davison London, England
Connecticut, M. Sohrwardy, University of Colorado and
Ruhr-Universitat, and D. University of Toronto Design of Linear Multivariable
Jordan, University of Control Systems by CIP
Connecticut L. L. Gresham, J. R. Mitchell,
3:00 Output Control via Matrix On the Design of Accurate and W. L. McDaniel, Jr.
Generalized Inverse Observers Mississippi State University
R. J. Miller, D. L. Powers, S. P. Bhattacharyya and
and V. Lovass-Nagy, ?. G. Trindade, Universidade
Clarkson College Federal de Rio de Janeiro
and Universidade Federal
Fluminense, Brazil
3:30
c-'
VII. REFERENCES
I. R.L. De Hoff, W. Earl Nall, Jr., R. J. Adams, and N.K. Gupta, "F100
Multivari.able Control Synthesis Program", Vols. I and II, Technical
Report AFAPL-TR-77-35, June 1977.
3. R.W. Koenig and L.H. Fishbach, "GENENG-A Program for Calculating De-
sign and Off-Design Performance for Turbojet and Turbofan Engines",
NASA Technical Note TN D-6552, February 1972.
4. L.H. Fishbach and R.W. Koenig, "GENENG II-A 'P rogram for Calculating
Design and Off-Design Performance of T<,ro and Three Spool Turbofans
with as Many as Three Nozzles", NASA Technical Note TN D-6553, Feb-
a_
' ruary 1912.
3 12. M.K. Sain, J.L. Peczkows-i, and J.L. Melsa, Editors, Alternatives for
Linear Multivariable Contr ol. Chicago: National Engineering Consor-
tium, 1978.
_k
J
1.'
33_
Y
1.
Yi
?s,
i
APPENDIX A
7
L̀ GRANT BIBLIOGRAPHY, INCEPTION TO PRESENT
(1) R.J. Leake, J.L. Melsa, and M.K. Sain, "Preliminary Proposal on Mod-
ern Approaches to Jet Engine Control", November 1, 1974.
TA
`° (2) R.J. Leake, M.K. Sain, and J.L. Melsa, "Proposal to NASA for Support
of •a Fork Entitled 'Alternatives for Jet Engine Control'', November
IT 27, 1974.
(3) R.J. Leake and M.K. Sain, "Seim- Annual Status Report- on NASA Grant
NSG-3048, 'Alternatives for Jet Engine Control.'", March 1, 1975 --
u August 31, 1975.
(4) R.J. Leake, M.K. Sain, and J.Z. Melsa, "Proposal for Continuation
of NASA Grant NSG--31048, 'Alternatives for Jet Engine Control", Oc-
tober 1,. 1975.
(5) J.C. Shearer, "An IBM 370/158 Installation and User's Guide for the
r". DYNGEN Jet Engine Simulator", M.S. Thesis, November 1975.
(6) T.C. Brennan and R.J. Leake, "Simplified Simulation Models for Con-
trol Studies of Turbojet Engines", Technical Report BE 757, Univer-
sity of Notre Dame, November 1975.
(7) R.J. Leake, -M.K. Sain, and J.L. Melsa, "Final Technical Report on
NASA Grant NSG--3048, 'Alternatives for Jet Engine Control'", March 1,
1975 - February 29, 1976.
a (8) R.R. Gejji and M.K. Sain., "Polynomial Techniques Applied to Multi-
variable Control of Jet Engines", Technical Report EE 761, March 1976.
(11) M.K. Sain, R.J. Leake, R. Basso, R. Gejji, A. Maloney, and V. Seshadri,
"Alternative Methods for the Design of Jet Engine Control. Systems",
Proceedings Fifteenth Joint Automatic Control Conference, pp. 133-
142 9 July 1976.
(12) J.C. Shearer, W.E. Longenbaker, Jr., and R.J. Leake, "An IBM 3701158
Installation and User's Guide to the DYNGEN Jet Engine Simulator",
Technical. Report BE 766, July 1976.
111
r
(13) R.R. Ge jji and M.K. Sain, "A Jet Engine Control Problem for Eval-
uating Minimal Design Sof tware", Proceedings Midwest Symposium on
Circuits and Systems, pp. 238--243, August 1976.
(15) R.J. Leake and M.K. Sain, "Semi-Annual Status Report on NASA Grant
IdSG-3048, 'Alternatives for Jet Engine Contr'ol's Supplement No. I",
March 1, 1976—August 31, 1976.
(18) M.K. Sain and V. Seshadri, "A Result on Pole Assignment by Exterior
Algebra", Proceedings Fourteenth Allerton Conference on Circuit and
System Theory, pp. 399-407, September 1976.
(19) R.R. Gejji, "A Computer Program to rind the Kernel of a Polynomial
Operator", Proceedings Fourteenth Allerton Conference on Circuit
and System Theory, pp. 1091--1100, September 1976.
(20) R.J. Leake and M.K. Sain, "Proposal for Continuation of NASA Grant
NSG-3048, 'Alternatives for Jet Engine Control'", October 25, 1976.
a
(21) R.M. Schafer, W.E. Longenbaker, and M.K. Sain, "System Dominance:
A Preliminary Report on an Alternate Approach", Technical Report,
U-aiversity of Notre Dame, November 25, 1976.
d
(22) R.J. Leake and M.K. Sain, "Final Technical Report, NASA Grant NSG-
3048, 'Alternatives for Jet Engine Control.', Supplement No. 1",
IT March 1, 1976 - February 28, 1977.
(23) R.J. Leake, J.G. Allen, and R.S. Schlun,t, "Optimal Regulators and
Follow-Up Systems Determined from Input--Output Signal Monitoring",
` Proceedings IEEE International Symposium on Circuits and Systems,
April 1977.
ua
I
(28) R.M. Schafer, R.R. Cejji, P.W. Hoppner, W.E. Longenbaker, and M.K.
}t, Sain, "Frequency Domain Compensation of a DYNGEN Turbofan Engine
Model", Proceedings Sixteenth Joint Automatic Control Conference,
` pp. 1013-1018, June 1977.
(29) R.R. Gejji and M.K. Sain, "Application of Polynomial Techniques to
a• Multivariable Control of Jet Engines", Proceedings Fourth TFAC Svm-
posium on Multivariable Technological S ystems, pp. 421--429, July
1977.
(31) E.A. Sheridan and R.J. Leake, "Non-Interactive State Request Jet
Engine Control with Non-Singular B Matrix", Proceedings Twentieth
Midwest Symposium on Circuits and SIstems, pp. 539-543, August
1977.
(32) R. Gejji, R.M. Schafer, M.K. Sain, and P. Hoppner, "A Comparison of
Frequency Domain Techniques for Jet Engine Control System Design",
Proceedings Twentieth Midwest Symposium on Circuits and Systems,
pp. 680-685, August 1977.
0. (33) W.E. Longenbaker and R.J. Leake, "Time Optimal Control of a Tao-Spool
Turbofan Jet Engine", Technical Report ER 7714, University of Notre
F. Dame, September 1977.
(34) R.J. Leake and J.G. Comiskey, "A Direct Method for Obtaining Non-
linear Analytical Models of a Jet Engine", Proceedings International_
Forum on Alternatives for Linear Multivariable Control, National
Electronics. Conference, Chicago, pp. 203-212, October 1977.
(35) M.K. Sain and R.J. Leake, "Proposal for Continuation. of NASA Grant
NSG--3048, 'Alternatives for Jet Engine Control'", October 25, 1977.
(36) J.A. Ortega and R.J. Leake, "Discrete Maximum Principle with State
Constrained Control", SIAM Journal on Control and Optization,
im Vol.
15, No. 6, pp. 109-115, November 1977.
Ia
(37) Michael K. Sain and V. Seshadri, "Pole Assignment and a Theorem from
Exterior Algebra", Proceedings IEEE Conference on Decision and Con-
trot, pp. 291-295, December 1977. -- - -
° (38) R. Michael Schafer and Michael K. Sain, "Some Features of CARDIAD
Plots for System Dominance", Proceedings IEEE Conference on Decision,
1e
is
And Control, pp. 801-806, December 1977.
(39) M.K. Sain, "The Theme Problem", in Alternatives for Linear Multivar-
iable Control, M.K. Sain, J.L. Peczkowski and J.L. Melsa, Editors.
Chicago: National Engineering Consortium, 1978, pp. 20-30.
(40) R.M. Schafer and M.K. Sain, "Input Compensation for Dominance of
Turbofan Models", in Alternatives for Linear Multivariable Control,
M.K. Sain, J.L. Peczkotqski, and J.L. Melsa, Editors. Chicago: Na-
tional Engineering Consortium, 1978, pp. 156-169.
(41) J.L. Peczkowski and M.K. Sain, "Linear Multivariable Synthesis with
r. Transfer Functions", in Alternatives for Linear Multivariable Con-
trol., M.K. Sain, J.L. Peczkox qski, and J.L. Melsa, Editors. Chicago:
National Engineering Consortium, 1978, pp. 71-87.
(42) R.J. Leake and M.K. Sain, "Semi-Annual Status Report, NASA Grant
NSG-3048, 'Alternatives for Jet Engine Control', Supplement No. 2",
March 1, 1977 - August 31, 1977.
(43) R.J. Leake and M.K. Sain, "Final Technical Report, NASA Grant NSG-
3048, 'Alternatives for Jet Engine Control', Supplement No. 2",
March 1, 1.977 - February 28, 1978.
F,
TI-
as
as
it
^ ^-, 1.
W. E. Longanbaker
R. J. Leake
i ,;
t'
"pWFL Q,UAIJT% s
i
EIGHTH ANNUAL
PITTSBURGH CONFERENCE
i ON
MODELING AND SIMULATION
i APRIL 21-22,1977
Sponsored by
I
Department of Electri :a1 Engineering
i School of Engineering
U n vers,ty
tfP o a sburgh
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
In Cooperation With
Conference Committee
3
Conference Co-Chairmen
t William G. Vogt Marlin H. Mickle
t
x
° T i
: LTERARCUY OF SItNL °1TION MODELS FOP.
- .111.VMFAN GAS ENGINE a:
-
1 r^' Si. i'^ e Y 9 Print $.-fj.,e For 8•:{? Y '
...(3) CNC
HC
-
HC
-
-A,4 after burner exit pressure (P7)
]iCDESIC\ 1 1 21 /T 2 u 10070 /T21/516. b6S
:% -.high inlet energy (U4)
T1 + thrust (FG) ;.(4) 7, - T21 + 743.2122 C.:C 2 - 68 (AS - 2.94S255)
"72- high turoine inlet tesperuture (T4)
.__1(5) T4 - U4 /cn
.-.=e model is completely determined by thQ -folio -ding
^(6) T50 - .727 T4 :.y
•.-mpecifications.
_-Constants - -,.(7).P 3 - 1.05944P4
_J - AJ - 778.26 H = 20.713.75 -.{8)
P
21. - -6.20568 + _0129774 '21 - _0185376 P3
- ,L$ J 2.948255 CPC .24 {y) WMX - 3.516739 C%'F - 63.916
..0252CPF 4 .24
-(10) P rL^x - 3.516739 CNF - .23561
.20279
^i
1.4 CVB s
P2 1.
CpgT - .22589 _ (]1) WAF - WF + 28.502 11 •- 2. 3 132681 pF`kx t 21 ) )
- 2 518.656 CPLT .27938
(1) W(
i.AX - 137.54 - 457.987 C::C + 564.317 5 CNC2
' 3C - PHTXa - 3.8 - ^ X 6 .16 - PCBLC
1E8.113 LNC3
V
ar - Pri -12 - 4.5 a - - rC6LDU - .208 -.(13) db: L1X - 6.492 - 4.9747 C,NC
[ *f -.77 - 1.65 g - PCBL:m - .726
(14) 26.43184 -- 89.0484 C".0 + 109.7234
I P01AX
49.77 -7=- PCBLLP -.066
VdFli^t ' C,NC 2 - 36.5756 C.NC3
_.:XC -I1£SIGN - Y:.'HPOS - 10070
:31F DESIGN - MC LP05 - 9651 _.) LAC - _P?1 {w -151.' {1-e-.3662
...121/518.668 C'L1\ CpAX
^" Resign Values
(P CSf - 3) )^
;_ibB - 2.?5 VC - 1899.2 FC - 1:1431.02 P21
,.__ dB - -2.948255 NF - 9873.94 T4 - 2982.04 (16) FA3 (1- p^l'A.0 - .84 WAC
`A P4 -.23.9299 --(17) WG50 - 301.957 P4 W-7-
4-
-J4 -'586.467
--(18) WG4 - ?:C50 - 86WAC p WC50 -- .316164 WAC
Y7 - 2.55007
(34) WG55 - VG50 + y^WAC - WC50 . + .01056 WAC
state £quatfons
(20) 155 - 106.002 + .85154T 50 - .10458C'rC rT2
-(s 0 ) 2 -
(1) d!
`C
[CPC1AC(T21-T3)
.j dt C1'C (21) T, - (T55 + 414.592P7)
+ CRHTWG50(T4 - T50)) 2.01365
WiC7 - 1i7.1.784Y7A8
'(22)
(2) dNF 30 2 J
. ' dt u ) T^v F [C PF W(T 2 - T21)
+ CPLTU-u55(T50 - T55)) (23) VC - .02951 i.'G? 193 + 685.8.315
+2116.217A 8 (.539'r5?•7-1)
[T4(WM + WFB - WG4))
':(3) dt yYa
. CO'iB
^/r^wwh LNw`
dP
RyeT MN-
•--(;) 7 T--- 7 - J C'r - WA3 + WAF i:G7 ;
'
dt VAMN
dU4
(5) 1' BP'T4 [T (WG4 - WEB - WA3)
•.^€
dt VCOHBF4
•^' + -1*(T 3WA3 - T4WG4 + T4 (1 + t1)WFB))
:.
}
.U259 :355326
.2.116 -.316176 Hodel 2
_ 12.54 -13.7828 -Vary nozzle
- --.6201 --94.388 r area
157.783 6.84396
t^
i
t
f
T,
^.
T - U4 Y_ociei 2
-1 .4
ORIGINA p Time (sec)
L
AGE IS 23-Sure 6. Thrust Time Response -
-^2Ygure
'—"aa Fuel Step Input
-A Comparison of the linear system frequency
C= , Yodel 1 s-•respcnses of nozzle area to thrust, ::nd fuel _`low
.fhangc ^^ -to thrust, is sho p-: in Figure 7. :todels 11.5 znd
-.2L5 hatch extremely well for the fuel input, but
:off
E^..Dealgn
so ,^ _ not so well for the nozzle area input. Even the
' - lower order riodel 11.3 is closer in this case.
N c Model 2 --
1e N liodel 1
c,
,z .4
-Tize (sec)
-;ligure 4. State TIm`. Responses-Fual Input
1L3 i
.•.ta P 4 Model 2
1L5 i
` L* Model 1
4
1
+
., ..
Change 1L5
f
Off I
$.5
Design '4
Nozzle Area
Fuel flow---o+.
1
,
3
P 7 Model 2 j
• ^, n" e ^r o i
,^ ^, ro z io
-figure 7. Frequency Responses-Inputs
to Thrust
P 7 Model 1 -
-+ - Si K4ARY
•2 .♦
Time (set) To the best of th e cutho-a = knowledge, no non-
f^f .fi ure 5. St a r e Tice Fesponses-Nozzle
- ga- ^,odels of a two-spool,
Lir.ear analytical dN-nic
Area' Input Step two-'stream jet engine have ever appeared in l itera-
ture. 'Indeed, it is the value of the develo:.ment of
such a model which is the most iaaortant cens_dera-
'The effects on thrust by a 51 step in fuel flow
tion in the eva].unt:on of our vor:, i.e., that a
- ore shown in Figure 5. Model 2L5 yields results
-good nonlinear anal y tical dynamic r.ocel %;ill provide
%^whieh are quite close to =oriel 2, although, both
a flexibility and cse'• ulness wnic'i is non-existent
mire 61Eniflcantly di iferent from eodel 1.
do present non-analvc:C-11 jet engine siaulaticns.
.11thouf:,, som-, sigoi_icznt discrepancies exist, our
•_^=adcl yields results waich_are . accurate to within 11
C
f
..
n 4m
in
' Appendix C
OF A
A
nv
^ _
T
R. 24. Schafer
" L., R. Criii
P. W. Hoopczcr
M. K. '•: a t n
a,
,.2
I
3977 Joint Automatic C.Ontl:ol .0011fc1rence
San Francisco, California
June 22--24, 1 977
• l .
• E
.VRIGINAL pA ,F IS
Ceatral to the application of 11yqulst type ideas to xi and y i lie inside and dashed circles if the
rultivarlable sy5tvml is time return difference ma- acceptnhlc region is outside. 4
trix, which in this, ease hecoi-rs (1 G(•)f;(s}]. if the above procedure is repeated over a range of
It's: ptincipnl use arises from the rclatlnn of the
ces of each row the s yste m, and the
closed loop characteristic p•olynonial (CLC?) to the
circles
ircluosof intersectiono drawn,
wn, a plot
out
open Hop characteristic polynomial (00?) which
number x i +-
the acceptable valu.^s of the coreplex nr.:ber
can be stated, in the stammer of (I], as
jy
i for each frequency results. In this way, the
CI.CP Acceptable Cat;re of the function 5 (s) such that
det[SG(s)K(s)], (5)
0lCl' the i tlt row of k:(s)C(s;) is do tina 1s doscribad.
where equality is understood up-to a real constant. The analysis of the CARDIAD plot for a given ro v
Of primary concern Here is the behavior of dcL(IAGK) of G(s) proceeds as follows. If the origin of the
for values of s on the standard Kyquist contour plot is contained inside all solid circles and is
(S`:C), which encircles the open right half plane excluded by all dashed circles, the row of G(s) is
clockwise with indentations into the left half plane dominant uncompensated. If the row of C(s) is not
around poles and zeros on the imacinary axis. In dominant uncompensated, the CA`:DIAD plot is next
practice, plots are made for values of s on the checked to sce if there is a constant entry S ; that
positive imaginary axis. Srahility can then be de- will rake Qs)G(s) dominant at all frequencies.
termined from plots of det& GQ in conjunction with For this to he the case, there must be a point on
knowledge of the open loop characteristic polynomial. the real axis that is included in all sella circles
Also interestin g,, of course, is the use of such plots and excluded by all dashed circles.
to aid in the choice of a suitable K(s). th
If therS exists no constant n. such that the i
CARDIAD Plots and Dominance [3,41 row of K(s)G(s) is dominant at all frequencies, the
3.
CA11DIAD plot is used zs a guide to design a fre-
The CARDIAD (Compensator Acceptability Pegion for quency dependent g .(s) that rill achieve dominance.
11
D JA gonal llo^finance} plot is a graphical approach to This Is accomplished by realizing a function 5. (r)
the problem of choosing a compensator that will whose value at jw lies inside the circle asnoci-
achieve systems dominance. A system is said to be ated with the sam" fre q uency in the CARDIAD plot if
row (eoluc_t) dominant (11 if the magnitude of each that circle is solid, or outside if that circle is
diagonal element of the open loop transfer function dashed. This approach is illustrated by consider-
taatrix is greater than the sum of the magnitudes of ing the DYSGES problem.
the off diagonal clexents of the row (colu=n) at all f
frequencies In the 2x2 case being con s idered in 5j
this paper, the dominance condition reduces to the
•, pagnitude of the diagonal ele-ment bein, greater
than the tta.^nitude of the off diagonal eler%o n.t of
the row (column). Consonant with the Rosenbrock 3j
approach, the CARDIAD plot analysis is applied to
the inverse of the punt G(s). As a notational
point, the inverse plant transfer functici_ matrix
will be dcnoted . by G(s) and the inverse pre- Oj
compensator by 1(s).
The specific application to the jet engine design
problem involves trying to find a co:Tcnsator i(s) —3j
such that K(s)G(s) is row dominant. Without loss
of generality, the fora of 1:(s) will be restricted
r
to
—5J
L
^'(s)
1 . 1!2(s) 1
where
s i ( s ) - x i (s) •1 jy (e), 1 r 1,2. (7)
J. —4 —2 —4 0 1
If As) and 9(s) are each evaluated at a frequency Fig. 2 CARDIAD Plot Row 1
w , the equation for domunance of the ith rota of Uncompensated
o
K( ::)C(Q becomes a function f.(x ,v.)•.;hich describes
a paraboloid in three-space. t The itersection of The initial CARDIAD plots of Us) indicate that
this paraboloid and the com p lex plane is a circle row 2 of As) is dominant uncompensated since the
which is the locus of the values of x and y { such plot consists only of dashed circles, which all
:j that the ragnitule of the diagonal element of the exclude the origin. the plot for row 1, however,
i th row of Q s)G(s) is equal to the magnitude of shows that this row is not dominant uncompensated
thin off diagonal element of the row. Minima and and also that there is no constant entr y in the off
Maxima analysis of the function f. rcvcalr that diagonal cic;:cnt of row 1 of ,(s) that will make
values ofx I and y on one side of the circle will the row dominant at all frequencies. This is
e make the system dominant, whereas valuos which lie easily seen since all the circics in this plot are
on the other -ids of thr circle will not. Ia the solid and there is no point on the x axi, that is
CARDIAD plots, this diffcrcntkntion is wide by Included in all the circles. Moreover, the plot
F^ draviag ,i solid circle if the acceptable values of hints that Kett will be difficulty finding a dl(s)
G1 ..!i . to :, f':?
f._... _. - -- .... .. _...._..^ ..^._ .^_ . t ... .may.._«. ^---^._ ^.^. ..^..........__._ -..r.^...^
3.3 j
Inc IT ..N!
0j ^.- T:..' Oj
l \\\Ile
i
-3.3j
-.12j
-1 U 3.4 6.7 10.
-•.12 -.07 0 •07 .12
"Jr.. 3 CARDIAD Not Row 2 CARDIAD Plot Row 1
Fig. 14
Uncompensated
Compensated
K, a
11, 01 . of
Space limitations do not allow the CAr,DIAD plots of
Kl G(s) to be included, but the new lots are the
same share as the C.'RDIzD plots of G(s) with two
ttajor chnngcs. The row 1 plot of IK 1 (s) is the
same shape as the row 2 plot of G(s) with dashed
circles cliangcd to solid circles. Similarly, the -9.6j
row 2 plot of K C(s) is the sane shape as the row 1
plot C(::) wi ) h the solid circles changed to • n9
F
choice of K (s) that will make row I duzir.ant at
make row 1 of f a ((s) dominant, the off diagonal all frCn. U0T1CiCS, but the de^. ,.inancc achieved by th-.
entry in row I of K 2 (s) must follow the semicircular above K2 (s) proved to be sufficient.
path throttFh the Coc:-vlcx- plane described by the
CAPM AD plot for this roa. A fit was made to this An interesting, feature of the CAP,DIAD plot is
r
I
shape and the resulting; V 2 (s) was l lustrated in the fir.al plot for row 2. Close
analysis o - this plot sl=ows that there are three
l 9.4798 + 0.'49St occurrences of solid circles changing to dashed
1 1 1. - 1.2359s circles or dashed circles changing to solid. then
(s) (B)
2 0 1 these transitions occur, the paraboloid is invert-
Y^-
ing and the circle of intersection degenerates to
The CARDIAD plots of X 7 (s)K I C(s) are considerably a line. These lines occur when the otter row
more complex tlinl the previous plots. Tllc plot for changes from being doninnnt to not dominant or vice
row 2 shows that the row is dominant at all fre- versa. Thus, each cl'anpc in dominance of row 1
quencies since tha origin is included by all solid causes a change in the type of circle being drawn
r
circles an.i excluded by all dashed circles. Ilie in the plot of xow 2. ,
CAkl))Al) plut for row 1 shows that the row is clearly
riot dominant at all frequcncics. DocainancC is lost ..1.
4. Design Vsing Characteristic 1.nci high frequency r-%fnitude of q 11 (:;) while simultano-
ously boosting the Iew frequency ntal •,nIttide, 1h I;
Another approach to design, due to A.G.J.'1.icFarlane,
Is in accordance with the freedom specified fcr K2
uses lltc IOCnS of the elgrnvalnce: of C(_:)!;(s), call-
prcvlously, the riodified 1:(s) gives rise to the
ed the chatactc • ristic Ioci (C.L.), for V.IIUe:; of s plot . of Fig. 6 and 7.
an the S':C. 'this method is barccd on the rcl.tlion
of the detert.i(nant of the return difference to Since dot.d nance is not affected by diagonal cer?en-
cigenvalues of G(::)K(s). In order to assess st..-- satovs, ;he problen becomes that of inc:cpettduntly
bility from the C.L. plots, for s-^L • , w pof;itive, shaping q 1l and q2, by means of single loc•p tech-
one vas t count the clockwise encircicr:.nts of the n 4 1ues, n order to reduce high freluency Fait: in
critical point (-1,0) :ztde by the C.L. plot_ and q22 without appreciabl y affecting; low frequency be-
sum all these up. Me closed loop system is stable havior, we use lag conpennation. A little bit of
If tills suet equals -po, :here pa is the number of cut and try led finally to K
terns of OLCP enclused by the SNC. As an a,prosi- (-s-0.1)/(2000s +70)). Tile pots corresponding , to
Mte pleasure of interaction, we compare the eif,cn- K=K1*12*K3AK, are not sho-- ru. The 1. 1 and e ll1 plot
value plots with plots of the diagonal elements of is es.enttally that of a in Fig. 6 scaled 6y a
1. Q(s}=G(s)h:(s}. For a noninreractirg system with factor of 0.440-4. SiMdarly, the q,,,, plot in-
Q(s) a diagonal sratrix, these would be identical. verted and scaled by 0.0005. (By inersicn we
In our design cxanmple, Q(s) is a 2x2 matrix, and mean reflection throur,h both axes.) The plot for
therefore ve trill be looking at plots of two cigen- A 2 is shown in Fig. 8.
velues a (s), (s) and the two diagonal elements
g ll (s ), 472(').2 5. The Direct Kethod of Analysis
First, an examination of the C.L. plots of the un- Direct methods of Wultivariable Nyquist analysis
compensated system revcr.led th.'tt, without compCn- concern themselves with the a4ebr^.i.e rclaeien-
sation, the closed loop system is unstable. The ship bct •.;ecn the elements of return difference and
plots are not includcd due to lack of space, but its determinant. For an NxN return difference,
conclusions drawn front then are given. Control pro- the most basic of these relationships is
blems for the uncoc,tensated model were complicated
by the cxlsteuce of considerable interaction, and det(Ig GK) - 1+ {F ixi principal ninors of C1:).
large gains at high frequencies. An additional S^Z (10)
difficulty was that one of the eigenvalues was riega- For the example of this paper, (10) takes the forai
tive at zero frequency. This tended to limit the 1+((G + det(C:,) . (11)
response speed o r the closed loop system. It ap- 11 K 11+6 12 1'21 )+(G 21 k 12 +G 22 K 22 ) )
poared on the C.L. plots that, from a stability In (10) and (11.) we note the advantage of minute
vicv.po,nt, the frequency range of interest is in the detail and the disadvantage of nonrecursive con-
:a vicinity of to rps. This gives justification for struction. Csesiderable interest attaches to the
use of the compensator given in the previous section. removal of this disadv;.ntat e, which can be accom-
As a practical cotter, our goal is to achieve as plished by methods drawn from the results of exte-
rapid a response as possible to a step input, with- rior algebra (5;. Consider the recursion (where y
out suffering, any overshoot. Heavy emphasis is tr denotes trace)
placed also on steady state acer•racy.
a 0 " 1 (17a)
To remove the right half plane pole in k" we choose r•-1
K 3 arbitrarily as diag (1/s,(-1+1.2359s)7s). The
a r - a1^tr (GK)r-p (12b)
resulting K(s)=Kl*K2*K3 becomes p=0
0 -1+1.2359s for 1<r<N. It can be shown that
It(e) 0 9
1 9.4796+0.2494: ( )
s
The diagonal nature of K (s) does not affect domi-
3
Hance. t,orcover, an examination of the (1,1) and
t
(1,2) cicrcnes of G(s) reveals that if the 0 in K(s)
2j
is changed to 9, we can significantly reduce the
-6000 -4000 -2000 0 200 6011)
^aa ^
lj
J375
w> 0 ^) 1 2 100
v-1
j250 -+-- —^
qll -j2E4 W=10
J125
q22
11 ^•=1 .Zj I
lU V
` -I -j4E4 1000 i
100 .2j
.-i t a2
-j6F4
t
Fig,. 6 First C.L. plot for Fig. i Second C.L. plot Fig. 8 Second C.L. plot- for
I ..1
ri
H`.
i i .
d:t(im) - L (--1)a (13)
i-o
^K
The direct approaches differ appreciably f:on meth-
ods described in preccJ: , T :sections, in that they .3j
a
address thenselvOS directly to the !male of
G12^2
tdct "100) on the SNC, without any particular con-
cern for such issnos as dominance or interaction.
G 22 1 22 i
Alternate in:iphts accrue from such plots, which •J
we Illustrate here for the engine design example.
All plots are drawn for Lite finnl return differ- -.3
. 3 - —+
ence as developed in the section:: preceding.
0.0
f
i
:-0.2 i.
t
:•-0.4 QRIGINAI;
PA GE IS
OF POOR QUALITY.
0.6 1.2 1.8 2.4 3.0 3.6 4.2 4.8
Time (sec)
Fig. 13 Response to Step in Second Channel
7.' Conclusions
t
This paper has demonstrated the usefulness of the
new CAJUTAD plot approach to designing compensators
for complex plants. The DYNGEN simulation for a
step in channel 1 has shoa-n +:hat acce p table re-
sponses can be obtained using linear co:rycusators.
j
An ordered collection of these my rare global con-
trol feasible. For steps in channel 2, conclusive
evidence was not obtained. We suspect that this is
due to inadequacy of the linear model in describing
the plant. This important factor of selecting an
appropriate linear model is often overlooked. But,
as we have seen, it turns out to be crucial in
practical applications.
8. References
, . , , .. .. i } 1 . .
E«f
i Appendix D
R. R. Gejji
M. K. Sain
i
.,., •• , r;itro rKINI SurrALt fUR tl 1/Z x 11 YAL. ^i
. 1
SLMMARY
This paper describes a complete case study of the application of the theory of minimal de-
I sign to multivariable control of jet engines. The minimal design problem is appro;.ched from the
viewpoint of polynomial modules, and computational experience with PL/I and FO .`LiC-PL/I software
is discussed. The complete minimal design solution exhibits flexibilities not apparent in early
industry studies, and a new ap p roach to pole assignment can be used to advanta g e in this situation.
1 INTRODUCTION !control system design in the near term.
^ne way to approach Lhe design of linear multivari- 2. TILE MINIu4I. Dr_SIC.; PROBLEM
able control systems is to express system specifications
rn terms of a desired closed loop transfer function ma- Suppose that F is a given field. For the jet
frix. A question which is often raised about such an engine control problem, F is taken to be R, the field
approach is the practicality of making such a specifica- of real numbers; however, a great deal of the algo-
Eion. Another, related, question concerns the possibili- rithmic nature of the discussion is more general than
ty of determining the existence of realizable compensa- that, and is so ,tated. The sec of polynomials which
tors to achieve the specification. When such compensa- are of interest is Fis], namely those polynomials in
tors do exist, there are the very practical issues of the variable s with coefficients in the field F. The
giving a finite enumeration of them, of determining fact that F[s] is a principal ideal domain ringis well
whether they have fired poles, and of assigning one or known, as is the e q ually pertinent fact that F[s] has a
more of the non-fixed poles. Of s p ecial interest, as it quotient field F(s). More intuitively, F(s) is often
turns out, for the issue of pole assignment is the idea described as the field of rational functions in s hav-
of miniruality, in the state-space sense, of a proposed ing coefficients in F.
solution in the context of all possible solutions.
The design problems of interest in the sequel are
This paper provides a thorough case stud y of such a convectionally stated in terms of r(s); however,
design approach wizen applied Lo realistic num ,^rical mod- Section 4 explains how such problems may be re-converted
els associated with an F-100-like turbofan engine. back to a corresponding F[s] form.
$pecifications are accomplished by means of the methods
Principal interest renters upon the minimal design
of linear optimal control theory, according to proce-
problem (IMP), which can be described as follows.
dures already worked out in the jet engine industry.
Let G: V +V be a linear operator for finite-di;aensional
e remainin g tasks are addressed by regarding the design 1 2 ,
F(s)-vector spaces V ]. and V,. G is regarded as
s a problem in free polynomial modules. A special fea-
realizable if its matrix is proper. Now let G 1 : V,^V
^ure of the application Iles in its attention to campen-- and G
2 : VhV l be given linear operators, where V, is
kators of simple structure, with a view [o the use of a
p ace. M,,3 con-
^radcd collection of them for the purpose of global
sists in determining whether there are realizable linear
ngine control.
i operators G which make the dia g ram in fib. I co.-unute
Section 2 describes the basic design problem, once also
and,a if
finite-dimensional F(s)-vector
so, to find one whose minimal srealization is of
1pecifications are made. Section. 3 provides the dis- least dimension among all such realizable operators.
ussion of the jet engine application, with particular Intuitively, -
ttention paid to the manner of making tha specifications
lid to the formulation of the main design problem for
lie jet engine application. Section 4 explains hoti, to V1 - - - - - V2
This work was supported in part by the National Science Foundation under Crnnts GK-37285 anti
ENG 75-22322 and in part by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration under Grant NSG 3048.
._.. --
Pape
FA,C Ni l. Is 7 118 x 9 15 la p ;,It:T SL12i ,c:f f ),' a 1; 2 x 11 PAGE ^--^---I•
--^
1 (1) a finite enumeration of all possible solutions, (ii)
1 fT •T •T
determination of any fixedpoles in the matrix of C, and J - (.y Q6y + 6u R6u + 6y S6y)dt
(3)
(III) methods for assigning the poles of G which are not 0
I
^f ,fixed. The answers to these questiuns resolve such
)issues as the availability of solutions with varying where superscript T denotes matrix t-ram;posiEion. The
.degrees of integration. From a Conceptual viewpOint, wtit;liting matrices Q,R, and 5 are.. listed in table 2.
these ideas are develo
developed
p ed further in Sections 4 and 7,
2
,whereas the computational issues are discussed in
Sections 5 and 6. I I freighting matrices i
with Optimal Integral Control Solution
Next in order of presentation, however, is the
,statement of a minimal design problem for jet engine K-1trIX Matrix Elements
control. I 50,000 - 0
Q 0 10,000
3. JET ESGISC APPLICATION)
--- 550 0
R
In this section, we demonstrate tLe practicality of 0 175
;the minimal design approach in the context of jet. engine S 0 0
,control. The basic plant is a version of the. l'-100 __0_ _ 20,000
turbofan engine. Inputs are Set exhaust area and main L 0.509 0.268 1.979 2.171 2.x98
Turner fuel flow; statrw are fan inlet temperature, train -_2.137 -0.377 - 0.223 - 0.776 - 0.227
burner pressure, fail speed, high compressor speed, and 8.329 - 1.126 i
1.
afterburner pressure; and outputs are thru.t anu high- -2.511 - 1.842
turbine inlet temperature. The linearized .nodol approxi-
At this pint, a minimal design problem can be
mates the small signal behavior of these engine variables brouelkt into play. The control scheme of fi -t •,. 3 is
An a neighborhood of 47° Power Lever Angle (PI.A). This
seen to he more desirable because it incorporates out-
jcorresponds to a point approximatel y midway between
put feedback and enjoys the concomitant advzntare of
^Cngine idle and maximum nonafterburning power. The plant zero steady state error, even in the presence of plant
Is specified by the four matrices A ,BC ,D in (1) and
p p p p parameter variation.
(2).
6x - A p dx + B e' 6c (1) j i 5y
p lant
dy - C dx + D 6u (2)
P P dz l:
I i 1: r (`gyp' B p' ^^►
Zable 1 lists these matrices for our example. The
-
+
S + Cp, D p)
attempt to design simple compensators for linear control
over a specified region is part of a strategy for global S^
control of the engine using; a graded collection of these. GIN AL. PAGE IS
ITable 1 POOR QUALITY t
State De s cription Matrices for Jet Engine (H.A=717°)
-
Katrix Matrix Elements
Fig. 3. Optimal Integral Control
1 -51.1196 3.613 -10.211 - 5.451 - 2.715
19.832 -72.34 30.295 40.972 15.327 One relates the per.forman,:e of the two control schemes
A 0.66 4.496 - 3.601 - 0.011 - 2.808 by equating, in both, the Laplace transform of the
p 1.376 2.313 - 0.809 - 3.032 - O.F21 variable du, as written in terms of the respective state
O.fiR 2 0 .703 2. 9 22 1. 79 - 4.596 variables. This leads to the followin •{ equations, which
1.017 39.792 may be solved for L and 11, the values of which have been
- 0.125 4.181 listed in table 2. I
Bp - 0.077 -- 0.382
(4) 1
- 0.088 - 0.565
3.563 IL:1 111A : B
C - 0.037 0.031 - 0.016 - 0.042 1.368 - (5)
11 c p : DP IG 1 C2^
1.031 0.149 - 0.057 _0.001 - 0.086 P• p
D 0.546 0.016
That this is nothing but a form of the minimal
p P.Oi3 - 0.096
design problem can be seen by evaluating the 2x2 closed
We neat examine how engine. control s-pecifications loop transfer function matrices T(s) and V (s) for the
-I-- ...-. w ' i I 1- .Y . - two systems in figs. 2 and 3. In fig. 29
ib.- 2, the compensators.
T(s) - P I (s) l sl - P 2 (t)1 -1 M (6)
where
P I (s) - C p (sI-A p ) -1 B p + D (7)
d zn
i- ! p (5) - G (sl-A } -1 B + C (e)
i 2 1 p p 2
i
In fig. 3, cn the Other hand,
! T'(s% - -P 1 (s) IsI- p 3 (e)1 -1 11 (9)
Where
F 3 (s) - li p I (s) + sL(st-A p ) -1 B p . (10)
67.2
-.Pogo -
Comparison ofP 3 (s) and P.,(s), with the aid of (5) We remark here on a special feature of (20), in
and (7), establishes the equality of the two transfer that it Implies a common set of dynamics for both rom-
unctions T(s) and V (s). pensators. Suppose that a suitable Soluti011 of (22)
]cads us to matrices A g , Bg , Cg , DS and AL , R k , C k , ad
n
We can then pose questions regarding the existence D such that
Of compensators other than 11 and t, to :achieve the same
performance as attained in fig. 3, and wh. , t., if anv, C(s) - C 9 (sI-A 6 ) -l B 9 + D 9 (23)^ i
advantages such compensators would have over that scheme.
To do this, we consider fig. 4, which is a more Eeneral K(s) C k (sl-A k ) -1 B k + Dk. (24)I
scheme of control based on fig. 3. ! I
In a typical situation, D g 0; and it can be shown that
Plant ,
E A - AC k
8 k
Fig. 5 then shcws how such a control scheme can be rea -
lized.
6z
P (s)- 1 1 (s) (I+K(s)P5(s))-1 G(s) (13} Finally, we make the observation that (22) can b2
ana
4 completely solved, and a mini...al solution com p uted by
P5(s) - (sl-A p ) -1 Dp. (14).
algorithms given in the Appendix. The next section
deals with the theoretical foundation of these algori-
rom (12), we obtain the equivalent condition thms; and subsequent sections describe their application
to (22). i
P4 (s) _ ( I+P 4 ( s )) T(s),
4. FREE M O DULAR APPR O ACH TO 1•WP
phich c.•a be restated in the manner (15)ti
In matrix form, the mir-imal design problem of fig.l
P I (l+KPS ) -I G = [I+P (f+KP ) -1 GIT. (16) reduces to solving all equation i
1 5
I i
^rom table 1, D is clearly invertible; and so the linear G 1 (s)G(s) = G 2 (s) (25)^
dynamical systA P has a unique linear d y namical inverse for the various realizab l e G(s), where G,(s) and G,,(s)
system P I -1 1 which l we designate 1 I . Thus (16) is are given. Section 3 provided a nontrivial illustiation
equivalent to f (25) in (19), where i
G(T-T) - K 1 1 5 P I T = P IT (17) G 1 (s)[1'1(s)(TT(s)-1} - PS(s
) ] (26),
which in turn can be written I
I ! G (s) = I, (27)i
[(I- TT ) -T T PIP51fG P 1= T 1 Pi. (18). 2
i3nd where the field F was R, the real numbers.
T Ji
ome simplification can be achieved at this paint if we The free modular approach to MDP is based upon the
t ake advantage of the fact that the matrix T 1 (s) has an recognition that, as a set,
i nverse T T (s). Then (18) can be cleared in its right F(s)c-- F[sj x F[sl,
ember so that i
which, in turn, suggests that it ma y be possible to ex-
[P T (T T -I) - P S ] ( GT l I (19)
;•r, • ss (25) in terms of F[s]. A convenient way to bring
KT this about, as illustrated in (20), is to write
N ow compare (19) with fig. 1, from which it becomes clear
hat G ? is the identity man, or that our control system C(s) h(s) D -i (s), (28)'
minimal design problem turns out to be aversion of the where N(s) and D(s) have their elements in Ffs]. It is
minimal inverse system problem. Writing easy to see that every C(s) has re p resentation in the
GT (s}^ o I form (28). Similar representarions could be adopted for
N(s)D - 1 (s), (20) G ii (s), i - 1,2, but the presentation can be simplified
lKT(s)J ii the ChoiceMi(s)
nd
Gi(s) - i - 1, 2 (29) ,
[P _1)- P5(s)]= d(5), (21), d i (s)
there N(s), D(s), and M (s) are matrices ever R[s], and is made, with d ii (s) t F[s], i 1,2 and 1l (s) havin g elc-
here d(s) c R[s], we can nut (2i) in the poly p aaial forte menu. in F(s], i 1, 2. Equation (25) is thenclearly
(H(s) -d(s)1] f the sameas
['Ill ( s)}J a C (22); i
Hl(s) _1 !T2 (s)
I „ ! a N(S)l) (s) (30)
Equation (22) is a polynomial "kernel problem, dI(s) d2(s),
equivalent to the design problem of fip,. 4. By compar-
which, in turn, is equivalent to
Ing figs. 3 and 4, we can trivially establish that a Sol-
r
Ution to the problem does Indeed exist. Our goal in the 2 I
Id(s)M(s) d(s)M2(s)]
l `(s)] =
liequel is to give a finite enutreration of all possible
U. (31)
^D(s)j
p olutlons and to study their t.ule assignment possibili-
an equation written over F[s). For the jet engine
tics relative to the structure of f ig. 4. __ . __ 1 u---•- --- - --- ----_—•--- -- --
47,31
Pone
F . : r^ r
j
[FA(' hiVT$ 7 li0 1 9 IS;'ib PRINT SUfiFAC:C FOR S 1/2 " 11 PAGE :^^•-•^
rroblem, (22) corresponds to (31). Let Wit-h, rite-se notions, the MDP Algorithm in the
n (s) ppendix Solves MDP. The issue of pole assignment is
k ti(s) 7 i ---^ (32) taken up in Section 7.
dI00
' 5. FLOATI`G POINT FSPFRIKECF.
denote the ith column of
In view of the material presented in the previous
I!"(s)
,section, we are ready to take a closer look at (22).
ID(s)IThe matrix [`1(s): - d(s)IJ turns nut to be n 2 x 9 matrix
bf polynomials iii R[s]. Lack of space prevents us from
(Then
(33) reproducing all the numbers here, but fig. 6 shows that
(AM 2 (s)J i i (s) - 0,
[d2(s)M10): -d 1 the typical element is a thirteenth degree polynomial.
and every candidate tc construct a solutior. (79) can be We also note the large variation in the magnitudes of
t raced to such ri(s). the coefficients of the polynomials.
Thus ftDP is quite closely related to the homogeneous
iequation t
(to yield a solution to the kernel problem, of the form Appendix, on an IBM 370/158 computer.
x(41).
r h
-11T
D-, a -s1.T
(41)
Starting cith the numbers of table 1, together
.with the 1, and It matrices of table 2, we go through the
Calculations outlined in Section 3, and arrive at an
exact rational-coefficient version of the kernel prob-
sI- lem of (22). By applying the p1DP Algorithm, conceived
47.5
P ati o
n FAC MVTS 7 1/8 1^ 9 15/16 PRINT SURFACE FOR
Table 4
8 1/2 x It PAGE r «MC
r
0.0 5.081E-4 4.794E-4 4.479E-4 0.0 0.0 0.0 i
1.843E-4s 1.713E-4s -4.245E-5s -3.07GE-5s 1.279E-5s
0.0 0.0 0.0 -2.217E-6 I -3.491F-5 0.0 0.0
+3.131E -6s 7.438E-6s -1.421.E-4s I
I
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.622E-5 0.0
9.972E-5s j
2.935E-2 2.949E-4 -4.416E-4 -4.068E-4 -2.25 E-4 -2.434E--4 0.0
r x.69 E-4s
(48)
ni(s)l 2
i t i (s) =
6 7 I + a 3i d 1; (49) i
D(s) is 2 x 2. Accordingly, S1Id1. 6. 7
fik t R, i - 1,2. (45) r Starting then, with (50) and working backwards, we
d 1 (s) - fik dk (s), can calculate e i , i - 1,2,3 and thence (I il
k-1 l f 16 , f17)
I: Then
7 7
las well as
I, (f 21' f
26' f27). These calculations were
I D ` s )1 I kY l dk (s); jSlf2jdj(s)I performed using exact arithmetic again. The results are
flk
presented here after rounding. First we obtain,
F 7
L
k^1
7
j^ l
flkf2j Idk (s) : dj (5)I ' (46) r
I
B l r -4.202E6
6 2 -1.154£7
(51a);
(51b)I
by elementary properties of determinants. This shows] -1.095£9. (51c)^
that the characteristic polynomial of the state matrix a3
t_
47.6
.^ Page
L-
FA C: \R IS 7 1,0 8 -. 9 IS to PRIN1 SU;F ACE FOR 8 I. ? * 11 P-3E
Text, ^thc needed f l 's arti: obtained from the basis for
,the kernel of [6 3 , l 6 2 , 3 1. A workable set of f ij 's is, Output
0 (52a) 1 Output 2 i
F. f1 82/'3
f 21 - -6 1 A 3 (52b)
1
Output
1
.5
(520 ^G
Output
L 1
f 16 f27 ' 0 I
f 26 - f 1 " 1 (52d)
0 CI 4
V:: 2
,he f 's were, in our application, further scaled by a
ij (a) (b) I
factor of 10 to obtain the compensator rains as reason-
hble numbers. This can be done without upsetting the
compensator pole placement to be achieved. Eqs. (45)
and (42) c-in then be solved for t and t 2 of (43). The
1 Fig. 7 Unit Step Responses. (a) step
x 2 matrix [[ 1 .t 2 J, which represents our solution, is
seen to be, i on In p ut 1 (b) Step on Input 2.
i i
1.573 -0.937 ! As a final note in this section, it can be pointed
1.687 65.039
`out that the fixed poles in a compensator solution are
1.769s +1.183 57.634s +14.665 ! the zeros of the greatest common divisor of the poly-
0.0202s -8.12 8.395s 0.029 nomialslld i :dd , i, j = 1,2,...,7]. It is clear from
-1.158s -1.607 -13.396s 1 0.585 (53) the pairings (1,6), (1,7), (6,7) of our example that
-3.076s 1.2799 1 this CCD is 1, and thus that there are no fixed poles
0.744s -14.214s j (in the jet engine application. 1
1.622 9.972s I
0.915s +6.582 29.213s -11.258. R. RE1141TS
A number of procedures exist which lead directly 8.1 Conclu s ions
L m the matrix [C : t ] to a state-space realization for
the compensators G^1) 2 and K(s). Referring then to fig. Considerable work has been done in the control
5 and eys. (23) and (24), we find the matrices A , B °vstems area on polynomial design methods. Regardless
C , B and D for a final solution of the problet c3. g which viewpoint one takes toward the definition of
Ifl. are listed in Table 7, after rounding. such problems, their solution is usually assumed to
i !proceed according to algorithms of the type described
Table 7 [ din the Appendix. Conceptually, this theor y has achieved
Compensator Realizations eonsiderabie maturity, and so it seems appropriate to
conduct an extensive case stud y of its a pp lication to a
1 Ma trix Elements realistic problem. This is the reason for the jet
-2.0 -0.1626 ieng,ine control analyses carried out in t-is paper.
i
Ag
12.298 0 I The conclusions are generally positive in nature,
! though with some temporary limitations. On the positive
2.5732 1.686 j
Iside, Sections 3 and 7 show that MDP is a probl_m rele-
B I ivant to the jet engine control industry and that the
8 -0.9369 65.039 1MDP Algorithm offers a s'_guificanc improvement in flex-
i
ibility of design over existing algorithms in that in-
-3.2 0.1 ! dustry, The application problem detailed herein pro-
C vides a realistic and nontrivial test case for workers
S 1.092 0 IN the area of computer solution of polynomial problems.
A first limitation clearly occurs in Algorithm 2, which
-11.727 -9.725 2.888 5.944 0.824 is a popular and well known theoretical algorithm.
Both in terms of integer growth and relative CPU time,
B 36.416 3.28 -13.66 -37.83 9.147 this reduction a:gorithm points to a need for further
research. Following such an improvement, it would
D 0.119 0.777 2.363 9.973 -3.806 appoar that the second limitation is overall CPU time
k for an exact solution. Though the cost of such time
1.932 0.022 -1.265 -3.36 0.813
would be a small part of overall design cost, it appears
tThe solution given in table 7 was verified by com- desirable to reduce this time by an order of magnitude.
Since such a reduction seems to be a near-term poFsibil-
Closed loop systems of figs. 5 and 3. An exact calcula- ity by hardware or software advances, it would seem that
T* tion comparing the first two Markov parameters, showed polynomial methods may soon be ready to play a greater
these to b._ identical for both systems. Another, non- role in everyday practical. design. 1
4xact calculation, which verified the first six '4arkov 8.2 Historical Remarks
parameters, shoved agreement to tour digits. The first
two of these were listed in the second column of table 3. The original stimulus for this work was the paper
of Wang and Davison (1] in 1973, in which a minimal
lStep responses obtained from the closed loop system inverse system problem was solved. That work subse-
Of fig. 5, using the numbers of table 7, are shown in quently led to the algorithm of Forney (2] phrased in
lg. 7. ! rational vector spaces. Together, these works then led
A visual comparison of fig. 7,vitn similar plots to the free-modular IMP Algorithm (3] which has been
obtained for the optimal integral control System of applied here. The jet engine application has been
fig. 3 showed them to be identical. Hence the latter motivated by Michael and Farrar (41, whence arose our
oet is not included here. It Might he interesting; to numerical data. A report on KERPO in double-precision
examine the distribution of closed loop poles, which is FORTRAN has been presented (51, as has a more complete
given below. treatment of the pole assignment approach [61 in Section
-138.43 -4.47 + 0,986 1 g V. Background reading on the algebraic aspects of the
- 78.38 -1.678 + 0.238 1 paper is available in [7]; and the exact proposition
-_ -0.136. peeded in Section 7 can be found in Chapter XV Seetfon
, Proposition 15 of (8 J ' Further references to related
-- -----^^ L
Pone
o
•. I
.^c art ^1 7 1/8 1, 915116 PR!NT SUPfACE 10R B 172 , II PAGE
polynomial works h^+ve been cited in [3), j _S tep 2. By elementary column aperations, reduce
If (A.4) to the form
17 REFER ENCES
i I•:11 ^ 0
1. S. U. Wang and E. J. Davison, "A MinimizaL'on (A.5
Algorithm for the Design of Linear Multivariable I
1'21 E22
c
Systems," I EEE Trans act io n : on Automatic Control_,
Vol. AC-18, pp. 220 -225, June 1973. i where E l) has p rows, has no zero columns and is in an i
2. G. D. Forney, Jr., ":finimal Bases of Rational Vector echelon form.
Spaces, with Applications to Nultivzriahle. Linear st!f 3. Then the columns of E11 are a basis for
Systems," ST AM Journal on Control, Vol. 13, pp. 493- the image of M, and the columns ol I E 22 are a basis for
520, May 1975. the kernel of M (her .1A).
I
3. M. K. Sain, "A Free-Modular Algorithm for Minimal Now, let b., i = 1,2,...,a be the colu pos of E
Design of Linear Nultivariable Systems," Proceodinr-s 22
obtained from Algorithm 1 as a basis for Ker M. Then
IFAC 6 th World Congress, Part I8, pp. 9.1-1--9.1-7,
by application of further unimcdular transformations,
August 1975.
we can get an equivalent basis for Ker M which is re-
G. J. Michael and F. A. Farrar, "An Analytical duced in the sense of Section 4. Notice that we have
Method for the S y nthesis of Nonlinear ,tultivariable introduced the notation b i for elements of the basis
Feedback Control," Report M941338-2, United aircraft before reduction, to avoid confusion with ti, i = 1,2,
Research Laboratories, June 1973. ...n, which was assumed to be a reduced basis in Sec-
tion 4. The algorithm below is used to reduce the ker-
^. R. R. Gejji, "A Computer Program to Find the Kernel
nel basis. However, the procedure is more general in
of a Polynomial operator," Proceedings Fourtcenth_
nature and can be used to reduce A linearly independent
Allerton Conference on Circuit and System Theorv,
elements in F[sl q regardless of their origin. This ono
September 1976.
is typical of procedures described in the literature
. V. Seshadri and M. Sain, "An Approach to Pole for doing these kinds of calculations. However, as has
Assignment by Exterior Algebra," Proceedings_ been pointed out in the p aper, it is this part of the
Fourteenth Allerton Conference on Circuit and computation that consumes tho major portion of computer
System Theory, September 1976. time. Any research aimed at achieving efficiency in the
i
reduction process is, therefore, the most likely to have
M. K. Sain, "The Growing Algebraic Presence in
a significant payoff in terms of making the L-Ml' method
Systems Engineering: An Introducti.on," IEEE.
of control system design tractable in the near term.
Proceedings, Vol. 64, pp. 96-111, January 1975.
Algorithm 2
S. S. MacLane and G. Birkhoff, Algebra. London: The 1
M N
(A.4)
JD
4 7.8
Pape
F!1C 111YTT i 1/8 `K 9 1516 f::Ihli SURF-ACL 1`0^ B 1/2 A 11 PAGE tau-±w
are reduced and furthenaore, letting the i tr` column be As a matter of fact, more solutions to MDP may be
n i- possible. Any elements t 1 , L ,...,t L in Ker t1,
t i is = 1,2,..., L, (A.12) which admit a linear dynamical interpretation and achieve
J - d i Fhe minimum order dynamics predicted in (ii) above, are
LL
solution to ".DP throug t the equations
these L columns, when expressed as _ - !
( N- f jt t .. t ] (A.19)
Ei i I 1 2
l D
[,
1=0 i,j
sj, t i,mi # 0 (A.13) and
FOR
i :ET ENGINE CONTROL SYSTFMS DESIGN"
i^
c
M. K. Sain
R. M. Schafer
R. R. Gejji
P. 14. lloppner
r.
r
PUGINAL PAGE IS
pg BOOR QUALITY,
Abstract_
Present research efforts in the area of linear multivariable control systems in-
clude activities which will probably reestablish frequency do -tin methods as fre-
quently used tools for design. Two notable branches of this activity are polyno-
mial methods and return-difference-determinant methods. This paper sketches some
features of these approaches, in the context of a numerical exauple from turbofan
engine control.
1. 1WRODUCTION _ - 5.481
57X95 3,613 - 10.2-11 2015
State variable methods for the design of lir,ar ,,0 15,327
29•f332 - 72'3~ 3O.f95 -,0•tJ72
^
multivari.able control systems are well established
as a ; ojor tool in the arplications. Variants of
A - .66o 4.116 - 3.601 - .011
the linear quadratic regulator theory are probably
the most successful, with a variety cf other tech-
t 1.315 2.313 - .809 - 3.032 .821
ni q. •y es _t t :cl i •r pu ' E p ...
-ant , d ecoun 1; ion, ,, n d
geo:etric regulator theory also available. Even
.02 2.922 1.471 - 4.516
today, however, linear quadratic regulator theory '703
still requires a somewhat indirect thought process,
a fea w re it shares with many optimization methods;
and much of the remaining technique is synthesis 39.792 1.017
oriented instead of design oriented.
4.181 - .125
Accordingly, some modern re-emergence of frequency .018 -51+4 ]
domain thought has occurred---especially for design. 1 = - •3 82 - -077 D =
broadly depicted, this work involves polynomial .066 .013
methods and return-difference-determinant methods. - .555 - .088
This paper records certain studies of these ideas,
c
on a cnra
a^n illustration from turbofan er.i;ine con- .78 -5 - 3•.63
trol. Brevity precludes in-depth treatment; we re-
ly instead on the illustrations and the references.
r - 07 .031 - .016 - .042 1.368
2. ILLUSTRATIVE PROBLEM c.
i The turbofan engine model chosen for the illustra-
L 1.051 .149 - ,057 .002 - .036
tions has two control inputs--fuel flow and exhaust G(s), in a loop under unity negative feedback of the
area, five states--fan turbine inlet temperature, plant outputs. Fast step responses with small over-
train burner pressure, fan speed, high compressor shoot are of interest.
speed, and augmentoz pressure, and two outputs--
thrust and high turbine inlet temperature. In 3. POLYNOMIAL METnODS 12 1
traditional (A,S,C,D) fotm, the state description
(1] is given by the matrices at the top of the Polynomial rcthods take advantage of the fact that
following column, at a power lever angle of 47'. action of the A-matrix an3 the s-variable are close-
For the sequel the corresponding matrix G(s), name- ly related in a nodule theoretic sense (3]. Not yet
well advanced computatiunally, polynomial methods
ly C(sl-A) -1 B+D, is recorded.
nonetheles •a offer conviderable insir4c into system
Structure.' As is to he e-petted, they resemble the
The design problem is to select compensators for
geometric methods in this regard.
W
the dorcain of the map represented
to determine seven
i'y this rutrix
(.016r 5 +.1LSs 4 - 92,05x 3 (.545sS + 71.95 4 t 121^s3 "reduced basis" elements, shown be-
low which serve to describe the
- 396.9;; 2 + 29;o1s + 9;1 ;91) -19`3... 2 - 16E55s -121 ,95) kernel. From these, construction
C(_) . of K I (s) and K,(s) involves two
linear tom.5lnalionE of these seven
- <O^Ss S + 31,,,54 + 3321,5x 3 (-,013c 5 - •it 37s4 t 68.x ,_ 3 module elements, and standard reali-
zation rethodology. Using first,
+ 255JQt; 2 + 761,4-8z;+ 762;7) + 1703.3s 2 + 17L2.9s -3532• sixth, and seventh elements, and
_ J the assumptions
B5 + 14,0.7s i' T 5337.6::, 3 + N-, / ^ t 115690s + 1333' CK ` DK 0,
CK
1 2 1 2 1
As an example, consider the selection of K (s) and
K 2 (s) in Figure 1 in order to achieve a specified a
realizations can be found in the rnncr
closed loop performance T(s). Such a r-pecification Compensator Fealizations
IS, of Course, a nontrivial. issue in its own right.
A complete treatment of such a specification can Matrix Eletaeats
be found in (2]. Relying upon the algebraic inter-
pretation of a transfer function as a pair of poly- p -2.0 - 0 .1626
nomials, such a design problem can be ccnvertcd to hl 12,298 0
a kernel calculation in V(s)- modules, where R(s]
denotes polyno-mials in s with coefficients in the 2.5732 1.056
real number field R. Considerable manipulation D
must be carried out to set up this kernel problem, k1 -0.9369 65.039
which turns out to involve a 2x9 matrix of polyno- -3.2 0.1
finials up to the thirteenth degree, as shown below. C
K1 1.092 t'
1.5261:-3 9.6a5F.-5 2.6931:-G 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 If we set K,, to zero
6.54 E-4s -6.621E-5s -4.642F.-5s -4.423E-5s -2.416E-5s -1.84:8-5s - 1 . 314E - 4sand denote K by K,
l.).0 0.0 Ve have the arch
etypal
0<0 5.OS1E-4 4.7941:-4 4.4794F.-4 0.0
-3.076E-5s 1.279E-5'nity negative feed-
1.643E-4s 1.713F.-4s -4.24SE-5s
back precompensation
0.0 0.0 0.0 -2.2171-6 -3.491F-5 0.0 0.0 Frohlcm. IC K is
y 13.131E-6n 7.436E-6s - 1.421E - 4 a^ssumcd to have :rate
1.622E-5 C.0 description ("K ,1,,
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
( 9.972E-5 -IC K .D K ), then a corn
7.9351:-2 2.949E-4 -4.416x:-4 -4.068E-4 -2.25 E-4 -2.434 E-4 (1.0 Lined state descrip-
8.69 F-4s 2.9551:-4-lion (AC ,1t C ,CCI DC ) for
681
i
F
E 711k St
l
1
Temperature
a.s
6
2 4
Seconds
Fig. 2
Closed Loop Response to Unit Step in
Commanded Thrust; Folynccial Design
., r Fig. 1 ,•.556 - .371 - .185 0 .165 .371
is Compensation Scheme for Polynomial Design
pp
F, J.23-
2
ust
-j.232
0
^econ^s
-J.464
R
Fig. 3
Closed Loop Res p onse to unit Step in
I Coaalanded Temperature; Polynomial Desigi;
jo j.l
k
j'
i
-fill
- j .2 i
-j.424
-j.5
3 --j.643
_-; -j•7 '3
Ffg. 5 -j.1
Nyquist Plots for Compensated System;
ii Alpha Expansion
-1.037 -.622 -.207 0 .207
Fig. 6
Nyquist Plot for det(I+CK)
Ij
6V
Seconds
2 3 4
4j -^ It;^ tl J
0 1
Thrust
.R
Oj
.6
.4 —2j
tII 11:C W
Temperature
.2
;; ' 1 ,^`` I _1
0
-4 -2 0 2 4
Fig. 9
Fig. 7 C.SRDIAD .Plot, Column 1, Uncompensated
Same as Fig. 2 for Direct Approach Design
Seconds
1 2 3 4
2j 1 Inc to
1 Tempera 1j
Oj
O T'hrus t
to 0
-1
InC to
-2j
-2 -1 1 2
Fit; 8 Fig. 4o
CARDIAD Plot, Column 2, Uncompensated
Sax as F!h, :: for Direct Approach Design
the Ic:,p can be obtained by an isomor p hism on the Important relationship that
product of Ow :Late spaCtrs X andassociated
114DD K I Isl-AC 1-1liGKI IsI-Al IsI-AKi,
j with t1w plant and compensator, r0speetieely, pro-
vided th.tt the {'ain !.0 has no nel ,,itive unit
eigenvaIucs. For this s l tuatLn, one has the upon which a Kyquist study can be based. We refer
683
qU P,J Jrl expansion chosen for the return-difference-deter-
minant. The obvious expansiun, shown for the pre-
cent illustrative ease, is
I
!lam _ / ^ f
1+G K +G 1:
li 11- 12 Z1
+G K1 2 +C K
cl 1^ 22 22
+ ;cK^;
fir
and a less obvious, more recursive expansi.oa in an
HxN rase is N
4.8./x`
Where WO
a 0 1.
and
i-1
ni - ( - 1/i) ap trace(CK)VP,
P=O
pj for i > 1.
r
CAfcDIAD Plot, Column 2, Com p ensated System widely :studied for the case in which K(s) is rqo^,_
to such studies as rct"rn-difference-determinant stricted to be a constant matrix. .Such less has
methods. because of the presence of J14GKI in a key been accomplished relative to the choice of a
dynamic K(r).
role.
Carstruction of a Nyquist plot is related to the A new technique for this purpose is the CARDIAD
684
pF
E
^I
i
it, acronymed for Compensator Acceptability 3. S. Kacl.anc and G. Hirkhoff, A_1 !L ra. London:
- P ion for Uf.^^ n.il Dominance.
Compensators 71kc• t:.-icmillan Co., 1967,
xz(J +jy2.(j^,)^
-^ r(j^) .r 4. P. W. 11oppner, "The Direct Approach to Cowpen-
L L S (j-) j y l (j^) 1
Ilie simple compensator 7. 1i. 11. Rosenbrock, Cornuter-Aid ed Con t rol System
1 .7s .44 Design. New York: Academic Press, 1974.
K(s) _ .05s + 1
-10 1
achieves dominance at all frequencies in both col-
umns, as can be seen in Figures 11 and 12, which
consist only of solid circles cacti of which inclu-
des the origin.
6. DISCUSSION
i
cal model from the turbofan engine area. Focus
has been on polynomial methods, which hear close
resemblance to geometric control methods in an
abstract algebraic sense, and upon methods re-
lated to the deternir.ant of return difference.
The CARDIAD plot, a new dynamical ap roach to
dominance, has been illustrated.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
REFERENCES
, 1
It
T IF
Appendix F
W. E. Longenbaker
R. J. Leake
TIME OPTIMAL CONTROL
OF A T140-SFOOL TURBOFAN JET ENGINE
by
September 1977
ABSTRACT
commonly used to design controls for jet engines. Who reas most modern
accurate existing models of jet engines are (1) linear analytical models
needed for this study is something which lies between these two extremes,
A fifth order nonlinear model was developed in this study which cor-
rectly models most of the qualitative behavior of the jet engine, but which
analytical simulator. Several linear models were derived, both from the
nonlinear analytical model, and also from DYNGEN. A time optimal control
Finally, these results were tested on the two principal simulators, PYNCEN
valuable insight into the nature of the problem was obtained, and much
useful computer software was developed. However, an optimal control law
obtained from any model can only be as good as the model itself. For
this reason, more work is needed to develop a better nonlinear analytical
model of the two—spool turbofan jet engine.
If
TABLE OF CONTFNTS
Page
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
i
iii
Page
REFERENCES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136
iv
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
commonly used to design controls for jet engines. Whereas most modern
accurate existing models of jet engines are (1) linear analytical models
needed for this study is something which lies between these two extremes,
ril
1
#.4
i
CHAS TER II
2.1 Introduction
engine is discussed. The configuration for this engine has been speci-
t his work is given in reference [1] and has also bFGn reported in [2].
2
3
Model 11,3.
Model 2L3.
the engine variables. This allows one to gain insight into their static
tend to have more structure (zero entries in the ABCD matrices) than
in references [5], [6], and [7] were employed _s a starting point and
tions, least squares and exact fits were made tc: theoretical forms, and
tial forms were used, whatever seemed to best fit the situation.
P a pressure
T a temperature
U a specific energy
V a vclume
W a flow
High-pressure turbine-,
Dudburner- .\ N
Comtustor-^ ^` ^, HPFXT r Low-pressu re tu Nn e
Room
28
22.21 23 ^1 < 2.1 ,s` rlr 25
h ^ ^
B
1 2 ran 22,21 Compressor 3 < d 1550 55 b< 7
<
BLf, ^
BLDU BLHP BLLP
i
Afterburner
BLF
BLOB
r
5
Before delving into the details of the model, certain decisions had
to be made regarding the choice of state variables and the order of the
the higher the order of the model, the more accurate the approximation
should be. The order that was selected (5th) was a function of the
the DYNGEN 16th order model, but is not an excessively low choice, for
The most obvious states to choose are the rotor speeds, (1) N and
(2) NF . The other selections were (3) the burner pressure, P 4 , a vari-
able which is strongly affected by changes in fuel., WFB; (4) the burner
actual ex_istin control systems, inputs (1) an3 (2) are used, along wi^.h
movable guide vanes mounted throughout the compressor and fan stages.
These vanes cause . changes in the air flow in a manner similar to the
Tables 2.3, 2.4, and 2.5 respectively are listings of the constants
engine configuration, and the nonlinear state equations. Note that the
TABLE 2.1
SYMEJLS FOR VARIABLES
A8 nozzle area
CNC corrected compressor rotor speed
CNF corrected fan rotor speed
FG thrust
NC compressor rotor -need
NF fan rotor speed
compressor pressure ratio at surge
PCMA%
fan pressure ratio at surge
PFMAX
P 21 fan exit (compressor inlet) pressure
P3 compressor exit pressure
P4 combustor exit pressure
P7 afterburner exit pressure
T 21 fan exit (compressor inlet) temperature
compressor exit temperature
T3
T4 combustor exit temperature
high pressure turbine exit temperature
T50
1 55 low pressure turbine exit temperati.ire
T7 afterburner exit temperature
U, combustor internal energy
WAC compressor airflow rate
WAF fan airflow rate
WA3 airflow rate into combustor
maximum compressor airflow rate
WCMAX
correction term for maximum compressor airflow rate
AWCMAX
14B fuel flow rate into combustor
maximum fan airflow rate
WFM.AX
WC4 gaseous flow rate out of combustor
i
W050 gaseous flow rate out of high pressure turbine
_- W,55 gaseous flow rate out of low pressure turbine
I
` WG7 gaseous flow rate out of afterburner
ZC con.pressure surge margin
ZF fan surge margin
7
TABLE 2.2
TABLE 2.3
CONSTANTS
CPHT
i high pressure turbine specific pressure .22589
low pressure turbine specific pressure .27938
CPLT
f(PCB..C) I percent of compressor exit air bled for cooling .16
a(PCBLBU) percent of bleed air which leaks into fanduct .208
6(PCBLHP) percent of bleed air put into high pressure turbine .726
Y( PCBLI.P ) percent of bleed air put into Iota pressure turbine .066
TABLE 2.4
DESIGN EQUILIBRIUM VALUES
TABLE 2.5
STATE EQUATIONS
I dNC = 30 2 J _
`CPCWAC(T21 T3 ) + C WG50 ( T 4 - TS0)l
(1} dt (r, )IC NC PHT
dNK
J _`^ F
3021_N^`,pFWA_(T2 - ,
CPLTkG55(T50 - T55}]
(2) dt (n T 21 ) F
" r
4 - VRy* (T
+ WFB - WG41
(3) dt
COAT
MB
^i dP Ry*T
(4)- = V JWG4 - WFB - WA31
Arr BN
di7 C RT
(5) VVB (T {W4- WFB - WA3) + Y * (T 3WA3 - T^} WG4 + T4(l+rj)W-FB}]
dt = P
cORB 4
9
TABLE 2.6a
Eq. N ` Equation
NF NF
(1) CNF = N
FDESIGN 9651
N % = NC
(3) CNC = —
NC DESIGN T 2 10070 /518.668
(5) ` T 4 = U4AVB
(6) ^T S ^ _ .727 T4
(7) IP 3 = 1.05944 P4
-2.313268 (P
FMAX-p 21)
(11) WAF = ^vFr1AX + 28.502 1 - e
10
TABLE 2.6b
Eq. #1 Equation
(16){ WA3 = (1 - m)WAC = .84 WAC
1121.786 P A
7 8
(22) WG7 = --
(P 3 /P 21 ) - 1
(24) ZC = _
P CNLIX 1
P 21
(25) ZF = 1 1 .
F<0 x
3.1
these can be readily observed in a DYNCEN listing, while others are far
more obscure. Equations (9) through (15) are approximations to the fan
equation and nonlinear function was calculated, and then combined to-
f;ether to form a linear model. This linear model was then normalized
as follows.
be written
n m
Ia.. x. + b (2.3-1)
1 j=1 1J J j=1 1 J J
Let the values of x at the design point be denoted x, and denote the
x. = x (2.3-2)
r i
x.
i
ui - ui
(2.3-3)
u.
i
r•
n m
(x x_ a, x x+ b u u (2.3-4)
J=l lj J j j =1 lj j J
(2.3-6)
a. ij = a.
lj _x]
x.
i
and
b = b.. u (2.3-7)
X.
1
The normalized linear Model 21.5 is given in Table 2.7. The eigenvalues c
of Model 2L5 are (1)(2) -7.2264 + 1.39L3j, (4) -73.554, (5) -153.27, and
(3) -343.11. The numbered eigenvalues can be associated with the state
of like number, as they bear a loose resemblance with the diagonal terms.
Note that all eigenvalues are negative, and the model is clearly stable.
h
It seems quite reasonable that lower order models would be almost
4F
t
as accurate, suggested by the clear difference in the m-gnitudes of the
mentioned above, the eigenvalues show that the states which will be
eliminated as the order is decreased, are P 4 (3), then U 4 (5), then P7(4).
i
t. The method used to perform the ardor reduction is to first rearrange
eliminate", x2.
tI
1. Xl = [ A ll A ]+Bu(2-3-8)
F ^2[X I 11
g I, X2 A21 A 2 ^ x 2 B2f
f
. Now set the derivative of X2 equal to zero, since their dynamic behavior
is to bq eliminated. Thus,
13
A21 X + A 22 X2 + B 2 u = 0 (2.3-9)
1 - B 2 u} (2.3-10)
X 2 = -A22 -1( 21 X
yielding
X 1 = (A 11 X1 + (B 1 22. B2 )u (2.3-1.1)
Al2 A22^1A 21 ) - Al2 A
1 Application of this method yields Models 2L3 and 2L2 per Tables 2.8
t
and 2.9 respectively. Note that the most important eigenvalues have not
should yield a good model of the DYNCEN simulator in the area of the
design point.
{ Additional insight into the selection of states for low order models is
in DYGABCD, which is to perturb the inputs and states one aL a time, and
ing how much each state perturbation affects the fan speed (which is
MODEL 2L5
0 1.4078
0 .75817
B = 1.2813 -122.31
0 -48.928
149.21 -3.092
0 0 0 1.461 0
0 0 0 0 1
0 1.2138
0 0
TABLE 2.8
MODEL 2L3
3.406 .79722
B 2.1241 .56161
31.486 -64.49
C 0 0 1.461
-.63298 -.97907 -.01486
0 1.2138
D
1.072 .1598
15
TABLE 2 .9
MODEL 2L2
B 3.3852 .83984
2.1262 .5573
C -.23288 1.1412
-.63061 -.99068
1 .63396 -.084644
D
I 1.0656 .17301
TABLE 2,10
MODEL 1L5
-.00259 .3553
.2116 -.31618
B 12.54 -13.774
-.6201 -99.3
157.78 6.84
-.10277 .90094
D
-.013839 .020856
16
TABLE 2.11
MODEL 1L3
Matrix Matrix Elements Eigenvalues
-2.4307 -.70897 -.81149 -92.242
A 3.8281 -4.9579 -1.7235 -5.0644 _+ .86196j
2.4466 140.5 -94.982
1.395 .30875
B 1.2585 -.35303
15.44 -98.208
I
0 I .034897 -.0083832 1.3734
-.60014 .081353 -.12635
D - . 023854 .86846
.52351 .046147
TABLE 2.12
MODEL 1 L 2
1.2631 1.1483
B
.97844 1.429
.070274 2.0232
O
-.60339 -.10555
.19932 -.55158
D
.50298 .17879
17
Table 2.10 details the results for Model 1L5 after normalization.
Inspection shows that Models 11,5 and 2L5 do not closely match on an
felt that model 1L5 was a reasonable approximation to the DYNGEN simu-
lator at the design point, and it was desired not to rely heavily on an
experimental program. Tables 2.11 and 2.12 list Models 1L3 and 1L2
Euler integration and was used with a time step (DT) of .001, very
DYNGEN was run with time steps of .01 and higher, for it employs a
In addition, the linear models were tested on program ABCD (see Appendix),
shown are the closest Models 1 and 2 came towards agreement. The linear
r responses are evidence that the linearization and order reductions were
correctly calculated.
2.6, 2.7, and 2.8. There seems to be better agreement between models
temperature (T).
i
C 18
rt
.t O
sJ
-1
2
n 2
v
H
V U
t -2
O O
iA
V^
Z
G
Z 2
U ^-3
i^ e
7 0
e
v.
0
C,
C 4
w
V
Q
1
v ^i..s
r
`.^ 2
to
1
zLz
ILz
=
e.1
1l.3
?L q 2L3
la 1co
FI 2.5• Magnitude Frequency response - WFB to FG
sL3,xL^
1.0
JL3, IL5
IL2
I 1
at 2L2
2
!O W TOO
2L2, 2, L";
to
it2 fL3
1
BLS 2Ls
0.1
to w 100
_,.10
fLZ 2L2
2 L.3
0.r-
%3
2.
\ f L s
2Lc
10 to Jon
^.^ VIFB
two.3
loo % N, = 11 8 99 RPM ^, 13...^ [j ^ TI w 7s
too % N F = 9874 R PM
]d0 ^^ O. S
^ el s
i MODE
L.^ ^^
MODELZ
99
^ ^ FBA ^'^ B / .
C0 0
qg , d
_ wF6
IV
,^,
97 , _ ,. `owFa
a• i•
9Q
^^ Y
f......
a3 5'^ 9^ 96 97 98 9 9 Ala
.:, 22
This follows since Model 2L2 is known to have higher eigeava.lues than
Model 1L2. Also shown are transients for step inputs between a low A
f ^
rJ
f
LL
ff
i
3 s
is
i
r
CHAPTER III
3. 1 Introduction
which will drive a model from a low thrust equilibrium to the design
understood that
f(x(t), u ( t)) = Ax(t) + B u(t) . (3.2-2)
r: I
for linear models. Let x(k) be the starting state and let the terminal
time N be defined as the first instant at which the system state reaches
the designated target set S. All x(t) are eX, the state set. The per--
,
formance index
N--dt
S (x, ti) ^ Qt (3.2--3)
t=k
t = k, k + flt,...., N-et
t
i
.. . _......
L ., 24
control sequence.
u = u(k), u(k + At),...u_(N At) (3.2-4)
a strong intuitive need for such constraints, for the physical jet
engine has very real performance limitations. Brennan and Leake C81
have been chosen for this study: (1) high pressure turbine inlet
temperature (`f4); (2) compressor surge margin (Z c); and (3) fan surge
if either the surge margin or the turbine temperature is too high, the
y. T4 = g (x(t), u ( t )) (3.3--2)
G ^
ZF = g B (x(t) " ia(t)) (3.3--4)
s
is
The next step is to determine gi for each model.
{ Ems' Model 2 presents no difficulty whatsoever since all three constraint
t
25
The constraints are harder to determine for the linear models, and
have used constraints which were strictly functions of the states. How-
ever, such is not the case here. Simulations of both Models l and 2
show T4 and Z to have very little steady state change over a wide range
of state space, yet step inputs elicit strong overshoots from both
Once again, DYGABCD was used to obtain linear expressions for the
Constraint functions were not determined for the other linear models,
the optimal control solutions of Chapter V, for they are hard con-
straints which will often affect the control chosen. After studying
results of DYNGPN simulations, it was decided to use the following
values:
cI = .150 (3.3--8)
c2 = .105 (3.3-9)
C3 = .080 (3.3-10)
1 ^ .
t
1
1
CHAPTER Iv
4. 1 Introduction
It has been pointed out in Chapter III that a feedback control law
is found in reference (121, where Basso and Leake. have successfully ob-
tained a feedback control law for a single spool turbojet engine. Use
The starting time k is known, and the terminal time N is known. The
Rewriting:
2T
which leads to
Since the minimization really only concerns u(k),(u(k + At) .... u(N - At)
Equation results;
The task is to fit the time optimal problem (i.e., free time, fixed
right end), into a forms which can utilize the basic Dynamic Programming
[13] and [14], and Later applied by Basso and Leake in [12].
As per [12], let Vk ( x) be any function such that Vk (x) > Vk(x)
and let vn ( x,k) be a control law which results when performing the
minimization. ]
i
min
U E:U
[L (x, u, k) + V + At (x + f (x, u)) ] (x, k) 4 S (4.3--1)
l
1
28
' number of steps, although each (x,k) may require a different number of
that in the solution of the fixed time, free right end problem, equation
(4.2--8) is relating two performance indices for the same state, but
formance indices for the same state, and the.same time k, one being a
r
better approximation than • the other.
t ,^
r It now appears that the time optimal free time free right end prob-
method. indeed this is true for all practical purposes; however, there
r definition, ilk ^l is the cost which results when applying V n (x,k), until
t
the target set S is reached, which is not equation (4.3-3). For example,
i
d let
and
(x, k) E S
i
t
Then, if x is sufficiently far away from S, it is quite possible that
to be true, i.e., the control- could not cause the system to reach the
target set in a time of At. Since equation (4.3--4) is true for all
(x,k) E S, then
ever, the method used in [12] and also used in Chapter V of this
V n (x)
Vta+l (x) = min
r
v_
A successive- approximation problem allows still another departure .
from the basic Dynamic Programming problem (fixed time, free right end).
forth,. Therefore, each iteration has a specific time associated with it.
However, in the successive approximations technique, either all app ro xi-
mations are concerned ;with the same time; or the 'problem' is time-inde-
pendent.
pendent. In Basso and Leake [121,'V (x) was calculated for all x.e X
and stored iii,aii array. Then V (x)-was..: calculated ,. and . .-after that.had .
be en . compxeted . far all. x "E X; V "(X) r epla c ed V (i) . in the array, and so
forth. it would be more :efficient , to immediately change each VI (^) to
{ the 'us calculated V2. x in a state b state manner. In. reality then
the approximations" .
for ' V changes -much more rapi dly, f o r one. d oes. not.
Wait unLil the ;completion: of the sw eet' t hrou gh state space before using
..,.raw
32
TABLE 4.1
Iteration
#6 X1
Y f
E_
t
ii
^. 33
Asroof
P of the numerical su P eriorit y . of this "fast update"
P method,
through regular "do loop" sweeps through state space, the other by the
"fast: update" method.. Both started with the same V o (x). Note that the
number,. but L;erves as a record of how many sweeps through state space :a
. ` have been made.. In the fast update of Table 4.1, there will have been
is equal to the number of the sweep through state space times the number
^k
of points - ta state space, the finer the quantization, the more benefit
nation: is that the old method (do loops) makes you wait even longer
E ;
} before obtaining new information, when you increase the quantization of
the state space.
' of the number of points in..control space and state space, as well as the
ky
time increment At which is used.. (It should also be mentioned that this
tional j obi ,control language complications which occur for higher times.
i, Thus, 'single Dynamic Programming solutions may be the result of several
program. runs.. Near the 'end of the time limit,. each job st ores. cos.t
information on,
on.. disk to be used by a subsequent job as a: starting point, #
r
F^ _
34
st
.No re Yes
AL PAG9 IS
tj't e
constraint
s atisfd
. Determine x(t+At) 4UALIT%
T t
No
x 1 Yes
(t+At)F-X Interpolate to determine cost
?
iii ^
I t is stat
%a ii5st
4- 4-1
Yes
Save the cost and control
1
a contr6,k
No Yes
_s tisfy test
s 2 for his
all
Unco e
at
tates been
Yes J ^ispj&n arbitr ary
sted
\^teV
oi,
is s e
NO &isapp
malle
Cost
tim Smalle s
No /t
app
or
o store Cost
^._ ,_ - .^-- _ t result ?
Write es br, Yes
on disk ISate cost & contro l
r Yes
-Stop FIGURE A.2. Flow Chart of Dynamic Programming
55
0
V (x). In addition, control_ information is stored, so that the optimal
Chapter VI.
Dynamic Programming is generally best-written in a somewhat ad hoc
structure to the program. Figure 4.2 shows a flow chart, while the
redo loop" for searching the state space. Also, the target cost is set
ever, the 'future state" x(t + At) is used when testing whether or not a
particular control takes the state outside of the state set X. The
r.
C.
C
}
F
F ^
5
CHAPTER V
and the equilibrium values at the target are designated as x and u, then
x = (x - x) = A (x - x) + B (u - u) (5.1-2)
(y -- y) = C (x - x) + D (u -- u) (5.1-3)
such that the program does not rely too heavily on interpolation. How-
1 ever., if the state quantization becomes too small, DT trust also be
' time step L'-' will also have a bearing on the state quantization. For
36
t
37
the control set U, not only as regards the quantization, but also the
the resultant control law. In these studies, the controls were limited
such that
Again, these are normalized -values. The state set, X, does not affect
the solution for the states of interest, as long as these states are
is
a
V (x) min V .70
max
1)2 + c (x 1)2 + c
C (X
2 2 3
with the c., chosen such that V'(x) V(x)- Whether or not this condi-
J,
^^ . .^ _
._.. _
- ^ ^ .. .. ._.. i ..r __.i ....... .. ... __ y < ... i .. _
jY
0.30 0.92 a,`J4 Oo96 o.s$ i•90 1.a7- 1.a^ 1.46 i,a8 ^,1a
.* a.^a^ v•^v a,5a a,5a a.an o•^v v,^v c,^a. a•^9 v•av 0.50 ^ 1.20
iQ^a 5.
* a•$0 0•^a 9,aa vrsv 0.$a v•5a a.5a - a,^v ^.$v o•av v,3a. * 1.va
i.tl$
1.Ob ^ o•aQ ' tl•50 a• 59 0.50 " a•5 o ^ ' Os50 0.5a^ 0.5 a ^ 0.50 ^^ 9.5 a Oraa ^ 1rG6
^ 0.59 0.5a 0.59 0.50 O,aa 0,50 .. O,SO 0.501 0•a0 9r50 0.5D * x.•94
1.s0^4
1.02 ^ 0,5,1 a.50 0.5a 0x60 4.50 0,3d• Oa80 Or80 0.50 O.aO t^.50 ^ 1.02
NF' 1r90 * 0.50 1.3a 1 •:ra 3r39 1.20 1.OD 0.80 9•Fp 0.70 1.40 1.40 ^ 1.00
a,9$ * 1.4a 2.49 1.40 1.4a i•4a 1,4a 1.49 1.4v 1.40 1.40 1.40 ^ l?,98
^ 1,4a 1+40 1.40 2.40 1.40 1.44 1.40 1.40 1.40 1.4a^ 1,4a ^ a.95
a•9G
a•94 * 1 n 4a 1,40 2.40 2.49 1.40 1.40 1.40 2.40 1.40, X1.40 1.40 ^ a.94
0..92 1•'40_ 1.90 1.40 1.40 2.40 1.40 1.40 1.4G ^ 1.40 1.40 x.42 ^ a.s2
*
A.,9D ^ 1.40 1.40 1.40 1.40 1.40 1.49 1.40 1r40 1.40 1.4E1 1,40 ^ Ar90
0.90 13.92 0.94 9056 0,98 2000 1•U2 1•a4 .1.06 1.08 1.20.
woa
" _
NC
Or98 4.9D o..9x r^.sa oo^^ 3x09 1x92 irO^F 1rDf► x.09 1,10
* ,^ *. ^ ^ ^ ^
1.14 * 0..242.E 0,2374• 9,2325 6.2273 0.2224 4.2159 9.$091 D.291:i a.isz8 a.ls^^ 0.172T *^ X•10
S,.D& * O^Z288:' -02231 0x2172 x.2307 0:2934 9r19*^1 Dr186b a.i7^a 4.1619 0.1+{96 4.1391, ^ 1.48
1.06 * 0x2140 0.2072 '; 0,997 0.1911 4x1813 0.1593 0.1653 br13a9 0,1215 0.1139 0x114'«5 *. 1rti^a
1x94 * 0.1977 - 0.1893 • 4x1793 9.1674 0.1530 ^` 041352 0.1139 0.9915 a.asut^ 0.11990 d•1120 ^ 1x04
1.02 * 0.1753 ^ 0.1684- 0x1546 0,1374 0.1153• O.0g72 6.0574 0.9749 0.99.22- 0x1129 0.1312 * 1,D2
NF 1x00 ^ D.1567 0.•7.4'30 0.1231 4.9976 4.0621 4.0 0.0681 U.0^373 9.1229 9^1y:25 4.1559 ^ Z.00
17.43 * D-.1344 0.7.179. 0.9977 p.0Tfi5 O.06fr4 0.0x72 0.3152 0-.1371 Dri541J (1x1671 0 s 177,2 ^• 0 .98
0.36- * ,D.1210 Dr1493 0.1911 0x101$ 0.1.162 0.1353 • 0.1539 9x1673 Oo1787 b.1880 D.1959 ^ D.96
9.9E * 0.1277 ^.i250 0.1306 0.1426 0.1566 4x1709 11,1616 0.1913 n.lss4 ^ 9.2us3 0.23,26 ^ 0.94
0.92 * 6..7.512. 4.15(.9 0..1565 0.1772 Ou1B74 •0.1965 D..2044 0x2113 0 x21712 0.22,26 0e2277 ^k . 0 x92
A.90 ^. Os1810 •17.1886 9.1967 D.2044 9.2115 0.2178 6.223K 0.2286 D.^2334. 0. 2 373 9.2435 .^ 0.94
^ ^ * ^ * +M
090
1.96 Or92 Orgy 0.96 0.98. 1.60 1.02
i. b+b 1.98 1s10
N^
n,sn. D,9^ D.sw a.s^ n.sa 1.4a .^.^^ 1.44 1,D6 l.,aa 1.10
1.10
'^`
1«10 * Oi70 D.70 Oi70 0.70 ,^ Oi^O a r 70 4vti 70 , ,7
0x 0 ^ O iTO 4x70 o,^a
^..oa ^ 0,50 0.5D Dv54 0.50 0050 0.50 D.50 O.SD 0,50 U.50 0.50 * 1.D^
0.70 0,70 4.70 4a74 0.70 D.74 ^ 0.70 4.70 '0.74 0.70 D.70
1.t16 * O0SO 4.50 0.50 405U 0.50 0.54 0.50 De50 -, 050 4x50 0.50 * 1.06
0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 O.T4 ^ 4,70 OPTO 4.70 0.70 0.74 0.74
^..D4 4.00 0.50 4.50 Qe50 4.54 •0.60 0.50 4.50 0.54 0.50 D.50 ^ 1.44
^ 0,70 0.70 070
0.70 J,70 4.74 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70
3a0Z ^ O.S4 Oo50 0,60 0.60 0.70 O,bO 0.50 O.SO 4.50 0.50 0.50 * 1.02
4.74 0.70 0.70 4.7a 0,70 4.00 0.80 0.70 4.70 4.70 1,20
1x00 ^ 4.5D 1.30 1.'50 1.30 1.40 1.00 4.64 4.70 0e70 1.40 1,40 ^^ 1000
^F D.7D 0.90 0.90 1.UD ladR 1.40 0.80 1.40 1.20 1020 1.20
fl.98 ^ i.44 Z.^k4 1x40 1.40 3.40 1.40 1.40 1.x+0 1.40 1.'^i0 X,40 * 0,`38
1.Z0 1v20 1.24 1.20 1.24 5.20 1.20 1.20 1.ZD 1.20 1.2a
tf.9i ^ 1,40 1x40 1.4D 1.44 1.40 1.40 1.40 1r40 1,40 1.40 1.µ0 #• t1.9^
1.20 1.20 1.2D 1020 1.20 1.20 71..24 1.20 i.20 l.^24 1.20
Q.9^F !^ 0
1. 40 1.44 1.40
1,.20
1.41!
1.20'
1.40
1.20
1040
1.20
1.40
1.20
i.44
1.,20
1x40
1.20
^ 1.40.
1.20
1,40
1.20
# 0.9 1} '
1.2.4 1.20
^ i.40 1.140 ^ 1.40 1.40 1.44 3..40 1.40 1.40 1.4D 1.µD 1.1+0 ^* Oo42.
G,9^ 124 1.20
1.20 7^.2D 1,20 1.2D 1.20 1.20 1.20 5..24 Sr^O
s n ^C * 1„4D 1.40 1.4D 1.'40 2.40 1.40 1.40 1,40 1.40 1.40 1.44 * D.9D
loxD 1x20 1x20 1.2D 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 lE2D 1.2D
^ * # * * ^k * * ^ # ^k
a.9D 1► .92 0.94 O.F6 4.98 1.00 1,02 1.D4 1r0b 1.00 1.10
- , . _.
uc
0.90 0.9^ 0r9^ 0,96 Or9d 1r00 1,02 ^r4^ 1r08 1 rQ8 1r10
* *• * * q^ * * ^ * *
;Lalfl ^ Or2i6:+ p,^21d 4r^163 4v211^ Ov$0^9+ 0,2nfi^ - 0.1937 Orx861 Or17?d Or16?^S -Or13b^. * 1r14
1.rOd * Oa213^! Oa^?0?^ Ov201=F^ 4e^9'S2 Ov1 g 6^i OvidO'3 Dci71'l Ori$Da' *
Or1604 4r:47'^ Oai32+1 ^ le0d
i.D^ * Or1987 Dv1918 '- Ov18uy 6 Dv1766 Qe?.b71 4v135d Dv1^22 Or1257 4v10'^6 ,OitlJ,̀il ' Dv0944 * iv.6
1s0^F ^ 4x1$27 Dv17^F4 ^ Da1652 Ov1539 0.1401 Dv1232 OviDl9 0.075} Ov0719 0.08{8 D.494b +R 1.04
1.02 * Oelb48 OrS54^F ti ^v1414 Dv12^6 Ov103'.5 0vD764. 0.0416 4.D55D 0.0763 0v0984 D.1167 * 1v0^
^^ 1.DD * 0.1443 Dv13D2 0>11G5 0.095,2 OvD51'Z D.v4 Ov0511 OaD$49 Oa11D4 4a127fa D;1T3^ * 1v00
0.9$ * Ov1231 Ov1022 OaD$,21 Dv0617 OaO^#9'S Ov0'162 DviD31 4.1238 Dv1395 Dv151? 0.1617 * Ov48
Ov9^ * 0.-1434 4,4910 0,0822 Dv0$3fs ` 0.1029 D.i228 Ov13g3 0.1526 0,1633 4x1722 Qv18D0 * Dv96
Ga9^ # O v iD7'8 Drzo bS D.1129 0.1279 n.142$ D.is57 D. 1b6S 0.1795 4.1832 Dv1940 Ov1963 * OvY^^
Or9.^ * Or1317 0.1393 Dv1509 0rib22 $,1,722 Ua1808, D*3652 0.1947 Or2005 0.2058 Dv2111 * Cr92
Or90 * Ovi'b31 Qv1720 0,I$Ob Oei$$3 Orl'I61 Dv2010 Dv^Ob4 0.2112 De213$ Ovi^242 Dv22^F7 * Ov90
^ * * ^a * ^a s *
Dv90 Or9a^ 4.94 O.S6 Dv9d i r00 1.02 ie0 +^ 1.46 ^ 1rD8 1.10
^-
,.
^2
^.4
N The program was origixially developed using only one control, Wk'^i.
Su'6sequently, the A8 coxxtrol ores added but .conis^raints were riot yet
`= considered. Figures 5,l and 5.2 present the results, showixzg a s^.rigle
p?ane x3 {P ' } = 1.
unchanged Frith the addition of the second input. However, the benefit
reaches the target roughly lol faster than the one--input system, for an y
given state.
^ target, the smaller the difference becomes. This suggests that a second
^ er£gi^ie are entirely suitable for this study. Considering the law order
^-
:^;
of t11e system,, 3.t was decided that analytical apcimal control theory
s ^^
,, might provide good insight into the ultimate feedback controller
i`-,
^3
Minimize
ti
} such that
i
i
t = the time at which the target set S is reached `,:,
' 3
^ ^ ^ (t 33
^i O o
'^
,;
:i
^^
}
t u{t) e U, the control. set
^`
(xf^^) =t,) ^ s
I?
^, ^
^^ ;j^ u(t =the continuous control. over the interval. from t o tot 9
yJ ^
rte ^ '
;' •.
t `^
^} - Na'Ge that ^3^e canstrain^s gi (x{^) ,u(^) } axe excluded from the prabZem. in ,
phis analytical, s^iady.
1 _;
}. 1
}: } ^,
^3
-^
i
i^ -...
^ .
Such that
^^ ^ ^.. 1 °
_.
Thee are. two princ^.pal artaly.t^:ca1 approaches tri so^.ve this: px'obZeta,.
^..I`
,.
^.l
^(^>pru,.t) _ ^ P,f(x,u,t) ^ + p^L(x,u,t.) (^.3-5)
;.
,: ;
where p .i:s ^-^own.. as the adjoint var^.abla, and p equals . 3; in :-this case, .
a
equation: (5.3'3),,.
o. o a. o
i
o
v - - .
-. ' :i -. -
- _.
a^ a^
..
.., o 0
rf ^ .
t -.
;:
:. r; 1:^
is
=f _
.^__ ..... ^:.^. _ __
s
1
F ^^
j`
3 i
I
Solution of equation {5.3-?) will yield a control v (x, aJ^ T (xo ,t o ) , t).
S a^
Zf this control does carry (x(t v ),to ) tv S, the target set, then the
i
control i.s optimal. Often the control law reduces to v (x), ^..e., a
v ^ ^^^
1 ax
_^
.
x — BHT (5.3-11.)
a
^g
^, such that {
Condition L^-^^
^' ^:::
t e
Y -:- _.i-rf
n ,-^. - -. .- ,. ^^ Asa+..-...^--_..'_^ .. ^.. ..
... -^ ., V .1..
^' ;.
I !- - ^f
.^
-
Ii : ^ . < p., Ax + . Su > + X ^ ^ A ^ ; x } + ^ :B . p ^ n >' ,'-E-.. ^. (5 .:3^-^3 ^
-
L
..% t ,.
,.^
where p,^, `and. ii are vectors. To'mnirdize (5.3^^?}, u must' lie at an
^^: extreme poi^tt of its control set, depending- on the' signs of {B^p} l ..and
-
f ^ .^
`t (B p }g i.e.,
'p - - -
1 i...
T r^
^f (^ ^) x _ ^ ^g p) ---
_
i ^ (I} u 1 max. u 2 max 2. ,
-
. ^ ^ (-^) ^,^ mi:n: u2 max ' 3.f (BTp } i = + (B^p } 2 - -
^ !
,. ^ msn ^ min
t ^.
tilrte optimal cont^al pro^sl.ems. It is now. certa^.n that the controls wi3:1
t ^ °._
ride the boundaries of the control se.t U.: The probxem lies in: determ^.n:-
^ ^ - '.- .
ing what control. is apg^,^,ed when,, and for haw long.. This leads:ane to a.
..
^ ^
4
.. . ' ' switching
.. point analysXS.
.... ^ ^- . - :. -
.
^ -
. - ;
^ -
^ . ^
,' .. ^gt^aton,
-.
(5.3--14) shojis that 3.f. the tra^^.ctory of p (the a^.j,oint
`.
_. system}
^ ^ is known:, then the sw^.tchings are known.:.. Thus..Pontryagin. del^res 3nt.o .an
r. .
' } analysis of the ad^oint system, 'employing various transforzrtatians: and
94
translat^.ons to obtain.
. .
^ Ci
,} ^ _;
^+7
,'F
f
^... - ^
,. ^
^.nformatiozf,.state space trajectories can be constructed. Since the
tio3p. in state space, and fallow the control sequence in ^xumerical order
(.asd repeating) for the specified time intervals, until the target is
reached. phis, naturally means that the first and last intervals may
in Fxo yes 5.3 through 5.6, each set of traj ectories has a point of
singularity, which is the equilibrium point of the system with the given
^'
control applied. Lath "x" mark shows a time interval of 0.1 second. As
`! the fa:gures show, there exists a single trajectory for each cantro'!
which will pass th^raugh the target. Let us start at the target, and
^. trajectory follows the trajectory due too control i to the target, then
. ^ the switching. In this way, figure 5.8 can be constructed. `there will
o^^cur at most two switchings in the optimal control law for the ar^:a of
^r
^f
'r
0
i
^ ^ y
..
j
1
U
N
t O
1
t ^_
i a
I ry 0.
x^
0
0
11!
X ^ ^ ^ ^ .
L o
a ^ ^
k
f
E
^ ii
;^
1.
kg
^fi
i
^;
^ o
'.
x•
t
U.liU ll. /U t]. Of? U.SIU 1.U(] 1^. SO t^„'I! 1.3^—j.ill]
x^
^^
50
(f
.:,
^^.
m
li
i'. ..
i 0
0
N ^^
x -^
0m
cy'
6
m
O
O
O^ e
`4
04
ill
X"'
O
p
0m
^:
C7
M1
a
I
^^
^ 4
-T--'-- r-- ----,r-- C?.90 1 QQ 1.10 1.213 1.3 q 1 .4G^
^. 6D 0. 70 U. Bfl
X
• Trajectory due
to Control ^
^.+E
. ^ - ^^
- ^
T1^GET
tt^
Trajectory due to ^.,.,,^ Tra^jecto'ry due to 1
X2 l Control ^ ^c^r ^. Control. 2 for I
ma:^im^n ti^ze maximum time }
^.nterval. interval }
f ^. - E ^ -
Tra^ectbry due
to Control. ^
Xi
^'IGi1RE 5.7. Model 2L2 ^ Opti.ms.Z Control Synthesis
_^
l.-^e
^-
S3
0
x
0
M
Control 3
. 40
^1
Irt
state space. Tltis is'shown iii Figure 5.9. Due to the relativel; short
time inters*al for which controls (2) and (4) are applied, they have a
^^.} would be applied for approximately 0.2 seconds, then control (2}
for 0.00149 seconds, and finally control (^} for apgroxi^nately 0.06
seconds. Control (2) could have been eliminated for all practical pur-
r tween the analytical study and the numerical results iahen consider^.ng
the amount of time necessary to reach the target, V{^:}. The control
laws, however, are not exactly the same. While the Dynamic Programming
results shozr controls (l) and (3) to be optimum in the same areas (for
the most part} as the analytical results, the boundary areas between the
there exist control la^+^s (in the Dynamic Programming results} which are
not theoretically optimal. But when these control, laws are applied,
p^
^.: they yield costs which are so close to the optimal cost float, in a
^...
f
I
^i
i
Q,90 A.9,2 0.94 0.95 Oe98 ^eQO 102 1.04 1.06 x•00 1.+!}
1,IC ^e ^ 4s5t} 0.50 D^5A 4.5D 4.50 4.54 D.5D 0,5D D^°5U Gr50 0.50 .d^ x.•10
0.70 4x70 0.74 0,70 0.70 Oe70 0.7U Us70 0.7t! 0.74 4 n 70
1e0^ to 0.54 0.54 0.50 0.5U 4.50 4.50 0.50 Ds5D D.50 a,54 0.50 # i.08
q ,70 0,70 4.70 0.70 0e70 0.70 -, D.70 D.70 0.70 0,70 0,70
3..06 ^c D.SD 0.84 0.5D D.50 0.50 '0,50 0,50 0.50 0.5C 4.50 0,50 ^ g.06
', 0,70 0.74 0.7D 4,74 D.70 4.70 0.70 0.70 0.74 D.70 0.70
71.O^F ^ 0.50 0.5D D,50 0,50 0.55 0.55 D,54 U,50 0.5D 4,50 0,50 .s E • A+}
a.70 0.74 0.70 0.70 U.70 t1.7a Oa70 0,7D 0.T0 0.70 - 0.70
5.02 ^k 0.50 D.50 U.SD 0.fi5 q.55 0.7U 4,50 4.50 0,54 q .50 0.50 ^ x.02
0.70 Or7D 0.70 0.70 4.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 O.7a 1,20
N^, x . q 0 * d,50 7 . 35 5„35 5.40 x . 4a x.UO 4,60 O.fi5 O.fiS 1 . ^FU x.4 0 * 1.dD
0,7'0 0,74 U,74 U.70 0.7a x.00 7.2G x.2U 3..20 ^.2U 3•,:20
4. •58 * x.40 x.^ D 1.40 x. 44 x. +^0 5.35 1,38 7..40 x. 4D x.^ 0 A.iFD ^ 0•`^8
1, •r_n x.za l,^u l.zo 5.24 x.ao 1.20 1.2 a 7.. 2 0 1.2a 1.2a
4.9b * 1,4 0 1.4 u x. 40 x. ^1U x. 40 1.4 a 5, 4 D x.^ca S.^a x. 4U x e^+D ^x ue^^
x,zo z,2u S,z4 x.zD x,?^ S.za x.2a 7..^a x.za x.xn a..aa
o.s^ ^ 7.4D x o44 x.^+a 7..4 0 1.44 x.^+a 1.4 0 1.4 0 1.^: D 1.44 x.4 a ^ o.g^
1.2D 1.20 1.20 1,20 1.20 x,20 x.20 ^, 1.20 ir20 1.20 x.20
O.S2 ^ 1.4U 31.4U la^4a 7..+kU x,+^a 1.4a 1.30 1.40 1.44 x.44 1,40 ^ fi,Y2
1.20 x.20 x,2a 1s20 x.20 Y.2a 1,2D 1.20 3..20 1.20 1.20
0,90 ^ i,4D 1,4a 1.44• 1.40 1,4a •1•.41 x,4D 1.40 1. ►^o I-.40 5.44 ^ Oe90
x.2D 3.•20 x.20 7.,20 x.20 7.. 2p x ► 20 x.20 1.2D ^ x.20 x.20
^,:, -
^n
^^.- ^ .n
f -
^ . ,, ..
^C
0,9fl Os92 0.94 p096 0098 1004 1s02 9•s04 1.05 1r08 1s 10
1r3.0 * Os^21'S fls2170 Os2124 0.2076 4ai!g24 401967 001902 001 ©27 Oo374 "s 0.164°5 0.1530 *^ 10?4
1.08 * 0s20$T 0s2034 0.3.578 0.1917 0s1.849 O 0 i77t 401678 0e1570 0s1jk43 0.1294• 0s117^k ^ 1.,0$ •
• 1 0 06 ^ Os1^46 0s1802 Os1E312 0.3.732 u'st637 0 0 152^k 0013Q9 O.i2^5 001027 Os p 922. Os0916 ^% 10g6
1a A4 * 0s179U Us1710 0.1618 U 0 1bU5 Os1.f57 4 0 1199 0.0989 0.0726 O.u59i Or07$1 0.0920 ^ a*.04
1 ;0r * Os16i4 0s1510 D01379 0.x213 O,i004 Oa0734 Os03Q5 0.0522 0 0 07^k3 0.0958 40i1^{0 * 1.02
Ids, 3.s GA :^ 011411 0s12b7 Os1fl7i 800 $ 22 000485 004 Os44a8 0 . 4[324 Os1073 001250 Os138'S * 1000
Us98 ^r 4s2-1^s9 4rU992 asi1794 U0U592.' Os447^F g 0 g T37 403U46 4.?212 Osi36'1 Q•a491 4.1591 ^ Us9$
0.96 ^ 0 0 1407 1100884 0.4797 fls4811 4;i0Q4 U,i202 0.1367 401540 0.1.E+06 4s1699 0 0 1773 ^ Os4r
Os9^k * 001g52^ 401041 As1i48 Oa1254 001402 0 0 9.531, p .163$ 0.7.729 0.1.805 0.1873 0s1935 rr U.9q
092 ^k 0.11~$1 Os13Fi7 (7.1484 9s19^}7 001G95 4si7$1 001$55 00192U 0 0 1978 UO2431 Os24$Zf' +ic flo`32
11090 ^ 0.160'.5 001695 0a178D 4 0 9.867 #]si924 0,1984 0s^0'..37 _ 4.2065 Oe213$ Os2174 0.2219 ^ 0a9Q
^ ^ ^ x^ ^* ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
t1v9A 0v9Z Q094 0.96 0098 1e40 7;vfl2 1s0^t 1.0€1 1,48 1,1p
,,,
rn
• ^.
.:^.,.....^.^:..^.^...,...J.,..^.._...^..._.,__.1...^.W ^^.^
.. .^_,^ ^^f ._.. _ _ __ _ _ ___
n ,;
^.
^,
;;
,.,
^a 57
3.
r:
;^
"' . f eren a 'bet een controls . ? and 3 is tar e ^aliera one would be
^; - ..
optimal and the other r^on aptxmal) , applicati.o.n of each at the part-i cu-
,^';
Iar state (in the v^.cini-^y of a boundary) ^riL'1 yield costs which. are
^^
^.^_^ together as they were for rlodel 2L2, and thus the different controls
r
- cause much different trajectari^s to occur. Recall that in Section 5.4,
t.
t ^^^ the close proximity of t^a'o s^:ngularities revealed that two^contrals Moth
^ had the. same ge^te^a^ effect on ttie stake trajectoxy, but one central •
^^
is
^' was altaays slightly better for a much larger area of the state space.
E
S The composite effect is shown iYl Figure 5.15. These results are
^, . ^.^
i
^ the four swain trajectories (wha:ch co^►pletely define the control regions)
s:
will allodr one to fit a curve ^o each. bounciaxy..^-. Tn -:this -way:, the
- ,.
cantra^ is app^.ied accardisig to the xeg^.on of state space, cantinuo^lsly
€' ^ '
..^
^^
_ _
,,
i
^_ ^ s 5a
F.
of
+;
f
[4
x
^,
^^
, o
'o
c^
... o
N
ID
- 6
N
M1 Y
i
_'
^.
,.^
. ,,
:; ;,
^i .,_^ __ -- -..._...... o
{' ^ !
',, ^
va
N
.^
i
a
'^=-M.
62
^ AGE ^3
,^^^^ ^ au^^^^
^,
,r: .
1^I^
^1s90 De92 tI.9+3 0.46 0.98 8x00 1,42 8.04 ]L•05 1.08 2.10
+s1D ^k 1•^ 0 Is^F4 1s40 1 sL1'17 ? •40 1 s 30 0.70 Or 54 0•a0 O s $0 O s 5G rit 1,rQ
0.70 0.79 4.70 4.70 I1.74 0.70 Os7l"+ a.74 0.74 Os70 0.74
1x021 * 2s40 1.40 1n^F0 ls^i4 2•x}4 1•lU 0.50 U•50 - 0.50 4.5U 0.50 * 3.•4$
0,70 Oa7U IS•74 Us7U U•74 Os70 U•7U U•70 4x70 4r7U 0.7U
^.s4f^ * 1x40 1x 44 1 x4 0 1 siF 0 As 40 1•I4 U•50 0'50 Os 50 OrSU D•54 * 3.sOfa
0,74 U97U Uo70 Us7U U•70 ^ Os74 4s70 Us7U Uo70 Os7U 0,70
1r04 ^K 1sRF0 1.4U 3r.s40 Z.•.4U 7.•44 1,f15 Uo54 Os54 U454 U•54 U.50 * 3 ► 04
' 0,,70 Os70 U•70 Us7U Us70 0 ► 70 4`70 0.74 Q•%0 0070 4s70
1s0 `^ ^ z,40 1•+^U %•44 1.40 1x40 ? 0 0a 1],50 4,a0 Os5U OsSD 0.50 # 7.x02
0,70 Os74 Os74 4e70 4s7D 0.70 Us74 0.70 0.70 O,iO 0.70
N^ l o OD ^• 1.40 Ae44 1.44 101F0 1.40 1.00 0.50 Os50 0.50 0.50 4x54 +K 2sOD
1x 2 0 3.20 1s14 1.013 4x90 3.00 1.20 1x20 1x20 1x15 Is20
Do98 * 3.4Q ]..E}0 1.40 Ss$0 1.40 3*#0 1x35 1x34 4x50 4050 Os50 # 0.98
1e24 1.20 1.24 1x20 1.24 1.20 7..20 1.20 1.20 1s2U 1020
Ds9^ * Ys90 1s40 1.40 Ss4U 1•x}0 1x30 I.30 1x35 ls'-SU Ov'3U 0.50 ^ 41x96
I,24 1.20 102A 1.2U 1x20 1se'0 f•2D 1s2U 1s2U 71,,20 1.20
Ds9^f' # 7.•40 1.40 1x40 1.40 1x40 1.30 1,30 1x35 1.35 1e30 0.50 * q.91^
3sZ0 1n20 1.20 1.24 1r70 1,2U 1sZ0 Is24 1a20 1x20 1s20
41 ' 9?. ^ 1x44 a.rr3D 1,40 3.4U 1.40 1035 1035 1040 1.4U 1s4U 1.25 * t1s98
1x24 3.s 20 1x24 1x20 1.20 1x2`3_ 1020 1020 1s2U Is2U IO20
Ds9b * 1s t F0 1.44 1.44 1r^FD 3e^F0 7.040 1stF4 7..40 1x44 1.40 1.40 * Qe3C
1.20 1e24 1x24 : ls2D Is24 Zs20 I.20 1.20 .y.. 20 ko?. 4 1,20
' : 4x30 G•92 Gs9^? D^96 41.9$ 3,.40 1.42 a.s04 2x05 2.4D I.IQ
rn
w
l
^^: .., _^ _ ., ,a^+.^.:u:3,^,a..:...^x ^ ._,..^ - s,a...^.^=-_- , ^ u^,,.aad
^,::
i ^C
i i
F's
. c1
^-
! need to be considered. ^^
t
The Dynamic Programming results for T`[adel 1L2, unconstrained, are ,_
shoran in Figure 5. J.G. Again, while there is excel lent agreement otx V (x)
bettaeen tlne analytical and the numerical results, the optimal control
Section 5. 4.
jectory would easily reveal wlxen tlxe control was riding a state consiraxnt.
liigure 5.15. Note that each of the constraints has an effect on the
I , optimal feedbacic control J.atti^ for some area of state space. In fact,
^.
there is only a small region of state space tahere the constraints do not
affect the solution. The main impact of these constraints is tlxat the
control set U becomes, the smoother the control law tti^ill be.
.. .
:...:. _ .: _ . .5
^..;^• . . W. _
_. ,
^^
D.9D {'1v9^2 0.9t}, 4.96 R.35 -1.00 .1.02 1.4# 1•D6 1.48 1,14 .
* * ^ * # ^ ^ * m xr
1s10 :^ D o 64 Ds6'.S 0.50 Oe55 ^ 4,fan 0•^5 4.50 4varD n,50 Dr54 Ov50 * 1s10
0.95 4.95 0.94 4.90 4.90 0.90 ,•^. U,85 0•H5 0.85 ." Ov85 ny80
1.OQ ^ D•65 D.70 .•0.55 0.6D 0.65 0,70 Da55 0.8D D•5D 0.54 0a50 i# 1•.4$
4,95 Ds^S n.90 ^ 0.90 n.90 0.90 4aAb ns85 Do$5 n.85. 4 .sn
1 4 06 ^ 7.,15 O.aO 4.55 0.65 D.70 0.50 0.60 0,65 4.54 4ai'iD .. 0.54 * 1,06
1x45 Oe90 0.50 Oo90 4.94 4v0rJ U,05• D a85 0.85 4v80. 4 o0Q
1eDr} ^ ^ 0vfi4 D•70 0.75 Oo80 0•G^ 0.5D ^ Ov9D 0.5n 0,5n * l., nt}
^.US ^^ © ^ U.9D 4.90 4 . 94 Oo90 t3e85 0 v8'J- 0v&4 9.80 Or^iO
1a42 1.15 1s10 ts15 0.75 DeBD 4v85 4.50 ^ D•54 D•5D, D.5D 4v.50 ^ 1r D2
1,45 1000 1 •nn 0.90 9.94 4.94 4^•a5 4.8D• 1.10 1.Z4 1.2D
loD p :x• 1.16 1•;:6 ^ 7.•ZO 1a2D ^-25 1aDf1 0.5D 0a5U 4o5U 0y50' 0a.54 ^ ^. r.D 0
2v U 5 2rU4 1•UD .1•D0 I;pO 1oD0 1., 2D 1020 1.20 162D 1.20
• Da90 ^ z .15 •• 1.7.5 1o2R x.015 1,3.5 1.15 ^ t.15 .1.15 a;zn - ^ 0,65 - n .SD * 0..:'S
I0 D5 1.10 1vD5 1v^0 1.20 i ► 20 1.?D 1,^n 7.v2D 7i.s^U 1^2U
Os46 la^r.8 1.14 ~ . 1 a 15 ^ 1.15 1.15 1.2D 1.2D 1o2D ^ 1e23 1.3 0 ^ 1,30 #• Oa96
1•n5 •• 1,20 .i^.15 102U .. 1•ZD 1.20 1.24 1;2D 1.20 1•ZD 10.24
O s 9^3 ^!s 1,1b 1,10 1s25 1,15 ^ 1v1^a 1,24 1.211 Io25 1.2a 1.30 2.30 # 4v94
1.15 1«24 ".lal$ 1•ZO 7:•24 1.24 1.24 1x24 7.02D 8020 .1•.24
40}2 ^ 1v10 1.1D .101!] 1:1'-5 1,7.8 1.7.5 1.2Q 1.24 1a2'•i 1.25 I.25 •^ 0.`12.
1,15 1.24 ,3.•20 .7.•24 1,2D 1.2D 7..20 .1.20 1.24 1v2D 1.20
0.30 sx 1v1D 10D5 ^ .^05 1e7.D 1014 1.10 1015 1.15 1.24 7..20 :L.,20 *. 0 ' ^ 4
1.10 1.20 ^.:-4 1v^2R 1a20 1•Zn 1084 1.24 2.20 1.20 1v20
i],90 C,9,2 4r9^• Or96 n.s$ x044 1.02 7.v4f} 1005 7,00$ , l •7. p
ca
rn
.. . ,^ " _,. `. _
,.
^..: , .
f-
-1
Ne
4,90 0.92 Ds94 0.96 0,98 .3.40 3,42 1,04' 1^Dfi •. 3.08 .3,10
* ^ * * ^ xc ^: # ^ # x^
1 3 10 # Os4z19 Os40iCs. Oe3519 4.3750 0.3567 0.33SD 0.3107 Ds281a^. 0,247'4 4,2095 Ds172$ # 1,1D
1.08 # O.k045 9,3685 Os3706 8,3513 0,3296 0,3D37 Ds27'19 .0,2345 D,1909 0.1443 0,13$4 * 1, D8 '
1sOfi # 0s2^8',51 Oe3567 0.3463 0.3235 0,2964 0.2b28 Ds2215 Dr1712. 0,1212 0,1899 ^ 0x1471 * 1,06
1^D4 ^ 0.3E3^. 0s34^7 0.3178 4.285'5 x.2543 x,208° 0.150a 0,4919 0.1022 0,1374 U.i't03 * 1,44
3..42 # 4 . 3391=' 0.3226 0,2$31 ^ 0,2^bh5 Or1 '3$5 4,1316 O.D564 0 , 0860 0x1288 4s1641. Os1936 # 1, OZ
^F 1s00 ^k 0.31'S3 0.2759 4.2^F02 O.i897 U.12.8fJ U,4 0.0735 4.1232 4v1GU3 0.3.944 U.2159 * 1^UU
0,98 * 0.2882 4,8490'-0.2017 0.1435 O.D843 Q,0$99 0*1392. 0.169+} Os1969 4,21yg D.,2',5gg # Us98
D,96 # 4e2G48 0,2225 Os1T4$ Os1309 4+11.52 0,1481 R.Y79li,:. Os2053 D.286$ 0 , 2454 D.2623 ^ 0, 9b
0.54 * Os8453 0.2050 411681 O,1^D(3 Qo16^+?1 Os1945 4s2142, D ► 2341 D.25?.6 0,2673 Os281b # U,9^¢
Ds98 ^ 0.2'.528 Vr2004 4s1808 Oel$33 0,2025 Os2237 0.2420 _ Qs2582 0.272° 4.2x64 Ds29El9 ^ 0,`32
4x`30 ^ Ds2315 O,CD`39 0x2454 4.2313 Os^338 (!.2505 0,?&54 0x2790 Da251b Os30'Sk 0x3144 # Ds9R
0,90 0.92 0.94 8.96 Qs98 1. U0 1,02 2s0W a..0fi 1sD8 2x7.4 '
a ^.^_ .. ^_ --^- -^ -- _. ; .
... ,.
.._- -
^^:^..-.._...
r
^']
O^
{?
^:
.^
't`
!.
'^ ^j
}
^_
4
:-:^
{
I
Lf^
+-y
3 ^^
i
6
'^
r::a
9
aj
:\(i
"+^
1
L a
1
,— a
,: 3
RAZN1'S
^^
^; ^ ^ ^ ^
^ F
Y
^^^ ^ -. _;
X77
f g
1 ^ '
}, ^ -
f` ^,,,,,,o_,,,,,..,..--""ter
k ^ ^ 3
o^^,...
_ ^/7
`fMA
^"
g
g9
^^^
J
JJ `^. 8S Q. 91 q. ^7 1 . t13 1 . C19 1 . 1 ^ ,,^
;. ^C ^"^
^a '^
FZGURF 5.18. effects of Constraints on hfodel ^.L2 O^^t,s^na1 Control. T,s1k=
M . .. _.
f'V
^:
^.
J
b9
^^^^ ^ ^
E
S.7 1`iodel 2 Unconstrai ned
__
:^
^. After sufficiently analyzing the linear models, it now remains to
'_ ` study the nonlinear r[odel 2. No attempt will be made here at a non-
^^
!' linear system analysis, which would be mare complicated than the linear
more complicated,
variables, and the number of operations required for each paint in state
^'^
1i .
require a prohibitive amount of c.p.u. time, and is automatically ruled
^^= ^ out. A method must nar^r be found to reduce the order of the system,
i
preferably to second order. Ideally, one desires to set the derivatives
^}
^' of the unwanted state variables to zero, just as was done in SecL-ions 2.3
,:.
and 2.4 with tha linear models. However, it i.s impossible to obtain a
;•' closed form solution for all the intermediate variables, with state
4, s.alutions.
^' ^°
^ If equations 1 through 25 of Table 2.G are to be solved {whi.ch is
,..
necessary to evaluate the state derivatives), then values for P^, U^ anti
'. a determination of x{t + fit} for a given ac and a given u. The first
,,
attempt, then, was to supply an initial. guess for the eliminated states
{P^, U4 , and P 7 ), holding 3v^, i^r , and the controls fixed, and iterate
^. `
^t
-;
----.--
f' j.,
>_€ ^ 0 r
7
3
I. sA
^. b
'
's .
until asteady--state solution raas reached.
^ ^ This method failed. for several reasons.. if one undergoes this
!_:
;'
iteration process tar each state and each control on every successive
and each control after the first approximation (e1.^.^ninatiug. the need-`ta -:`.:
it + -1
^ iterate on subsequent app:roxim^.tivns) a prohibitx•vely 'nigh amount of ^^
;•:
_ memory is required,. Furthermore, if an iztiti:al guess for , the e1.^.mxna:ted "^
^^
s ^ ' states i..s not close to the actual steady--state solution, ^.nstabiZii:ies
will actor and the system blows up. All of which requires us to look
^b ^ `
which is basically the Bynamic Pragramt^ting method as outlined ^.n Figure ^.:.
4.2, along tti*zth the constants used in Model^2 per Table 2,3; (2) the
^``
^, ..
.' static relations a.f rSodel 2 per Table 2..6; (3) the dynamic relations of
_ ^,-
4 ^:.
i^..
^ ;.
,.
:;
-- -: „- _ ,.
.^^...^...M..,.^.:...^.^....:...:.^...^, ^:.^
NG
^c 1r3D 0.50 0.50 0.50 4.50 ^q50 4x50 ,0.54 0,50 ^. 0 * 54 ^ ^ D,SD ^ 1r7:0
7.e1G - 1, q 0 1.00 1,D0
1., D0 _ 3.1V 7.•04 1.00 1.00 .;.90 1.00 1,Ot3
1. q8 * 1r10 Or50 0.50- 0.54 Oe5 q 0.50 0.50 0.50 ^ Or54 4.50 0.50 ^k •1e08
1rU4 1•D4 i•00 1.40 3..04 1.00 ^ 1,00 1.OD 1.00 3.90 0,°4 .
' 1.40 0,50.;. 0.50 0.50 Og50 Or54 O,SO 0.5D ' . Oe50 4s54 O.SO * ^1r0$
1r9£s ^ 3..00 .1.00 1.00 0,9D OgBD
1.00 l .aD • , 1•oD 1.4V 7.•00 3,.00
1.^F4 1.40 1.^}0 ^ 7:440 1.+40 1.^^J '.°..^+0 1,;F0 1'.4D 1,3D ^ ^q.98
Or°8 ^R 9..^t0
0,90 Or94 1•DO 1.20 ^ 1.20 0.70 Dr7D 4c70 0.70 4070 0.70
0,96 ^ 1r44 "da4rQ 1rGF0 1.40 1•++4 1.40 ^ 1.40 .1.40 ^ lr r+`J 1,40 1.30 ^ p.96
1.00 1a 20 1.20 1.2V 2.20 D•70 +;•70 Ur70 0,70 0.70 0,7U
D.°:; ^c. 1.40 1..x.4 ;.i^0 1 . 40 -.].,44 x.+FO 7.•^+D^ 1.^i0 1.4D 1. ►+0 1.x30 ^k 0.`^^F
1,24 1r2D 1x20 7,.24 1.20 1.24 0^7D D•70 Or70 - 0.74 0.70 ,
4ry2 4 1•;}0 1,e40 1.40 ' 1s44 1.40 ' . 1.4 q ^ 1•^+D ^ 1r ++D 1.40 3..I+V 1g3D •M^ •4t92
1,14 3..20 1.20 1r2U - 1.20 1r2D .1x20 1r20 V•70 ge7U 0.70
* 1,40 1r40 x•40 1.44 .,1.40 1x40 .1.40 .. 1.40 .1.40. 1.•40 i•20 * 4.90 _
Og94 1.20 0.70 0.70 0 ► 7D
1.20 1r20 1.24 3.24 1.20 .lr"^0 ^ 1020
• Or 90 O•`32 0.9^r Or`3E► . ^ 0.98 1r4^0 3x02- 1.Ot} Zr06 1r08 7.r 10
ti
Ev
NC
a.9a De92 0,94 0.95 0.98 n.00 1.02 .1.04 x.n^ 1.08 lain
^ r ^ •, ^ ^
^% ^
1.10 ^ Q.2420 8.2332 0.22116 0.2160 x•2974 a. 19as ^0.1 a95 O.i79S 0.1685 0,1559 0.1416 ^ 1.3,n
0.214$ 0.2052 0.19x6 ^ 0.1859 0.1755 0.1642 0.151.5 D.1366 0.1193 ^• 0.1n56 ^ 1.45
1,x6 * 0.20x4 0„194G 0.1839 9.1463 •
0.1'730 ^ Oa1B?3 0.133 q ^ 0.115£, O.OJ45 D.0$32 O.DB02 * 1.06
1.4^} * 0.1841 a.17^a °n.iana 4.1471 0.1322 0.13,4 1 {• Ov0929 O.n670 D.o62a
1.0+2 ^ 0.7.611 0.1475 x.133,1 O.i1b2 n.a9511 nr06$9 n.a363 4.0444 v.a^na.. 0.{1772 0.0920 *- 1.n^u
NF 1.00 * o.135v p .i196 o.loas 0.0769 O.at}53 n.0 0:0303 4.0629 Os0a33 0.0997 x.1120 ^ 1..04
0.x:3 ^ o.lvati U.4923 0.0734 0.0533 0.039s n,057z n.o7a2 O.n95u D.108'1 0.1206 0.13Sf3 ^ Q.98
x.96 * 0.0935 a.vao7 o.47n^ O,n679 0.0812 0x0960 ..0.3,092 n ► 12a5 0.1303 0.13$9 0,1.471 ^ 0.96
0.54 * 0.0451 n. 0912 O .n934 a.1a37 a, 11^16 0,1247 0,3.336 0.1416 0.1487 0.1553 0.1625 * U.91i
0.92 .#- 0.1131 0.1168 4.1246 0.1327 4.11}03 0.1473 4.1536 0.155+} 0 ^.16^-t3 0.171.►2 0.1757 ^ 4,92
0•`10 ^ •0.1383 0.14^4a 0.1500 0.1556: 0.1609 n.1G5$ 0.1704 x.1748 0,1792 0.182f^3 a.19a5 ^ Sf.90
* rt ^ ^ #
• '^
0p90 0.90 a n g4 Or96 0.99 -1.4 ►i
1rD0 1.02 1.06 1.08 ls1,u
• ^
,. ,^i.
^ :. --^.^, _....,Y`.._^...:,__:......._.n.,. ^ , .^,.._- L.L. _:...,^^. _.^^_.^.^ .^.-_._-^___.^w .__. ,_,e^^.._... _w___.._..a...-,^ ^____. .._.__.^,^^.,^^...;^a,...^^.._..^__.^.^...,..,.,W - ^..f,
u
i
^
7 3 ^`
^, ;
^I s
Model.-2 per Table 2.5, Manus the eliminated state variables; and (4} ^.:
^-
equations for determination of P^, P 7 and U^,. per equations {5,7--I},
(5.7- 2} and (5.7-•3}. Note that subroutines ^SLaTd and riUD1;L2 utilize the
unnormalized systems while the main program and FAST utilize the
normalized system. Thus conversions from one system to the other are
xt is also important to note ghat, even thaugh c.g.u. time has been
^ 2. Dynamic programming Solution fox i^iodel 2 than for the linear naadels.
' •For this reason, it is important to use as much c.p.u. time as possible
• per jab run, but stall leaving enough time to insure that the results are
i
stored an disk before the allotted program time limit is exceeded. The
program itself insures that the results are safely stored, by measuring
how riuch c.p.u. time is reciuired for the first successive approximation,
and then using that infarmation to decide when to write the results on
- .I '
d3.slt.
{{ The first results presented in Figure 5.1.9 axe for Model 2, uncon--
strained, and are normalized values. The control law is similar to the
^^ solution fo g' Aiadel 2L2, unconstrained, but the cost is lass than the
= Model 2L2 cost for most points in state space. Zt is somewhat surprising
a
that nozzle area does not rode the limits of U at several states.
.^
^3
5. $ l^iadel 2 Constrained
^^^ ^ ^'iguxe 5.2(3 shotas the Dynamic 'Pragxanuning results far kiadel 2 faith
_
a' the constraint limits as specified in equations {3.3--8),(3.3-•9), and
(3.3--10), and using equations 23, 24, and 25 of Table 2.b. T^ Thi1e the
i.
:' cantraJ: can actually only ride one canstr'aint at a time,..there is a
^: k large area of state space where bath T^ and Z c axe very near their
1 `.
^^ _ ^.
..... ^ .,....
. ^. ^ ., .-._ .. ......, .^......^.. _.,_. ... ..._...r"._.--..,.. ,._ _ _ T. _. . ^ .-
c:._^_ _ _.. .. _ _
:T ^_._ ^.
7. -- _ ___.__ _. _ ^.
r..^ F
_. _. _.. ^. .. .. . .._. .,, .. .. _... _.
NC
` - 4o9a Oa98 0.94 0.9b 4,9A 1•DO 1,02 1,04 l,aE• 7.•D$ 1•ta -
^ * * * # * ^
X,18 +ic 4.5D 0.50 4.5D 0.50 a•54 D•50 0,5a 0 n 50 ae54 4.50 a•50 * 1•la
5•Za 1,^0 7..15 1•x"3 1.15 Sel•5 ,^ .3.,55 Zr15 1•SG lala 1.10
'^,
^^ 1r48 * 4'.'JD 4.50 U•5D D•50 U•54 .. 0•a4 U•'3D U ► 5a a•5U U•5U U•5a * Z,D6
z 1'.15 1,15 1,15 1,15 x.10 1,I0 l.la 1.1D 1.10 1•l a 1.05
`: 1.4f ^ Q.50 a•50 4.5R 0.5a 0•aD pe50 •0,5n q •50 0.50 D,5D 4.54 * 1s{t6
I,14 5•Sa 1•la 1.1D 1.14 I,14 i,a5 1,05 1x05 1.05 1.05
# 1.0$ ^ 4,50 0.54 ^ a,aD 0.50 0,50 0.50 0.5U 0.50 arrs0 0.5U 0.50 ^ 1•D^i,.
^I 1•la 1.24 1.05 1•U5 1.05 1.05 1,D5 5.45 1 .05 1.4D 1.Oa
1x02 ^k 1,UB 1•D5 4.54 R•5a 0.5D 0.55 0.50 D•54 a•50 a.l30 0•"^5 ^x 1,02
1•a0 3.a0 lra5 Sr05 S^aS 1•a5 ^ 3.•40 1.00 1.OR a•95 0.95
y N 1•DD ^^ 1,U5 5.45 ^ 3•SU 5•lU 1.14 SsUD 4,T0 U•75 U•9U 1•lU 1.2U M^^ 3,00
F 1.15 5.15 CI.95 7..Ua S,DS S.GO 5,20 5.2D 4.90 0.9D a•90' .
E'
0.98 ^ 1•a5 1.05 1. D5 1.50 1.1D 1.. D5 ^,1,SD 1.15 1,25 3.,15 1.2D * 0.9s
5.05 x•Sa 1.15 U•95 1•a5 1.20 7..3.0 ar95 U.$5 U•85 U,$5
0,96 ^R 1.05 1.05 1•D5 1•U5 1•a5 1.10 1^Sa 1.10 1 ► 15 1.25 1.1'a * 4.9G
r,E U•95 1.00 1.Oa 5.10 1.20 3.•Da 1,U5 1.05 O.B5 0.95 1.00
^;^ U,9^b ^ 1.0a 1.OS 1.05 1.05 1,05 1•la 1'10., 5.10 1,15 1.15 1.15 * 0.94
1.50 a•9a a•95 f•a5 1•a5 0.85 4.95 1.00 0•BD 0•$0 0,55
0.9s'' ak 1•UD 1.OU 1,05 1•U5 1•a5 1•U5 •^ 3.14 1.10 1.10 SoIU 1.1'3 * U•92
1,0a 1.05 0.85 0.90 3.00 1,00 U•85 ^ 4.90 a•93 D•95 a•ua
as90 5c 3,•00 3.OD 1.04 1.Oa X.05 1.05 .. 1,D5 1,7.0 1,14 1x1,0 1.10 * a,9a
0.9a a.95 1.00 3.00 0,90 0.95 -0„95 Da84 a•$5 a.90 U•30
8 xR rk ^ ^ , +R ^% # # %^ rk
^ Q,90 0.92 a•9^4 0.96 a•98 1•Qa loa2. I..gr3^ 1,06 1.08 1,1•.0
.^-
i;
,. ,:
..:..
^ • ,'
,^.. ^..^.... _.^.^. M,. r ^..^ .....,. .-.
^^^ -
^
_ ^^ ^,
^.
^ ^ ^ ^ ^
f
', a
,.
:! .
.^C.
f.
^..
i _
r
a,^a a,9^ o.a^ a,^^ D.98 1,Ot7 .1. 02- 1vf1^8 l .os 1. D8 I:,Sa
' . - - * ^ * ?k :k ^ ^
1'.10 w 0.2677^.O.Z6U5 Q.2526 Os$^4^4 Oa2$55 0.22G1. - O..zJL57, q .2045 ' 0.191.5 0 ,.176 9 0,16p5 ' ^ .1',10
^.r0$ ^ 0.2509 D.2428 0.c'^'S5 OQ223$ 0c2129 0,2012. 0.1081 0417'3 0.x559 0 v 1361. 0,1223 * x.09
t
lv0b xe q .232^ 442227 0..2120 0 * ZOUt! ..1866 D,1715. 101.535 0.X330 0,10819 Os0993 0,101E ^ 1.06
f i
0.3.722 1.04 * 4.2123 U,20U6 0*1873 0s154B 9.1341 0.1484 .,0785 0,0776 . 0.4$94 0.146} * 1,04
IsfJ2 * 0,1$95 0.1753 0.1.583 0,13$5 0.a1µ5 0,4$6 ^ 0.0453 ..0609 0,406^F 0.1093 0,1275 ^ 1vD2
^^ 1400 * 4.I65U D,1455 Qr1227 0.0960 D.0585 D40
^ 4.955D 0.0921 0.1183 0.137$ x.1509 ^ 3.400
4,9b ^ Q 4 18i9 x.1613 4.1172 x.0947 .0,0869 4x11+46
O.i395 0.1.35'.,1 0.1509 0.7.636 a.17a^ * v.s$
^,
0 r 0.96 ^ a:2133
.1580 D.^93B 44i7ka ^ 0.1470 0,1452.' Oex5$6 .0.1705 0,1742 6.1$74 x,193$ * .496
^ ,.^ 0,94 ^ Or2462 x,22$6 0.2121 O.i976 0.19x4 041487 041^942^ .0+2040 0,2040 O.;^U90 v,2z2^ * u,94
a'.' 0+192 * 0.2783 gsE617 n.z^7u 4 n 2;i +F9 x.2262 0.223E 0.2z40^. ,. 0,2261. Qv2271 o,^zz^a 0,,2310 ^ u,9 2
f1..90 ^ vs3485 Rr2929 0.27$9 D.2fa75 0.2571 vr25,^5 0.250$..;; Or249^4• ^ Ov^485 0.2490. 0,2}97. +k 4.90
^ ^ • ^.
m i^. q 0
.9 0.92 0 r 9^• 6 .498 1.00 1.02- 1.04 2.06: 7..08 1.7s©
f^
^.
G^
t;
': 'y
'_
'^
j
,: l
-^
r
c
^,
7T
i
^^
respective l^.m^.ts, and-thus they both are shown as azf pcting the ^,
solution in Figure 5.21. ^^ oily the constraint closest to its limit `^-^
a.s unrealistic tti show these smaller reg^.ons, since the sarne^ahat coarse ^.,
^'
c^onstraa.nt the controls are xising. The result i.s an almost random ^^` ,'j
1 .^
choice as to which constraint (Z c or T^) that the controls ride (in the
-_^;
T^ 2 c reg^.on.). Note also that. tie constxaints affect the solutio^t .u ►^ch ^,
of c.p.u. time, using a 225-point state space search, and a 209-point !;,^^
!_
,._:
!:
^_
P'
^i
},
;;.
t
^^
^
;3^^
} -
^
;''
^^-.
:}^ '^'
^` .
., L • ^
^!$-
^^.
' C1iAPTlaR VJ
CONTROLL^P. 5I1+NLA7'1.ON5
^•^- Jntroductian
1. Na^ry that feedback control Jaws have been abtai.ned for several.
scheme to decide cohere the txajectvey lies in state space, and is accom-
o i
pushed using the soma scheme as employed in the Dynamic Programming. '^
^ to a compromise. '
,^ ar the other, and not sametliir^g in--between. In this case, the interpola-- `' ^
1
tion scheme could be overridden by an analytical test, similar to that
^.
which was mentioned in Secrian 5.5. Such considerations have not been ;.^
^^
implemented in this study. ^
_
The addition of constraints, and their resultant "smoothinu" effect
_ ^^
^„ on the original "bang--bang" control law, will reduce the number of abrupt
_^_
f $.
-,--^-
. ... .. .
F
-. y4
^ 4
^' ^ 1
- LL
r
r
There is another very fundamereta-1 Consideration ^r^r .the controller
E
simulations. idhile the optimal. control laFi at some axhitrar}r state
^- '.
(^cl, x^) is quite possibly the same, or nearly the same as that for
,
^..
state (xl -i- c, x^ + d}, (s, S .small.} , this is not at all. true near the
^ ^^ single point in state space tiahich defir_es the target. The state
i
^'f
In reality, we will consider the target to be sama small. region,
i
1 not an inxxnitesimally small point. As far as the simulations are con-
^
-
cerned, this small target region has already been detersuined by the
This will cause the states to be slowly eased towards the target, which
comgarison.
to the high-thrust target state in nu^ixmum time, the nature of ah. optimal
that it is more concerned with state space and the time domain, As such,
^^
^^ so
'^ terns. It is assumed here that satisfactory output responses are `'
,^
obtained when the system constraints are not violated.
often would involve specif ication of an extremely low 1^PB, and is easily
. i higher WF'B, aNd results in convergence problems once the transient simu-
lotion has begun. The success or. failure of the simulation to converge
'^ is used in the simulations, the feeling bQing that 3otaer initial condi-
i
^ _ _^.^._._,..,...^...._.,.T, - . - _ .- .___ ^__ _ _..,,...^. _.
r
{
^,:
sl
^:
G.Z Pfodel 2 Simulation Utilizing Mode, 2L2 (Unconstrained} Control Law
^,
The Model 2 controllers are implemented using the program shown in
^.
the Appendix. Figures G.l through G,4 show the results of a simulation
k• ti 7. _ ,', utilizing the Model 2L2 (unconstrained} control law, which was presented
^.
i in Section 5.^. The starting state chosen corresponds to a thrust q f
i,
f
approximately $Qf of design thrust. The effects of interpolation on
the control law axe readily seen in Figure G.l, showing the inputs ver-
sus time. After 0.08 seconds, the controls are slowly eased towards
fan speed (Ids,), certainly not a desirable response for a jet engine.
zn Figure G.3, Turbine inlet tem p erature (T^) has skyrocketed to 5501%
of its design value in only D.02 seconds, and the surge margins have
^" ^ previous chapter. The time it tastes to reach the target is also in
Saction 6.2, and with remarkably close resu^.ts. The control laws axe
slightly different, but the resulting state and constraint variable '
.. .. ... ..^.._ .. ^.. ... _. . ^._m .... ;.
c
^-,
r_
Q
^"'^
^C
^^
C
C
C
00
ro
-1 ...- < -- s r - v 4
^.
Q
^--^
^
fV!Y
f^
r^^
V J^
C
Q
C
TIME
FIGURE 6.2. P4odp1 2 Simul.a.tion Utilizing Mode3. 2L2 (Unconstrained) Control. Law; ,
lax (O,uantization) _ .02
,.
^ ....... . _ .....
^ z..._. - ,. ,_, .___ _ ..., . __ .__. _ , __ _ _. T._^....^ _. _._ ..._ ^.
c
^r
.:.::
,. :..
,,.,
c
U7 ^
^^
.,—;
^i
^-..
c
^c
^n
U
c
c
-c
c
^. eg o o, as a. ^ a a. is a. ^a a. ^s a. 3a ^. ^a a.^^
T^MF
FIGCIR^ 6.3. Mode. 2 53.mula^ion Uti^.a.zing ?^ode7. 2L2 (Unconstx^a7 ned) Control. Law;
Qx (Ruantization) = .02
a^
:+^.
{ 3^
i
. ^
^,
n^
^
(
1 ^
i; . C7]
m
.
^ ^
,i
^- w„
^f
^.
3.. ^:
a
i'
r^
^ ^-y ^
v/
Z =
F^
{^
F^G^ b,5. Mc^r^e^. 2 Simul,a^ion U^^.].izing Tdode3. 2 (Uncons-^rained) Con^ xoJ. ^,ara;
00
cr
t
T^
^4rnw - .^..^ ...,., _.......^.... .,,.....^..,.s^....w.^._ .m..,^^......_ _ ..._ .... _ x ..... _..._. _, .._ _.. ._^,..,..
r _, .. _ _.. _._ _..
j:
O
.--^
^f
. ^
L r,:
C
t:.
^'---' Et
U?^
C
C
Q
C
^. an a. a^ a. is o. is a. zo a. ^^ a. ^a a. ^s a. ^a
TAME
FZGUR^ 6.6, Model 2 Simulation Utilizing Model 2 (Unconstrained) Control Law;
ax (^uantizatzon) ^ .Q2
o,
i
... ,..
,.:. _. .: _
^• k.
^-
1 ^ ..
U. 35 a.^a
TIME
^'TGUR^ ^,7. Model 2 Sa:mulation Uti^.izin^ Model 2 (Unconstra^.ned) Control. ^a^r;
^x {Quantization} = .D2
^. _ ^
oa
,.. , .
^~ . 8g
^.
;i
,.
^^
^:
^T.
1 _..
,` (; ^
;l
i --^
-^4^
.^
I^ -
- ^
^f
m
az
c^
4-
^ ^' ,
^1
r
r^^
W
^Y^
}+^
^^ W
'1.
L;J
A.Z
i.
is ^
^^ ^
- r
^^
a;
^ G a
F'' I
^,. f
9^
Model, 2L2 central law. This is certainly striking evidence that Model 2
'smoothed out, and Figure 6_10 shows that the state-time trajectozies
proceed to the target much slower and less abruptly, than was the case .
is riding both the turbine temperature and compressor surge margin con-
straints from the time ^ 0.02 seconds to time = 0.16 seconds. This
agrees with, the constraint analysis as shown in Figure 5.23. of the pre-
this simulation. This i.s not entirely unexpected, wht^n ^^onsidering the
rather important fact that the effects of three state variables are not
^-
seen i.n these results. Recall that the optimal control law was derived
^^
^. (see Section 5.7),out of necessity, by employing linear approximations
for states (3), {1^}, and {5) of hfodel 2 {see Table 2.5). The simulation
.S7
!^^
^^ of the controller as presented in this section uses no such appraxima--
^^^ !
^.,
^::
C
n
.-
C
O
C
U3
}---
^C
^C
C
e
n
c
^.^. as a. a^ a. ^ Q a. 15 0. ^ 0 0. ^5 a, 3Q 0.35 ^. 43
^^M^
i F'TGURE 6.9. Model 2 SimuZa-^ian F3^^iliza,ng Model 2 (Constraa.ned) Control I,aw;
^x (Qus,ntization) _ .02
C)
---^
^.^
e
(!7
W
1--
CL
t" ' Lr
C
ff
. ^
C
U!^r
^c
^c
^u
^^
U
U
^5
w
'^
91E
z
w
^,
r
cn
n
cn
rn
ca
a
ce
C" ^— ,.^ .^
^^--
^7. $5 0. S g Q. 93 t]. S7 i . 0I i . Oa
N^
rIGLIRE &.12. Model ? Simul.ai.ion Uti1^ zing Mode]. 2 (Constrained)
Control I,aw; ax (Quuni:izatinn) = .Q2; marks indicate
• . [^^. second i nterval s
^^
' ^ 95
^-
>': results.
- 'r
il`;
6.5 Model l Simulation Utilizing PSadeZ 2 (Constrained) Control Law
the same starting point as was used x.n Section 6.G. While the constraa.nt
;• resemble very sloca ramp functions. It takes 0.3^ seconds to reach the
^^
v` target area and, while Model 1 is known to react more slowly than
Model 2, it is not expected that the cost be that high. Clearly the
i
^:
' control laY•r is not satisfactory.for use on Model 1.
!fy 6.6 Modal 1 Simulation Utilizing Model ZL2 {Constrained) ContraZ Law
bast results far Model ^.. This is established by Figures 6.17 through
6.20, using the same starting state as the previous two simulations
^^
i
•."__-3 F/1^4 ^'^ ^. ^.LL..i i.^.::..W-i :
L=. «a:: J [^^:+i e^^a^wuf •.i,.a, .._^ .^ _e: ^uF L.^..:.'.: 37 L.... C--_^.•.-. t'-^...:;i
1
^ i.^.^ ^ ^
'^
1..1 I
r1
G
C
CJ7
}^—
Q~
^ C
a.-_.. C_
C
r.
C
C
w
a`
r,
I! ^..^ _. ....
C]
E
L
W
F---
F— u
^^
C
C
G
C
— _ :.k
o:
r,^
t!7 ^
F-^-
^^
Q:
F--
^ C
© ^
(_}
i_r
^n
tl
ou
_ _ _ w:z.^
99
.j
`^
cn
!^
cr,
Q
c
6
cc
u
tc
^,
^`'^ C
V
n^
es
^ ^
H L
C
C
_ 1
00
_. _ LL _ .
,. ,,
^., ..
^-. . , - -
^W.,.. e
J Y. ^.-U ^_t.-.7
9 c-.. e v
L
e
G'?
LtJ
}--
1--- u
U7 G
C
C
a
C
o.^s d,^U
TIME.
SILTULYIl 6..^.$. Simulation Utilizing MOd^3. ^.L2 (Constxsa.ned) Can^xo'! Law;
Moc1e]. 7.
ex (^3uan^ization^ = .Ol
N
0
'i • F-' i
__ ^_ _
.._...^i]1vYii^Waiwlmao:
.. ..., ,.. . Y: -, .,-....,- , . _.:.., _. ,.,_.,z
__
r,^
Cl7 r
F--
^^
^-.i
. ^
fr
I--
U7^
^^
oC
U
u
c
TIME
I` :..
..r^.....s.,_y_,.W..:., ..^..r. w...,^.....^.:. ^ ^._._.. ,__ u. .., ,...,..-....^.........^ ^..^...,.e....... . _............_^ ._.,...__....e.r::s,..,..^...y.^.a.....,,....^_..,....^..,,.^....,..z..^.^.,......»....i:{i:r.lua^:d.cd1
103
a'
LL
!
cr
6
C
E-
i
^. CC a
I
i
. L3 ^J
»^a
h='
^.. ,^: __ .. .
ti
a
10^t
possibly result in the exact prediction of the minimwn time it takes the
i
tra^ecto:V to reach the target. The control gaxte clearly rides the
f
Figure 5.l$.
C^IAPTFR VII
SUP^iL^Y
control for a two spool turbofan jet engine. Various mode's were
most of the qualitative behavior of the jet engine, but trhich fails to
achieve strong nvn^erical agreement with the non-analytical Aiodel 1
control laws far various models of the two-spool turbofan jet engine.
Furthermore, valuable insight into the nature of the problem has bean
obtained, and much useful computer software has been developed. Unfor-
tunately, all enthusiasm far the results achieved 'in this study must be
any model can only be as good as the model itself. For this reason,
r....
Z05
t
i^
a N
l06
;;
"^ allowable controls, U, and the 'limits placed on L he selected consCraint
•
sCraints, etc.) becomes closer and closer to the actual pltysical problem,
^ ^ efforts to ac. ,t=e global optimal control laws for Ciao-spool turbofan
jar engines. Zt has accomplished much of its original goal, bur leaves
F. ,
i
i .
8
9
^^
^ I
f
^::
3
1
is
^,
r
K
"1
t ^:
4 . --
4
1
^:—^
1
a
f-
L; . . .r..:_ . .. __ _ _ .
.. _ ... .._ ___
^,.-.
{,
;^^
et:
-'-_ ^f`
^ippez^axx G
^.
+^' R. J. Eeake
^. G. Camsk^y
►^
E
^a
_ . _. ..
-
f 1^1
tit t ?.rJ- d ^ ^T ^`^L' .
-^_:^LLCTl'.^tQ?^IICS
.13^ t ^ s ^ . •^
p ^^
} car./,^cz^.^^Tc^
+K t.^l^R^,Rr r,1^/.1^P,
fask Ar p ok Cietutivf Flaza #2 1223 ^f. 22nd SL. • Oah Flta p k, lII. 6b523 JCC 311 72a S7e0 is f ^^nr^+/na
^^^ ^^
` ^ ,
'
. ^i^TERi^AT^^^t^L FoR^I^'i
^+ l
.,
-"
6Pbl'd$OIt$ OF NATIONAL. CLLCt170HIC9 COHF[l1CI[CC HATlONAt COfi ►fUNICATIOk x 61 6R y 1.1 f TlIOTt5519HAL CROWYH 1N CHGINtlIIIl^IC. INST[TUTCS ^ "^
' ^
1.6 1^4EnSu£fiS ^'' ILL1N476 iH'JTIT UYC tlF TlCH NOLgGY NaftT H^VF7 TtRN UNtYrt : ^ITY UNIVCi[ 'S 17Y OF SaI [ NrrCTO tic
IOWA LiAiC UHIL'! II aIYY TNK dlll p Si ATC UN+V^ ra}[TY YNL UNiV LRSI * Y Or kISYU UHS .LT woLL4
I ^)^"`^^ }^}) LIA pq Ul'iTC UHIL' 111t1tY FilhGUL' 11Hlt' ! li!ItTY l7NIYCItGITY p l' HPTRY 17AS^C
^^' i^ a11CHICAN LTATC UI+IIVr; p Sl7Y YHS UNlYLRS17Y OF LtIC MILAN NNIYClt31TY p P LVIIICCN S IH
:. ... - j
- . ^ ^
7 R
^ .
i
AB^IZACT
w_ This paper describes an algorithm fox obtaining a nonlinear analytical model. oi' a
het engine from measurements of two equilibriu^^ point values and the linearized A
and S matrices at those points. The method is compared ^.^ith rote conventional proce-
._
;" dares of interconnecting individual component ^pprq^i^tions. .
^ '
..,
-^
...
^r
r =':
+ .1 i
._ ^a
^^
^i
^3`
`E ^ ^ 1 ^ t
^J c:
,ti
^^ • •
7
^— _.
.:i.
I:r
ri1 O^ r ^.
u! ; ,^ ^ •'
s_ .. .... _. .. .. i
n=^ . + •
'^^' S ^ ^
^ • ^
_^_
,... _ ..__.. .r
+ _., .. ,
. ' .
^^
i
^yy
,I. - e
^. DESCRIPTIaN OF MODEL 2
A refined and updated version of the two-input, five-state, two--output nonlinear
anal.ytica3. model. presented a.n [l^ is given in this section. The variab3.e designs-^
^ dons are:
U^ ^ fuel flow (T,TFB)
^,• Ux ^ nozzle area (A$) ^ .
Xx = compzessor rotor speed {NC)
I^2 ^ fan xotor speed {NF)
ICS ^ burner exit pressure {k 4 ) '
l^^ ^ after burner exit pressure {P7 ) .-.•
f
__ _
..:
•'^
},
i Cn»st.^^its ;.^^^
^;,.
t G ^ 32.1.74049 C,
l C
.24 ^ ^fN^ ^'AC^
^'Op$ QU ^]
R p I:A a .0252 ^ CI,F a .24 1^,r^
y^ 1.4 CAB a .,20279
.e
F2 = 518.668 , 22589
CPiIT
IC = PrilxP = 3.8 • 2793S
CPI.T
I F ^ Pr iIL r = 4 .5 BI'C
'- _ FCBLC = .16
^ z ;4^AC _
VCO;-IB ^ 1.65 u ^= PCL'LDU = .208
49.77
^AFRti = g = PCBLHP = .726
c^^rmOZ = .9494
y FCBLLF = .066
Cl^F S I' = 2116.217
' NC DESIGiT = X`i'1IPDS = 10070 -
NF DESIGN = lu^L,PDS = 9651
1 155 L 1789.15
ZC = .81430
WAC
2F
137.649
.8333
LIr*:^^ = 54.4151
AWriAX = 1.5 S 0 5
SrC = .737071 BYPLISS = .609694 WG?4 = 88.5047
1 State Equations
(1)
d'^C
d t
= ( 30 )
n
2 J [C WAr,(^^, -^T) + C. jaG50( T -T ) ]
zCNC PC ^1 3 ,'IiT 4 50
.2
30)
PFIti:AF(T 2-121 ) + CPLTI`1G55(T50-T55'J
(2) dttF _ ( I N [C
F F
f VfiY
[T4 tr'AS ^- ^v1FIl -WG4]
(4) dt7 = V
COMB
i:•j =t i
7 [^:G4 -WFB - WA3]
.
. '^
AFI3N
I
v
`. ,
• dui` c^^^tr^t
(5) a [r {c^c 4 ^ i^^^Ii ^. t«t^} a- ^.^{T WA3 - T wc4 -I• T (^+r^)i,^i'i3}^
cIC ^ 4 3 4 ^
VC at i BI
{b ^ T 5Q• — .727 T
4
^3
. .. ^
1
l.. • t
•
' i ^ '
_ ... .. -
;_ I.^.-... •^- ^• ♦ it ^ ^..
+ ^ 1 ! r w „ T .uv,M.^+^^"^`.'r_ .,..
.. .. _
-
1 ...- ... ... .^..
y
^:
- u
Nonlinear Equ:^tivns far OuC^uts '-
(1.) F'G ^ .02451 taG7 J.93 !^.4J.5 T7 a- G8558.3b5 + 2IlG.2l7 AS (,5397B ^^,--^.}
tz} ^^
^^ ^cr^x ^ ^'
max.
where A(x} is a square matrix Which varies as a function of x. Notice that if ^^,,
,^,. is an equilibrium paint of {1}, ^ = g{u D ), then a zinearization about this equa.^i-
bri.um point results in the linear sys*em
^,
`^^^ snd a linearization of the approximating system (2) at xg = g{r D) results in
^' ^ien.ce, the linearization of (2) wild. match the linearization of (l) if and only if
;• a
,^^^
^L7sa, if A O is invertible, as is often the case for jet engine models a equation (f)
.. ; ; yi.elds ' .
The basic idea of the proposed direct method is to use the above deve^.opments toge-
,;
Cher with function approximations far xl(:c) and g{u) to arrive at a nonlinear model.
Since equilibrium points and linearized models at those points can be obtained by
known algorithms, we shall use this fact. Our initial approach is to use just two
'.t ,; equilibrium points,.say :tp and xW . The input information is thus
^'-• wheze x^, and ^^ are design and off-design equi.libriu^n points. ^ and 1^ are she
,. system ^-matrices at these points and uD, D' gW' are the associate parameter
.,, and input matrices. Mathematically, uW' H
^: ..
^^^ 8x D ^u t^3
.^_^ =^ .
r':3.
.., ^ 1s
We eliall em 7.o a linear aPP
P Y roxii^atian £or A {
x ) ^ g i.ven b Y
and also
The method we pro p ose hers ::.s to appraxxm^te each scalar component g i (u} of g{u) by
a linear affine Hower law farm •
^. •Norm ifr the variables are normalized and scaled such that
^^ rz^ ^ [7.,1,...,1} -- 7. uW - {a,a,...,a) -- a 1;1,5}
then, the conditions of (11) and (12} can bs put in the farm
2g
^ ^ •^
^g ..^
^c ^ • a:
._ r
..
^cm^ -^.
''. ^k^^ ^ Eck + C
2m-E-la ^ ^ otn+^ '
., . 1;17?
^• - tx T r -^ n -E- r
.^ ^ _
• ,
^c ,^
e
k2Arh2 ^ a^c^ + c 7.m-h^. a ^^ -}- c2m+2
which is off' tha form
s^ ^ rl + x3r2
r —^.
2
^^ ^ xl ^. x3rza .
El8}
s^ Q r l -^- r 3 -h r^
,^, r
s^ ^ arl + x3 a ^ -^- r^
:.
which, incidentally, is the m = :l. condition also. This set of transcendental equa-
^d
Lions is solved nuzaerically fox x Z ,r 2 ,r 3 ,r^ and (16} as then used to solve for
each c^. In the event that (l8) has no solution, a best fi.t is made on the second
eguatiun by varying r^ whi.le the other conditions are satisfied exactly,
^^^
^, w n w w
. iwhere ^D "" xi xi ^ ^d
.. ^(x} _ ^ diag i- + .AD diag _
i ^4 }
,' ^f ^T^
A
^`Di ^i
E y
^^^
^^ ^ ^G^II^ ^- 7T u^^'d
^.^
c2IIr1-3 "^' e^m-t-^
wihexe u^ ^ a^u^ + ^^ . 9
'
. ^
" ' Algorithm I. .^
'- a
.^;Y 3. Input: ^,^,A^,$D,m^n^a^ c,X , ^,^' ,B ^ =`
d1 w, "Y ^+I w
.. '^ ^ r' • _^^
-i
R^ ^ {au -u ) f Cu
r ilk W^ D^^uW^ - ^
^ ^ ^y w w . , ^. ^
i..^^ C—^T^^t.Tf i^
^^SIE7-L YY ^^D..[ Y W
5e Calculate ^9
i
^^ ..
- $^ r ^'2m•i-1 s4 ^ k^m^-2 ^
.j
- ' . Gw Co to Algorithm I7^.
Send: si, s^', si, si , a, s
_ 7. Cal.clalate:
i ^. i 1
^.
... ^ ^2m+1 ^ r3 e2m^-2 — r4 ^ ^
^..
ki —kid
:.
^^.^ --- c — k r^ c^
j J J '.
i r2-^
.- ' ' ^
$w. QuL'put
i 'i 3
-9..,
i
."^ f - }^ 9
-^`'.
3. input: si,s^,s^,s^:E,-a ^ ^ ^ `• ^ `^ j
• i ^. Calculate. - ^:^
s ^-54 ,;
,•.
. :^
• _ e ..
.. -
•. - ETsing the,. ..paramEter value a = .7, the c^ coefficient which specify the equilibrium
:: function g {u) as i±^ Section 4„are given by the matri^c ,f
^', phis matrix together with the values a = 1.1 and $ ^ 0.1 and the matrices A^ and
W ::', uanzp7.eteJ.y specify Made1 3A. :. .^
"' Another model which we wi11 call Model 3B is easily obtained by using a linear '
^' sffine appraxi^natinn to ^{u; such that g(i^) = ^D , g(uw ) = ^c^. Afodel 3B is specified
r.
;c .
. .. .. ^:
__ ',^. ...Y_.
3 h;^ ^a ^ ew9 , a m- 3. 1778, ^ ^ --^,.3^.778 and C^tc ^a^^f^yci.en.t ^:a^x^.^
^' a 1.553 , Oa2.i3 ^.. ^ ^.. ^ 0. ^ .841.8
i .. ^^
.1G19
.5351
.17 d7
—.1208
7..d
1.f3
^.r1
1..Q
U.
d.
Q667;; ^
.585'
•
'(^^
.5878 —, 49313 1.. d ^.. €^ 0. a 9053
.2962 --.2d99 1..^f ^.p d. .4^.3^
- In o; der to m compare the four models, a test point x T far^remo^red from x 4^ was-chosen
^ by setting uT ^ (.S,I), and calcu^.a^ing the equilibrium { A step change to u =
^ 1 s 1^ then causes an accelexatian transient back to ^. ^he results of this cotn•-
'^ parison far the rotor spee^js are ^howa in `Fable ^., Mare detailed infa^atz-an a.s '
shown £ar ^ludels ^. and 2 in Figure 1.
. Mode:L ^. ^od^i ^ ^^pdel 3A Mode1 3B
`^ ^ N NF Ne ^ Ne NF H^ NF
^ ^
0 .918 .929 .934 ,903 ,^36 .940 .92$ .925 ..
'^, R^ .. 9 6 n8 . 94 6 . gSS s ^ql^^ 7 85 ,955 .954 .945
^ S nn [ 1'1 n i^
1 G, RJ; . 9 9V. . 7-t 7 ^a LEI ^3 7 g^^ a^&^ .9T8 .983 .9.T5 •^
^ •' 43. • ^98 a 993 y
Ya Qdl} , ^^^ ,^9f .991 ,995 .990 ^',
- `• 7 z. odd . 9 98 ^,. 0 03 ^. ao^ 998 997 .998 .997
^ r ^i #
`^^• +^A ^it^merip^^. algnri^hm fir ^bta^n^.p.g ^ar^^^^ea^ analytical models for h et engines is :^,.
1^^ •. p xesente^^ The method ^,^ to Sepa^a^e ^}^^ ^r^n^i.^n.i. A{x} and equil?brium g{u} Parts
^f the system dynax^ies aid t3ppro^^.^a^e those ^as^.ng easily accessible data, The cam-- ',
Parients of g{^,} are agpra:^^t^aCea by a linear affi.ne power law tor-r^e. The principal
numerical di.fficulry is that a1z bpundar-y earcditions may be impossible to meet. The ^'^^
^' algorithm then satisfies ^.^^, but the geeQnd of the equations {IS} in Section 3 and ,
s' fats the second as closely 3S p QSSible, ^^ie vari able y i.s zero when an exact fit ^_,
^cCUrs; but, othercaise, iii ^^.uses a ^eas^ squares fir on the derivative conditions at x.^ ^^
;;:.. ^ equations {l6}, Secti o^ 3, wh^.le mafce^ng the other conditions exactly. The 'i
;. free parameter :in the lineax ^.ff3ne ^pprox^.^at^on of Model 3B art handled similarly.
c: •^.
' ,,.,This research was supported by the ^Ia^^o^al Aexonaut^cs and Space Adinxnzstration
` ^: under Grant NASA I^SG-3048. :: ^$ =^
^^ ^ • ^1.,
^' [2^` J. F. Sellers, C. J. Aan3.e^.e, '^T?YNGF.r1 - A Program. far Calculating Steady State - }'
^5^ and Transient Pcrfaz-manc^ o^ ^^rbpje^ and Tt^rbaf:an Engines, r` NASA TN D--7902, ,
,,^ Anr^.1, 1.975. .^ -`
_ •-
^
^ 4 ..,
,''^' ^ 3^ L Ge y se r, 1Q ll ^GE1.^3C D -^ A ^r^ag^a^a ^Qr ^,^,^ct^la^^ng LTnear A,B,C, and D Diatrices
from a I^onlittear Dynamic R^fi?^?^ ^?^.^^a^P^'a xti ^'ech. Report in Prenaratian at .
NAS11 I,ecais ;°e^earch G^ttta^ 3 ^I^^^^^^da 4^k^^. ti.,
^^i
,,0 j^^ W, E. Langenbakcr, "T^.mo ^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^ Q^ ^ Ewa-- Spaa1. Turbofan Jet Engine, r'
.,;^i; ^^^E Tliesl.s, ^^^:vcrs^,ty ^^ ^a^^^ ^^^^,^ ^^ 4 ^y^^as, September, 1977. '
€'^ G.,.,-.-d. 6^--^^ C---J^ cam.. ^—.—:-; ^"_-=^ ¢.-^ tr^=-^a^7 ^=--^ ^ »-^:_) C..;:_^ E". _...^.7
^•----
^I
^r^.^•
} r . `r r r • •x4.23 ^lr•^
^ ^ ^ $^'C.^ f
R^
^'WFt3
• t=a,1 [^^•
^r
^ . - r ^ -^^ a.z s^ .^`e
?8 ^ ^^ ^`^ wFS f '
q^ r ,d `'^w^e ^
• . t
2^
^
B p
46 ^ / 2 .^, ^ ^ ^s^. ^
^. ^ .._...... _..
! ^ ^'
.s
4s ^'^ ^Yo.^
4 !^ 2^^^^ t^s
{.^ ^ - ' ^^ .^
• ^ ^^ =®,s
^+^^d ,^RRoWS "^"RA^SI^HT^
StGt^iF1' - o ^,^
^ ^
• ^4 ^
^ , ^^.^ ^• ^ N^. A^^ow^ s ^^ ^ ^FY ^F^'R^7t^lC^ ^^KE^ :^ `°^a
W F S ^^ ^ •^ ^ l^ ''^,
. ^ ', l^
A^pei^dix H
!t. M, Schafer
M. K. Sain
i^.
°R^^ ^ ^vA,,crY _^.. .. __..._ _ _.. ...._
i !^^ , •
.. ... _.. .-
^
I
^ _ -_.__
P,. Fitchacl SchZfrr _ •._^-- Hichacl F:. Sain
i
Dr;+artc^• nt of lacctrical EnginecrinE Drpnrtrtent cf la cctrScll Enginccring
Univc • rsi[ •a oC l:^tcc Da^•a Unlvcrsit y n^ Kutrc Dame .__ . __._^__
1{otrc i:aa:c, Indiana GG556 _ _ Notre Aae^:r, '.loon 4056_._ _.,,
I f
t
• • _ ^; 1
_ ^ ^._.__ _I__..— __._.^
,;u::r^_t^^tci e: `^ • :^n .:^ r. •r ^, ,r^ e,•t i:^^. {^ _ • on^y.
f 2... ^ E ^ •r :rx!
t
P.eccntly, the CAFDIAD (Cot^plex Acceptability Pant modc]s used to construct Che plcrs in
r egion for DiAgon:^I D oaiirancc) plot i7as here in- the ::cc,ucl hs y e been Generated frost the sertcral
tlOdl_'CC j and applied to the pro'ulem of desiFninb purpn::c digit.tl jet tnPinc simulator DYSGE:: [6]
dynattieal precoraaensatio q to achieve colu-:n doer under a load t,hich gravid^s behavior similar to
fr.ance. This pcper i'_lustrates ..^weral basic that of the F-100 two-spool turbofan er:gine at sea
features of tl7e rrthnd while using it to desi^,n a level static cotditions. The c:odcls have two in-
si r^.]c, lot:-ord•^r dynamical compensator which a- puts, five status, :.ud two outputs, Thcr are lin-
chieves doxinancc at fire operating points of a earizations of DYXf:f:^ abtained with the aid of the
realistic tt:o-spool turbofan digital simulation. DYGAI:CIt package [ 7 ] under development at :;.ASA Lewis
....^ Rcse^ICh Cen[zr. FhVSic^1 description of the
states.caa be found in the references [3). The in-
1. Introduction puts are fuel flow and crhae:st area; the outputs
are thrust and high turbine inlet [e7aperature.
the CARIIIAU (Coaplex Acccncr.bili *_y Region for Paranet.^rication is acce^ap[ishrd tltsnt:Eh tae no.-.,-
DiAFc.^.al Dominance) plot in a graphical technique inal value of the. fuel flora °dF3, which takes the
for choosing dynamical cocpensatnrs to achieve five values 2.145, 2.31, 2.475, 2. G4, end x.75
diagonal rcw or column dc-^inancc, as do*inr_^. by Lh`i/`;EC, raniue from a ]ow thrust condition [o
Roscnbrock [1]. itiithout esGential lots of Eeneral- hi Eh thrust without aug::entation. All the aK+c!cls
i[y, the coc:;,ar.s3tor is assumed to have its di- have been normalized.
agonal elements equal to unity, and a typical
CAhD1A°J plot describes the acceptable range of tae Thus the plan[ transfer furictinn tr:.^trix has
re:l and icaginary parts of the off-diagonal el- tc;o rows and two colu^: s, and ex^tibits tra:,sfcr
emen*_s such that doninaace is achieved. 71te basic functions of degree five in bath nur,cracor and
graphical building block is the circle. F.ach denominator. Space limitations preclude their
circle represents the acceptable range at a spec- presence in this manuscript.
ific fzeq:]rncy. Solid circles are dra^nt if ac-
cEptable real and it:aginary pairs correspond tc Denote t}te plan[ by G(s). ,-ttcn the issue is
paints inside the circle, and dashed circles arc. to select a precortpcnsator E; (s) in such a s.•.Iy tear
drawn if acceptable pairs correspond to ^^ints act- C(s) ]i(s) is colu:tn dc;;inant (1J. In particular,
side the circle. Plotted as a function of fre- it is desired to select on_e K(s) so that colur.::I
quency, these circles describe the acceptable range do:ain+n^c is r.:.-tintainrd over alI five nominal fuel
of the eomnensat^r eleacnt in question, considered f]ow conditions.
as a cocplcx fuuctior, of frequency.
.•
1
. .
^._
4. Design Example
Titus, the overall compensation is K(s) given by
The CAF.DIAD plots of the five uncompensated
0 1
uodeis are all very 'si,^ilar in shape. This great
t¢itaflarlt^ sus_rests that one cor.aensator night be
K(s)
1 found that ti• ill cake all of the redels column dom-
inant. The urcoapensated plots also show ..:at a
colour[ switch would cake the first colors[ of each
of the models dominant at all frequencies without
1
-.742s - 9.59
—
.014s 7 -,998s T 1.
^
t
0
>t
1
o
•
G(s)K(s} for Che five c.odels. It is clear that
they are all dominant at all frequencies since
all of the circles are solid and all include the
origin. Thus, one compensator has been found
^t .. . Tr..,., ., .
e .f1 1 a .a ..1..
pgIGINA^ ^ F `°`GE ^
+^ -
^ ^^ ^R QUALITY
^^ ^ ttttry .hick the C_1Ci.^IAl3 plot represent. will Hake nominal valrrc of the fuel flaw increases, Since
the calumtr dominant at ail Erequcneits. It there there is more m7rFirt for error itt rho lower nnt^-
3s no such point the Cd2llIA p plot describes tire inal value of fuel fla:^ modals, a compensator
ron};c of a Cruquettcy- dependent af[-diagonal entry which is fit Ca a rough average of the five plots
:^ which viii make the column dominant. and WhiC}t tend . to he closer to Lhc higher nominal
value of fuel flow models, mig}rt achieve dominance
CAFd}IAD p1oCS for two input, two output sys- in ail five models. -" '^ " "^"' '
toms have same interesting features. ^ circle at
a specific frequency in the CA^I,1t3 p1aC far one The average value of Che canter aF Che lowest
ealarsn viii be solid if an.3 only i£ the cHrcr Frequency circle of the five plots is -9.SI. leis
eol^tt is dominant at; that frequency. Thus, vhan - suggests that cirsig:ti.ng a compensator to fit rho
a system is dominant at all frequencies, a!I the aarai.nal fuel £low of 2.75 model which has as t}te
circles in the CAhI3Iall plots will he-solid and all canter of the Ios;est frequency circle the value of
will contain the origin. .mother interesting fea- --9.54 might achieve dominance in a1I of t}te >:sad-
ture is the effect of a colurvt s:ritch, that is, els. The second order funtion that ttas^chosen is
multiplication by a matrix faith the only non zero
elements being ones an the off-dia6onal, The -.742s - 4.59
effects of sue$ a switching of the inputs are that .dl4s - .99Ss + 1.
ail the solid circles become dashed, all the dashed
s
circles become sitlid, and the shapes of the calum;t and the next compensator, }:^(s}, is
one and two plots are switched. ?}tic fact will be
,^- aced in the next section to achieve dominance in 3 ... -.742s '- 9.59
Lhe various set point models. IC(s) - .Ql.4sz -=.998s +T
d 1
^ ^ 4. Design Example
c Thus, the overall cot^pensatian is K(s) given by
The CARIII^LIT plots of the five uncompensated a
stodels are all very 'similar in shape. This great I
aimilarit;a suggests that one compensator raigErt be _.
'" ^' found that v:ill male all qf Che trodel.s calu:rn dam- iC(s) ^ -.742s - 9_.54 i
;^ 3nant. The uncompensated plats also show tarot a 3 7_
column switch wogld t-iaake the first column of each •Q14s --.998s •i- I. i
of the models do;rrinant at all frequencies without
further cnr^pensation. Thus, IE 1 vas choseTi ^o be Figures Il -- ?d are the CAI{i)I.lLU plats of
G(s)K{s) for the five models. It is clear that_
0 1 they are aII dominant at all frequencies since
-1 all .of the circles . axe solid and all include the
Q
^ _ - Origin. Thus, one compensator has been found ^
^` Figvres 1 - 10 are the CS.RDIAD plots of G(s)t`t foz ^a•hich will make-all live of the modelsconsidered -
the five models. The repetition of the general in this paper dominant. t
_shapes of the .plots, w}tich is unaffected by the _ 1 ^'
c®ltnart switch, is very apparent_ T} ;e plo Cs also ^, Conclusions
6hov Lhat the first colu+an of each of the modals -
^,A is now dominant. T7tis can be ascertained either
#ay the fact t}rat the origins of the column one Through the use of CAfiJ]IAD glots, it has beena
- plots are included by all solid circles and ex- possible to achieve dominance aver a range of s"
eluded by all dashed circles or by noting that all. operating paints of a jet engine simulation:. The
a# the circles in. the column two plots are solid. compensator given above also achieves dominance at.
aII but a very narrow xange of frequencies in the '
To achieve dominance in the second col llten5 of model of another operating point,. The results i
sltggesC two t}rings. xirst, using the C1iRDIAD a
the models, it is clear thaC some:sorc . of frequency
depeatenG campensaeioII gi5.l be necessary because Plots as a guide, it could be possible to design ^
there exist Fla points on the rea], a:;es of Che plats a compensator which varies kith the nominal value
- vtiich lie inside all of the solid"circles. A fires. of the fuel flow and achieves global dominance .
choice of a function to fit the paths of the cir- aver a wide range of• operating points. This is
rles could be a simple fixer order function which, currently being sttdied. Second, the repetikive
.traces a semicircle through t}te cauinlex plane as s}tape of the GARUTAn plots over the range of
the fre q ue nC v operating paints suggests Chat the C^1PDlAD plot
` y aries. However ' it 's a. de s fired t ha ^
..one such function be found that will w qrk on all might be a useful tool in the classification of
.^ Sive of the models; sa, a second order compensator operating points with regard to interaction, -Such
will be used to Sit Letter .the shape of the circles... a feature could be .quits helpEul,in analysis of
a t the hig her frequencies: lt:o things that should v}rich models to use aver flig}tt envelopes varying
from sea level to°High - altitude and frasu low 3
be Hated about the shapes of t}se circles in rite
column two plats are that Che circles tend to be through high thrust."- ^^
larger for'the lover values of fuel flow and teat _.
- 5
in general, the center of the lowest frequency -- ,,
_ (largesC} circles moves toward the origin as the ^: ^.... '.
^,^ r -. . • • .....r .... .rte—^. .—.• ^. .. -- : r.... • -- — ^^' ^
y
e. •..
' ^ ,
_r.---_
..^u.r+[wr-L..v...- ...r+:^•^.^...-. .x.+_^..__-._.^.._--' - -
^ r f I:Jr\l ...':: ... '
._ ._^__ -___ _ .. _ _ i
y.`+•.
Acknn>wledgment r
-
—^
T}^e nuthor3 thank R. R. Gcj!i for hi9 assi[- - --• ! ^ I
ante in obtaining the linear c.^dals used for these ^ ^
plots.
t
. ,_
-- - ---- - - - -- ._... :.: _.
ReCerenccs ` ^
s `ter\ i
1. H, H, fiosenbrock, Cnc+:+_u t e_r Aid e d _Con tro l Svs- ^^ ^'~ \.
----.:. 1^
tea Dcsi^n. London: Academic Press. ].974. _— ^ _ ^.r ^
qT.i
\ j
— +
Y, - I
^^ 2. R. Mich :el Schafer, "A Graphical Approach to ^ ^^ ^ ^slI^^"+^•• , I 1
5y{tem Dominance," Technical Report \o. 778, - — •' ,f^rr;t4^a^ j
Dci^srtrrcnt of Electrical cnrineering„ Uni- • - ^ ^ .`' , ^ ^ ^, j
versify of Sotre Dar.:e, Piarch 24, 1977. = ^^='^^^'J ^ Inc. m II
._
Circuits and Systems, Part 2, pp. 650-485,
Ass ;r.st 1977. ^
^^^ i ^
^^ ^
S. D. N. Schafer and "f. K. Sain, "A Dynamical
,l}- , zoach Lo Diigonal Uosinance, a,th Illustra- - ^ ^^^ ^',» ; ` 1
[ions fora TurLofasz Engine Ltodcl," Proc. 1977 =i ^fl! - 'r• '^.:^ 4 . - •t^ y i
._„ ZiEC International Forum on A.ternatives :or ^• "` }C^ ++^r J r
Linear lfultivariablc Control, October 1977. ^y :.`^ "• // i
^f
y.^; r i
6. J, P. Sellers and C. J. Daniele, "DY:CGEN - A ^ ',/i j
Program for calculatinr_, Steady State and Tran- s
scent Pcrforr^ncc of Turbojet and Turbofan ' ^ -^ ^
£nEfncs," }CASH TCi t}-7901, April 1975. ^ ^%' ^
^ i ^,` ^
_I
t ^^N ^^^,! ^c ^ ♦ . ^ ^.w ♦ f '•YM - w .w .tY /,.1 •w a.w ..w ara .,.ry Y
•
^'
- . -: ^ Y ^^
.• ^ ^ • ^ ^^^PWR QUAL^^^ ii
---- - .._ .-_-_...____-__.._._ --- . _ ... ---- ----- - ----- --- - 'ii
.•
r....-._ -- -
U^ . ^ ^xu^^^^''^''.^z'
---___-^^'~___''---'..-^-----_-..
^^^ ^^ " ^'
'
!
-~ |
/
' '« /.
- ^
'- |
.
. |
' .
.
''-''
|
^ ^`/ /
^
'''--- ^
.. ^ /
.
` |
^
i /
/ ^.
^ ^ .
.~
*un. »' p^n~z ' ^7^, o(y )r,. cvzv^n z. r^u' u ' n^n~z.^^, c(x}n~, co^^om x'
N ' ^ ' ^
''^^
^^ ^N ^ ' i
^ | |
U^ ^
^ ' | '
^
^
U
^
'
'
^
^ ^ ^
^ ^
. ^
.
^ ^ -~^^^=~-
^
^ .
^^ .
- . ^
' ^
@^ ^c^' o ' n^u~z ' 47^, c(»)u,, n^z ""m z, s«o. p , n^^~z.7s, c(s>x ^ noxu"^ z'
, ^ z
. ^
^
" .
^ .
'^ '
^
^^ .
~ ^ ~~ ~~ ~. ^~ ^^~^: .~ ^~ ~~ .~ ..
^
^^o ' r, ^^m~^.a4 ^ o(s>x, ' ovzu^n z' , _ z^o, ^ u '_ n^^~z.7s^ n(v)x `" ^oz""m_z.. . ~_ _
. ^ ^ __ _' --__- __^ __-__-_--__-_--^_--__''-_-_--^--_---_-
X ~° ~
^ . '
^' ' `''^---'^`. ' ^ ' -,^ ^ .', ^&G^ ^^
, ^
r^^^^
_ _ ' _ _ _ ____________ _~_______ ______________________________^^ _^
'
^ N^
^ ^^
~ __-____-- '
-~r
^ Y '. ^r^`^^^,r^^^
^ . [x^*\^^`^^^^^
.
^ ^' ^ _ . _- __-____-_'_---- -_'-'__-
^ .^
- -^//^^ / \ ^ .>
' -'' . |
^ - ^ /
-''
^^ '/ ^_-_-
/. ^
^ ___ |
w^ +^, i
|
.
` '
^ ^
^^
°^ ~~ ^~ ^~ ,:"^u^ ^~ .. " .~ ._
° ^ ---'
'..- - \/
^^x. zz. no^~x ' z^s. n(")x^^). c " ^"^^ z. ^^a. ^4. nro~u ' Ja. o(v^o(;), cuzuo^ z.
^ '
°^ ^ ' (.
'
N .|
^
°* '
.
^
^ .
Nv
^
^
,
^^ ^
^^ . .^
. . .
^
^ . @c '
^^ .
.' "
^^ ^^ ^^
^^°.. "~ .~ ^_ ^~ -^^^^ ~. .. '~ ^~ .~ ^
^ ^
^^ v^n ' zz ' wru~z.z4s, o(")x(">, coz"=, z ' n^o. z» ' n^^~z.^7s, n(s^u(s}, oozno^ ^'
i '^ _
/
' '
.
^^
^ ^
U '
o '
'
.
^
^
' |
i
'
a. • i.it `...:..^ rt i.i(! dl^a ^rw.i6t:1^i1 J ;: ^:S tip:r ^__ _, _ . ^ c t.11[ s«u:a! ; :^ulnf} SS^t1tt.E ;kid Su^C^]Cklill) tl.. ; _^ !1^ !e
1
r
i i _..^r.._.^_ ._....,»...-
^14it% U.v t-• '_ ^ ...^.^^it liw, G^f^7^!' _fl^ — I 1
:- ------. ., .. ----- i -- ------
^
• ^ ^^`\ ^ e ^I i
^ - ^^ . ^
^ l ^^^: .
T ^ - •^ ! ` -
.
z
. ^
Fig. 17. KFS = 2.64, G(s)EL(s), Colu^ •.n 1. ^ Fig. 14. hT f'B = 2.75, G(s)K(s),• Coluut 1.
. - i
r--- .
• ^r ^^ .^\ ,
^^
^/ ^_ \.
!. `,} ^
..
^=
^- ^r^ ^
^ „•:,^
_
4
\^^ ` ^
r • ^-^!!
\ ^^^ /
.e i
r
3 r. _ _.. _ _^..._ . ... ^ . ^[; r^ s ^
. l 1 - - _
• t J 3
.^ Fig. I$. 47FE3;2.bu. G(s)K(s}, Calamn 2. Pig. 20. 1aFB a 2.75, G(s)K(s), Column 2.
M ^ ^ ^ ^RIGINAi, P^'^(^^, ^$ ^
{
APpenciix x
- _ ^ ^ ^
_,
_:
.i .^
i=
,^, is
^^^` ^^,1`CY
^ R
..^Tl
^. 1^.. J^
',
^'
i
IForeword
From the outset, the use of a Theme Problem has posed certain challenges. Aut>:ors
from academic b3clrgrounds tend to be in need of highly detailed information about
plant and specifications, cahile workers in industry and laboratories must often be
satisfied with indirect information and sometimes with none at all. We have tried
to arrange a reasonable compromise somewhere_ on middle ground. Our decision to
select a problem related to a realistic modern turbofan engine had special ramifi-
cations of its own, not the least of which was the fact :.h a L- certain types of addi-
tional data were precluded for proprietary or ot}^er reasons. We believed all alC^no
that the advantages of da_a realism outweigh the disadvantages of incomplete infor-
mation.
The chronology of the Theme Problem begins in late summer, 1976, during discussions
with J. L. 1•felsa. Subsequent contacts with several potential Forum participants
led to the drafting of a Tentative Theme Proble:,^ Description, which was sent out to
various•worlcers for cr.itiaue in early 1977. jti'hen evaluations orere in hand, a Theme
Problem Description was prepared on March 1, 1977 and became the warkin^ document
for authors preparing paper.• for the meeting. Corrnnunications with several addition-
al researchers established the need for minor modifications and clarifications,
which were decided at a committee meeting held during the Joint Automatic Control
Conference at San Francisco in •7une, 1977. These decisions formed the basis for an
a^3di*_ion Theme Problem 1`femorandum mailed to all participants on Juiy 1S, 1977.
A1.1 these adjustments are included in the Final Theme Problem Description, which is
included here.
Any clarity which may be present in this final problem description is due in large
part to the valued advice of many colleagues, among whom I must especially mention
$, T,. DeHoff, R. D. I}ackney, B. Lehtinen, W. C. Merrill, J. L. Peczkocaski, C. A.
Skira, and H. A. Spang, III. Credit for any and all obscurities must, of necessity,
accrue to the author.
M. K. Sain
Notre Dame, Indiana
September, 1977
ORIGINAL PAGE IS
=;
OE POOR QUALITY.
+^R^t^IrlAL PRGE 1g
^`1^; ^ DOR QJ.ALIa ^. I'INAi. TIiFAfI: PI:OHLFrf DESCFIPTIOIV
ABSTRACT
_. ^ ,e design problem should serve the Forum goals in at least three wa}*s. First;
ft r,:,-^ •_1d help to unify the presentations and, thus, make them more useful for group
^'tt^^; • zfter publication. Second, it should helg to make Lhe Foz-um relevan t to the
^^re^:ent-day design world by focusing upon a real system of considerable current zn-
_:tere:=t. Third, it should help to delineate the state of comoutaticnal readiness of
thz various design viewpoints, and so help to paint out where additional numerical
::researches would be useful.
T - 1. Il^TKO>;UCTIO}1
i ^- '
very important developing area for linear multivariable r.ontral has ar.iser. because
T --of r?ceazt increases in the complexity of aircraft turbine engines. Engines in use
today have, essentially, the one • control variable of fuel flow, though some matte use
of a variable nozzle area which is not unli3,e the iris da_aphragm that controls
a p erture settings i^: a camera. Engines in the p at-so-distant future can be expected
to permit control of Tones i.n the stator portions of the various compressor stages.
.- Further docan tl^E development line are engines with enough variable geometry to re-
ceive the informal designation of "rubber engines" by research engineers in the
industry.
I* is widely accepted that the alder, workhorse, hydromechanical control methods are
not equal to these new tasks and that they wall, therefore, gives way to electronic
digital control. The entrance of the digital computer opens up vast numbers of new
design possibilities, which are now beginning to receive increased attention in the
industry. 1'he central role played by the aircraft turbine engines in civil and
military aviation makes clear the economic import of these trends. It would be hand
to select a more timely theme design example for comparison of ?inear control alter-
natives than the jet engine.
In the United States, a joint study is now under-,aay on the Pratt & ^+ Thi.tney F100-Pjd-
100 afterburning turbofan, a low-bypass-ratio, twin-spool, axial--flow engine. Spon-
Bored by the Air Force and by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration,
this study focuses an the linear quadratic regulator theory, applied at nrultaplc
operating points in the control regime.
One eff?ct of the theme usage o£ such a plant in the NEC Forum should be a broaden--
ing of the design discussion to include other design viewpoints as well.
2. PLANT
The numerical model of the jet engine is supplied in (A,B,G,D) form on Attachment 1.
For the A and C matrices, note that columns 9-16 are listed below columns 1-8. This
modal is for zero altitude and for a power lever angle (P1^^) of 83 degrees, whict7 is
near maximum non-afterburning power. The motivation far choosing this operating
po:.nt comes from the fact that every engine has to pass through ti^is condition, as,
fa:: example, an takeoff. Also supplied is a list of the input, state, and outpr^t
va^_iables associated with this model. ThPSe two pages are taken from the report
3
;^?^..
Because a number of the techniques which will be discussed at the Forum have graphi-
cal aspects, i*_ is planned to facilitate the inclusion of curves in the publication
by limiting the plant to three control inputs. In consultation with numbers of our
Theme Problem Advisory Committee, we have selected U , U^, and U as these inputs.
Workers who feel an absolute necessity to use all five inputs are welcome to do so;
however, we would aslc that in such a case they pro-.^ide a comparison of the effect
of using five inputs over and above that of using only three. This request is
` designed to increase the comparability of the various design results.
.Actuator information for the three control inputs is given in Attachment 2. Also
prcwided is information associated with the actuatior. of U 4 , if that input is used
in addition to U U 2 , and U Finally, should U 5 be used in addition to (J l , U^,
.and U a servo ^ime constan^ cf 0.02 sec. can be assumed for actuation. Various
rate limits on the actuators can be noted, as in Table A. ...
Table A
Actuator Rate Limits
U1 15,800 (lb,lhr)/sec.
U 2 3.F Ft2/sec.
U 48 Deg/sec.
3
U4 40 Deg/sec. .
The actuators have some limits, also, which will be mentioned here. On LT 3 , it may
be assumed that the limit is -+- 6°. On U 2 , a limit arises because the nozzle area
is pretty well doGm to its minimum at this operating point; the limit is assumed to
be about 1 square feet in that direction.
The Theme Problem models are in absolute, unnormalized form, without any mention of
the set point values. This makes it difficult to size inputs. Tine committee worked
out a proposal to supply "ballpark" set point values so that the model could be
normalized. U^.fortunately, it was not possible to obtain even such approximate in-
formation.
A cors^ , uence of this fact is that the absolute rate limits of Table A have meaning
aaly in relationship to the size of reference commands assumed. Because we are un-
able to supply the suggested reference command, the effect of actuator rate limits
can be treated only hypothetically; and we have to leave the issue of whether to do
this, and haw to do this, in the hands of the authors.
^^.:_^
..
Table B
Sensor Time Constants
P ^^^^; P AC ^ ^S X G. 0 3
Ft ^^p^T'Y 1
^^ ^ X2 0.05
X3 0.05
X5 C.05
Sensing of FTIT is a bit more elaborate and is indicated on Attachment 3.
3. ENVIRO:^'^iEtdT
Measurement noise is on the order of 1%; and state noise as negligible. Therefore
it is not planned to sup p ly any noise data. Authors wishing to rake noise studies
must make their awn assumptions. This is not unrealistir_ for the present stage of
discussion. :Chough same techniqu4s may well make use of observers or dynamical out-
put feedback,' no Formal stress on filters is anticipated. The Forum, then, is
visualized primarily a.s a control meeting, although contributed papers in tl:e stoc-
hastic area ^^i11 be accepted if they contribute Co the Forum theme,
Practice in the industry involves the use of multiple linear models at various oper-
ating points from sea level to high altitude and from low to high thrust. As oper-
ation transitions from 1112 neighhorllood of one operating point to the neighborhood
of another, these models change in consonance with some physical variable. Para-
meter variation is, therefore, a!^ aspect of design.
But publicly available neighboring linear models arc not near en^^ugh to the Theme
Problem model to provide meaningful data on parametric variatiar.. This fact, com-
bined with lack of set point infarmation, led the committee to suggest a 5% change
in ei^;envalues as one, hopeful.l_y useful, measure of such variation. Because normal-
ization of the model is a similarity transformation, this characterization is 7n-
dependent of set point.
Approximate eigenvalues of the Theme Prob lem plant are -577, ^-17G, -59.2, -50.7,
-^^7.1, -34.7, -2I.3 + i.822, -17.3 + i4.73, -19.0, -b.71 -{- i7..31, -2.62, -1,9I,
-.648. It is the nature of the het engine control problem that these can usually
be well identified with physical. variables. Far exaE^ple, -.648 associates with X10'
-1.91 associates with X -2.62 associates with X and so forth. X • is related
13
to the eigenvalue pair -6.71 + i1.31. This type of infarmation can be deduced
from a study of the eigenvectors corresponding to a particular eigenvalue. It can
he expected that actuator modes, surd as that involved with fuel flow, will enter
into this list. Same discussion on ^.'Yis point can be found in :t. 1,. Delioff and
W. )w. 1ia11, Jr., "Design of a )!Iultivariable Controller for an Advanced Turbofan
Engine," Proceedings 1.976 IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, page 1002.
In the interest of offering some Fssistance to authors who might be having c^mputa-
tional difficulty with the full size problem, the following; reduced model has been
ode available by Dr. Delioff of Systems Control, Inc. (Vt.). It is a model which
neglects sensor dynamics, augments the plant by tha dominant actuator dynamics, and
then reduces to fifth order. Ilse resulting five states are
IV'ote that the "^1uo entar" Pressure X is not to be identified with X the quanti-
5
^ ties are not. defined at th° sari° physical location. Nate also that X5 was not
:,
- ^ one of thv oragina7. states.
.:, R.emark: The ti Actuator diagram shotas a Servo 5ystetr gain of 2.4.
It has come to
=;; our attention hat a more realistic number for this gain would be about 12:0. The
effect of this gain change is to taI`e the dominant CIW position actuator eignevaluF
.^; from a location of high dominance in the overall plant-actuator system to a location
of cansidc^rably less dominance. It is not necessary for authors to make this charge
if they , ha^e already completed their calculations, inasmuch as the 2.4 gain apparent-
ly is one of those "g15.tches" which crept in an uninvited manner. Some authors may
choose to comaare the effect of the gain 12.0 with the gain 2,4, if time and space
permits. Cde have included this remarl-; Here so that the reduced order model, whic}^
has the soma controls and outputs as the full. size system, may be more understand-
able.
A (5 x 5)
^-.3245E+O1 -.2158E+01 -.9355E+03 .5731E+D0 .1342E-^•D3
.1'42L+O1 -.5941E+01 --.2816E+03 .1897E+00 .5705E'+D2
,1685E-01 -.255^sE-OI -.1003E+02 .7994E-0l .5S07E•i^0
.0000 .0000 .0000 -.1000E+D2 ,0000
-.2163E+01 .6862E+O1 .7405E+03 .1195E+01 --.1715E+03
B {5x5)
C (5x5)
^ ( x 5)
^^.
5. SPECIFICATIONS
The overall viewpoint of the controller is quite simple. T}Ie pilot has one lever,
which we *.light intuitively call the throttle and :^]Iich sets I.hat is called in the
industry the "power J.ever angle." Basically, the pilot increases the levor angle
to obtain riore thrust. All the ether variables must be controlled so as to achieve
the new thrust quickly, but I,itl^out overshoot and ^.itllout violating some important
physical considerations. AIi example of one of these is the temprcature at the inlet
to the "high" turbine jest aft o£ the burner. This temperature is ordinarily
scheduled very near its maximum safe value, and temperature increases are not wel-
come because the turbine elements are thin, respond ver y fast, and can be permanent-
ly damaged or create a need for more frequent engine overhauls. elnother example of
a constraint i.s the various undesirable stall conditions in the compressor.
Thfs problem comes down_ to IIS in the following form. Ass:Imin^; a step change in
power lever angle, we want to move the engine to a slip,htly different operating
point in the above described acceptable dynamic fashion. The power lever angle
change is converted by a master engine scheduler into a reference input for our
linearized feedback model. The nature of this reference input is not highly specif-
ic. Step inputs are commonly studied. It is not likely that highly detailed infor-
mation about these references will be available, but we can try to firm up any par-
is cular issues which may be crucial to one paper or another. The exact nature of
these references gets one into the exact_ nature of the schedulers. It does not seem
too productive in a linear meeting to go very far into such "global" issues. If
greater reference variety is needed, it can probably be safely assumed. It would
he good, however, if each paper tried to discuss at least the reference step.
For purposes of design, we can group the variables into two fami:ies. Y l , Y 0 , X1,
and X 2 ar.e desired to respond fast witl.out overshoot. Y 4 should not decl-^ase more
than .05; Y 5 should not decrease more than .15.
Remark: TIIe decrease limits on Y 4 and Y are to be refiarded in the same spirit as
the U actuator gain change in the precc^ing section. If calculations are complete,
there 3 is no requirement to incorporate it. Some authors may wish to study its
effect, however.
6. VIEWPOINT
We believe that the theme problem should appear in each presentation as the major,
and prc•bahly the only, illustration of the particular design methodology being
described. Gde visualize each paper as an exposition of design viewpoint, with jet
engine illustration. tde do not vis^alizc the paper as an exposition of jet engine
design. In other words, the theme problem will be an apparent thread through the
fabric of the Forurn, but the pattern of the fabric will be set b_y the various linear
control alternatives as entities in themselves. Put in yet another way, the forum
is on "Alternatives for Linear Piultivariable Control" and is not upon "Various
Approaches to Jet Engine Control."
ORIGINAL PAGE IS
Q$ QUALITx
L">^fG1AiA.. .
1 ^ ^^^ r
1
1 '
^,;. o^,
^+•^ ^^ ^
,^
THE C r1ATRIX
THE D rfATR IX
^ll
I.
^.
1. Engine State Var^.ables
X1 =Fan Speeci, SNFAN (N 1 ) - rpm
X2 = Compressor Speed, SNCO:; (N 2 ) - rpm
X3 = Compressor Discharge Pressure, Pt3 - psia
X4 Tncf:rturbine Volume Pressure, P t ,^ , 5 - psia
X5 = Augmentor Pressure, P^^ m - psia
X6 =Fan Inside Diameter Lischarge Temperature, °R
Tt2.5h
X^ =Duct Temperature,
T t2.5c - °R
1 X 8 = Compressor Discl-:^rge Teperature, T t3 - °R
Xg = Burner Exit Fast Response Temperature, °R
TL-4hi
X10 = Burner Exit Slow Response Temperature, Tt410 °R
X11 = Burner Exit Total Temperature, T t ^` - °R
3. Engine Outputs
Y1 = Engine Net Thrust Level, FN - 1b
Y z =Total Engine Airflow, I^'FAN - lb/sec
Y3 = Turbine Inlet Temperature, T t4 - °R
Y 4 =Fan Stall Piargir.:, SMAF
t
t
10
l
^.
%x^.
A^^Ar,^it^t^ta^r 2 ^:
U I Actuator
,: n n
4
c^ = 6Hz
n
^ a 0.5b
i
- ''
T.T 2 Actuator
';
Servo Power
StepFrr Motor System System Cylinder
{:.^^
[^^ A: tuator
_ ^
U Actuator
4
11
:^
__
g
ATT.ACfi^fFNT 3
FTIT Sensor
_0. i09
0.5955 + 1
.--^ + FTIT
FTIT
^" Sensed
O.C9I +
'^-
^ --
_ ^^' S.49S + 1
^
^.. ^ '.
i `
^::^:
^:.
t
.;
I2
ei Appendix J
ii
i ''INPUT COiff ENSATIO^I
i
i R. M. Schafer
M, K. Sain
^l
_ - .^. -
^ ^^'^
...
j: ^.
• ^^
^ ^^ - •,
l ^.
• ABSTRACT .
The determinant o` return difference establishes a crucial link bet h^een open and T
^•! .
3%;
^^ 4 ^ Z
ry .,
^^ ^+ ^`
w ./
^tii
^^
♦ l'
.. `= /
t. • ••
f
• 1 r.
.^
M
. ^
^^•,,
.t
^' 4,
^.A • .
^ •
^ ^ •
.^,
'>;
Department of Electrical Engineering
University of Notre Damc
• Notre tame, Indiana 46556
U.S.A.
. AnSTf:ACT
The determinant of return_ difference establishes a Crucial link between open and
closed loop characteristic polynomials in multivariable feedback control sys`ems.
As a result, Nyquist constructions on this determinant carry important design infor-
mati.on. One way to extract this information is by achieving diagonal dominance.
This paper presents a method which uses dynar:^ical input. compensation to achieve
column dominance. ^lpplication to the Theme Problem is included.
^^ 1. INTP.ODUCTIO.d
Recent advances in the generalized Nyquist theory ^3r Iinear multivariable feedback
^s • control systems Y:ave brought about very substantial new op p or_tuniti.es for research
in the area of frequency domain control design. i`fost of th_•se advances are predi-
sated upon the relationship between closed loop and open loop characteristic poly-
, nomial.s--as embodied in thedeterminan.t of return difference. Features of the Nyquist
diagram of this detert,^inant are important aids to control system design.
^ It is apparent that a diagonal return difference will decompose she return differ-
ence determinant into a product of its diagonal elements, thus reducing a multi-
.
' variable problem to classical single-input, single-output form. Less apparent, but
of much greater practicalsignificance is the fact that an approximately diagonal
return difference can have essentially the same reducing effect on a multivariable
^- ^. problem, t^*hen regarded from a generalized Ny q uist viewpoint. The best known of
Y
,- these approximately diagonal con:litions has come to be described as diagonal domi-
Hance. A productive dCS1gI1 strategy can be mounted, therefore, in two ste p s. First,
b
achieve dia^onaldominance' > second a 1Y classical sin g le-in P
> PP g
ut^ sin le-out Put
'techniques [1]. ._
., Unfortunately, methods to attain diagonal dominance have been rather slaw to advance.
For the most part, they have been restricted to the selection of constant real co;^t-
^pensators, the entries of wh-ch are typically obtained by procedures of optisniza*_ion
^: , that da li.ttle to preserve some of the classical advantages, such as insight, affor-
- ded by the frequency domain approach. rluch work needs yet to be done on the theory
of attaining diagonal dominance by use of frequency dependent, dynamical compensation.
,,^ This: paper considers the application to the 'Theme Problem of a useful new desii;n aid
callr_d the C:1F.DL1D I'Iot. In its present form, this method deals ;^}ith the design of
'
s dynamic precompensator for the plant, in such away that column dr^minance is
•^ achieved. An im p ortant feature: of the approach is the enhancement of designer in-
••• sight toward the coupling present in a plant. -
Secti^rti 2 introduces the CIIRDIiD method for two-input, two-output plants, and Sec-
Clo p 3 provides an illustration of certain basic features of the method, in the con-
e text of a het engine plant related to the Tlleme Problem. Section G gives a genera-
- F
Iizatioit of the idea to tlsree inputs and three outputs, and Section 5 applies these
^^results to the Theme Problem. Conclusions appear in Section 6.
• ^
-
•
^
• ^ ,• ^
IZif
cG) {2 - iZ
3 i (s)i Z > 0 i ^ j (2)
for all s on D.-
Censidcr a two-input, two-output system havinE on?y precompensation. The open loop
transfer function of the system is
^' Since any matrix having; nonzero entries an its main diagonal may be put into this
form by multiplication with a diagonal matrix, and since . multiplicat^un by a diaFO-
nal matri^c does not affect dominance, this czn be done ^wit^^out essential loss of nen-
erality.
Let G(^=) be evaluated at a specific frequency w. Then ,
ll j r 12 + i l ^j 1 x^ + y2j
rll + i
•
r 21 ^ i 213 r 22 + i 22 J xi + y lJ 1
Performing tlzz indicated matrix r,^ultiplication, thr_ four entries in the matri;;
Q (s}^ - are
j^
q ll r ll -!- j
i ll + (r l ^ + it ?j) ( xl + Y lj ) , (^) .
+
ql2 ^ r12 + i 12 j {r
ll + illj) (X2 + y 2 j
), • (7 )
( ), (8)
q21 r 21 + i21j + r 22 + 122J){xl + Y lj
q 22 r 22 + i 22 j + ( r 21 + i ^ 1 J)( x 2 + Y 2 j )• (S)
' .b ^ 21 i_ 22 , {12)
:r ll r l2 + i ll i l2 r21r22 - i
G e t 2i 1 -+ r r -
1 1 21 i22 1li1 2 r 22. i 21' AT p,4^^ r3 (13)
OF
u 2 2 _ 2 _ 2 ^R ^UALITy (14)
x l.l + i ll. r 21 21^
Zrotc that each constant is composed of complex field e lem_nts which came from evalu-
alien of G(s) at a specific frequency m.
The functian f l ( x l , y l ) is a para^soloid in three-space and is normal to the xl-yt
1^= olane. If this paraboloid intersects the s l- y I plane, the intersection will be 3
circle. Stanr'.ard maximum-minimum analysis gives that the maximum or minimum of the
dominance function occurs at
xx ^ -b/a yl -c/a (I5)
To dctermir.e if tl^e point that was four_d i s a minimum or a r.:aximum, the hessian is
formed. If the Hessian is negative definite, the point found is a ma:;imum. If ti7e
3 hessian i.s positive definite, the point found is a minimum. The Hessian of the dor.:i-
nance e^uatian for colur..n one is
^^
^ 2a
0 2a
0
^
(lb)
so that the second derivative tf_'st reduces to a test o:^ the sign of a. ^ _
Pror_eeding from this ar:alys^.s, there are four possible cases. T}ie point that was ,
found Gas a positive maximum, positive minimum, negative n.;z ;i-:um, or negative mi_ni-
mun:. The twa cases that are of interest are the positive maximum and t^^e negative
minimum since it has been shot„•n [2J that the other two cases cannot occur. In each
of the cases of interest, the positive maximu^^ and the negative mini,;:um, there is
an intersection of the x - y l plai.e. Recalling that the column will be dominant if
f l ( x i , y l ) is positive, t^e analysis of the two cases is as follows. In the pasitive
maximun case, the values of x l and y l which will result in solution of the dominance
inequality are those points which lie inside the intersecticn of f l (:^ l , y l ) and the
x l-}' 1 plane, that is the circle which is the solution of f l (x l' y l ) Q' In the nega-
tive minimum case, the choices of x l and yl which result in solution of the domi-
nance inequality are these poi..^.ts which lie outside the circle of intersection. .
Thus, the intersection of the dominance function fl('^^1'y1) for column one and tha
x l -y^ plan:. defines the acceptable ra.zl;e of x l and yl such that the system will be
dominant in the first column at the stecific frequency at which the analysis c^as per-
^ .formed. In like fashion, the second colunn of th4 system may be analyzed, and the
• acceptable choices of s 2 and y 2
may be determined.
If. this dominance analysis is repeated over a range of frequencies, and the result-
, i.ng circles of intersection plotted, a C:1i.DI:1D (Complex Acceptability Region fer
DlAgonal. _Dominance) Plot is produced. A solid circle is dra:rn if the acceptable
''.^ choice of x and y lie inside the circle, and a dashed circle is drawn if the accept-
, able region is outside the circle of intersection. Associated with each C:1RDI:1D plot
is a locus of centers p lot, which indica[es the centers and labels tt^e frequency of
^^^ each. Space limitation, do not allow the locus of ccr.ters plots to he included with .
tt^e CARDI:ID plots in this paper; but they will be mention4d and referenced as neces-
nary,
. 3. ILT.UST1u^TIO^I
Figs. 1 and 2 are C:1ItDIAD Plots of a two-input, five-state, two-output model of a
jet engine. The n:odcl is derived from a jet engine siriulator called D1tiCl:^I [3,'.J
^"
*^ and represents an F-1.0;1 turbofan ,jet cnl;ine with a fuel flew of 2,75 Lb:a/sec. (full
%^ `.
^^^^^ ^^^,g^"^,
;^ rea f. iY'
4^ P^O^ r
.
r %!
!!r ~
Y om,
`\` •,, ^` ♦•.
•.
l
^(i i^ .I ' i,.t SI^4l
„ ! 111 _Y^ •; _ ^
^^^^.^' _ —r ^ ^ \ ♦+♦ , •+ * \I ,^; \, \ +1
1/71
1
^O 1 i • I
L ; ; ^ 11 ^^
^^ +^ 1 I + ;
I, 1 ♦ ^I i^}t I f ^ I
/ 1 • .^ _
RN f ; ^ 1 ,1\; ., ^,^^ ^ s„1 !♦ ♦• !! ^ 1 1 ^
1 ♦ r ay i =• : ^. ^: ^ q :: ^ % ^ It i f + l ♦ ♦+♦^ f ^ '.^..
t 1 1 \r f
1 E'
r•f
1 7 •l f I I
t o f
a
1
+
r
^
• •
+tea_ ^'
1
^„ ' T^ c..^..^'
i ^ r!
r f
r +
!
^r \\`
I^R^
-. -
^^ ^a1
!
`
^I
^ ^,.
!
,+
`^: r ,• ,
f-1.M ♦.oa+ `:¢ -2.CG - LC'T -
• Y 1 • t.p
-- Es9' y
` 7.t9 , , •.r + s^
t. flEPt ltEPt. P t34I
,i throttle without afterburners}, The inputs axe fuel flow and exhaust area and the
outputs are thrust and high turbine inlet temperature. This model is one of a
sexl.es of such models presently being used in a set point study of an F-100 like
i ^et engine.
The analysis of CARDIELD plots proceeds as follows. Recall that, at any given fre-
quency, the acceptable region is outside the circle if the circle is dashed or
l inside if the circle is solid, The first question of interest is whether the colu;^ns
of the aysterE are dominant unCOnponsated, For this to be the case, the origin of
i
the C^iRDIAD plot must be 3.ncluded in all solid circles and e^:cludcd by all dashed
circles, since the origin xepresents identity compensation of tY:e column. This is
not the case far either of the two CARDIAD plats of this system. The next question
is ^--rhethe: the system can be made dominant by constant real. precompensation. if
this is the case, there will e^cist a point on the real e^cis which lies inside all
solid eixcles and outside all dashed circles. Fig. 1 shows that the first column
of 'the system can be made dominant at all frequencies by the choice of any constant
6 x1 which lies outside all the dashed circles of the Ct1ciAZ^'^D plot. Fig. Z shows
t.fiat there exists no constant value that will make the second column of the system
dominant at all frequencies. Thus, some form of frequency dependent precompensation
will. be necessary.
c before grocceding wz.th dominating this system, some of the features of CARDI.AD plots
should be mentioned. One property is that d circle at a specific frequency in the
plot far one column will be sl^lid ii the other column is dominant at that frequency
and will be dashed if the other column is not dominant. From this £act it follot.s
that the transition from one type of circle to the other in the CARDI^'1D plot for
one column occurs when there is a c.hangc in dominance in the other column. Once
a again considering Figs, 1 and 2, these £acts indicate that the second column is not
dominant at any frequency since all of the circles in the CRLgDIAD plot for the £zrst
column are dashed and that- the first column is dominant at low frequencies {until
i W =7} because the circles in the CAF.UTAD plot for the second colunn are solid for
this and all lower frequencies.
^ second .feature ox the CARDI^ID Plat is the effects of a column switch on the plots,
t n
w. _.. .. .. -. _. .., ,. .-
....:.... ^. .. w.-r, -:., Imo., .^ _ .-,t....,t, ^ .:... a
.:. ,.. . .
'^
^^ that is, pramultiplicatian by a matrix with the only non^.ero entries being off-die--
• gonal 1's. The effects of such a switching of fire inputs are that all solid circles
' become dashed circles, all dashed circl^.s becat^e solid, and kite shapes of the column
. _ one and twa plats are switched. Th` Cf1TtDT^1D plats o;E the system with this type of
compensation ar^^ given in Figs. 3 attd G. :dote that the first column is now dnrti-
nant at all frequencies wl.thout further compensation. This fact cren be ascertained
__ A -- - ^F ^M
O
^ •y\
t
i L
^ 17
l
^^^ ^
. ^\_t\
f `
^^^}V, .", . , .
^^ ,,, yi
f e
if1. 1 f
i I
^^ 1. ^^ n ^
,.. ,_^^^
1^^
i' ^' h:
'^; . _f
^ ^:==^r^,f ^ ^ •fir
^- %^ ^ ^[ ^ ^
^ • ^^
^ ^ - (la)
^ a
1!:t 3.s still necessary to ntal:e :he secand column af- the system dominant. From the
C^DIAD plat for this column {Fig. ^), it is apparent that frequency dependant com-
pensation will. he necessary since there exists na point in the real axis which is
r ^.nol.uded in all the solid circles of this plat. To design such'a compensator, a
f^sncCion of s is fitted to the shape of the CP^^DT1D plot so that, at any given fre--
gt€enc}', the compensator lies inside the solid circle associated with the same fre-
e quancy in the CAFAI<tD plat. While at is possible to find a first order compensator
That will make this calitrtn dominant, a second order compensator has been used be--
cause this same compensator tould also achieve dominance at four other set paints
of tIte model.. is (s) is the compensator the'- achieves dominance in the secand column
- pg U ^s d x^Z , ^ -
. ^ °-. 742s ^ 9. ^9
vc^l4s^ — 0998s -t• Z.
. ^^ fs) ^^.a)
GAT ^^^^ IS
l^ 1 dr
..,1.j ^^ ^ ^^A^^L^`7^
^.
^:-^ a
e 1
•
- ;.t
- ^3
4 ,
^ ^ the averal.^. ^am^ensation is K3,^R2 (s) ^ K(s) given bcl.ow.
. ,
t ^'f p ^. _'
(I^1)
^"^s) ^ ^ PAGE ^3
^ --0.742s — 9.59
2 n ^ ^ +f^iJALITY, c
o ^l^+s — s^J^ s '^' 1.
^ The C^iRDTAD plots of the system with this compensator are giti^en in Figs. 5 and 6.
^ _ It 3.s obvious either from the fact that only solid circles appear in the plots or
from the fact that all. the solid circles include the origin that each column. of the
system is now dominant at all €requencies.
`^'.
.^ ^.
,..;` `^ -
F^.g. 5, Column ^, G{s)^K(s) Fig. ^. ^ol.umn 2, G(s)^1:(s)
^_t^.
^. GEt^^RALT^k^TT^J^
the CARDTAD Plot approach tv syster: dominance in the three--?nput, three-output case
r 4
^ ^s similar to the app?-aach in the two-input, two-output case.
- the actual condition for dominance in the ^ x 3 cases is the i th column of a matrix
^ Z(s^ will be dominant if
c _ ^
^ ^ -
P ,. i 3 ^i
fox a].l s ort D. Tf bath sides of this ^.a^egt^ali.ty are squared as, in the 2 x 2 case,
^: Mien an equivalent ^ condition is ^
^€.
^i
^^. Using inequality (?l.) = the condition for dominance in, say, the first column i.s
^^ 2
^^ l^x^^s^ ^ ^+ z s ^ ^^^ s
,^-2x ^ I z
1 ^^^ s^ l C^^^
^^^^^^) ^ 1 31 ( ^ i
' the czass term produced by squaring adds non--integral. power reams to-the dominance
.•,^_
^^. •..
`` 1 •
i^
`l, _ .,.
_
inequality for the 3 x 3 system. To circui^^vent this prnUlem, the last term ai ine-
•quality {2^} ^.s replaced by an upper bound. Since '
23. j j 31 I— I a l II 3l I
with equality when ^y2i1{s}I ^ Iz 31 (s)I, it is convenient to^replaca the last form
- of inequality (22} wits the Left member of inequality (23). This yields a suffi-
.^
cient condition fox dominance. For column 1, the condition is :.- ^;
-: ^z ^x (s} I^ — alz a^. {^) I^ -- zjZ ^^. (^) I Z > ^; c^^^
and the general farm is
. , : ^ ^ 2
- ^z^^^s} I . --z ^ jZ ji {s) j ^ o, ^ = x,^,^. c2s3
^-^
^^^
` From inequality (24}, the derivation of the dominance equation for the 3 x 3 case
proceeds analogously to the 2 x 2 derivation. The general form of the compensator
^ssed i.n the analysis is
^ ^^-^{s, a13{s}
^($^ - u 2^. Cs7 l x`23
{s) ' {2b 7
X31{s} a32{s} l
^' _..
where a ij = x ij + y ij 3. .
o
Cnce again,6-^the
^
open loop transfer function matrix G(s) and the general form {26) of
• the compensator are evaluated at a specific frequency and multiplied to form Q{3w},
(' Then, using inequality {2S'1, a dominance inequality for eac;i of the three columns of
• ^{jw} can be form:.d. For example, the first column of Q{jw) w^.11 be do;ninant at the
frequency w ix
2
—2 (2 ^ }
^ ^^a. I ^ °^^ I q ^i I ^ I q3l 1 ' °
and the dominance function for co7.umn 1. is
The. following design i.s performed on the reduced order model of the theme problem
wa.th state feedback. Tha states being fed back are the two turbine speeds and the
^^._;.^ pressure P b . Dominance will be achieved using only precompensation.
The plots for the uncompensated system using the standard dominance analysis showed
_ that the first two columns of the system could be made dominant with one off-diag--
vnal entry in each of the first two columns of the compensator zero. The third
-column, however, could not be made dominant at env frequency kith either one of the
- off-diagonal entries in the third column zero. Physically, this a.ndicates that the
principal effects of all three inputs {fuel. flow, exhaust area, and ;uide vanes)
are nn the two speed states. To facilitate achieving dominance, a colunjn switch was
_ ^ done Tay choosing the first camgansator to be ,
a 1 ^
^^ x ^ ^ .
_ ^F3.gs. 7--12 are the CARDIAD plots of the system with this compensator and use the
standard domina.:^ce analysis.. The plots for the entries in the first column, Figs. '
- ^` 7 and 8, show that tlxc first column ^s damxnant wxthaut further compensation, since
the origin a£ each p1a.t is included inside x1.1 solid circles and excluded by all
slashed circles. Fags. 9 and 10 a,:e the Ce1i.I)Tr1D plats for the second cal,umn. Fig.
^.1}, the plot far the 3,2 entry, has several triangles in it, .indi.ca .ti:ng that,. at
^,
s
a^. ^ ^^ .f
! •'^.'7e^^^•`^^ ~,ate -^.^^.: '^
Cn
s Ik ^! ^='
^+ `' -- ^'^:,'
t`lax ;sip: xai-ss=-5'^
e ^^^. ^ •
t Kl , 3,1. Entry
F^.g. 7. G (s) ^^: 1 , 2,1 Entry Figs $. G(s)
a
• ^:
^r
R :^..
^4
^i.^
4L
/•R
^^
My^^,+
- .
p'
S^
S^ L•
^.i ^:1
Li
F
C a ,'
4,
r
f^.
. ^;i
t' •
a^^+
a
s^'^ ^
•
•nl
^wS 1
•^^t t
'^' t
'^:,
rt ^
t
tt
i r.. ^
St
t
^
t
t
1
^
i ^^t r
ww
. lt{ ^
r ;
^
t
t
S
rwn 1 t
r.^.li i t
r' ^^ \\ ^
r.7^ f.71
^
a.lo
^
I•
^^•^^
^.lt 9..7 a.l,
7 .n •7.:7 -7.35 •^.ld a.71 9.69
IiEia LAST +t^
^.vi a. 19 9.IS a.l9 9.! ^: ^. ?
- ^
4
-
s i ^.
M..
S.. • a
.:.< •_ ,:, .i ..^:. <^1.^,a.. ..a ., mod_.. ,r
^^
,-.
• ^
i w ,g
i
•
t ^
a
a
=n.^a ,op i,ra s: s crc^ • p,vs 2^:h6 x.ao sl:m ► a.oa s-.
`^ . ; ^ xE^ Fair
'^
' Fig. ^.3,. G (s) ^xZ , ^., 3 entry ^'^.g. 1. 2. G (s) ^Kl , 2, 3 Entry
diagonal entries i.n the compensator zero.
•
Figs. l3 and ^.^ axe the plots for the third column using the full. gradient rather
khan tine standard analysis. The solid circles which appear at high frequencies in
Fig. J.^ are very important. Recall that the circle c^^.IZ only be drawn if dominance
can be achieved while the other entry is zero. Th^.s means that by staying inside ^a
these solid circles, dominance can be achieved at the frequencies at which they :n
occur while the l,3 entry in the compensator is zero. Thus, ir: designinn the 2,3
-,a
''' ^
,^
i^^
^' i s'ntY; ,t F i^' rrxat ,^;^ that ^,s emp^.oyCd is to falla1a tl ►e tri.ang].e., at low frcquenc^.es
_ - and :.t ^^;- .its ?de :. ', solid circles at the ha filter frequcnc.ics. ^If this is done, the
dc:^il;^t crF the 1, ^`^tCry will be simplified bccausc it will only be necessary to fit
- ' the ^:^: ^:y to the ,,-^^ca frequency triangles and have the function go to zero at higher
fa _ ^ r . Lcs. '
• ; this strategy, a Iag compensator was designed to fit the 2,3 entry as
^',",...~r. ^^cd previously. The compensator entry that was chosen is
1_• (s} _ -I29.4s -I9^r0.2 s
-
- ^23 .0365s + 1.
. . , fit, i':e same Lime, another lag compensator is fit to the solid circles in I'ig. 9,
^.: ^__ }..• :;^sRDIAD plat for the 1, 2 entry. This was chosen to be
:. ^ . Q3.27 ^ ^
_ ^ ^ x`12 (s} _ .1162s + I. '
- DeLin.ing this compensator as K^(s) with all the other off--diagonal entxies zero, the
c:^ • ralZ com
P ensation thus far ^s K
^(s} = K K1 2(s) .
0 I
-- 129.4s -- 19^Q.2
^^
_ . .03b5s + 1
^^IG^TAL PAGE ^g
. . i7^.27 4
1 . i3.G2s + ^..
.-,
Figs. 15 - 20 are the CAADI_^ plats of G(s)K3(s) using; the standard dominance analysis.
i^ The pints show that the first two calursns of the system are dominant at all freauen--
' ties since in 1?igs. I5- 18 the origin of each plot is contained by all solid circles
and e^culuded by all dashed circles. Fig. 19 shows that the strategy applied in the
design for the 2,3 entry was successful. To make the third column dominant, it is
now on^.y necessary to fit a compensator to the shape of the. solid circ3.es in Fig. I4
^•
E
F-^ `\.\
S
•^ ,
^'-;
t ^ f t^
s r^ ^
^^
s.,°, i l:j 1 i
¢a 's i
!^F ac ^^
o. ^ ^ 4 ^ ' ^
^n
¢^
s^ i
Is `` •
•
Z ^^ ..^ ,. ''`I ,I_ ^r ^ 15
^C e
m
_ ^
P ,'1 ^
• ^k
.•^ `
• a i
. .. f
Fag. xS. G (s) *1:3(s), 2,1 Entx'y Fig. ].6. G{s)*h^{S}, 3,^ Entry
.+
•:
, , ,.
au highe r frequ encie s. The funct ion was
ond have it
.,5321' + 16,917
' ~.u ;!~,~
l 2
.0127 s + .19865 + 1.
The only chang e this has on the overa ll compe nsa'to r
is that the ze,ro in the 3,3
• fOO1L ..,1IJiI
co11!mn is replo tted using this
.entry is replac ed by this funct ion. When the third
I
, comp ensato r and stand, ard domin ance analy sis, Figs.
show tha,t the third colum n is now d<lmin ant at all
21 and 22, the CMliilIMI plots
frequ encie s. Thus, the sys,te m is
I ,
I
I
I.
'I:. .. ,
F:l.~. 18. G(S)*K3 (S), 3,2 En~ry
G,(S)*K3 (5), 1,2 Entry
I. Fig. 17.
=ir."~----------~--------~~~
..
I,
•• ..
·l. t
•
•
I
I
I.,. '
,I '.
,J F:l.g. 19. G(s)"'K3 (S), 1,3 Entry Fig. 20. G(S)*K3 (S), 2,3 Entry
,
. 1'~ •
'
~, .. •
...
_ ''V~)
tt
:..,
""
t: g^1^ =^ r
^ ^;'•^
^ ^^^.
w.
Sri i ' ' ^ ^ ^,V^^^{
f ^ f { ±^ ^ ^
^ ;^ '.
f r4
^ ^ ^^^ r ^ 1^^ ^^ 1^^^ .
e.
t. ^
` "^^%
^i.: ' ` ^
f ^ I
t A
s.ec .,.a ^-i.:.r^ ' -r.e^ -e,ze r.::
1lE[iL lGSY
Y
111 ^
^.ea z:ac
'
im <ia a.e
' Ffg. 2I. G(s)^K{s), 1,3 Entry F^.g. 22. G(s}^K(s), 2,3 Entry
dominance with sinple, lead-lag compensators. Examples up to this tir,^e suggest _that, ^.
over the useful bandwidth, simple compensators are often succassful in this regard.
:, .1
It should be noted that this paper illustrates only compensator selection for dor.^i- i',^
Nance. Completion of the design is by classical means, For an example, see [5]. ^^
'{ particular note is the fact that compensator denominators having right half plane ?^
^^
zeros do not necessazily land to unstable controllers. This may also be seen in [3]. '^;^:
;t:.
Continued research on this class of graphical., interactive methods is in progress. ^,
^i
:, ,
:^
,t.
7. AC1^Iq^dI^EDGAIENT
14
^`h$s work was supportFd i.n part by* the National Science Foundation under Grant E^tiG ^_±
'^--22322 and in part by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration under ^p
Grant NSG 3048. -
a
..
S. fiEFEr.ENCES r
. ^
:i X
1. H. i^. Rosenbrock, Com uter Aided Control S y stem Deli. n, New York: Academic ^:
Press, ].974. ^ ;^ 5
2. R. M. Schafer, "A Graphical Approach tv 5ystem Dvmxnance," M.S. Thasis, Depart- ^^,
_^.
meet of Electrical Engineering, EJnivexsity of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indians, y...
`'
;3
:,;' I^ay 1977.
^.: .. . .. .
^•.. ^rsnd Tran.^3et*: f'erLor^Etancc of 'ittrbojet and Turba^at^ F.n^ines,' r NASA Te}tctt^.cal
• Motes, NASA ' :+" ^}-- 7901, Sdas }tinBton, D.C., April 1975.
--_ ^.. ?,. ^. Ge}r sex, `"NASA Preliminary P^cport on DYGISBCD," April 1976.
:_
,f_ .-
__
^,
_. -
^^
^ _
'
^•
^. ^ ^ .
... ^
.^`
:^ ^,.
= `'
,; ^' ^ -
_. ; . _
'; ,^
__^ „