| Literature DB >> 27213389 |
Jianliang Zhu1, Panlong Wu2, Yuming Bo3.
Abstract
Because the existing extremum ratio method for projectile attitude measurement is vulnerable to random disturbance, a novel integral ratio method is proposed to calculate the projectile attitude. First, the non-orthogonal measurement theory of the magnetic sensors is analyzed. It is found that the projectile rotating velocity is constant in one spinning circle and the attitude error is actually the pitch error. Next, by investigating the model of the extremum ratio method, an integral ratio mathematical model is established to improve the anti-disturbance performance. Finally, by combining the preprocessed magnetic sensor data based on the least-square method and the rotating extremum features in one cycle, the analytical expression of the proposed integral ratio algorithm is derived with respect to the pitch angle. The simulation results show that the proposed integral ratio method gives more accurate attitude calculations than does the extremum ratio method, and that the attitude error variance can decrease by more than 90%. Compared to the extremum ratio method (which collects only a single data point in one rotation cycle), the proposed integral ratio method can utilize all of the data collected in the high spin environment, which is a clearly superior calculation approach, and can be applied to the actual projectile environment disturbance.Entities:
Keywords: extremum ratio method; integral ratio method; least square; magnetic sensor; projectile attitude
Year: 2016 PMID: 27213389 PMCID: PMC4883421 DOI: 10.3390/s16050730
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1Coordinate transformation schematic diagram.
Figure 2Schematic diagram of mounted magnetic sensors.
Figure 3Comparison between the period of function () and the two integral outputs of feature values and .
Figure 4The flow chart of integral ratio method.
Figure 5Comparison of the pitch angle error with .
Figure 6Comparison of the pitch angle error with .
The comparison of the pitch angle error.
| Method | Error Mean | Error Variance | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| (unit: 0.001 rad) | (unit: 0.001) | |||
| σ2 = 0.001 | σ2 = 0.01 | σ2 = 0.001 | σ2 = 0.01 | |
| Extremum ratio method | 0.45389 | 11.2 | 0.017722 | 0.87621 |
| Integral ratio method | 0.070004 | 1.1 | 0.0019182 | 0.034168 |
| Error reduction | 84.6% | 90.2% | 89.2% | 96.1% |
Figure 7The curves of the attitude angle during projectile flight.
Figure 8The attitude angle calculated by the integral ratio method.
Figure 9Attitude angle calculating error of the integral ratio method.
Figure 10The pitch angle calculated by the extremum ratio method and the integral ratio method.
The error variance comparison between the extremum ratio method and the proposed integral ratio method.
| Method | Pitch Angle | Roll Angle |
|---|---|---|
| (unit: 0.001) | (unit: 0.001) | |
| Extremum ratio method | 1.4526 | 0.20321 |
| Integral ratio method | 0.18652 | 0.093807 |
| Error reduction | 87.2% | 53.8% |