| Literature DB >> 35746370 |
Chenming Zhang1, Jie Li1, Xiaoqiao Yuan1, Xi Zhang2, Xiaokai Wei1, Kaiqiang Feng1, Chenjun Hu1, Debiao Zhang3, Yubing Jiao1.
Abstract
Single-axis rotation modulation (SRM) still accumulates errors in the roll axis direction, which leads to the navigation accuracy not meeting the requirements of guided missiles. Compound rotation modulation (CRM) superimposes one-dimensional rotation on the basis of SRM, so that the error of the projectile in the direction of the roll axis is also modulated. However, the error suppression effect of CRM is not only affected by the error of the IMU itself, but also related to the modulation angular velocity. In order to improve the accuracy of rotary semi-strapdown inertial navigation system (RSSINS), this paper proposes an optimal rotation angular velocity determination method. Firstly, the residual error in CRM scheme is analyzed; then, the relationship between the incomplete modulation error and the modulation angular velocity in CRM is discussed; finally, a method for determining the optimal modulation angular velocity is proposed (K-value method). The analysis of the results shows that the navigation accuracy of the guided projectile is effectively improved with the rotation scheme set at the modulation angular velocity determined by the K-value method.Entities:
Keywords: RSSINS; incomplete modulation error; optimal modulation angular velocity; rotation modulation
Year: 2022 PMID: 35746370 PMCID: PMC9228760 DOI: 10.3390/s22124583
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.847
Figure 1Schematic diagram of the structure of compound RSSINS.
Figure 2Solution principle block diagram of compound RSSINS.
IMU error parameter.
| MEMS Sensors | Bias Error | Scale Factor Error | Installation Error | Random Wandering |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gyro |
| 50 ppm |
|
|
| Accelerometer | 2 mg | 50 ppm |
|
|
Simulation rotation scheme with different K.
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
| 1/4 | 180 | 45 |
| 1/3 | 180 | 60 |
| 1/2 | 120 | 60 |
| 1 | 120 | 120 |
| 0 | 120 | 0 |
| 2 | 60 | 120 |
| 3 | 60 | 180 |
| 4 | 45 | 180 |
Figure 3Error comparison chart of different K in static state. (a) Deviation angle in three axes; (b) velocity error in three axes.
Setting of angular motion state.
| Serial Number | Movement Status | Duration (s) |
|---|---|---|
| 1 |
| 10 |
| 2 |
| 45 |
| 3 | Uniform | 10 |
| 4 |
| 45 |
| 5 | Uniform | 45 |
| 6 |
| 45 |
| 7 | Uniform | 45 |
| 8 |
| 45 |
| 9 | Uniform | 10 |
| 10 |
| 45 |
| 11 | Uniform | 10 |
| 12 |
| 10 |
Figure 4The error-free ideal trajectory in angular motion state.
Figure 5Error comparison chart of different K in yaw motion state. (a) Deviation angle in three axes; (b) velocity error in three axes.
Setting of acceleration and deceleration motion state.
| Serial Number | Movement Status |
|
|---|---|---|
| 1 |
| 20 |
| 2 |
| 20 |
| 3 |
| 20 |
| 4 |
| 20 |
| 5 |
| 20 |
| 6 |
| 20 |
Figure 6Error comparison chart of different K in acceleration and deceleration motion state. (a) Deviation angle in three axes; (b) velocity error in three axes.
The same K rotation schemes.
| Scheme |
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 5 | 10 |
| 2 | 2 | 10 | 20 |
| 3 | 2 | 20 | 40 |
| 4 | 2 | 30 | 60 |
| 5 | 2 | 40 | 80 |
| 6 | 2 | 50 | 100 |
| 7 | 2 | 60 | 120 |
| 8 | 2 | 100 | 200 |
Figure 7Angular velocity and specific force of the sensors in b-frame. (a) Angular velocity in three axes; (b) specific force in three axes.
Figure 8Error comparison chart of the same K in stationary state. (a) Deviation angle in three axes; (b) velocity error in three axes.
The parameters of the simulated missile at the initial moment.
| Indicator Items | Numerical Value |
|---|---|
| Quality |
|
| Length |
|
| Rotational inertia |
|
| Pneumatic pressure |
|
| Yaw |
|
| Pitch |
|
| Roll |
|
| Latitude |
|
| Longitude |
|
| Altitude |
|
| Speed |
|
| Angular velocity |
|
Figure 9Output information of IMU. (a) Output information of angular velocity. (b) output information of acceleration.
Figure 10Trajectory comparison chart of different navigation schemes.
Figure 11Error comparison chart of different navigation schemes. (a) Attitude error comparison chart; (b) velocity error comparison chart; (c) position error comparison chart.
Comparison table of maximum errors of different schemes.
| Errors | Single-Axis Rotation Modulation Scheme | Compound Rotation Modulation Scheme |
|---|---|---|
|
| 0.007 | −0.003 |
|
| 0.318 | −0.072 |
|
| −0.220 | 0.114 |
|
| −0.331 | 0.021 |
|
| 0.829 | −0.013 |
|
| −0.058 | −0.032 |
|
| −6.917 | 0.329 |
|
| 18.119 | −0.224 |
|
| 6.049 | −0.581 |