Directional stability during the roll-out phase is crucial to the safety and reusability of the aircraft. Because of the mechanical properties, the wheel-skid aircraft is more prone to produce course instability. To address this issue, the taxiing safe set of the wheel-skid aircraft is discussed based on the reachability theory. A dynamic model of the on-ground aircraft is established firstly, considering the complex condition of the ground loads. Then, the particular Hamilton–Jacobi partial differential equation is used to obtain the safe set. According to the safe set results, the optimal control of the rudder is built in the state space. Its effectiveness is verified by the comparison with other robust methods. In addition, three structural parameters are selected to analyze the influences on the safe set. Results indicate that the maximum safe yaw angle increases from to at 70 m/s under the optimal control of the rudder when the steering of nose wheel is locked. The safe boundary in the middle–high-speed region expands by 43.5% under the rudder control. Because of the mechanical properties, uncontrollable deflection will appear due to the asymmetric disturbances when the longitudinal velocity is lower than 42 m/s.
StillwellWH. X-15 research results: With a selected bibliography. Washington, DC: Scientific and Technical Information Division, National Aeronautics, 1965, vol 60.
2.
JenkinsDR. Hypersonics before the Shuttle: A concise history of the X-15 research airplane.18. Washington, DC: National Aeronautics and Space Administration, NASA Office of Policy, 2000.
3.
JenkinsDR. X-15: Extending the frontiers of flight. Washington, DC: NASA, 2007.
4.
MatrangaGJ. Analysis of X-15 landing approach and flare characteristics determined from the first 30 flights. Washington, DC: National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 1961.
HuangZBestMKnowlesJ. An investigation of a high-speed ground manoeuvre under optimal control. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part G: Journal of Aerospace Engineering2019; 233(12): 4363–4379.
7.
LooyeG. Rapid prototyping using inversion-based control and object-oriented modelling. Nonlinear analysis and synthesis techniques for aircraft control. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, 2007, vol 395, pp. 147–173.
8.
DongSJiaoZSunX, et al.Dynamic allocation algorithm for the gain of UAV nose wheel steering and differential braking based on decomposition control. In: 2016 IEEE international conference on aircraft utility systems (AUS), Beijing, China. IEEE, pp. 831–835.
9.
DuprezJMora-CaminoFVillaumeF. Aircraft-on-ground lateral control for low speed maneuvers. IFAC Proceedings Volumes2004; 37(6): 475–480.
10.
BoLZongxiaJShaopingW. Research on modeling and simulation of aircraft taxiing rectification. In: 2006 IEEE conference on robotics, automation and mechatronics, Bangkok, Thailand. IEEE, pp.1–5.
11.
RoosCBiannicJMTarbouriechS, et al.On-ground aircraft control design using a parameter-varying anti-windup approach. Aerospace Science and Technology2010; 14(7): 459–471.
12.
YanBWuC. Research on taxi modeling and taking-off control for UAV. 2014 seventh international symposium on computational intelligence and design., Hangzhou, China: IEEE, 1, pp. 108–111.
13.
ReF. Modelica landing gear modelling and on-ground trajectory tracking with sliding mode control. Advances in aerospace guidance, navigation and control. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, 2011, pp. 103–115.
14.
YinQNieHWeiX, et al.Aircraft electric anti-skid braking and combined direction control system using co-simulation and experimental methods. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part G: Journal of Aerospace Engineering2020; 234(2): 173–191.
15.
ChenBJiaoZGeSS. Aircraft-on-ground path following control by dynamical adaptive backstepping. Chinese Journal of Aeronautics2013; 26(3): 668–675.
16.
LemayDChamaillardYBassetM, et al.Gain-scheduled yaw control for aircraft ground taxiing. IFAC Proceedings Volumes2011; 44(1): 12970–12975.
17.
SadienERoosCBiroucheA, et al.A simple and efficient control allocation scheme for on-ground aircraft runway centerline tracking. Control Engineering Practice2020; 95: 104228.
18.
GreenbankS. Landing gear—the aircraft requirement. Proceedings of The Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part G: Journal of Aerospace Engineering1991; 205(1): 27–34.
19.
AndrewAM. Applied interval analysis: With examples in parameter and state estimation, robust control and robotics. Kybernetes, 2002.
20.
FeuerAHeymannM. ω-invariance in control systems with bounded controls. Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications1976; 53(2): 266–276.
21.
LygerosJ. On reachability and minimum cost optimal control. Automatica2004; 40(6): 917–927.
22.
MitchellIMBayenAMTomlinCJ. A time-dependent hamilton-jacobi formulation of reachable sets for continuous dynamic games. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control2005; 50(7): 947–957.
23.
KitsiosILygerosJ. Aerodynamic envelope computation for safe landing of the hl-20personnel launch vehicle using hybrid control. In: Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE international symposium on, mediterrean conference on control and automation intelligent control, Limassol, Cyprus. IEEE, 2005, pp. 231–236.
24.
KitsiosILygerosJ. Final glide-back envelope computation for reusable launch vehicle using reachability. In: Proceedings of the 44th IEEE conference on decision and control, Seville, Spain. IEEE, 2012, pp. 4059–4064.
25.
KitsiosILygerosJ. Launch-pad abort flight envelope computation for a personnel launch vehicle using reachability. In: AIAA guidance, navigation, and control conference and exhibit, San Francisco, California. 2005, p. 6150.
26.
OishiMMitchellITomlinC, et al.Computing viable sets and reachable sets to design feedback linearizing control laws under saturation. In: Proceedings of the 45th IEEE conference on decision and control, San Diego, CA, USA. IEEE, 2020, pp. 3801–3807.
27.
AllenRKwatnyHBajpaiG. Safe set protection and restoration for unimpaired and impaired aircraft. In: AIAA guidance, navigation, and control conference, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 2012, p. 4822.
28.
WangXFLiJMKongXW, et al.Towards docking safety analysis for unmanned aerial vehicle probe-drogue autonomous aerial refueling based on docking success-probability and docking reachability. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part G: Journal of Aerospace Engineering2019; 233(11): 3893–3905.
29.
WongJY. Theory of ground vehicles. Ottawa, Canada: John Wiley & Sons, 2008.
30.
PacejkaH. Tire and vehicle dynamics. London, UK: Elsevier, 2012.
31.
AllenRCKwatnyHG. Maneuverability and envelope protection in the prevention of aircraft loss of control. In: 2011 8th Asian control conference (ASCC), Kaohsiung, Taiwan. IEEE, 2011, pp. 381–386.
32.
MitchellIM. A toolbox of level set methods (version 1.1). Vancouver, BC, Canada: Department of Computer Science, University of British Columbia, 2004, Tech2007.
33.
OsherSFedkiwRP. Level set methods and dynamic implicit surfaces. New York: Springer, 2005, vol. 200.
34.
MitchellI. Demonstrating numerical convergence to the analytic solution of some backwards reachable sets with sharp features. Vancouver, BC, Canada: Dept Comput Sci, Univ British Columbia, Tech Rep TR. 2004-012004.
35.
MitchellITomlinCJ. Level set methods for computation in hybrid systems. International workshop on hybrid systems: Computation and control. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, 2002, pp. 310–323.
36.
MitchellIBayenAMTomlinCJ. Validating a hamilton-jacobi approximation to hybrid system reachable sets. International workshop on hybrid systems: Computation and control. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, 2001, pp. 418–432.
