0
Research Papers

Actuator Design and Flight Testing of an Active Microspoiler-Equipped Projectile

[+] Author and Article Information
Dooroo Kim, Laura Strickland

Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering,
Georgia Institute of Technology,
Atlanta, GA 30332

Matthew Gross, Mark Costello

Guggenheim School of Aerospace Engineering,
Georgia Institute of Technology,
Atlanta, GA 30332

Jonathan Rogers

Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering,
Georgia Institute of Technology,
Atlanta, GA 30332
e-mail: jonathan.rogers@me.gatech.edu

Frank Fresconi

Guided Weapons, Weapons and
Materials Research Directorate,
U.S. Army Research Laboratory,
Aberdeen Proving Ground,
Aberdeen, MD 21005

Ilmars Celmins

Weapons and Materials Research Directorate,
U.S. Army Research Laboratory,
Aberdeen Proving Ground,
Aberdeen, MD 21005

Contributed by the Dynamic Systems Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF DYNAMIC SYSTEMS, MEASUREMENT, AND CONTROL. Manuscript received October 27, 2016; final manuscript received April 28, 2017; published online July 10, 2017. Assoc. Editor: Soo Jeon. The United States Government retains, and by accepting the article for publication, the publisher acknowledges that the United States Government retains, a nonexclusive, paid-up, irrevocable, worldwide license to publish or reproduce the published form of this work, or allow others to do so, for United States Government purposes.

J. Dyn. Sys., Meas., Control 139(11), 111002 (Jul 10, 2017) (15 pages) Paper No: DS-16-1519; doi: 10.1115/1.4036808 History: Received October 27, 2016; Revised April 28, 2017

Actively controlled gun-launched projectiles require a means of modifying the projectile flight trajectory. While numerous potential mechanisms exist, microspoiler devices have been shown to be a promising control actuator for fin-stabilized projectiles in supersonic flight. These devices induce a trim force and moment generated by the boundary layer–shock interaction between the projectile body, rear stabilizing fins, and microspoilers. Previous investigations of microspoiler mechanisms have established estimates of baseline control authority, but experimental results have been restricted to cases in which the mechanism was statically deployed. This paper details the design and flight testing of a projectile equipped with a set of active microspoilers. A mechanical actuator is proposed that exhibits unique advantages in terms of robustness, simplicity, gun-launch survivability, and bandwidth compared to other projectile actuator mechanisms considered to date. A set of integrated test projectiles is constructed using this actuator design, and flight experiments are performed in which the microspoilers are oscillated near the projectile roll frequency. Data obtained from these flight tests are used in parameter estimation studies to experimentally characterize the aerodynamic effects of actively oscillating microspoilers. These predictions compare favorably with estimates obtained from computational fluid dynamics (CFD). Overall, the results presented here demonstrate that actively controlled microspoilers can generate reasonably high levels of lateral acceleration suitable for trajectory modification in many smart-weapons applications.

Copyright © 2017 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Siouris, G. M. , 2004, Missile Guidance and Control Systems, Springer, New York, p. 3.
Costello, M. , 1997, “ Range Optimization of a Fin-Stabilized Projectile,” AIAA Paper No. 97-3724.
Ollerenshaw, D. , and Costello, M. , 2008, “ Model Predictive Control of a Direct Fire Projectile Equipped With Canards,” ASME J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Control, 130(6), p. 061010. [CrossRef]
Chandgadkar, S. , and Costello, M. , 2002, “ Performance of a Smart Direct Fire Projectile Using a Ram Air Control Mechanism,” ASME J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Control, 124(4), pp. 606–612. [CrossRef]
Baines, W. R. , and Sumrall, C. W. , 1985, “ Ram Air Steering System for a Guided Missile,” U.S. Patent No. US 4522357 A.
Costello, M. , and Agarwalla, R. , 2000, “ Improved Dispersion of a Fin-Stabilized Projectile Using a Passive Moveable Nose,” AIAA Paper No. 2000-4197.
Landers, M. , Hall, L. , Auman, L. , and Vaughn, M., Jr. , 2003, “ Deflectable Nose and Canard Controls for a Fin-Stabilized Projectile at Supersonic and Hypersonic Speeds,” AIAA Paper No. 2003-3805.
Kennedy, W. B. , and Mikkelsen, C. , 1998, “ AIT Real Gas Divert Jet Interactions: Summary of Technology,” AIAA Paper No. 98-5188.
Tournes, C. , Shtessel, Y. , and Shkolnikov, I. , 2006, “ Missile Controlled by Lift and Divert Thrusters Using Nonlinear Dynamic Sliding Manifolds,” J. Guid. Control Dyn., 29(3), pp. 617–625. [CrossRef]
Frost, G. , and Costello, M. , 2004, “ Linear Theory of a Projectile With a Rotating Internal Part in Atmospheric Flight,” J. Guid. Control Dyn., 27(5), pp. 898–906. [CrossRef]
Frost, G. , and Costello, M. , 2006, “ Control Authority of a Projectile Equipped With an Internal Unbalanced Part,” ASME J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Control, 128(4), pp. 1005–1012. [CrossRef]
Rogers, J. , and Costello, M. , 2008, “ Control Authority of a Projectile Equipped With a Controllable Internal Translating Mass,” J. Guid. Control Dyn., 31(5), pp. 1323–1333. [CrossRef]
Dykes, J. , Montalvo, C. , Costello, M. , and Sahu, J. , 2012, “ Use of Microspoilers for Control of Finned Projectiles,” J. Spacecr. Rockets, 49(6), pp. 1131–1140. [CrossRef]
Scheuermann, E. , Costello, M. , Silton, S. , and Sahu, J. , 2015, “ Aerodynamic Characterization of a Microspoiler System for Supersonic Finned Projectiles,” J. Spacecr. Rockets, 52(1), pp. 253–263. [CrossRef]
Leonard, A. , Rogers, J. , and Jubaraj, S. , 2016, “ Aerodynamic Optimization of Microspoiler Mechanisms for Projectile Flight Control,” J. Spacecr. Rockets, (accepted).
Massey, K. , McMichael, J. , Warnock, T. , and Hay, F. , 2008, “ Mechanical Actuators for Guidance of a Supersonic Projectile,” J. Spacecr. Rockets, 45(4), pp. 802–812. [CrossRef]
Massey, K. C. , and Guthrie, K. B. , 2005, “ Optimized Guidance of a Supersonic Projectile Using Pin Based Actuators,” AIAA Paper No. 2005-4966.
Massey, K. C. , and Silton, S. I. , 2006, “ Testing the Maneuvering Performance of a Mach 4 Projectile,” AIAA Paper No. 2006-3649.
Celmins, I. , 2007, “ Design and Evaluation of an Electromechanical Actuator for Projectile Guidance,” U.S. Army Research Laboratory, Aberdeen, MD, Technical Report No. ARL-MR-0672.
Fresconi, F. , Celmins, I. , and Fairfax, L. , 2011, “ Optimal Parameters for Maneuverability of Affordable Precision Munitions,” U.S. Army Research Laboratory, Aberdeen, MD, Technical Report No. ARL-TR-5647.
Kang, C.-G. , Lee, J.-S. , and Han, J.-H. , 2014, “ Development of Bi-Stable and Millimeter-Scale Displacement Actuator Using Snap-Through Effect for Reciprocating Control Fins,” Aerosp. Sci. Technol., 32(1), pp. 131–141. [CrossRef]
Celmins, I. , Fresconi, F. , and Nelson, B. , 2014, “ Actuator Characterization of a Man-Portable Precision Maneuver Concept,” Def. Technol., 10(2), pp. 141–148. [CrossRef]
Costello, M. , and Rogers, J. , 2011, “ BOOM: A Computer-Aided Engineering Tool for Exterior Ballistics of Smart Projectiles,” U.S. Army Research Laboratory, Aberdeen, MD, Technical Report No. ARL-CR-670.
Reuleaux, F. , 1876, Kinematics of Machinery: Outlines of a Theory of Machines (Translated by A. B. W. Kennedy), MacMillan and Company, London, p. 116.
Dueck, R. , and Reid, K. , 2012, Digital Electronics, Cengage Learning, Boston, MA, p. 286. [PubMed] [PubMed]
Bukowski, E. , 2009, “ Evaluation of Commercial-Off-the-Shelf Lithium Batteries for Use in Ballistic Telemetry Systems,” U.S. Army Research Laboratory, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Aberdeen, MD, Technical Report No. ARL-TR-4840.
Montalvo, C. , and Costello, M. , 2010, “ Estimation of Projectile Aerodynamic Coefficients Using Coupled CFD/RBD Simulation Results,” AIAA Paper No. 2010-8249.
Gross, M. , and Costello, C. , 2016, “ Projectile Parameter Estimation Using Meta-Optimization,” AIAA Paper No. 2016-0538.
Arrow Tech, 2000, “  PRODAS Version 3 Documentation,” Arrow Tech Associates, Burlington, VT.
Bhagwandin, V. , 2016, “ High-Alpha Prediction of Roll Damping and Magnus Stability Coefficients for Finned Projectiles,” J. Spacecr. Rockets, 53(4), pp. 720–729. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Microspoiler mechanism on-board a fin-stabilized projectile

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Army-Navy Finner projectile. All dimensions in calibers.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Optimized microspoiler geometry identified in CFD studies [15]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Microspoiler forces and moments versus angle of attack, Mach 2.5 [15]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Cross-range versus range for example trajectory simulation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Candidate rotary actuator mechanism designs: (a) scotch yoke design, (b) modified scotch yoke design, (c) positive return mechanism design, and (d) cam-follower design

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Microspoiler extension versus cam angle for candidate actuator designs

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Motor assembly (left) and latch circuit schematic (right) for microspoiler projectile

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Lab-characterized actuator step response

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Exploded view of active microspoiler assembly

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Active microspoiler projectile integrated design

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Fully assembled active microspoiler assembly in aft section of projectile

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Fully integrated active projectile and sabot assembly

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Example spark range shadowgraph from active microspoiler flight experiment

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Cross-range measurements from spark range experiments

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Altitude measurements from spark range experiments

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Yaw angle measurements from spark range experiments

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Pitch angle measurements from spark range experiments

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Example baseline no-microspoiler trajectory fit

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

Example controlled projectile trajectory fit

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

Microspoiler perturbation forces versus Mach number

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 22

Microspoiler perturbation moments versus Mach number

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 23

Cross-range versus range for control authority simulations

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 24

Angle of attack versus time for control authority simulations

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In