Engineering topics
Publications and source records attributed to Krishnakumar, Kalmanje S..
Throughout the world, especially in dense urban environments, the quality of life is being negatively impacted by ever growing commute time. Travel, beyond commuting, is increasingly driven by door-to-door challenges ? not just gate-to-gate considerations. Air Mobility may be an approach to address these challenges, as it can effectively convert our 2D mobility system to a 3D mobility system, vastly increasing mobility options.
A method and system for control of a first aircraft relative to a second aircraft. A desired location and desired orientation are estimated for the first aircraft, relative to the second aircraft, at a subsequent time, t=t2, subsequent to the present time, t=t1, where the second aircraft continues its present velocity during a subsequent time interval, t1.ltoreq.t.ltoreq.t2, or takes evasive action. Action command sequences are examined, and an optimal sequence is chosen to bring the first aircraft to the desired location and desired orientation relative to the second aircraft at time t=t2. The method applies to control of combat aircraft and/or of aircraft in a congested airspace.
This technology presents a novel, stable, discrete-time adaptive law for flight control in a Direct adaptive control (DAC) framework. Where errors are not present, the original control design has been tuned for optimal performance. Adaptive control works towards achieving nominal performance whenever the design has modeling uncertainties/errors or when the vehicle suffers substantial flight configuration change. The baseline controller uses dynamic inversion with proportional-integral augmentation. On-line adaptation of this control law is achieved by providing a parameterized augmentation signal to a dynamic inversion block. The parameters of this augmentation signal are updated to achieve the nominal desired error dynamics. If the system senses that at least one aircraft component is experiencing an excursion and the return of this component value toward its reference value is not proceeding according to the expected controller characteristics, then the neural network (NN) modeling of aircraft operation may be changed.
A method for modeling error-driven adaptive control of an aircraft. Normal aircraft plant dynamics is modeled, using an original plant description in which a controller responds to a tracking error e(k) to drive the component to a normal reference value according to an asymptote curve. Where the system senses that (1) at least one aircraft plant component is experiencing an excursion and (2) the return of this component value toward its reference value is not proceeding according to the expected controller characteristics, neural network (NN) modeling of aircraft plant operation may be changed. However, if (1) is satisfied but the error component is returning toward its reference value according to expected controller characteristics, the NN will continue to model operation of the aircraft plant according to an original description.
The ability of space assets to rendezvous and dock/capture/berth is a fundamental enabler for numerous classes of NASA fs missions, and is therefore an essential capability for the future of NASA. Mission classes include: ISS crew rotation, crewed exploration beyond low-Earth-orbit (LEO), on-orbit assembly, ISS cargo supply, crewed satellite servicing, robotic satellite servicing / debris mitigation, robotic sample return, and robotic small body (e.g. near-Earth object, NEO) proximity operations. For a variety of reasons to be described, NASA programs requiring Automated/Autonomous Rendezvous and Docking/Capture/Berthing (AR&D) capabilities are currently spending an order-of-magnitude more than necessary and taking twice as long as necessary to achieve their AR&D capability, "reinventing the wheel" for each program, and have fallen behind all of our foreign counterparts in AR&D technology (especially autonomy) in the process. To ensure future missions' reliability and crew safety (when applicable), to achieve the noted cost and schedule savings by eliminate costs of continually "reinventing the wheel ", the NASA AR&D Community of Practice (CoP) recommends NASA develop an AR&D Warehouse, detailed herein, which does not exist today. The term "warehouse" is used herein to refer to a toolbox or capability suite that has pre-integrated selectable supply-chain hardware and reusable software components that are considered ready-to-fly, low-risk, reliable, versatile, scalable, cost-effective, architecture and destination independent, that can be confidently utilized operationally on human spaceflight and robotic vehicles over a variety of mission classes and design reference missions, especially beyond LEO. The CoP also believes that it is imperative that NASA coordinate and integrate all current and proposed technology development activities into a cohesive cross-Agency strategy to produce and utilize this AR&D warehouse. An initial estimate indicates that if NASA strategically coordinates the development of a robust AR&D capability across the Agency, the cost of implementing AR&D on a spacecraft could be reduced from roughly $70M per mission to as low as $7M per mission, and the associated development time could be reduced from 4 years to 2 years, after the warehouse is completely developed. Table 1 shows the clear long-term benefits to the Agency in term of costs and schedules for various missions. (The methods used to arrive at the Table 1 numbers is presented in Appendices A and B.)