14.02.2013 Views

Thesis - Leigh Moody.pdf - Bad Request - Cranfield University

Thesis - Leigh Moody.pdf - Bad Request - Cranfield University

Thesis - Leigh Moody.pdf - Bad Request - Cranfield University

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Chapter 1 / Introduction<br />

_ _<br />

radar target state observer in §4. Bar-Shalom categorises tracking filters<br />

considered as:<br />

• Static, non-switching models<br />

• Optimally Multiple-Model (MM) estimators<br />

• Sub-optimal MM estimators with Markov switching<br />

Fixed gain filters tend to be inflexible and ignore cross coupling effects<br />

resulting in poor performance against complex targets. Since processor<br />

loading is less of an issue that it once was, these are rarely in modern state<br />

observers having been replaced by time-varying stochastic alternatives. Of<br />

these the sub-optimal Interacting-Multiple-Model (IMM) was chosen for its<br />

flexibility, stability through re-initialisation, and its potential for expansion<br />

into the variable-structured algorithm suggested by Li [L.5] .<br />

The core of the IMM comprises filters with different dynamic models driven<br />

by the same radar measurements. Although the IMM can accommodate<br />

many types of filter the reasons for using the conventional Extended<br />

Kalman Filter (EKF) are discussed. Whilst other options were considered,<br />

EKF iterative and adaptive forms, Second Order Filters (SOF), many were<br />

discounted due to computational burden, indirect access to covariance data,<br />

inability to process range and range-rate data, etc. The suitability of the<br />

EKF and its iterated form is discussed in the context of operating in<br />

Cartesian or polar state-space, measurement conversion, and initialisation<br />

using α−β−γ filters and least squares algorithms. §4 concludes with a<br />

description of the tracking simulator, its controls, and interaction with the<br />

target and sensor simulators.<br />

§5 extends the state observation started in §4 with a review of centralised<br />

and decentralised observer architectures covering the benefits of track and<br />

measurement data fusion. The hybrid architecture chosen for this<br />

application combines the up-linked IMM target track with the radar’s<br />

missile measurements, and the missile gyroscope, accelerometer and seeker<br />

measurements. The track is fused into the missile observer target state using<br />

information filtering techniques favoured by Lobbia [L.8] and Durrant-<br />

White [J.2] .<br />

The measurements are serial processed in a conventional EKF whose<br />

process model is purposely simple so as to promote high frequency<br />

propagation. State cross-coupling is introduced using directed process noise<br />

and pseudo-measurement updates. Constraining the process model through<br />

the measurement update provides a flexible observer since executive control<br />

can be exercised over the type and frequency of the pseudo-measurements<br />

used. Pseudo-measurements are derived from aerodynamic constraints,<br />

circular target models, PN goal orientation, and quaternion normalisation.<br />

Protecting the observers from spurious measurements and failing sensors is<br />

crucial. Commonly employed integrity algorithms are discussed noting the<br />

work of Daum and Fitzgerald [D.3] , Kerr [K.6] amongst others in this field. §5<br />

1-9

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!