Impact time control guidance for moving-target considering velocity variation and field-of-view constraint

doi:10.23919/JSEE.2025.000025

Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics ›› 2025, Vol. 36 ›› Issue (2): 552-568.doi: 10.23919/JSEE.2025.000025

• CONTROL THEORY AND APPLICATION • Previous Articles

Impact time control guidance for moving-target considering velocity variation and field-of-view constraint

Hao YANG(), Shifeng ZHANG(), Xibin BAI(), Chengye YANG()

College of Aerospace Science and Engineering, National University of Defense Technology, Changsha 410073, China

Received:2023-05-25 Online:2025-04-18 Published:2025-05-20
Contact: Shifeng ZHANG E-mail:yanghao16@nudt.edu.cn;zhangshifeng@nudt.edu.cn;xibinbai@nudt.edu.cn;yangchengye22@nudt.edu.cn
About author:
YANG Hao was born in 1997. He received his B.E. degree in aircraft design and M.E. degree in energy and power engineering from the National University of Defense Technology (NUDT) in 2020 and 2022, respectivety. He is pursuing his Ph.D. degree in NUDT. His research interests include inertial navigation and aircraft dynamics and control. E-mail: yanghao16@nudt.edu.cn

ZHANG Shifeng was born in 1971. He received his B.E., M.E., and Ph.D. degrees in control theory and engineering from National University of Defense Technology (NUDT) in 1994, 1997, and 2000, respectively. He is currently a professor in College of Aerospace Science and Engineering, NUDT. His research interest is active disturbance rejection control of aircraft. E-mail: zhangshifeng@nudt.edu.cn

BAI Xibin was born in 1989. He received his B.S., M.S., and Ph.D. degrees in aerospace science and technology from National University of Defense Technology (NUDT) in 2011, 2013, and 2018, respectively. He is a lecturer with the NUDT. His research interests include inertial navigation and aircraft dynamics and control. E-mail: xibinbai@nudt.edu.cn

YANG Chengye was born in 1999. He received his B.E. degree in remote sensing science and technology from Space Engineering University in 2022. He is pursuing his M.S degree in National University of Defense Technology. His research interests include aircraft dynamics analysis and parameter identification. E-mail: yangchengye22@nudt.edu.cn
Supported by:
This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (U21B2028).

Abstract

Abstract:

In the existing impact time control guidance (ITCG) laws for moving-targets, the effects of time-varying velocity caused by aerodynamics and gravity cannot be effectively considered. Therefore, an ITCG with field-of-view (FOV) constraints based on biased proportional navigation guidance (PNG) is developed in this paper. The remaining flight time (time-to-go) estimation method is derived considering aerodynamic force and gravity. The number of differential equations is reduced and the integration step is increased by changing the integral variable, which makes it possible to obtain time-to-go through integration. An impact time controller with FOV constraints is proposed by analyzing the influence of the biased term on time-to-go and FOV constraint. Then, numerical simulations are performed to verify the correctness and superiority of the method.

Key words: moving target, time-varying velocity, time-to-go estimation, field-of-view (FOV) constraint, flight time control

Hao YANG, Shifeng ZHANG, Xibin BAI, Chengye YANG. Impact time control guidance for moving-target considering velocity variation and field-of-view constraint[J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2025, 36(2): 552-568.

Figures/Tables 19

Fig 1

Fig 2

Table 1

Table 2

Fig 3

Fig 4

Fig 5

Fig 6

Table 3

Fig 7

Fig 8

Table 4

Table 5

Fig 9

Table 6

Fig 10

Table 7

Fig 11

Fig 12

References 31

1	FOSSIER M W The development of radar homing missiles. Journal of Guidance Control and Dynamics, 2015, 7 (6): 641- 651.
2	HOU L B, LUO H W, SHI H, et al An optimal geometrical guidance law for impact time and angle control. IEEE Trans. on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, 2023, 59 (6): 9821- 9830. doi: 10.1109/TAES.2023.3305974
3	ZHOU J P, ZHANG W J, ZHOU H, et al Design of integral sliding mode guidance law based on disturbance observer. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2024, 35 (1): 186- 194. doi: 10.23919/JSEE.2023.000111
4	ABHINAV S, CAO Y C Nonlinear guidance law for target enclosing with arbitrary smooth shapes. Journal of Guidance Control and Dynamics, 2022, 45 (11): 2182- 2192. doi: 10.2514/1.G006957
5	HUANG J, CHANG S J, CHEN S F A hybrid proportional navigation based two-stage impact time control guidance law. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2022, 33 (2): 461- 473. doi: 10.23919/JSEE.2022.000046
6	NANAVATIA R V, KUMARB S R Impact angle-based engagement classification and nonlinear guidance against targets with a speed advantage. Aerospace Science and Technology, 2022, 129, 107856. doi: 10.1016/j.ast.2022.107856
7	BIN Y R, WANG H, LIN D F, et al Impact time control guidance against maneuvering targets based on a nonlinear virtual relative model. Chinese Journal of Aeronautics, 2023, 36 (7): 444- 459. doi: 10.1016/j.cja.2023.03.014
8	YOU H, CHANG X L, ZHAO J F, et al Three-dimensional impact-angle-constrained fixed-time cooperative guidance algorithm with adjustable impact time. Aerospace Science and Technology, 2023, 141, 108574. doi: 10.1016/j.ast.2023.108574
9	WANG C Y, WANG W L, DONG W, et al Multiple-stage spatial-temporal cooperative guidance without time-to-go estimation. Chinese Journal of Aeronautics, 2024, 37 (9): 399- 416. doi: 10.1016/j.cja.2024.05.026
10	YU J L, SHI Z X, DONG X W, et al Impact time consensus cooperative guidance against the maneuvering target: theory and experiment. IEEE Trans. on Aerospace and Electronic, 2023, 59 (4): 4590- 4603. doi: 10.1109/TAES.2023.3243154
11	HE S M, LEE C H, SHIN H S Optimal three-dimensional impact time guidance with seeker’s field-of-view constraint. Chinese Journal of Aeronautics, 2021, 34 (2): 240- 251. doi: 10.1016/j.cja.2020.04.006
12	RAZIYE T, KORAY S E, FLORIAN H. Impact time control methods based on time dependent shaping of the fundamental states. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Scitech Forum, 2019. DOI:10.2514/6.2019-1925.
13	SINHA A, KUMAR S R, MUKHERJEE D Impact time constrained integrated guidance and control design. Aerospace Science and Technology, 2021, 115, 106824. doi: 10.1016/j.ast.2021.106824
14	ZHANG Y, WANG X L, MA G X. Impact time control guidance law with large impact angle constraint. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part G-Journal of Aerospace Engineering, 2015, 229(11): 2119−2131.
15	WANG X L, ZHANG Y A, WU H L. Distributed cooperative guidance of multiple anti-ship missiles with arbitrary impact angle constraint. Aerospace Science and Technology. 2015, 46: 299−311.
16	DHANANJAY N, GHOSE D. Accurate time-to-go estimation for proportional navigation guidance. Journal of Guidance Control and Dynamics. 2014, 37(4): 1378-1383.
17	MUKHERJEE D, KUMAR S R Field-of-view constrained impact time guidance against stationary targets. IEEE Trans. on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, 2021, 57 (5): 3296- 3306. doi: 10.1109/TAES.2021.3074202
18	HUA W H, ZHANG Y J, ZHANG J P Sliding-mode guidance law for attack time cooperation of multi-missiles. Journal of Chinese Inertial Technology, 2018, 26 (1): 98- 102.
19	LIU S X, YAN B B, ZHANG T, et al Guidance law with desired impact time and FOV constrained for antiship missiles based on equivalent sliding mode control. International Journal of Aerospace Engineering, 2021, 2021 (1): 9923332.
20	LEE S, CHO N, KIM Y Impact-time-control guidance strategy with a composite structure considering the seeker’s field-of-view constraint. Journal of Guidance Control and Dynamics, 2020, 43 (8): 1566- 1574. doi: 10.2514/1.G005063
21	KIM H G, LEE J Y, KIM H J Look-angle-shaping guidance law for impact angle and time control with field-of-view constraint. IEEE Trans. on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, 2020, 56 (2): 1602- 1612. doi: 10.1109/TAES.2019.2924175
22	TAHK M J, RYOO C K, CHO H Recursive time-to-go estimation for homing guidance missiles. IEEE Trans. on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, 2002, 38 (1): 13- 24. doi: 10.1109/7.993225
23	SATADAL G, DEBASISH G, SOUMYENDU R Unified time-to-go algorithms for proportional navigation class of guidance. Journal of Guidance Control and Dynamics, 2016, 39 (6): 1188- 1205. doi: 10.2514/1.G001472
24	MA G X, ZHANG Y A Impact time and impact angle control guidance law for missiles with time-varying velocity. Flight Dynamics, 2013, 31 (3): 255- 259.
25	JIANG Z Y, GE J Q Impact time control cooperative guidance law design based on modified proportional navigation. Aerospace, 2021, 8 (8): 231. doi: 10.3390/aerospace8080231
26	MA S, WANG Z Y, WANG X G, et al Three-dimensional impact time control guidance considering field-of-view constraint and velocity variation. Aerospace, 2022, 9 (4): 202. doi: 10.3390/aerospace9040202
27	DONG W, DENG F, WANG C Y, et al Three-dimensional spatial-temporal cooperative guidance without active speed control. Journal of Guidance Control and Dynamics, 2023, 46 (10): 1981- 1996. doi: 10.2514/1.G007641
28	ZHANG B L, ZHOU D, SHAO C T Closed-form time-to-go estimation for proportional navigation guidance considering drag. IEEE Trans. on Aerospace and Electronic System, 2022, 58 (5): 4705- 4717. doi: 10.1109/TAES.2022.3164863
29	ZHU C H, XU G D, WEI C Z, et al Impact-time-control guidance law for hypersonic missiles in terminal phase. IEEE Access, 2020, 8, 44611- 44621. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2971619
30	CHEN X T, WANG J Z. Nonsingular sliding-mode control for field-of-view constrained impact time guidance. Journal of Guidance Control and Dynamics. 2018, 41(5): 1214−1222.
31	ZHANG Y, WANG X, WU H Impact time control guidance law with field of view constraint. Aerospace Science and Technology, 2014, 39, 361- 369. doi: 10.1016/j.ast.2014.10.002

Parameter	Mach=0.1	Mach=0.2	Mach=0.3	Mach=0.4	Mach=0.5	Mach=0.6
${C_{D0}}$	0.4209	0.4223	0.4235	0.4252	0.4274	0.4256
$ C_D^\alpha $	23.9483	24.0008	24.0336	24.0533	24.0927	23.8728
$ C_L^\alpha $	24.1175	24.1977	24.2665	24.3639	24.4900	24.3868

Parameter	Value	Parameter	Value
m/kg	26.41	${q_{\max }}$/(°)	40
S/m²	0.0227	$ a{^y_{m\max }} $/g	3
N	3	${k_1}$	0.2
${k_2}$	0.5	$ {k_3} $	1

${V_t}$/(m/s)	${T_f}$/s	${T_e}$/s	$ {e_{{\mathrm{cm}}}} $/s	(${e_{{\mathrm{cm}}}}$/${T_f}$)/%	${e_p}$/m
−20	18.00	18.27	0.27	1.5	0.021
−15	18.65	18.95	0.30	1.6	0.083
−10	19.36	19.71	0.35	1.8	0.011
−5	20.16	20.56	0.39	2.0	0.032
0	21.05	21.52	0.46	2.2	9×10⁻⁶
5	22.06	22.61	0.55	2.5	0.011
10	23.23	23.88	0.65	2.8	0.037
15	24.57	25.38	0.81	3.3	0.035
20	26.15	27.18	1.03	3.9	0.016

tf/s	${T_f}$/s	$\Delta t$/s	$ {e_p} $/m
22.5	22.38	0.12	0.014
24.57	24.57	0.00	0.035
26.5	26.4	0.10	0.076
28.5	28.38	0.12	0.003
30.5	30.2	0.30	0.072

FOV_max/(°)	tf/s	$ {T_f} $/s	$ \Delta t $/s	$ {e_p} $/m
30	30	28.51	1.48	0.081
35	30	29.62	0.38	0.047
40	30	29.90	0.10	0.065

Impact time control guidance for moving-target considering velocity variation and field-of-view constraint

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

Share this article

Figures/Tables 19

References 31

Related Articles 10

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments

ITCG	Max-FOV/(°)	$ \Delta t $/s	$ {e_p} $/m
Proposed method	30.12	0.38	0.047
[19]	33.25	0.72	0.003
[31]	30.96	0.08	0.330

Number	Deflection parameter	Error distribution form	Deflection range (3$\sigma $)
1	Mass M	Normal distribution	[−5%,5%]
2	Atmosphere density $\rho $	Normal distribution	[−5%,5%]
3	Initial velocity ${V_0}$	Normal distribution	[−10%,10%]
4	Initial velocity flight path angle ${\theta _0}$	Normal distribution	[−5°,5°]
5	Axial aerodynamic $ {C_{D0}} $, $ C_D^\alpha $	Normal distribution	[−10%,10%]
6	Normal aerodynamic $ C_L^\alpha $	Normal distribution	[−10%,10%]

[1]	Hongcheng ZENG, Jiadong DENG, Pengbo WANG, Xinkai ZHOU, Wei YANG, Jie CHEN. A spawning particle filter for defocused moving target detection in GNSS-based passive radar [J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2023, 34(5): 1085-1100.
[2]	Yuanying GAN, Chuntong LIU, Hongcai LI, Zhongye LIU. A camouflage target detection method based on local minimum difference constraints [J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2023, 34(3): 696-705.
[3]	Shengnan FU, Guanqun ZHOU, Qunli XIA. A trajectory shaping guidance law with field-of-view angle constraint and terminal limits [J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2022, 33(2): 426-437.
[4]	Jia HUANG, Sijiang CHANG, Shengfu CHEN. A hybrid proportional navigation based two-stage impact time control guidance law [J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2022, 33(2): 461-473.
[5]	Meiyan PAN, Jun SUN, Yuhao YANG, Dasheng LI, Sudao XIE, Shengli WANG, Jianjun CHEN. Improved TQWT for marine moving target detection [J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2020, 31(3): 470-481.
[6]	Xiaoxuan Hu, Yanhong Liu, and Guoqiang Wang. Optimal search for moving targets with sensing capabilities using multiple UAVs [J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2017, 28(3): 526-535.
[7]	Lin Zhang and Yicheng Jiang. Imaging algorithm of multi-ship motion target based on compressed sensing [J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2016, 27(4): 790-.
[8]	Yan Zhang, Yunhua Zhang, and Xiang Gu. Improved STAP algorithm based on APES [J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2011, 22(3): 387-392.
[9]	Zhiwei Yang, Guisheng Liao, Shun He, and Cao Zeng. Target location with signal fitting and sub-aperture tracking for airborne multi-channel radar [J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2010, 21(5): 752-758.
[10]	Liu Shujun, Yuan Yunneng, Gao Fei & Mao Shiyi. Method of moving target detection based on sub-image cancellation for single-antenna airborne synthetic aperture radar [J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2007, 18(3): 448-453.