Research on Control Method of Electric Proportional Canard for Two-Dimensional Trajectory Correction Fuze of Movable Canard

  • Dan FangEmail author
  • Yi Wang
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering book series (LNEE, volume 516)


The two-dimensional trajectory correction fuze of movable canard is the hot spot of research currently with the advantages of low cost and strong correction ability. For the two-dimensional trajectory correction fuze of movable rudder, continuous sine control, interval sinusoidal control, and constant control angle control are used to control the electric proportional canard. By analyzing the influence of different control methods on the ballistic characteristics and the correction ability, the canard control methods are evaluated and an optimal control method is proposed. It is greatly significant for the development of two-dimensional trajectory correction fuze for movable canard in theory and engineering.


Two-dimensional ballistic correction fuze Electric proportional canard Control method 


  1. 1.
    Clancy J, Bybee T, Friedrih W. Fixed canard 2-D guidance of artillery projectile. US: 6981672B2. 2006.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Costello M. Modeling and simulation of a differential roll projectile. In: Proceedings of the 1998 AIAA modeling and simulation technologies conference; 1998. p. 490–9.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wernert P, Theodoulis S. Modeling and stability analysis for a class of 155 mm spin-stabilized projectiles with course correction fuse (CCF). In: Proceedings of the 2011 AIAA atmospheric flight mechanics conference and exhibit; 2011. p. 1–13.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Theodoulis S, Gassmann V, Wernert P. Guidance and control design for a class of spin-stabilized fin-controlled projectiles. J Guid Control Dyn. 2013;36(2):517–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gagnon E, Lauzon M. Course correction fuse concept analysis for in-service 155 mm spin-stabilized gunnery projectiles. In: Proceedings of the 2008 AIAA guidance, navigation and control conference and exhibit; 2008. p. 1–20.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fresconi F, Cooper G, Celmins I et al. Flight mechanics of a novel guided spin-stabilized projectile concept. Aerosp Eng. 2013;226:327–340.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gross M, Costello M, Fresconi F. Impact point model Predictive control of a spin-stabilized projectile with instability protection. In: AIAA atmospheric flight mechanics conference. Boston; 2013. p. 1–21.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fresconi F, Plostins P. Control mechanism strategies for spin-stabilized projectiles. In: Proceedings of 47th AIAA aerospace sciences meeting including the new horizon forum and aerospace exposition, Orlando, Florida, January 2009. AIAA Paper; p. 1–23.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ollerenshaw D, Costello M. On the swerve response of projectiles to control input. J Guidance Control Dyn. 2008;31(5):1259–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Corriveau D, Berner C, Fleck V. Trajectory correction using impulse thrusters for conventional artillery projectiles. In: 23th International symposium on ballistics, Tarragona, Spain; 2007. p. 639–46.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Corriveau D, Wey P, Berner C. Thrusters pairing guidelines for trajectory corrections of projectiles. J Guidance Control Dyn. 2011;34(4):1120–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Frost G, Costello M. Control authority of a projectile equipped with a internal unbalanced part. J Dyn Syst Meas Control. 2006;128(4):1005–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rogers J, Costello M. Control authority of a projectile equipped with a controllable internal translating mass. J Guidance Control Dyn. 2008;31(5):1323–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Army Engineering UniversityShijiazhuangChina

Personalised recommendations