Proceedings of the 10th

World Congress on Intelligent Control and Automation

July 6-8, 2012, Beijing, China

Research on QFT Controller Design for LOS Stabilization

System of Opto-electronic Load for UAV *
Dexin Xu, Kunpeng He, Yanhui Wei
&ROOHJH of $XWRPDWLRQ
+DUELQ Engineering University
+DUELQ, +HLORQJMLDQJ Province, 150001, China

5epair factory of navigation device

7roops 92854
ZhanMiang ,*XDQJGRQJ Province, 524000, China

{xudexin&hekunpeng }@hrbeu.edu.cn, wyhhit@163.com

zjphyq@163.com

Jiangpeng Zhao

Abstract - In order to decrease affection of parameters

uncertainty of line-of-sight stabilization system of optoelectronic load for UAV, quantitative feedback theory design
method is adopted on the servo controller of line-of-sight
stabilization system of opto-electronic load for UAV. The
simulation result indicates that the performance of QFT
controller is better than the traditional controller. QFT method
can deal with the special problem effectively since parameters
uncertainty probably decrease control performance, it has
strong robustness and can solve the controller design problem
with parameters uncertainty of line-of-sight stabilization
system of opto-electronic load for UAV.

of 1980s, they have gotten a series of achievements from the

theory analysis to the project implementation. The flight
control system of F-16 fighter aircraft is designed by QFT
method by them and the result is successful after the flight test
and verification. Thus the practicality and effectiveness of
QFT method is proved, study of QFT controller design is
necessary about the servo loop of line-of-sight stabilization
system of opto-electronic load for UAV.
P(s)
Mf
f

Ia
1
Mm
1
1
C
G1 K M
m
S
La s + Ra
Js

Index Terms - quantitative feedback theory; line-of-sight

stabilization; servo control; pre-filter

Ce

I. INTRODUCTION
Many works have been done on the study of the
controller design about the servo loop of line-of-sight
stabilization system of opto-electronic load for UAV, and the
correction frequency Domain method is widely used. It has a
series of advantages such as mature theory, simple arithmetic,
high reliability and good real-time performance. Whats more,
it can be realized by both analog and digital control methods.
Unfortunately it has some shortcoming at the same time, bad
robustness is one of them which occurs when the model
parameters of system are uncertain. We can use robust control
method such as quantitative feedback theory to solve this
problem which is also based on the frequency domain.
Quantitative feedback theory was delivered in 1972 by
Horowitz and Sidi, which is developed and improved all the
while. This method aims at the controlled object which has
parameter variation, the given time domain indexes will be
transferred to frequency domain ones, and the boundary
satisfied with frequency domain indexes will be built up in
Nichols diagram, the loop gain will be designed to located in
the proper position, thus the output response of system can fit
the performance index. By adopting this method, controller
will meet the requirement of system even if the parameters of
controlled object have changed in the allowable range. In
other words, we can realize the robust control by using QFT
method.
Researchers of American air-force college have done a
lot of research work about QFT method from the middle age
*

1
ds + 1

Fig1 Detail block diagram of line-of-sight stabilization

system for opto-electronic load

II. ANALYSIS OF QFT MODEL OF SYSTEM

The QFT model of line-of-sight stabilization system of
opto-electronic load for UAV include several modules, they
are pre-filter, control law, motor and load model etc. The
intention of QFT control model design is very clear, it is that
the output value of angular velocity will be located in the
given performance index under complex circumstance, that
means parameters of controlled object PD\EH changed or the
external disturb existed.
'etailed block diagram of system is shown as Figure 1,
is
G1 stabilized controller, 1/ ds + 1 is the filter of MEMS
gyro loop, Ra is the resistance of motor, La is the inductance
of motor, K g is the transfer function of velocity gyroscope,
K M is the driving magnification factors of PWM, M f is the
disturbance quantity of moment, f is the disturbance
quantity of velocity, is the angle after integration of output
angular.
The main uncertain factors of system model is originated
from several reasons, such as parameters of motor, turrent
frame manufacturing and assembling error, circuit element

This work is partially supported by the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities(HEUCF041210)

978-1-4673-1398-8/12/$31.00 2012 IEEE

Kg

1982

errors of controlled object. In this paper J , Tm and Ce are

uncertain parameters, and the uncertain range is 15% of
reference value. J is the moment of inertia of motor and
system platform frame, Ce is the Back-EMF coefficients of
motor, and the Tm is the electro mechanical time constant of
motor. Take azimuth axis as example, the value range of
uncertain parameters of Ce is 0.2192~0.2965 V / rad / s ,
which of J is 0.001547~0.002093 kgm 2 , the Tm is also
uncertain parameters which is effected by J , and the value
range of it is 0.1221~0.3219.

expressed as Pa (s) = K1 /(Tes +1) and the transfer function of

azimuth ring is stated by Pp(s) =1/(J1s +Dd1) . The added
weight value in figure 3 is uncertain, to simplify the design
we choose the ultimate condition under which we can get
the result that products of disturbing and weight values is
the biggest one.
So we get the weight value of different

parameters, is 1/(0.950.22) , N e is 1/ 0.95 , Td is

10(0.0017s +1)/(0.950.22) .

Ne

1
K PWM

III. ANALYSIS AND SIMULATION OF QFT CONTROL METHOD

Td

com

A. Converting of standard QFT structure

There are several steps if we simulate the system under

circumstance of parameter variation, first step we should
convert the system structure to standard QFT control one,
then we can design the QFT stabilized controller base two
factors, which include the QFT modules of line-of-sight
stabilization system of opto-electronic load for UAV and the
concrete parameter uncertainty.

For designing the robust controller by using QFT

method, MEMS gyroscope and velocity regulator are
considered as controller G, and the controlled object is
defined by subsystem which consist of mechanical
platform, PWM power amplifier and the motors rotor
armature. The design of stabilized controller include two
aspects, they are velocity regulator and the pre-filter,
reference input is the instruction
angular velocity of

azimuth ring, we express it by COM , and the output is

inertial rotate speed of azimuth ring which is stated by .
Disturbing input of system include several factors, they are
electronic noise N e , gyro noise N g , disturbing torque T d
and the rotate speed of aircraft which is expressed by ,
some of these parameters are uncertain such as the torque
motor, PWM amplification coefficient and the gimbal axis.
If we want to transfer the system block diagram to
standard QFT controller style, interior disturbing of
controlled object should be moved outside of the object.
That is to say, Td , N e and should by moved in front of
PWM power amplifier, and all of these can be equivalent to
the input disturbing D1 , the transfer function block diagram
after adjustment is shown as figure.

1
K PWM Ce
1
K PWM Pa

Gg Gv

K PWM Pp Pa

Ce Pp Pa + 1

Ng
Fig2 QFT standard structure diagram of azimuth axis stabilization loop

Above all, we transfer the control problem of azimuth

ring to standard QFT control one. In this new block
diagram, G means the controller and F means pre-filter,
controlled object can expressed as P= PPK
p a pwm /(1+PPC
p a e) .
Input disturbing consist of three parts and the expression is

shown as D1 =Td 10(0.0017s+1) + 1 +Ne 1 , the uncertain

0.950.22
0.950.22 0.95
parameters include K PWM , Te , K1 , J1 , D and d1 .
The control indexes of this QFT stabilized controller
include three aspects they are tracking index, input
disturbing inhibition index and robust stability index.
The tracking index set can be expressed as follow:
{TR ( j ) | TRl ( j ) | TR ( j ) | TRu ( j ) |, 0 }
According to the concrete requirement of line-of-sight
stabilization system of opto-electronic load, bandwidth of
velocity loop should above 25 Hz and overshoot should
below 8%, thus we can get the upper and lower bounds of
tracking index set as follow:
Tu ( s ) =

112.4( s + 280.5)
38648200
, Tl ( s ) =
s 2 + 258.48s + 31925
( s + 721.2)( s + 295.4)( s + 181.5)

According these two transfer functions we can get the

step response and amplitude-frequency characteristic of
system. As figure 3 is shown we can see that bandwidth of
tracking index is great than 25 Hz and the overshoot of step
response is less than 8%. Thus the designed controller can
meet the systems expecting requirement.

B. Design and simulation of QFT controller

The value range of Ce is 0.2192~0.2965 V / rad / s , and

that of K PWM is 0.95~1.05, it is 0.0270725~0.0366275 to
parameter K1 and 0.0013~0.0017s to parameter Te , the
simplified transfer function of torque motor can be

1983

which include tracking bound, robust stability bound and antijamming bound. Each kind of bound have several bounds
corresponding to the different frequency point, which is
selected according to the system bandwidth.

50

1.4

0
Magnitude (dB)

1.2

Amplitude

-50

-100

0.8

-150
0

Robust Tracki ng Bounds

0.6

Phase (deg)

60
0.4

0.2

40
-270

0.005

0.01

0.015

0.02

0.025

0.03

0.035

0.04

10

10

10

10

10

10

Frequency (rad/sec)

Time (sec)

20

Magni t ude ( dB)

-90

-180

(a) step response

(b) M-F responses
Fig.3 upper and lower bound tracking performance

The input disturbing inhibition index set can be

expressed as follow:

7
0
7
7
-20
7

{TD1 ( j ) | TD1 ( j ) || TD1U ( j ) |, 0 }

-40

-350

TD1 means the input disturbing transfer function, whose

max value can be ensured 1.6 volt according to the

practical data of line-of-sight stabilization system of optoelectronic load. According to the requirement of anti-jamming,
response steady-state value is expected as zero which is
associated with the maximum amplitude value of system. Thus
we can get the upper bound transfer function of input
disturbing inhibition index as follow:

6s
( s + 150)( s + 250)
To improve the stability margin of this control system,
the frequency characteristic of open-loop transfer function
o
must be kept away from points which located in (-180
0dB), so the resonant peek value of close-loop transfer
function should be less than M p , in this example we
choose the value of it as 2 dB. Which is also can be
expressed as follow:
TD1U ( s ) =

-300

-250

-200
Phase (degrees)

-150

-100

-50

Fig4 Tracking bounds of QFT controller

After calculating the difference of upper and below

bounds of tracking index set, a set of tracking bounds at the
sampling frequency point can be got according to the tracking
bounds producing procedure of MISO QFT, which is shown in
Figure 4, and the robust stability bound which produced
according the robust stability index is shown as figure 5.
[8][9]
According to the boundary combination rule , the next
step is L0 shaping of nominal open-loop transfer function after
the integration bound has been got. Intention of shaping is to
let the relevant frequency points of L0 locate in the
integration bound. Whats more, its better that they can locate
in the edge of borderline so that the bandwidth of system can
be reduced. Design of L0 is based on the nominal model P0 ,
the curve before shaping can fit the requirement of design
index through adding gain, zero and pole in the design
window of QFT feedback controller.
Robust Margi ns Bounds

20 log10 | T |< 2dB

20

It is also can be combined to the style of index set, just

as follow:

10
1

Magni t ude ( dB)

{T ( j ) 20 log10 | T |< 2dB , 0 }

Based on the analysis of control index, we can get the

controlled object template and the bound curve. The
transfer function of controlled object can be expressed as
follow:

-10

-20

-30

-40

-50
-350

P = Pp Pa K pwm /(1 + Pp Pa Ce )

-300

-250

-200
Phase (degrees)

-150

-100

-50

Fig5 Figure of robust margins bounds

= K pwm K1 /(Ce K1 + Ra ( J1 s + D1 d )(Te s + 1))

We can build up the plant template of controlled object at
the frequency plots w=[5 20 85 200 500 3000 10000
20000](rad/s), and the nominal model P0 can be selected in
any point after the plant template is determined, which is
selected in this system as follow:
0.95
P0 =
0.22 + 0.9718(0.0021s 0.1)(0.0017s +1)
After this work different bounds can be generated in the
simulation diagram according to the different control index,

During the process of shaping, sequence must be from

low frequency to the high one. At first zero and pole point are
added to insure bound condition of most of the frequency
point is satisfied with system requirement, then fine
adjustment is going on to the controller. Shaping procedure of
open-loop transfer function is also design process of feedback
control, which can make the frequency response of system fit
the allowed changing range of tracking performance index.
Because feedback controller cant fit the requirement of
performance index of upper and lower bounds, pre-filter
should be added in to adjust the total frequency response of
closed-loop system.

1984

8(a) and result of QFT controller is shown as figure 8(b). From

the comparison of two figures we can see that QFT controller
has better robust performance and isnt insensitive to the
parameter changing. Detailed data is shown in table 1 during
the simulation.

(a) simulation result without pre-filter (b) simulation result with pre-filter
Fig6 Frequency response of QFT controller

The frequency response curve can be produced by using

pfshape function of Matlab which is shown as figure 6(a),
from which we can see that the total frequency response cant
primely fit the requirements because part of the curves are
located outside of upper and lower boundary curves of
tracking performance index. Through the adjustment of zero
and pole points in pre-filter, TR can totally meet the condition
of upper and lower bounds. It is worth to notice that steadystate gain of pre-filter should be 1 during the design
procedure. By which can insure that instruction can be
accurately transferred to the stabilized loop. Pre-filter is
expressed as follow:
6.818
F ( s) =
( s + 1.172)( s + 0.2886)
The frequency response curve is shown as Figure 6(b)
after adding the pre-filter, we can see that frequency response
curves are totally located inside the upper and lower bound
curves after addition of pre-filter, so the total frequency
response of closed-loop system can meet the requirement of
upper and lower bounds of tracking performance index.
Effectiveness of QFT controller can be verified by the
step response of system. The uncertain value range is selected
as 15% to the reference parameters in this QFT controller
design, simulation result of step response is shown as figure 7,
we can see that response time is inside 0.035 second and
overshoot is inside 8%. Compared with QFT controller and
the traditional one, response time and overshoot are both
improved.

Fig7 Step response of parameters with uncertainty

IV. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF QFT AND PID CONTROLLER

Base on the QFT module analysis of line-of-sight

stabilization system of opto-electronic load, QFT controller is
designed to three axis platform. Take roll axis velocity loop as
example, step response of PID controller is shown as figure

(a) PID
(b) QFT
Fig.8 Step response comparison of PID and QFT controller
TABLE 1 STEP RESPONSE COMPARISON BETWEEN
QFT CONTROLLER AND PID CONTROLLER
QFT controller
PID controller
Peek
time

overshoot

settling
time

Peek time

overshoot

settling
time

0.022

0.362

0.12

0.02

0.321

0.06

0.013

0.237

0.05

0.02

0.197

0.06

0.022

0.248

0.06

0.02

0.311

0.06

0.013

0.211

0.05

0.02

0.182

0.06

0.022

0.363

0.12

0.02

0.322

0.06

0.013

0.238

0.05

0.02

0.198

0.06

0.022

0.249

0.06

0.02

0.313

0.06

0.014

0.215

0.05

0.02

0.190

0.06

0.020

0.364

0.12

0.02

0.315

0.06

0.012

0.239

0.05

0.02

0.194

0.06

0.022

0.245

0.06

0.02

0.316

0.06

0.013

0.213

0.05

0.02

0.190

0.06

0.020

0.367

0.12

0.02

0.317

0.06

0.012

0.239

0.05

0.02

0.199

0.06

0.022

0.249

0.06

0.02

0.318

0.06

0.013

0.214

0.05

0.02

0.191

0.06

From the comparative data of simulation in table 1 we

can see that robust tracking performance of QFT controller
is extraordinary excellent. Its tracking control performance
can hold the line in spite of parameters changing, settling
time preserves about 0.06s and peek value time is about
0.02s, the changing range of overshoot is between 0.182
and 0.322. Comparatively, parameter changing has great
effect on the PID controller, which has worse performance
than QFT controller. Both settling time and peek value time
are unset, settling time changes from 0.05s to 0.02s, peek
value time changes from 0.013s to 0.022s, changing range
of overshoot is between 0.211 and 0.367.

1985

V. CONCLUSION

Controller design for line-of-sight stabilization system of

opto-electronic load is studied in this paper. In such control
system, overshoot and steady-state error will become bigger
under the condition of parameters changing. Since traditional
controller cant solve the problem that caused by the
parameter variation, QFT control method is adopted to
enhance robustness of system. After changing range analysis
of uncertain parameters, the corresponding QFT robust
controller is designed. The simulation result indicates that
QFT method can improve control performance a lot than
traditional controller.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This work is supported by "the Fundamental Research
Funds for the Central Universities"(HEUCF041210),and also
supported by International cooperation project with
Russian(2010DFR80140).
REFERENCES
[1] Borghesani C , Chait Y and Yaniv O. The QFT frequency domain control
design toolbox for use with Matlab[ Z] . Terasoft , Inc. , 2003.
[2] Moreno , Carlos J , Alfonso B ect . Improvement s on the computation of
boundaries in QFT[J]. International Journal of Robust and Nonlinear
Control, 2006 , 16 (12) :575 - 597.
[3] Chen Zhenqiang, Sun Qinlin. Review of development of Quantitative
Feedback Theory[J] .Control theory and application,2006, 23 (3) :403 410.
[4] Lin, T. C., Wang, C. H., Teng, C. C., and Lee, T. T., Design of SampledData Systems with Large Plant Uncertainty Using Quantitative Feedback
Theory, Int. J.of Systems Science, Vol. 32, No. 3, pp. 273-285, 2001.
[5] Wanglei, Application of QFT method in aircraft flight control system [D].
Northwestern Polytechnical University,2007
[6] Ma Juanli, Song Yongxian, Qin Xuping. Robust control design of the
robot joint based on QFT[C].2009 Third International Conference on
Genetic and Evolutionary Computing, 2009:173-176.
[7] Qingwei Wang, Zhenghua Liu, Lianjie Er. Automatic design of QFT
robust controller based on genetic algorithms[C]. Proceedings of the 6th
World Congress on Intelligent Control and Automation,2006:2272-2276.
[8] Roozbeh Kianfar, Torsten Wik. Automated Controller Design using
Linear Quantitative Feedback Theory for Nonlinear systems[C]. 2009
IEEE International Conference on Control and Automation, 2009:19551961

1986