0% found this document useful (0 votes)
4 views

Sieberling2013_Chapter_FlightGuidanceAndControlOfATet

Uploaded by

jan-li
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
4 views

Sieberling2013_Chapter_FlightGuidanceAndControlOfATet

Uploaded by

jan-li
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 15

Flight Guidance and Control of a Tethered

Glider in an Airborne Wind Energy Application

Sören Sieberling

Abstract. One of the concepts of an upcoming technology known as airborne wind


energy is the pumping kite system. The pumping kite system uses a conventional
gliders to fly highly dynamic crosswind patterns downwind of a generator to which
it is connected by a tether to harvest wind energy. Operating the pumping kite system
requires a novel view on conventional flight control. A tether based reference frame
is introduced that in effect decouples the longitudinal and lateral motion which can
thereby be designed independently and thus allowing the highly dynamic motion
of the glider to be controlled through simple control schemes. Furthermore the lon-
gitudinal motion is constrained through the tether of which the tangential velocity
is controlled by the generator providing an additional control input besides the el-
evator to control longitudinal motion. Flight tests demonstrate that using the tether
based flight control system reasonably simple and commonly used control methods
provide satisfactory flight performance.

1 Introduction
Harvesting wind energy is being investigated for several decades with many inter-
esting outcomes as a result, [6]. One of the concepts introduced by [3] in the early
eighties, describes a technique using a tethered glider that drives a generator on the
ground through tension in the tether. [3] refers to this concept as lift power, also
known as pumping-kite power. Today the pumping-kite system represents a subset
of airborne wind energy, which has been a growing industry in the past decade with
the sole objective of outperform conventional wind turbines in terms of cost per unit
of energy.
The operational principle of the pumping kite system is discussed in Sec. 2, which
is followed by Sec. 3 providing the physical framework. Sec. 4 presents the flight
Sören Sieberling
Ampyx Power B.V., Lulofsstraat 55 - 13, 2521AL Den Haag, The Netherlands
e-mail: [email protected]
338 S. Sieberling

Fig. 1 The pumping kite system during power generation (left) and during reset (right).

control system of the pumping kite system split into longitudinal and lateral control.
Sec. 5 demonstrates some results from test flights, followed by the conclusions in
Sec. 6.

2 Operational Principle of the Pumping Kite System


To convert wind into electrical energy the pumping kite system consists of an glider,
a generator and a tether connecting the two. At the generator side the tether is wound
on a drum that connects to the generator (together called winch). Lift is generated by
flying crosswind patterns (similar to kites on a beach) downwind of the generator
and transfered to the ground through tension in the tether that is experienced as
torque by the generator.
The conversion of wind into electrical energy only takes place when the tether
is unwound from the drum such that the lift can actually do work. Because of the
tether being unwound, the operation of the pumping kite system consists of two
phases; power generation and tether retrieval (reset), Fig. 1. When the maximum
tether length is reached the glider changes its flight path from crosswind flight to
flying straight toward the generator, while the tether is wound again. This tether re-
trieval maneuver results in low tether tension due to low drag, making the power
consumption during tether retrieval significantly less than the power generated dur-
ing the power generation phase at high tether tension due to high lift. This results in
net power at the end of each power cycle.
One advantage of the pumping kite system compared to conventional wind en-
ergy becomes apparent when considering the wind power available, which is a func-
tion of ρ the air density and Vw the wind speed, Eq. 1.

1
Pw = ρ Vw3 (1)
2
A specific device can generate more power than another by being located in an
area with more wind (higher wind power density). The operational altitude of the
pumping kite system is between 400 and 500 m. When assuming that the wind pro-
file increases logarithmic with altitude [7, 4], wind power at for example 80 m hub
Flight Guidance and Control of a Tethered Glider 339

height compared to 400 m doubles (above agricultural land). In terms of wind speeds
this translates roughly into 25% wind speed increase.
A second advantage is that wind turbines are not expected to grow in the near
future [5]. Consider that power is cubically related to airspeed. With airspeed over a
wind turbine blade increasing linearly, it follows that most power in a wind turbine
is generated by its blade tips. When assuming that the power generated by a section
of the wind turbine blade is only a function of airspeed, hence neglecting the effect
of airfoil and chord variation, almost 60% of the power would be generated by the
outer 25% of the blades. In effect the pumping kite system could be compared to
this outer section of the wind turbine blades. The difference to wind turbines is that
it does not require a large tower and can operate with only one ’blade’, thereby
removing one of big upscaling obstruction of conventional wind turbines.

3 Physical Framework
The operation of the pumping kite system and the possible power output as a func-
tion of the wind speed is best described by basic aerodynamic equations and deriva-
tives thereof, [3]. For simplicity the influence of mass on the system is neglected
in these derivations. The glider is assumed to have no roll angle compared to the
tether. And the wind is assumed to have a constant velocity, (Vw ), parallel to the
ground plain.
The lift generated by the glider is given by Eq. 2.
1 2
L = ρ VTAS SCL (2)
2
With L the lift, VTAS the true airspeed of the glider, S the wing surface area and CL
the lift coefficient. The drag of the system consists of two components, glider drag
and tether drag. The drag of the glider is given by Eq. 3.
1 2
Dac = ρ VTAS SCD (3)
2
With Dac the glider drag and CD the drag coefficient, approximated by

CL2
CD = CD0 + (4)
π ARe
Where CD0 represents the zero lift drag coefficient and the remaining term the in-
duced drag with e the span efficiency factor and AR the aspect ratio. The tether drag
is approximated by assuming that the tether is straight, [2]. Since the lift of the glider
is about one order of magnitude larger than the tether drag, the resulting errors are
negligible. The effect of the true wind on the tether drag is also neglected. The drag
of an infinitesimal section of the tether ds is given by Eq. 5.
1
dD = ρ Vds2 CDc tds (5)
2
340 S. Sieberling

With Vds the speed of an infinitesimal section of the tether, t the tether thickness
and CDc the tether drag coefficient. By assuming a straight line (the speed changes
linearly with position on the tether) the sectional speed is approximated by Eq. 6
s
Vds = VTAS (6)
l
With l the tether length. Substituting Eq. 6 into Eq. 5 and equating moments around
the generator of the tether drag (integrated over the tether length) on one hand and
a resulting force on the glider, the resulting tether drag is derived, Eq. 7, [2].
 l  l  
1 sVTAS 2 1 2 2
Dc l = sdD = s ρ CDc tds = ρ VTAS tl CDc (7)
0 0 2 l 8

The lift to drag ratio (G) of the pumping kite system is then obtained by dividing
Eq. 2 by Eq. 3 and Eq. 7 resulting in Eq. 8.
CL
G= tlCDc
(8)
CD + 4S
Where the right hand component of the denominator will also be referred to as
effective tether drag coefficient. In a massless system, the system lift to drag ratio
equals the ratio of forward and upward airspeed (Fig. 2), or in other words the lift
to drag ratio describes the forward speed of the glider as a function of wind speed,
tether angles and tether speed, Eq. 9.

Vp = G (Vw sin Θ cos Φ − Vt ) = GVeff (9)

With Vp the forward speed, Θ the in the wind plane rotation of the tether (Fig. 3),
Φ the out of the wind plane rotation of the tether (Fig. 3) and Vt the tether speed.
Note that this equation holds only for a massless system, or in other words when the
system is in equilibrium.
For rigid wing kites, the difference between Vp and VTAS becomes negligible due
to the high system lift to drag ratio, Eq. 10.

VTAS ≈ Vp (10)

Furthermore, when assuming a high lift to drag ratio, the tether tension is approxi-
mately equal to the lift. With the tension then given, the resulting power during the
power generating phase is computed by Eq. 11.

P = ηm TVt (11)

With ηm the mechanical efficiency of the motor and other winch components. In the
derivation above the tether speed has not been specified. [3] however demonstrates
that for maximum power production the tether speed, should be 1/3 of the wind
speed component perpendicular to the glider, thus Vw sin Θ cos Φ /3.
Flight Guidance and Control of a Tethered Glider 341

Vw sinθ cosφ
Xz Θ
Φ
Vp
VTAS

T y x
D
Xk
z
Fig. 2 Force and speed diagram during Fig. 3 Definition of tether angles with re-
power production for forces in equilib- spect to wind direction blowing along the
rium, showing identical ratios between X-axis. Θ in the wind plane rotation and
L/D and Vp /Vw sin Θ cos Φ . The dashed Φ out of the wind plane rotation.
lines indicate the kinematic reference
frame (X pointing in the direction of the
airspeed).

Note that these derivations are a simple means to analyzing the pumping kite
systems characteristics. The biggest assumption is that the system is massless. In
reality the glider is constantly maneuvering to stay inside the wind window and thus
constantly accelerating hence not being in equilibrium. The true motion is governed
by the equations of motion conventional to aircraft, Eqs. 12.

⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤
u̇ X − sin θ p u
⎣ v̇ ⎦ 1⎣ ⎦
= Y + g ⎣ sin φ cos θ ⎦ − ⎣ q ⎦ × ⎣ v ⎦ (12a)
ẇ m Z cos φ cos θ r w
⎡ ⎤ ⎛⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤ ⎧ ⎡ ⎤⎫⎞
ṗ L p ⎨ p ⎬
⎣ q̇ ⎦ = J −1 ⎝⎣
M ⎦ − ⎣ q ⎦ × J⎣q⎦ ⎠ (12b)
⎩ ⎭
ṙ N r r
⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤⎡ ⎤
θ̇ 1 sin φ tan θ cos φ tan θ p
⎣ φ̇ ⎦ = ⎣ 0 cos φ − sin φ ⎦ ⎣ q ⎦ (12c)
sin φ cos φ
ψ̇ 0 r
⎡ ⎤ ⎤θ ⎡
⎡ cos cos θ

VN u VwindN
⎣ VE ⎦ = Tnb ⎣ v ⎦ + ⎣ VwindE ⎦ (12d)
VD w VwindD

With u, v, w velocity along respectively the body x, y, z axis, p, q, r rotational rates


along respectively the body x, y, z axis, φ , θ , ψ the euler angles, VN , VE , VD velocity
respectivily north, east, down, g the gravitational constant, X, Y , Z, aerodynamics
and tether forces along respectively x, y, z axis, L, M, N aerodynamic and tether
moments around respectively the x, y and z axis and Tnb the transformation matrix
342 S. Sieberling

Fig. 4 The lift to drag ratio of a clean free flying glider vs angle of attack compared to the
lift to drag ratio of a tethered glider with a fixed tether length of 400m vs. angle of attack.

from the body to the inertial reference frame, which can be found in any common
book on aircraft dynamics.
When using the derivation as a qualitative means to describe the pumping kite
system scaling, two observations can be made, [8]:

(A) From the discussion above it is concluded that when flying at higher lift to
drag ratios the power output grows. Since not only the glider lift to drag ratio is
of concern but the lift to drag ratio of the system, higher lift to drag ratio within
operational flight envelopes almost always correspond to higher lift and therefor
higher angle of attack, Fig. 4.
As is also stated by Eq. 9, higher lift to drag ratio also corresponds to higher
true airspeed, which results in the unconventional flight characteristic for a tethered
glider that the airspeed is raised by pitching up instead of pitching down.

(B) For free flying glider the lift to drag ratio provides a means to compare glider
performance because it is dimensionless. For tethered glider the system lift to drag
ratio is however not independent of dimension, meaning that system lift to drag
ratios of differently sized systems should not be compared without corrections.
The scaling dependency of the system lift to drag ratio is caused by the tether di-
mensioning. When expressing the scaling of glider in terms of wing surface, twice
as much wing surface results in twice as much lift and drag, hence tension. Twice
the amount of tension requires twice the amount of tether, hence the tether cross-
sectional surface doubles. Since the system lift to drag ratio does not depend on
tether cross section but on tether diameter, the effective tether drag coefficient will
grow with the square root of the tether cross section, hence proportional to the square
root of the wing surface. Therefore the relative contribution of the tether drag be-
comes smaller.
Fig. 5(a) illustrates the system lift to drag ratio of differently sized pumping kite
systems having identical aerodynamic characteristics in terms of glider lift and co-
efficients. Furthermore the tether length is identical for different sizes. Sizing of
Flight Guidance and Control of a Tethered Glider 343

(a) Lift to drag ratio (b) Drag coefficient

Fig. 5 System lift to drag ratio and total drag coefficient as a function of glider dimension

the tether thickness is based on the tension at a fixed airspeed and lift. In reality
the tether length will grow slightly for increasing systems as will airspeed, which
would have a softening effect on the differences in system lift to drag ratio. Fig. 5(b)
illustrates the glider and tether drag coefficients, which illustrates that the system lift
to drag ratio grows for aerodynamically identical glider as the system is scaled up,
thus tether drag is a bigger problem for smaller systems.

4 Guidance and Control


Compared to most conventional glider, the maneuvering of the pumping kite can be
perceived as aggressive and nonlinear. In only a few seconds the roll angle changes
from plus to minus 60°, while the heading is changing direction 180°and the pitch
angle is going up and down from 60 to -20°.
When however changing the control reference to a tether based reference frame,
the same maneuvers become rather mild and practically speaking linear in the sense
that dynamic coupling can be neglected and longitudinal and lateral control can be
separated. The tether based ’Euler’ angles then vary only up to 20°for the roll and
pitch angle.
The transformation from inertial reference frame to the tether based reference
frame is defined by:
1. Rotation around the earth fixed Z-axis by Ψ , the wind direction, with correspond-
ing direction cosine matrix Tz(ψ )
2. Rotation around the Y-axis by −Θ , with corresponding direction cosine matrix
Ty(−Θ)
3. Rotation around the X-axis by Φ , with corresponding direction cosine matrix
Tx(Φ)

Cti = Tx(φ ) Ty(−θ ) Tz(ψ ) (13)


344 S. Sieberling

FI

Ψz ψz

θy
-Θy

φx
Φx
φtx FB
FT ψtz
θty

Fig. 6 Reference frame transformation summary. Reference frames are indicated by the cap-
ital letter F, with the subscript indicating the specific frame. Superscripts are used to indicate
the axis of rotation.

With Cti the direction cosine matrix mapping inertial coordinates into tethered co-
ordinates and the other way around by taking the transpose, Cit = CtiT . When intro-
ducing the conventional axis transformation from the inertial reference frame to the
body fixed reference frame by means of the Euler angles (roll (φ ), pitch (θ ) and yaw
(ψ )) as Cbi , the direction cosine matrix to the body frame from the tethered frame is
given by Eq. 14.
Cbt = CbiCit (14)
The tethered Euler angles are then derived consequently as in Eqs. 15. The transfor-
mations are summarized in Fig. 6.
 
φt = tan−1 Cbt(2,3) /Cbt(3,3) (15a)
 
θt = sin−1 −Cbt(1,3) (15b)
 
ψt = tan−1 Cbt(1,2) /Cbt(1,1) (15c)

4.1 Longitudinal Control


As is concluded in section 3, the crux for high power outputs is flying at high lift
coefficients. Since the lift coefficient directly relates to angle of attack, this trans-
lates into a longitudinal control objective, being angle of attack tracking, which is
performed by the elevator. Angle of attack control alone is however not sufficient to
control motion along the tether based Z-axis.
Another important, but unconventional factor to the longitudinal control of the
pumping kite system is the constrained imposed by the tether. The motion along
the direction of the tether (heave) is defined by the rotational velocity of the winch,
which thereby becomes a second longitudinal control input. It is important to view
the control on the glider and the control of the winch as one.
Both control inputs have effects on the tether tension. Lowering the angle of at-
tack lowers the lift generation of the wing (hence tension), thereby also lowering
Flight Guidance and Control of a Tethered Glider 345

Fig. 7 Block diagram indicating the functioning of the longitudinal control scheme during
power generation

the lift to drag ratio of the system (Fig. 4), which lowers the airspeed (which again
lowers the tension). Raising the winch speed, lowers the effective wind at the plane,
which lowers the airspeed and thereby the tension. It is not hard to understand that
both control inputs in effect influence the same parameters, which can easily grow
into instabilities. What makes this control problem more complicated is that commu-
nication between winch and glider is over radio suffering from transmission delays
and that the winch has implementation delays orders of magnitude larger than the
glider implementation delays.

4.1.1 Power Generation Phase


Mostly because of the system latencies the longitudinal control is chosen to use the
elevator passively (in a fixed position comparable to a flap) and have the winch speed
control the tether tension, by varying reel out speed. Simulations indicate that angle
of attack control would become possible when latencies are reduced to about 50ms.
Note that this implies not flying at the optimal Vw /3 as derived by [3]. By fixing the
elevator in effect the angle of attack and thus the lift coefficient is set (and thus the
lift to drag ratio). The winch is programmed to control the tension in the tether by
varying the reel out speed, using a PI controller. The tension demand is scheduled
with scheduled tension demand versus airspeed. The tension demand is scheduled
such that at low airspeeds the tension demand rises, while at high airspeeds it drops.
A rising tension demand will result in slower winch speed and thereby raising the
effective wind experienced by the glider and visa versa.
Note that the winch control thereby does depend on the glider measurement by
requiring information on the true airspeed. As mentioned before the communication
between glider and winch uses radio and contains latencies, which is why the angle
of attack is not controlled actively. Compared to angle of attack changes, the air-
speed however changes orders of magnitude slower since physically it is a derivative
of higher or lower lift to drag ratio in tethered flight. Therefor the system latencies
are acceptable in this control architecture.

4.1.2 Reset Phase


As the tether length reaches its maximum the reset phase is triggered and activates a
second set of longitudinal controls. In this setup the winch becomes the passive
component by simply setting the winch speed to reeling in at maximum speed,
thereby making the time for resetting the system as small as possible. The elevator is
346 S. Sieberling

Fig. 8 Block diagram indicating the functioning of the longitudinal control scheme during
system reset

controlled to maintain a specific flight path angle that is derived from a sink demand
setting, which is scheduled against wind speed.Since the winch speed in this phase
is set, so is the ground speed. Which implies that the true airspeed, and thus the
drag, rises with increasing wind. The scheduling is therefore chosen to have the
reset phase consist of a steeper dive for higher wind speeds such that gravity com-
pensates for the glider drag as much as possible, yet never makes it exceed the tether
speed.

4.1.3 Phase Transitions


The change between control strategies is instant, therefore the plane enters the re-
set phase with a fast pitch down maneuver. The tether tension is thereby suddenly
lowered and possibly the tether gets slack for a brief period. Shortly after the winch
will however pick up the pace and straighten out the tether.
The transition back into the power generation flight path requires extra attention.
The plane is flying into the wind at ground speeds roughly equal to the winch speed,
such that the effective wind speed is that of the true wind plus that of the tether. The
tether tension is low and approximately a full order of magnitude lower than during
power generation. If the winch would respond too slow to the plane flying back into
the pattern, considering the equations of Sec. 3, unfeasible airspeeds would arise.
On the other hand if the winch responds too fast, the tension will drop completely
and the plane would not make the turn back into the pattern at all, or it would build
up momentum and at some point instantly tense the tether resulting in high shock
loads. In other words the tether may not get slack, but it can also not build up tension,
making the transition back into the pattern a delicate maneuver.
This creates hard requirements on the synchronisation, making the radio latencies
unacceptable. For ’communication’ in this situation the tether tension is therefor
used. Yet switching back to the conventional tension controller is not an option since
it is tuned to operate at reel out speeds during power generation and besides it would
not be sensitive enough to responds to tension changes in the order of only 100N.
Another simple controller is therefore designed, controlling the winch acceleration
directly. The tension error that is measured with respect to a set reference tension, in
the order of magnitude of the tension during the reset phase, is multiplied by a gain
to yield the winch acceleration. This method, in combination with the fixed elevator,
has proven to be fast and provides sufficient margin for different wind speeds.
Flight Guidance and Control of a Tethered Glider 347

Fig. 9 Block diagram indicating the functioning of the longitudinal control scheme during
transition into the power generation phase

Fig. 10 Block diagram indicating the functioning of the lateral control scheme

4.2 Lateral Control


Essentially the lateral control is not much different as for conventional glider. The
main difference compared to free flying glider is that the lateral control is not de-
fined with respect to the inertial reference frame, but with respect to tether frame as
defined in the beginning of this section.
The flight path is defined by waypoints in the spherical tether coordinates, Fig.
3, making the waypoints independent of tether length and wind direction. For flight
guidance these spherical coordinates are mapped into the tether reference frame,
with the origin in the generator, thereby generating waypoints in Cartesian coordi-
nates. The tether coordinates of the flight path thereby do depend on wind direction
and tether length (R), Eq. 16.
⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤
x 0
⎣ y ⎦ = Cit ⎣ 0 ⎦ (16)
z i R t
Different from the longitudinal control, only one controller governs the actual way-
point tracking. The lateral controller derives the closest point on the set flight path
from its current position. Taking the closest point as a starting point a variable look
ahead distance (scheduled vs. tether length) is travelled over the flight path to deter-
mine a so called look ahead point. The direction toward this look ahead point is the
track demand. A controller transforms the track error into a roll angle reference and
the error thereof is by means of a PD controller transformed into a roll rate, Fig. 10.
The difference between phases lies in the waypoint scheduling governed by a
waypoint controller and the roll angle selection (Euler vs tethered Euler). During
power generation the gliders flight path is a lying figure of 8, Fig. 11. During the
system reset it is a straight line starting at the location where the corresponding
phase was activated and ending in the coordinates of pattern reentry.
348 S. Sieberling

Fig. 11 Scheduled waypoints during the power generation phase in tether angles

4.3 State Machine


Since the maneuvering of the pumping kite system throughout an operational cycle,
is too diverse to be governed by a single controller and or guidance scheme (cross-
wind pattern flying during power generation vs. straight descending flight during
system reset), a higher level supervision is required to switch between controllers.
For the pumping kite system this task is fulfilled by a state machine. Depending on
this state different controllers are active and others are reset.
Each state has a predefined set of criteria (flags, demands) that must be met to
transition into a next state. Depending on the state, one or several transitions are
possible. Furthermore in each state an abort can be triggered when exceeding the
margins to the flight envelope, which triggers a completely independent control sys-
tem with its own state machine and consequent states and controllers to take over.
Table 1 presents an overview of the relevant states for power generation.

Table 1 Pumping kit states used in power generation and corresponding criteria to complete
the task of that state and trigger transition into a next state

State Condition Next state


Takeoff Completed when reaching a set altitude and climb rate Climb
Climb Completed when reaching a set altitude Pattern entry
Pattern entry Completed when within a set range to the pattern Power generation
Power generation Completed when reaching a dynamically set tether length Pattern exit
Pattern exit Completed when reaching a set waypoint Reset
Reset Completed when reaching a minimum tether length Pattern re-entry
Pattern re-entry Completed when within a set range to the pattern Power generation
Flight Guidance and Control of a Tethered Glider 349

2500 8

2000
4

Tether speed (m/s)


1500
Tension (N)

−2
1000
−4

−6
500

−8

0 −10
140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210
Time (s) Time (s)

(a) Cable tension measured at the winch (b) Tether speed

40
True airspeed (m/s)

40
35

30 45

25 50

20 55
140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210
Θ (rad)

Time (s)
60
15
Airflow angles (deg)

10 65

5 70

0 75

−5
140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 −20 −10 0 10 20
Time (s) Φ (rad)

(c) True airspeed and angle of attack (d) Position on spherical and waypoints

60 40
Roll Roll
Pitch Pitch
40
20

20
0
Attitude (deg)

Angle (rad)

0
−20
−20

−40
−40

−60
−60

−80 −80
140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210
Time (sec) Time (s)

(e) glider Euler angles (f) Tethered Euler angles

Fig. 12 Test results of one power cycle at 7 m/s wind speed, measured at 6.5 m reference
height. Starting point of the graphs is the reset phase, followed by power generation and
ending in another reset phase.
350 S. Sieberling

5 Flight Performance of the Control System in Test Flights


The performance of the pumping kite system is illustrated by Figs. 12. The graphs
present one complete power cycle starting in a reset phase, followed by a complete
power generation phase and ends in the middle of another reset phase. The tether
tension and speed, the true airspeed and angle of attack, Euler angles and tether
based position and attitude are presented.
Comparing tethered Euler angles to the conventional one illustrates the lin-
earizing effect mentioned in Sec 4. The tethered pitch angle varies approximately
20°from -20°to 0°and the tethered roll angle varies within -10°to 30°. The large neg-
ative pitch angle that is observed is due to the system being reset, where the plane
flies toward the winch. With the tether being much longer than the flight altitude,
this results in large negative pitch angles.
The angle of attack is tracked satisfactory in the beginning (to within plus or
minus 1°). In the middle some oscillations are observed that however dampen out
toward the end of the phase. Note that the oscillations in angle of attack have a
strong correlation to the tether tension, but much less to the glider airspeed.
The flight path tracking performance is good. What is observable is the plane
cutting the turns and staying within the flight path, which is a consequence of the
waypoint tracking algorithm fixing the track demand to a location ahead on the set
flight path. The strong overshoot is the spherical representation of the reset phase,
where the plane flies toward the winch but does not sink as fast as the pattern would,
resulting in a high entry into the pattern.

6 Conclusions
Through choosing the tether based reference frame and carefully selecting control
variables, simple control schemes are well capable of flying the highly aggressive
patterns of the pumping kite system. In lateral direction the glider is controlled by
means of a waypoint controller that produces track demands. Tracking errors gen-
erate roll angle demands, which again are used to create roll rate demands each
through linear controllers. The longitudinal motion is controlled by fixing the eleva-
tor and thereby fixing the lift coefficient and system lift to drag ratio in combination
with a tension controller determining the tether velocity.

References
1. Diehl, M., Houska, B.: Windenergienutzung mit schnell fliegenden Flugdrachen: eine Her-
ausforderung für die Optimierung und Regelung - Wind Power via Fast Flying Kites: a
Challenge for Optimization and Control. at-automatisierungstechnik (2009)
2. Houska, B., Diehl, M.: Optimal Control for Power Generating Kites. In: Proc. 9th Euro-
pean Control Conference (2007)
3. Loyd, M.L.: Crosswind Kite Power. J. of Energy (1980)
4. Manwell, J.F., McGowan, J.G., Rogers, A.L.: Wind Energy Explained Theory, Design and
Application. John Wiley and Sons, Ltd. (2002)
Flight Guidance and Control of a Tethered Glider 351

5. Thresher, M., Robinson, M., Veers, P.: To Capture the Wind. IEEE Power and Energy
Magazine (2007)
6. Williams, P., Lansdorp, B., Ockels, W.: Optimal Cross-Wind Towing and Power Genera-
tion with Tethered Kites. J. of Guidance, Control and Dynamics (2008)
7. Wortman, A.J.: Introduction to Wind Turbine Engineering. Butterworth (1982)
8. Sieberling, S., Ruiterkamp, R.: The PowerPlane an Airborne Wind Energy System Con-
ceptual Operations. In: Proc. 11th AIAA ATIO Conference (2011)

You might also like