TEN LATERAL-DIRECTIONAL DYNAMIC STABILITY AND CONTROL EQUATIONS OF MOTION In the previous chapter we dealt with motion in the plane of symmetry. Motion of the plane of symmetry will now be considered. This motion consists of transition in the y direction called sideslip; rotation about the x-axis referred to as rolling; and rotation about the z-axis, or yawing. To begin, the equations of motion will once again be derived, but in a somewhat more basic and complete manner than that which was followed in Chapter Nine, The following derivation closely parallels a similar development presented by Seckel (Ref. 10.4). Figure 10.1 illustrates a particle of mass of the airplane located at the point x, y, z, in the moving-body axis system. As shown, the axis system is translating with instantaneous velocity components of U, V, and W in the x, y, and z directions while rotating about these axes at angular rates of P, Q, and R. The linear velocity components of AM in the x, y, and z directions are, obviously, ¥=U+Qe~Ry (10.14) ye V-P2tRx (10.16) 2=W+Py-Qx (10.16) The accelerations are obtained directly by differentiating the above velocities. 402+ Q2-Ry—Ry (02a) ~ Pe~ Pe + Ret RE (1026) eee cee (10.2c) 591592 LATERAL-DIRECTIONAL DYNAMIC STABILITY AND CONTROL Figure 10.1. Motion of a particle of mags in a moving reference system. 4% y, and 4 are obtained from Equations 10.1, so Equation 10.2 becomes: = U+QW+ QPy-Q'x-RV+RP2—R'x+Qz-Ry (10.3) y= V~ PW P¥y ~ PQxt RU+RQz-Ry—Pz+Re (10.36) 2= W-+ PV - P*z + PRx - QU ~ Q*z + QRy + Py — Ox (10.3e) It is convenient at this point to use the concept of inertia forces and moments. Briefly, this concept allows one to treat a dynamic system as a static one by employing pseudoforces acting on the system equal in mag- nitude to the product of each mass and its acceleration. The forces are jrected opposite to the accelerations. As an example, consider Figure 10.2. The dynamic equation of motion is, obviously, Fe Mi 0.4) Now, however, add a force on the mass opposite in direction to ¥ equal to ‘Mi. As a problem in statics, the sum of the forces on the mass equals zero. F This, of course, is equal to Equation 10.4. ‘The inertia forces on the mass element can be written as Mi=0 Fam (05a) Fpoomy (10.5b) R (iosey Figure 10.2 Concept of inertia force.EQUATIONS OF MOTION 593 with %, j, and given by Equation 10.3. These inertia forces give rise to inertia moments. The moment arms can be seen in Figure 10.1. For example, fan x force on Am gives rise to a moment about the y-axis equal to F.Z. Therefore, the three inertia moments become: My = Fy ~ Fyz (10.64) M,= Fy Fix (10.66) M,,= F,x— F.y (10.6c) This can be written in vector form as M=RxF, ‘The total inertia forces and moments acting on the airplane are obtained by summing Equations 10.5 and 10.6 over the total airplane mass. In evaluat- ing these sums, the following sums vanish since the origin of the coordinate system is at the center of gravity Ams =0 LaAmy=0 Lam: =0 Also, because of symmetry, TAmxy =0 Tamyz =0 In addition, by definition, 1.=DAm(y?+2) (10.74) L,= Am(?+ 2) (10.76) = Zam y) (076) Ia =Z Amxz (10.74) ‘With these definitions, the total inertia forces and moments can be deter mined. From FR =0 M+M;594 LATERAL-DIRECTIONAL DYNAMIC STABILITY AND CONTROL it follows that, FE m(U +QW~-RV) (10.84) F,=m(V PW +RU) (10.86) F,=m(W+PV-QU) (10.8¢) L= LP + RU, ~ 1) — dG — RB) = LAR + PQ) ~ 1,(Q ~ PR) (108d) M = 10 + PRU, ~ 1) + LAP" ~ R) = 1,{R — PQ) ~ LP + OR) (10.8e) N= LR + POU, — 1.) ~ Lf? — O) ~ 1,(P ~ QR) ~1,fQ + PR) ao.sf) Not included in these equations are angular momentum vectors that may be present because of rotors or other rotating components. If h denotes such an angular momentum vector, then wh must be added to the above ‘momentum equations. Thus Equation 10.8d, 10.8¢, and 10.8f becomes, L= LP 1a + Qh, ~ Rh, (10.94) M=1,0~ Ph, + Rh, (10.96) N=LR~I,,P + Ph, — Rh, (10.9¢) Equations 10.8a, 10.8c, and 10.8e were derived previously in Chapter Nine and were used to examine longitudinal dynamic stability and control. Equa- tions 10.86, 10.8d, and 10.8f will be used for the analysis of lateral-directional EULER ANGLES Although we will not be concerned with them to any extent, it might be well at this point to define the so-called Euler angles. Finite angular rotations of an airplane about its own body axes are not commutative. The final orientation of the airplane will depend on the order in which the rotations are performed. To illustrate this, hold a small model in front of you, heading directly away from you with wings level. Now rotate the mode! 90° about its ‘x-axis, then 90° about its y-axis, and then 90° around its z-axis, all directions positive in accordance with the right-hand rule. The model will now be pointing nose-down with its top toward you. Now reverse the order. Rotate it 90° about its z-axis, then the y-axis, and then the x-axis. In this case, the ‘model's final orientation will be nose-up with its top toward you. ‘The Euler angles, starting with a given airplane orientation, are rotations denoted by ¢, 8, and / about the x, y, and z-axes, respectively. However, the order of rotation is first about the z-axis, then about the y-axis, and then about the x-axis. In other words, the airplane is first yawed, then pitched, and then rolledREDUCTION OF THE LATERAL-DIRECTIONAL EQUATIONS OF MOTION 595 With this order of rotation, the components of the angular velocity vector, P, Q, and R, are related to d, d, and by, P=$-dsing (10.104) Q= bcos +ycos a sing (10.108) R= Geos 6.cos. bd sind (10.10¢) For small values of , @, and 4, these become P=é (10.114) Q=6 (10.116) Rod (10.110) REDUCTION OF THE LATERAL-DIRECTIONAL EQUATIONS OF MOTION The lateral-directional equations of motion are linearized and nondimen- sionalized in a manner similar to that followed for longitudinal motion. The resultant velocity is taken to be nearly constant and equal to Uy. Vand W are assumed to be small by comparison to Us. The angles ¢, 0, and y and their derivatives are also taken to be small. Orders higher than the first for any of these small quantities are neglected. Also, the velocity V is replaced by UsB. Hence the lateral-directional equations reduce to y+ mgd = mUdb +R) (10.124) L=hd- LR (20.126) N=LR-18 (10.12) The aerodynamic force, Y, and moments, L and N, are expressed in coefficient form using S as the reference area and b as the reference lenath. The coefficients are then expanded in a Taylor series, assuming them to be a function of B, p. F,8.,and 6, and F are dimensionless rates similar to @ and are defined by (10.134) (10.136) Again a characteristic time £* is defined, However, in the lateral-direc- tional case, the reference length is taken as b/2. (10.14)596 _LATERAL-DIRECTIONAL DYNAMIC STABILITY AND CONTROL ‘The dimensionless time is given by (10.15) (10.16a) (10.166) (10.16) (10.16d) Substituting Equations 10.13 to 10.16 into Equation 10.12 results in the final nondimensional, linearized equations of motion governing lateral-direc- tional m CrP + Cub + Cb + CrP + Cy,8,=2W(B +A — (10.170) CB + Cb + OF + Cy, 1+ C,, 8:5 iia (10.176) Cuf+ Cugb + Caf + Cu, Bat Cu, 8:= uF id (10.176) In Equation 10.17, all derivatives indicated by a dot are with respect to the dimensionless time 7. A SUMMARY LOOK AT THE STABILITY DERIVATIVES AND OTHER PARAMETERS AFFECTING LATERAL-DIRECTIONAL DYNAMIC MOTION Y Dorivatives Equation 10.17a is the equation governing primari the airplane's mass in the y direction. It contains the stability derivatives, Cy, Cyp and Cy, the control derivative Cy,, and the parameters, Ci, and 2. Ci, 18, the trim lift coefficient and needs no further explanation. The dimensionless ‘mass 2 is defined by Equation 10.16d. For the Cherokee 180 example used previously at an altitude of 1500 m, 2m #986A SUMMARY LOOK AT THE STABILITY DERIVATIVES 597 Cy The side force derivative, Cr, consists primarily of contributions from the fuselage, the vertical tail, and the normal force resulting from the propulsion system, Referring to Figure 8.25, a positive sideslip angle of B results in a negative side force on the fuselage and vertical tail. The force on the fuselage can be estimated on the basis of Equation 8.71. The y force on the vertical tail will be given by Y, = —naS.a.B(1~ ¢) . or Ss. Cy, = mF BC) (10.18) For the Cherokee 180, the effective aspect ratio of the vertical tail (see discussion following Equation 8.90) is estimated to equal 2.84. This value of A substituted into Equation 3.70 gives an estimated lift curve slope of 3.04/rad. The ratio SS equals 0.0713. ¢, is taken to be zero, and 1, to be unity so Cy, = -0.216/rad The fuselage and propeller contributions to Cy, are assumed to equal their contributions to C,, that were previously estimated to total —0.18/rad. Thus the total side force derivative for the Cherokee 180 is estimated to equal Cy, = ~0.396/rad os, ‘The side force resulting from the rolling velocity is normally small. It results primarily from the vertical tail lying above the longitudinal axis through the center of gravity. If the aerodynamic center of the vertical tail lies a distance of Z, above the center of gravity, then it will experience, as shown, in Figure 10.3, an angle of attack resulting from a roll rate, P, equal to Pi da= Ue The direction of Aa is such as to produce a negative Y force, given by y, PZ. ~naS.as Ge In coefficient form, (10.19) where598 LATERAL-DIRECTIONAL DYNAMIC STABILITY AND CONTROL Figure 10.3 Angle-ot-attack increment at vertical tail resulting from roil rate. (a) Rear view. (b) Top view. For the Cherokee 180, Z.Jb ~ 0.09. Thus, Cy, = -0.039 The side force due to yaw rate results from the damping force on the vertical tail and on the propulsor. If the vertical tail is aft of the center of gravity a distance of J, a yaw rate of R will produce on increment in the angle of attack, as shown in Figure 10.4, equal to A side force in the y direction results, given by Rl nasa, Be In coefficient form, this becomes Cy, = 2ma.VeF (10.20) ¥, is the vertical tail volume defined previously, and F is the dimension- less yaw rate. For the Cherokee 180, V, = 0.031. Thus, o,= In a similar manner, a propeller experiences an angle-of-attack change 188‘A SUMMARY LOOK AT THE STABILITY DERIVATIVES 599 | 1 | | | s sort Figure 10.4 Angle-ot-attack increment at vertical tail due to yaw rate. Top view. ‘due to R, given by Ri a= Be 40" Us where |, represents the distance of the propeller ahead of the center of gravity. The direction of Aa is opposite to that shown in Figure 10.4, so the Y force on the propeller is Yoop = ~Py, Re In dimensionless form this becomes Clam = 2 SE cy, 0.21)600 _LATERAL-DIRECTIONAL DYNAMIC STABILITY AND CONTROL. For the Cherokee 180, the following quantities were estimated previously for the trim condition of 50m/s at an altitude of 1500m and a gross weight of 10,680 N. Poa = 08 /rad Co,= 0.0615 Ib equals 0.236. Hence Chg, = —0.0232/rad/air see ‘The total Cy, for the Cherokee is therefore estimated to be Cy, = 0.165 Cn, ‘The control derivative giving the rate of change of side force with rudder deflection is found from Ay = n@S.ar.8, or, in coefficient form, S Cy, = are (10.22) For the Cherokee 180, +, is estimated, using Figures 3.32 and 3.33 to equal 0.54. Thus, Cy, = 0.1N7Irad I Derivatives Equation 10.17b governs primarily the angular acceleration about the roll axis. The stability derivatives C, Ci, Cip the control derivatives C,,, Ci, and the parameters i, and i,, are needed to evaluate this equation. From the definition of i, given by Equation 10.16a, for the Cherokee 180, ‘The product of inertia I. is unavailable for the example airplane. If the x-axis is a principle axis, 1, is equal to zero, so it is reasonable to assume that In; is small. Therefore, it will be assumed that i= 0 G, This derivative, known as “dihedral effect,” has been previously covered in some depth. C,, can be calculated on the basis of Equations 8.108 to 8.112. ‘The Cherokee 180 is a low-wing airplane having a dihedral angle of 7.5°. The‘A SUMMARY LOOK AT THE STABILITY DERIVATIVES 601 wing is unswept, untapered, and has an aspect ratio of 5.625. From Figure 8.39, the contribution to Ci, from the wing equals ~0.089Sjrad. To this we add 0.0092 to account for the presence of the fuselage. Thus, for the wing-fuselage combination, G,, = ~0.0803/rad The vertical tail placed above the center of gravity also contributes to Ci, ‘Ata sideslip angle of 8, the vertical tail develops a side force in the negative y direction equal to Ay=-ngS.aB Acting at a height above the center of gravity of Z,, this increment in the y force gives rise to a rolling moment equal to Al =—ngS.aAp Thus, in coefficient form, (40.23) For the Cherokee 180, Cy, = -0.0195Irad Adding the contribution of the vertical tail to that of the wing-fuselage combination gives a total dihedral effect of Cy, = ~0.0998)rad ‘An effect that is not included here, but that can be important, particularly at low speeds with flaps down, is illustrated in Figure 10.5. As a propeller- driven airplane slips to the right, the slipstream trails to the left, causing an increased lift on the left wing. This can result in a significant increase in Cy This interaction is difficult to predict in a general way. It is best obtained by means of wind tunnel testing with a powered model. oy, ‘The roll damping coefficient can be calculated on the basis of Figure 8.36 for both the wing and horizontal tail. For the Cherokee’s wing, Ci, = ~0.420. For the horizontal tail, A, = 4.10 and A, = 1.0. Thus, from Figure 8.36, C),= =0.335. However, this value is based on the tail area and span. To base C,, on the wing’s dimension, we note that pb, h= nab FC, Thus, (10.24)602 _LATERAL-DIRECTIONAL DYNAMIC STABILITY AND CONTROL “te Figure 10.5 Effect of slipstream on dihedral effect, For the Cherokee, a 017 Thus the total C,, due to the wing and horizontal tail is equal to ~0.426. The vertical tail also contributes to Cy. As recommended in Chapter Eight, Figure 8.36 can also be applied to the vertical tail as if it extended below the fuselage to the same extent as above. The value obtained is then halved and corrected according to Equation 10.24. For the Cherokee the increment to C,, from the vertical tail is approximately half of that from the horizontal tail. Thus, for the Cherokee 180, G, = -0.429 The rate of change of rolling moment with yawing velocity was con- sidered in Chapter Eight. C,, is composed of two contributions, one from the ‘wing and the other from the vertical tail. According to Equation 8.103 for the‘A SUMMARY LOOK AT THE STABILITY DERIVATIVES 603 Cherokee 10, the wing's contribution to G, wll equal oy (1434 S(t) oust G, ‘The contribution to C;, from the vertical tail is given by Equation 8.10: =o, 2 O96, = 0.017 Hence, the total C, for the Cherokee 180 is estimated to equal 6, = 0.198 Aileron roll control was covered in Chapter Eight. C,, can be estimated on the basis of Figure 8.30b. For the Cherokee 180, . A= 10 A= 5625 21 = 0.603 n= 10 £2 = 0,193 Using these equations and a linear interpolation for aspect ratio for values of A between 4 and 6 gives a value for G,, from Figure 8.30b of Gy, = -0.0831/rad Since the maximum aileron deflection for the Cherokee is 30° up and 15° down, the total 8, of 45° gives a predicted Gig, = 0.0417 Cy, G,, can be found from Equations 8.101 and 8.102, For the Cherokee 180, Cy, was estimated to equal 0.117/rad. Therefore, n Zz G,= Cn, & =0.0105/rad604 _LATERAL-DIRECTIONAL DYNAMIC STABILITY AND CONTROL N Derivatives Cu ‘The change of yawing moment coefficient was covered in Chapter Eight. Equation 8.90 expresses the contribution from the vertical tail as, for ae Cherokee. The contributions to Cy, from both the propeller and fuselage are obtained from the values estimated in Chapter Nine for Cy,. There, the total Cu, from the fuselage and propeller was estimated to equal 0.153/rad. To obtain Cy, the sign must be reversed and Cy, multiplied by c/b. Thus, due to the fuselage and propeller, Cy, = ~0.0268/rad ‘Thus, for the Cherokee 180, Cx, = 0.0672/rad Cw, Cy, is given by Equation 8.107. For the Cherokee 180 at a trim lift coefficient of 0.543, this equation reduces to Cx, = = 0.0905 this contribution comes from the wing. There will also be a small contribution from the vertical tail, given by or, for the Cherokee, ‘Thus, the total becomes Cy, = -0.0735 Cy, Cy, can be obtained directly from the vertical tail and propeller con- tributions to Cy,. It is left to you to show that G eae Cy, + Cr, 40.25) or, for the Cherokee, Cy, = ~0.188(0.435) ~ 0.0232(0.236) 0.0873LATERAL-DIRECTIONAL EQUATIONS FOR THE CHEROKEE 10 605 Cu, The adverse aileron yaw is difficult to estimate. In view of the differential aileron deflections used on the Cherokee, it will be assumed that Cy, = 0. On, om, is given by (10.26) Thus, for the Cherokee, 0.0509/rad In addition to the stability derivatives, the parameter iz is needed to evaluate Equation 10.17¢. From Equation 10.166, for the Cherokee 180, ig= 18 LATERAL-DIRECTIONAL EQUATIONS FOR THE CHEROKEE 160 The three equations governing the lateral-directional motion and control of the Cherokee 180 are obtained by substituting the calculated stability and control derivatives into Equation 10.17. This reduces to: 30.46 + 0.3968 + 0.0394 — 0.5434 +30.2F=0.1178, (10.274) 0.09938 + 0.153¢ + 0.4296 — 0.1987 = 0.0531 5, + 0.0105 6, (10.276) 0.06728 +0.0735¢ + 1.18 + 0.08737 = ~0.0509 8, (10.27e) ‘The characteristic equation for this set of simultaneous, linear differential ‘equations is obtained from the determinant. 80.40 +0396) +(0.039 —0.543) 302 0.0998 (0.1530? +0.4298) ~.198 =0 0.0672 +0.07350 (1.180 + 0.08.73)| This determinant reduces to the following. o*+2.900" + 0.3810" + 0.2150 — 0.000454 = (10.28) Since the constant is negative, it is obvious that Equation 10.28 will have positive real root. Thus the Cherokee is predicted to possess at least one ‘mode of the lateral-directional motion that is unstable. ‘Typical of lateral-directional motion, Equation 10.28 has two real roots and a pair of complex roots. The real roots can be found from trial and error,606 —_LATERAL-DIRECTIONAL DYNAMIC STABILITY AND CONTROL by graphical means, or otherwise to equal 2.79 0.00210 (co ~«,) can be divided into Equation 10.28 (simply follow the same procedure as is done in a long division problem) to obtain a cubic. The cubic is then divided by (o ~ 0;) to obtain a quadratic, which can be solved for the pair of complex roots 05 = ~0.055 +0.2771 @4= 0.055 ~ 0.2771 Mode Shapes The significance of these roots and the instability exhibited by the positive real root can be examined by looking at the shapes of each mode in the same manner that was followed for the longitudinal motion. For the transient solution, 8, and 8, are zero. Using Equation 10.274 and 10.276, we can eliminate F to solve for the ratio of $ to B. This result, which holds for any o, is o. e053 B 0.76607 + 2.150 — 0.0180 (10.29) 716 can then be obtained from any one of the equations. Using Equation 10.274 (1.007 + 0.0131)~$ 0.001290 ~0.0180) (10.30) Roll Mode For = -2.79, 4/8 and Hp become ¢ $- a3 8 Fm 1.88 5 Since # ~ d, we can replace # by av so that = $--o674 e $- 628LATERAL-DIRECTIONAL EQUATIONS FOR THE CHEROKEE 180 607 For this mode, it is seen that both 6 and y are small compared to 4. Thus, this mode is predominantly a damped rolling motion. Indeed, if one neglects all but the terms in Equation 10.27b, a value for of ~2.80 that 1s very close to the exact value is obtained immediately. The time for the roll rate to damp to half of its initial value can be found from Equation 9.72 to be For the lateral motion, from Equation 10.14, ob Pou _ 9.4 260) = 0.0914 see Thus, Tip = 0.0227 see Obviously, this is a heavily damped, stable mode. Spiral Mode Consider the positive real root, ¢ = 0.00210. In this case, from Equation 10.29, 385 Bin BIS 677 or, again replacing F by oy, sis Bis608 _LATERAL-DIRECTIONAL DYNAMIC STABILITY AND CONTROL For this mode, the motion is seen to be predominantly a heading change with a small roll angle and sideslip angle. With o being positive, these angles increase with time, so the mode is actually unstable! With increasing exponentially with time, the flight path of the airplane describes a spiral. Thus, this mode is referred to as the spiral mode. If it is unstable, as in this case, the motion is referred to as spiral divergence; otherwise, it is referred to as spiral convergence, The time to double amplitude is found from Ind or Tay = 30.2 see This time is characteristic of many aircraft and is suffi the pilot compensates for the divergence without realizing it. Although spiral divergence cannot be described as unsafe, it can result in extreme attitudes if the pilot should be studying a chart and forgets to fly the airplane for a few moments. It can prove catastrophic for the noninstrument-rated pilot who finds herself or himself in instrument conditions. ‘The root for the spiral mode is normally small, so it can be closely approximated by the constant term in the characteristic equation divided by the coefficient of to the first power. From Equation 10.17, the determinant ently long so that defining the characteristic equation is: Our Cy) (Cyan Cw) -, (ia? Co) lino +) -Cw ~ (ia? + Cy) (har Cu) When this determinant is expanded for typical values of the stability deriva tives, one obtains approximately (CyCu, — CxgCi,)o = CrlCugCi,~ CyCw) 031) Equation 10.31 neglects terms in o of order higher than the first. It also neglects some first-order terms in o that are typically small. For the Cherokee, this approximation for the root of the spiral mode gives a value of 0.00227 that is 89% higher than the exact value. ‘The denominator of Equation 10.31 is usually positive, so the com- bination of terms in the numerator governs whether or not the spiral modeLATERAL-DIRECTIONAL EQUATIONS FOR THE CHEROKEE 160 609 is stable. For spiral convergence, C40, 0.019.SPINNING 617 angle of attack on the left side compared to the right side. The aft fuselage, depending upon its geometry, can develop a force also in the direction of rotation Rudder control is the principal means of recovering from a spin. There- fore, in designing the empennage, the placement of the horizontal tail relative to the rudder is important. If the horizontal tail is too far forward, in a spin its wake will blanket the rudder, making it ineffective. An attempt to quantify the blanketing of the vertical tail by the he ynital tail is presented in Figure 10.7 (taken from Ref. 10.1). Referring to this figure, term called the tail damping power factor (TDPF) is defined by FL? RiLy+ Rely ‘Sei S(bI2) Equation 10.40 is given here only to acquaint you with its definition, since it is found in more recent references related to spinning (Refs. 10.2 and 10.3). T question its value in view of the arbitrary selection of a in the spin and the use of the projected area F underneath the horizontal tal. The cross-sectional TDPF= (10.40) 2000 x10 1800 + 2 Revert of rudder alone 2 Simuteneos reversal of woo rusia end alvatr sofactoy 1 Smultnsovs revert of ruber and lunar nninactny 1200} i eee } o oxo Spruce +f I + | | +++ | | I en Sta es ty rand wow 600} —} = Figure 10.8 Spin recovery design requirements for airplanes with u values less than 30,618 LATERAL-DIRECTIONAL DYNAMIC STABILITY AND CONTROL saitactony satisfactory a8 30 a 760 BOX 0 Figure 10.9 Criteria for spin recovery. TPF x 108 Inertia yawing moment parameter, fe J) mb? 108 Figure 10.10 Spin recovery for a light airplane with different tail configurations.PROBLEMS 619 shape of this area must certainly influence the damping effectiveness of this According to Reference 10.1, the TDPF for satisfactory spin recovery is a function of an airplane’s mass distribution. This is shown in Figure 10.8 (taken from Ref. 10.1). Boundaries are suggested on this figure that divide regions of satisfactory spin recovery characteristics from unsatisfactory regions. However, from the points included on the figure, it is obvious that these boundaries are not too well defined. Indeed, there are several unsatis- factory points lying well within the region denoted as being satisfactory. Simitar graphs for 1. values as high as 70 can be found in the reference. The scatter and overlapping of the points in Reference 10.1 appear to rule ‘out any valid definition of the criteria as a function of a. Instead, the graph of Figure 10.9 is offered as representative of any w. value. In the region labeled “satisfactory.” there were no unsatisfactory points to be found in the reference. For the region labeled “possibly satisfactory,” there were ap- proximately an equal number of satisfactory and unsatisfactory points. In the region labeled “probably unsatisfactory,” the data points were predominan- tely unsatisfactory. Despite the uncertainty associated with this figure, one point is obvious. For satisfactory spin recovery characteristics, the moments of inertia about the pitching and rolling axes should be significantly different. Figure 10.10 is taken from Reference 10.3. Obviously, neither the shape of the curve dividing the satisfactory region from the unsatisfactory region nor the values of TDPF for satisfactory recovery agree with Figure 10.9. Tails 1, 3, and 4 were found to be unsatisfactory for spin recovery with ailerons neutral. With ailerons deflected, tails 2 and 7 were also unsatisfactory. This reference concludes that TDPF cannot be used to predict spin recovery. However, it is important to provide damping to the spin and very important to provide exposed rudder area for spin recovery. In modern aircraft, the T-tail is becoming very popular. The reason for this is twofold. First, from Figure 10.10, such a tail configuration provides excellent spin recovery charac- teristics. Second, the horizontal tail is removed from the wing wake, thereby minimizing downwash effects. For the same tail effectiveness, the T-tail will allow a smaller horizontal tail, thereby saving on weight and drag. PROBLEMS 10.1 Assuming small angles, calculate the maximum deviation for the Cherokee example from a straight path if only the Dutch roll mode is excited with a maximum sideslip angle of 5°. 10.2 Estimate TDPF for the Cherokee 180 and determine where it lies on Figure 10.9. (Note: This aircraft is placarded against intentional spins.)620 _LATERAL-DIRECTIONAL DYNAMIC STABILITY AND CONTROL 10.3 Draw the patching diagram to solve the lateral-directional equations of motion on an analog computer. 10.4 Dynamically scaled, radio-controlled models are frequently used for spin testing. Examine the scaling relationships involving size, mass, and mass distribution required for dynamic simulation of a full-scale airplane with a model. the The following problems refer to the airplane pictured in Figure 8.43, center of gravity positioned to give a 10% stick-fixed static margin. 105 Calculate all of the lateral-directional stability and control derivatives required to solve Equation 10.17 10.6 Calculate the roll, spiral, and Dutch roll mode shapes for a Mach number of 0.5 at a standard altitude of 15,000 ft. 10.7 Discuss the lateral-directional handling qualities for light phase category B for this aircraft based on the results of Problem 10.6. 10.8 Do you think the spin recovery would be satisfactory for this airplane? REFERENCES 10.1 Neihouse, A. I, Lichtenstein, J. H., and Pepoon, P. W. Tail-Design Requirements for Satisfactory Spin Recovery, NACA TN 1045, April 1946. 10.2 Bowman, J. S. March 1966. 10.3 Bowman, J. S., and Burk, S. M., Comparison to Results from Spin Tunnel and Radio Control Model Spin Tests with Full-Scale Airplane Results, presented at General Aviation Technologyfest, AIAA, Wichita, Kans., November 18-19, 1977 (NASA TP 1009). 10.4 Seckel, Edward, Stability and Control of Airplanes and Helicopters, Academic Press, New York and London, 1964. “Aircraft Spinning,” Aeronautics and Astronautics, 43),