Professional Documents
Culture Documents
I. INTRODUCTION
This chapter will discuss several aspects of the stability and control of
aircraft. Only low-speed (subsonic) aircraft will be considered, and only
enough wing theory will be presented for the purposes of basic stability
analysis. There are a large number of reference books and articles dealing
with aerodynamics and the stability and control of aircraft. See, for exam-
ple, Babister (1980), Dole (1981), Etkin (1972), Etkin and Reid (1996),
Hunsaker and Rightmire (1947), Hurt (1960), Irving (1966), McCormick
(1995), McReuer et al. (1973), and Vincenti (1988).
Because airplanes fly in three dimensions and are capable of a wide
variety of maneuvers, there are many aspects of stability and control that
could be discussed. Some are fairly obvious. For example, the vertical tail
functions much as the tail of a weather vane. It tends to make the airplane
line up with the relative wind and thus stabilizes the yaw rate in straight
flight.
Other aspects are quite subtle as when the airplane pilot attempts to
execute a so-called ‘‘coordinated turn.’’ In this case, the airplane turns in a
manner similar to a bicycle or motorcycle in a steady turn. As example of
some of the subtleties associated with three-dimensional motion, consider
first the initiation of a right-hand-coordinated turn. The airplane must roll
to the right meaning that the left wing must generate more lift than the right
through the use of the ailerons. This increase of lift on the left is accom-
FIG. 9.1 Angle of attack, lift, drag, and moment for a wing or a wing section.
FIG. 9.2 Lift coefficient curve for a typical cambered airfoil (angle of attack, a,
defined with respect to the nose-to-tail line).
FIG. 9.3 Typical sectional drag and moment coefficients for an airfoil with
camber.
The moment about the center of mass can now be expressed in terms of the
lift forces acting on the wing-body combination and the horizontal tail in
Fig. 9.4. There is a constant moment due to wing camber and, of course, no
moment about the center of mass due to the weight. The horizontal tail
typically has a symmetric profile since it is not designed to supply much lift
at cruise conditions and it has a smaller area than the wing so it is not
The lift forces in Eq. (9.7) can be replaced by expressions involving lift
coefficients from Eqs. (9.5) and (9.6).
1 1
MG ¼ M0wb þ ðh h0 Þc qV2 SCLwb lT qV2 ST CT ð9:8Þ
2 2
At this point, the change in the net moment about the center of mass as the
pitch angle of the airplane and hence the angle of attack of the wing and tail
surfaces changed could be evaluated to establish a criterion for static
stability. The quantities that change if the airplane pitch angle were to
change would be the lift coefficients. Instead of this, it is traditional to
convert Eq. (9.8) to a nondimensional form before proceeding further.
lT ST
CMG ¼ CM0 þ ðh h0 ÞCLwb CLT ð9:9Þ
cS
where the two new moment coefficients are defined to be the original
moments in Eq. (9.8) divided by (qV2Sc)/2.
The last term in Eq. (9.9) involves the ratio of two quantities with the
dimension of volume (length times area). This has been termed the ‘‘tail
volume coefficient,’’ V .
V ðlT ST Þ=cS ð9:10Þ
The tail volume coefficient turns out to represent a major design parameter
to be adjusted to insure static stability. When Eq. (9.10) is substituted into
Eq. (9.9), the result is
CMG ¼ CM0 þ ðh h0 ÞCLwb V CLT ð9:11Þ
The trim condition for the basic motion is that the lift and weight should
balance and that the net moment about the center of mass should vanish.
In moment coefficient form, the latter requirement is simply
CMG ¼ 0 ð9:12Þ
The static stability criterion requires that the moment about the center of
mass should be negative if the angle of attack or the lift should increase. In
moment coefficient form, this can be stated as
BCMG
<0 ð9:13Þ
BCL
BCM0
¼0 ð9:16Þ
Ba
The slopes of the lift curves in the linear regions are designated by a for the
wing and aT for the tail as indicated in Eq. (9.4) (see Figs. 9.2 and 9.4). (As
noted above, these lift coefficient slopes are somewhat analogous to
cornering coefficients for pneumatic tires.) With these definitions and using
Eq. (9.16), Eq. (9.15) becomes
BCMG daT
¼ ðh h0 Þa V aT ð9:17Þ
Ba da
It has been previously mentioned that the angle of attack at the tail is
affected by the downwash angle, e, which is shown in Fig. 9.4. The
downwash is due to the lift produced by the wing. In order for lift to be
produced, there must be a momentum flux in a downward direction behind
the wing. At the location of the tail, this downward velocity component
reduces the angle of attack by the effective angle e. When the lift increases,
the downwash angle also increases so the angle of attack at the tail does not
increase as much as the angle of attack at the wing. This is accounted for by
assuming the following relation:
daT de
¼ 1 ð9:18Þ
da da
In addition, the tail operates to some extent in the wake of the wing and
body so the flow over the tail may not have the same speed as the flow over
for two related reasons. First, the slope of the line relating the moment
coefficient to the lift coefficient must be negative according to the criterion,
Eq. (9.23), if the airplane is to be statically stable.
Second, the trim point, at which the moment coefficient is zero, must
occur at a positive lift coefficient so that the lift can counteract the weight.
The plot in Fig. 9.4 shows the only way that these two conditions can be
met.
Considering Eq. (9.23) and looking at the dimensions and definitions
in Fig. 9.3, a number of factors that influence stability can be appreciated.
First, a reduction in h means that the center of mass has been moved
forward. This reduces the positive term hh0 in Eq. (9.23) and makes the
slope in Fig. 9.4 more negative and the airplane more stable. Shifting the
center of mass toward the rear increases hh0 and makes slope less negative
and the plane less stable.
A large tail far to the rear yields a large volume coefficient V and,
because of the negative sign on the term involving V, makes the slope in Fig.
9.4 more negative and increased stability. Roughly speaking, one can
achieve static stability by having the center of mass far enough forward and
having a large enough horizontal tail far enough to the rear.
Modern airplanes can carry loads that are a significant fraction of the
weight of the airplane itself. This means that, when heavily loaded, an
airplane’s center of mass location depends importantly on how the load is
distributed in the airplane. Aircraft manufacturers have devised a number
of means to assure that the center of mass of a loaded airplane is not far
enough rearward to cause the airplane to lose static stability. The Wright
A. Parameter Estimation
Some of the parameters in Eq. (9.23) dealing with lengths and areas are
fairly easy to estimate. Others can be estimated at least roughly from
theoretical results. There are a number of results for wings of elliptically
shaped wings that give at least a reasonable idea of the magnitude of some
of the parameters for wings of other plan shapes.
An important shape parameter for a wing is its aspect ratio, A. For a
rectangular wing of span (or length) b and chord (or width) c, the aspect
ratio is simply
A ¼ b=c ð9:24Þ
For other shapes, the aspect ratio can be defined in terms of the area S and
the span b or the mean chord c
A ¼ b2 =S or A ¼ S=c2 ð9:25Þ
For an elliptical wing shape, thin wing theory can predict the slope of the
lift coefficient curve with respect to the angle of attack as a function of the
aspect ratio.
BCL =Ba ¼ a ¼ 2pA=ðA þ 2Þ ð9:26Þ
and this theoretical result can serve a guide for other shape wings if their
shape is not too different from an elliptical shape. It is of interest that for
very long thin wings such as are found in sailplanes with A H 2, the slope
a ! 2p according to Eq. (9.26). The slope of the sectional lift coefficient for
a wing section in pure two-dimensional flow is exactly 2p. For a high aspect
ratio wing, most of the wing operates in an essentially two-dimensional
flow as if it was a wing section in a wind tunnel. Only near the wing tips does
the wing operate in the three-dimensional flow field.
High aspect ratio wings are particularly efficient at generating lift
with low values of the so-called induced drag. The induced drag actually
results from a tilting of the total lift vector toward the rear. This
component of drag has nothing to do with fluid friction but does have to
do with the portion of the wing in the three-dimensional flow near the wing
tips. The induced drag does, however, have to be counteracted by the
power plant for steady flight so that a low value of induced drag is favorable
for airplane efficiency.
L ¼ mg when V ¼ V0 ð9:33Þ
This implies that the slip angle at both axles at the instant shown in
Fig. 9.8 is a. The question asked in a static stability analysis is whether or
not the induced forces produce a moment that will tend to reduce a. First,
we compute the moment about the mass center in the direction of positive
a.
Mc ¼ Yf a Yr b ¼ ðCf a Cr bÞa ð9:40Þ
A positive value for Mc means that a will tend to increase. This will be the
case if (CfaCrb) > 0 which implies the car is statically unstable. On the
other hand, if (CfaCrb)<0, then Mc will be negative and a will tend to
decrease. In this case, the car is statically stable.
From our previous dynamic analysis in Chapter 6, we know that the
statically stable case corresponds to what we called understeer and
understeer cars have been shown to be dynamically stable. It might seem
then that static stability analysis, which is far simpler than a dynamic
stability analysis, could be used for cars as well as airplanes.
The problem is that the statically unstable case corresponds to the
oversteer case, but an oversteer vehicle is actually unstable only for speeds
higher than the critical speed. How can this be?
Imagine dropping the car shown in Fig. 9.9 on the ground at a small
angle a0 relative to the velocity along a nominal path. Depending upon the
speed and static stability, the angle a may increase or decrease as time goes
on. Fig. 9.10 shows some of the paths that could be followed by various
cars traveling at different speeds.
The cases indicated can be explained as follows.
1. Statically stable or understeer vehicle. The yaw rate a<0 for all
speeds for an understeer car so a decreases initially although the
rate of decrease eventually approaches zero. The car has a lateral
These simplify somewhat using the trim conditions, Eq. (9.41). In final
form, the two equations of motion take the form
mW þ UðC þ Ct ÞW mUq UðCxa Ct lt Þq ¼ 0 ð9:48Þ
Iyy q UðCxa Ct lt ÞW þ UðCxa þ Ct lt Þq ¼ 0
2 2
ð9:49Þ
The corresponding second-order characteristic equation is
mIyy s2 þ U½mðCx2a þ Ct l2t Þ þ Iyy ðC þ Ct Þs þ U2 ½ðC þ Ct Þ
ð9:50Þ
ðCx2a þ Ct l2t Þ mðCxa Ct lt Þ ðCxa Ct lt Þ2 ¼ 0
Note that C>0 and Ct>0 so the coefficients of s2 and s are positive. This
means that the last term in Eq. (9.50) determines stability. After some
simplification, this term can be expressed as
n o
U2 CCt ðxa þ lt Þ2 mðCxa Ct lt Þ ð9:51Þ
If the entire term in Eq. (9.51) is positive, then the characteristic equation,
Eq. (9.50), will have eigenvalues with negative real parts and the airplane
will be dynamically stable.
The important factor in Eq. (9.51) for the airplane is
1 BCa BCat
Cxa Ct lt ¼ q S xa St lt ð9:52Þ
2 Ba Bat
If the factor in Eq. (9.52) is negative [noting the negative sign associated
with this factor in Eq. (9.51)], then the simplified airplane model is
statically as well as dynamically stable at all speeds. In fact, the factor
could even be slightly positive meaning that the airplane would be statically
unstable but the airplane could still be dynamically stable. This is because
there is another inherently positive term that always exists in Eq. (9.51).
There are strongly analogous terms in the two expressions in Eqs. (9.51)
and (9.53), but the speed U enters entirely differently due to the different
mechanisms of force generation for wings and wheels noted previously.
The expression in Eq. (9.53) will always be positive for low-enough speeds
regardless of whether the term CfaCrb is positive or negative, i. e., wheth-
er the car is oversteer or understeer. The expression Eq. (9.53) can produce
a critical speed for the oversteer case above which the dynamic changes, but
the equivalent expression for the airplane, Eq. (9.51), never changes sign
with speed.
Thus the use of static stability for airplanes is conservative according
to this simplified analysis since even a slightly statically unstable airplane
could be dynamically stable. In any case, the dynamic stability does not
change with speed as it clearly does for automobiles. For the car, a static
stability analysis by itself is not very useful because it does not necessarily
predict dynamic stability.
Appendix A shows bond graph representations of the car and
airplane models used in this section. The rigid body bond graphs from
Chapter 2 are used, and the junction structures that connect the force-
producing devices with the rigid body dynamics are clearly analogous. The
crucial difference between the force-generation properties of wings and
wheels is clearly shown in the bond graph resistance parameters for the two
cases.