ACSYNT
NASa /37Ol
Richard
Bortins
Prepared
The National
Aeronautics
Ames
for:
and Space
Research
Systems
Analysis
Mountain
View,
Administration
Center
Branch
California
Under:
Contract
No. NAS
213701
July 1993
SEAGULL TECHNOLOGY,
INC.
1310 Hollenbeck.Sunnyvale,
CA 94087408/7329620
Table
of Contents
1
Introduction
1.1
Background
1.2
ACSYNT
1.3
Project
1.4
Inner
2.1
2.2
2.3
3
3.2
3.3
4
Inner
4.1
Vision
.......................................................................................................
Summary
.......................................................................................................
Loop
Flight
Control
Design
Process
Requirements
.........................................................................
2.1.2
Inputs
from
the User
.....................................................................................
2.1.3
Inputs
from
ACSYNT
...................................................................................
Process
Outputs
Parameter
Functional
Default
of the ILFCS
Sets ..................................................................................
Design
......................................................................
2.2.1
Outputs
to the User
.......................................................................................
2.2.2
Outputs
to ACSYNT
.....................................................................................
Conclusion
................................................................................................................
Effector
Design
11
Effectors ....................................................................................................................
11
3.1.1
Definition
11
3.1.2
Control
3.1.3
Preliminary
Control
.....................................................................................................
Surface
Air Worthiness
3.2.2
Design
3.2.3
DATCOM
Loop
Inputs
Surface
Design
........................................................
Methodology
Constraints
Required
Decoupled
4.1.2
Coupled
4.1.3
Dynamics
Actuators
4.3
Sensors
4.4
17
.............................
18
..............................................
19
.................................................................................
Methodology
for Computing
Control
Derivatives
22
.....................
Design
Dynamics
4.1.1
11
......................................
.........................................................................................................
Control
Aircraft
Considerations
...................................................................................................
3.2.1
Conclusion
Design
Control
Derivatives
4.2
4.5
Module
2.1.1
Control
3.1
...............................................................................................................
22
....... 45
47
.....................................................................................................
47
Dynamics
....................................................................................
48
........................................................................................
49
Dynamics
of Case Studies
Aircraft ...............................................................
50
...................................................................................................................
51
......................................................................................................................
54
Algorithm
4.4.1
The Linearquadratic
4.4.2
Enumeration
4.4.3
Discussion
Conclusion
......................................................................................
Method
.......................................................................
..................................................
...........................................................................
................................................................................................................
54
55
57
58
62
Summary
5.1
5.2
and
Summary
Recommendations
63
...................................................................................................................
5.1.1
FCS Design
5.1.2
Control
5.1.3
Inner
Requirements
Effector
Loop
Recommendations
5.2.1
Immediate
5.2.2.
Intermediate
............................................................................
Design
Flight
Control
for Further
Tasks
Tasks
................................................................................
Design
Work
.................
................................................
........................................
...............................
63
63
63
64
64
...........................................................................................
64
........................................................................................
65
67
References
69
Appendix
ii
Introduction
The NASA
Ames
Research
Center
developed
the Aircraft
Synthesis
(ACSYNT)
computer
program
to synthesize
conceptual
future aircraft designs and to evaluate critical performance
metrics early in the design process before significant
resources
are committed
and cost decisions
made. ACSYNT
uses steadystate
performance
metrics, such as aircraft range, payload
and fuel
consumption,
and static performance
metrics, such as the control authority
takeoff rotation and for landing with an engine out, to evaluate conceptual
also optimize
designs
with respect
to selected
criteria
required
for the
aircraft designs. It can
and constraints.
Many modem aircraft have stability provided by the flight control system rather than by the
airframe.
This may allow the aircraft designer
to increase
combat agility, or decrease
trim drag,
for increased
range and payload. This strategy requires concurrent
design of the airframe
and the
flight control system, making tradeoffs
of performance
and dynamics
during the earliest stages
of design.
ACSYNT
presently
lacks means to implement
flight control system designs but research
is being
done to add methods for predicting
rotational
degrees of freedom and control effector
performance.
A software module to compute
and analyze the dynamics
of the aircraft, and to
compute
feedback
gains and analyze closed loop dynamics
is required.
The data gained from
these analyses
can then be fed back to the aircraft design process so that the effects of the flight
control system and the airframe
on aircraft performance
can be included
as design metrics.
This report presents
results of a feasibility
study and the initial design work to add an inner loop
flight control system (ILFCS) design capability
to the stability and control module in ACSYNT.
The overall objective
is to provide a capability
for concurrent
design of the aircraft and its flight
control system, and enable concept designers
to improve performance
by exploiting
the
interrelationships
between aircraft and flight control system design parameters.
1.1
Background
The objective
of aircraft
conceptual
design
is to answer
basic
questions
of configuration
arrangement,
size and weight, cost, and performance.
1 The goal is to work through
choices available
to aircraft designers
rapidly, efficiently,
and effectively
to arrive
the major
at a
configuration
that satisfies the given requirements.
Designers
use rules of thumb, algorithms,
design guidelines,
history and projections
of the capabilities
of new technology
to determine
best to satisfy many diverse and sometimes
conflicting
requirements.
The conceptual
design
how
design: 3, 4
Converge
to the appropriate
Optimize
a specified
Compute
variables
the sensitivity
Analyze
Compute
specified
Optimize
Presently,
function
using
ACSYNT
with respect
combinations
design
for a given
when
of two design
the design
design
to specified
the sensitivity
independent
fuel loading
point
constraints
functions
to one or more
design
variables
is optimized
with respect
to the remaining
variables
approximation
evaluates
techniques
longitudinal,
steadystate
flight
performance
at discrete
design
points.
1.2
ACSYNT
Vision
ACSYNT
continually
evolves to account for technology
advances, and to add precision
and
expanded
capabilities
in the aircraft disciplines
of propulsion,
aerodynamics,
structures,
and
stability and control that are required to perform and evaluate design trades between the
disciplines
at the conceptual
design level. This enables concept designers
to improve the
performance
of their designs by exploiting
the interrelationships
between design parameters
that
are in the domains of these more specialized
disciplines.
Figure
1.1 shows
currently
the software
assisting
NASA
modules
comprising
ACSYNT
and some
of the organizations
in this development.
COPE_CONMIN
ACSYNT
EXECUTIVE
WEIGHTS
3D Modeling
(VPI)
p,
I AERODYNAMICS
II
PROPULSION
6DOF AEROX
(Axelson)
I TRAJECTORIES
AgilityCycle
(Cal Poly)
I
STABILITY_AND
STRUCTURES
Eqv. Plate Meth.
(UW)
(Seagull)
Figure 1.1: ACSYNT
software
modules
NEPP
(VPI/Lewis)
Enhancing ACSYNT
capabilities
must avoid increasing
the number of required inputs
excessively
and adding such complexity
in the specialized
disciplines
that the tool is no longer
usable by aircraft concept designers.
The objectives
are to determine
rapidly and efficiently
the
effect on total aircraft performance
of design changes at high levels within these disciplines
and
to allow discipline
specialists
the opportunity
to understand
how their efforts affect other
disciplines.
Each discipline
has so many design parameters
and performance
metrics that only parameters
and metrics of each discipline
that have the most influence
on aircraft performance
must be
identified
and integrated
into the concept design process. This integration
should use
formulations
and approximations
that promote rapid design iterations
until more design details
can be established.
A designer
has many choices available. Adding additional
level of detail to ACSYNT
will
increase the number of choices and the difficulty
of comparing
multiple concepts
and the time
required
as more choices will have to be made without the aid of the ACSYNT
tool. To enable a
designer
to focus on the effects on performance
of specific aspects of the aircraft, initial designs
that satisfy all constraints
must be provided.
Moreover,
default constraints
must also be provided.
These defaults
and initial designs provide a point of departure
for the designer.
The data for the
defaults
atypical
1.3
Project
for convergence
Determine
control
goals:
what additional
system
design
detail
is required
in ACSYNT
to include
capability
Provide for the design of an inner loop of a flight control system (FCS) by determining
the level of modeling
fidelity and the importance
of terms in the aircraft dynamics
Evaluate
FCS control
Design
Evaluate
Determine
parameters
This report
ACSYNT
synthesis
to
Summary
This project
Finally, warnings
to the designer.
an FCS architecture
synthesis
to support
techniques
how to integrate
with ACSYNT
summarizes
must
lateral/longitudinal
rotational
dynamics
an algorithm
Aircraft
stability
Aircraft
mass properties
Flight
condition
the inner
made
Such
and control
the conceptual
design
the progress
calculate
algorithm.
of including
coupling
in the inner
loop
design
these
operating
and performance
points
evaluation
goals.
to implement
needs,
of ACSYNT
towards
mission
an inner
loop flight
control
system
as a minimum,
derivatives
such as mass,
center
velocity
of mass,
and moments
and atmospheric
of inertia
density
Aircraft
stability and control derivatives
describe nonsteadystate
aerodynamics
control design. The control derivatives
characterize
force and moment generators
their size, aerodynamic
shape, and location. The mass properties
are determined
during linear
and depend on
by weight and
_.
derivative computation
methods were found in references s. 6.
The design approach
adopted for ACSYNT
will use linearized
aircraft dynamics
at selected flight conditions
within the flight envelope.
The linearquadratic
method was chosen as the flight control system design algorithm
because it accommodates
linearized
dynamics
with lateral/longitudinal
coupling
and because it provides
a "handsoff"
way
to compute
feedback
gains from design criteria. The linearquadratic
method uses the dynamics
in statespace
form, and the important
stability derivatives
to form these dynamics
were
identified.
The statespace
form has the advantages
that many analytical,
design, and simulation
tools exist for dynamics
in this form. The FCS architecture
will assume that all aircraft state
variables
can be measured
perfectly and fed back through a control law to the actuators
to
guarantee
closed loop stability even when aircraft dynamics
is open loop unstable.
Case studies comprising
3 aircraft, each at 3 flight conditions,
were used to test the pole
placement
method and the linearquadratic
method. A single set of initial control design
parameters
were found to give acceptable
results for the longitudinal
dynamics.
This provides a
good starting point for automated
control design iterations.
We also tested the method on
lateral/directional
dynamics.
A preliminary
specification
for an interface
between ACSYNT
and
an inner loop control design module has been formulated.
1.4
Road
Map
to Report
and notes
1 contained
the results,
for contract
and reprints
findings, conclusions
and recommendations
based on the
NAS 213701.
Technical
details such as MATLAB scripts
from references
the introduction,
background,
have
been
ACSYNT
assembled
vision
and project
summary.
Section 2 presents
interface
requirements
for the addition of an inner loop flight control design
module to ACSYNT.
The requirements
comprise
what is needed by such a module from other
ACSYNT
modules
and what results will be returned to the user and other ACSYNT
modules.
Section 3 discusses
control surface sizing and control derivative
computation.
This reiterates
methods found in Roskam and other references.
Section 4 discusses
flight dynamics,
presents
the
This section
level diagram
discusses
of the organization
design
interface
with ACSYNT.
design
Figure
2.1 is a top
module.
Figure 2.1:
Schematic
of the inner
system
(ILFCS)
design
module
The elements
in the top row are inputs to the inner loop control module from ACSYNT,
default
data sets, or user input. The flight conditions,
stability derivatives,
control derivatives,
and mass
properties
are used to calculate the aircraft dynamics.
Sensor and actuator dynamics
and errors
also affect flight control system performance.
Section 4 gives a justification
for assuming,
for the
purposes
of conceptual
design, that sensor dynamics
are perfect. The methodology
chosen does
not preclude
addition of sensor models in the future. Actuators
will have f'wstorder dynamics
with time constants
loaded from the default data sets. The composite
of the aircraft and actuator
dynamics
is the main
set of feedback
gains
evaluate performance
evaluation.
Data from
implies
parameters.
The
the potential
a complex
controller
that in
Inputs
There
to the ILFCS
are three
classes
Design
of inputs
Default
parameter
Inputs
from
Inputs
from ACSYNT
Process
to the ILFCS
design
process.
sets
the user
by other
ACSYNT
modules
to define
the aircraft
dynamics.
The purpose
of the default flight control system design parameters
is to provide an initial design
that is a realistic point of departure
for including
the control design considerations
without
thought or effort. This is usually done early in the aircraft design process. The performance
of
this initial controller
will be reasonable
enough for initial studies. Ultimately,
the algorithm
will
converge
to a much
better
performing
controller
after starting
The default flight control system design parameter sets are organized
MILF8785C
classification
(Table 2.1) has been selected.
Table 2.1
Class
MILF8785
Aircraft
C Aircraft
small
II
medium
weight
heavy
to these
and
maneuverability
maneuverability
high maneuverability
Classification
and
low to medium
IV
The
and light
low to medium
large,
by aircraft class.
Type
III
design.
classes.
control
system
design
specifications.
There
Design
objectives
Design
constraints
Fixed
design
(e.g., stability,
no oscillation)
(e.g., deflection
variables
(e.g., dynamics
of sensors
and actuators)
are:
Percent
Rise time
Peak
control
surface
Peak
vertical
and lateral
Percent
steadystate
Closed
loop natural
Closed
loop damping
The fast
overshoot
four metrics
deflection
acceleration
error
frequencies
ratios
are transient,
timedomain
measures.
They require
a simulation
capability
to evaluate.
The steadystate
error can be evaluated
analytically
only when no nonlinearities
are
present;
otherwise
a simulation
capability
again is required.
The last two metrics directly relate to
aircraft handling qualities and can always be evaluated
analytically.
2.1.2
The designer
will select an aircraft class and an aircraft mission.
the control design criteria appropriate
for that class, as described
The selection
of a class loads
in the previous
subsection.
The
designer
can override
any of the default design parameter
values. The aircraft mission determines
the flight conditions
used to compute
the aircraft dynamics,
and the stability and control
derivatives.
The flight conditions
are made up of maneuvers
such as
Steady,
level
Steady,
level turns
Steady
climbs
Steady
rolls
High
One engine
Takeoff
Approach
angle
flight
or descents
of attack
maneuvers
inoperative
at various combinations
of altitude and velocity. The fast and last three flight conditions
are
applied to all classes of aircraft. The middle two are usually applied only to fighter aircraft in
Class IV.
2.1.3
The primary
data required
Mass
Stability
Control
from ACSYNT
modules
are
properties
derivatives
derivatives
the aircraft
dynamics
decouples
(Table
Table 2.2:
Stability
2.2).
and control
Longitudinal
2.2
derivatives
Lateral
CD
CLq
Cy#
Cnp
CD u
CL 8
Cy_
Cn5
CD a
Cm
Cy r
Clfl
CD 5
Cm u
Cyp
Clfl
CL
Cmct
Cy 8
Clr
CL u
Cm_t
Cnfl
Clp
CLot
Cmq
Cnlj
CL&
Cm 5
Cn r
the dynamics
are coupled,
so other
stability
and control
derivatives
Two kinds of outputs are required of the ILFCS design process. The first are the data provided
to
the user to show how well the process is converging,
how good the final controller
performs,
and
what might be done to improve performance.
The second are data provided
to ACSYNT
modules
(most likely the COPES/CONMIN
optimization
program)
to integrate
the ILFCS design process
into ACSYNT's
design optimization
and sensitivity
computation
functions.
2.2.1
The main driver for the user outputs is that they be useful to an aircraft
feedback
control expert. Four types of data will be useful:
Plots
of time responses
Performance
Design
constraint
Iteration
history
metric
values
values
designer
rather
than a
the performance
how the control
when a constraint
has been reached or violated.
design algorithm arrived
at its results.
The iteration
Outputs to ACSYNT
Sensitivities
to stability
and controlderivatives
already
handles.
However,
to
required is an indication
of how much to increase the control derivative
magnitudes.
Changes in
the stability derivatives
is another matter. This is much more conceptually
difficult than the brute
force method because
it requires inverting
some complex,
difficult,
and possibly
singular
computations.
Dynamical
approximations
exist that give damping
ratios
as simple functions
of a few stability derivatives,
but these approximations
inaccurate.
2.3
Conclusion
3 Control
Effector Design
design.
Effectors
3.1.1
Definition
In the context
of aircraft
design,
the control
effectors
the design
principles
remain
control
and
surface
roll,
In the following,
surface effectors.
that other
3.1.2
force
control
without
the design
However,
generators
need
for a vertical
tail, etc.
be added
as design
options
for specifying
and sizing control
will be designed
to be modular
so
at a later date.
Three passes
surfaces:
are made
through
the design
1. The baseline
control surface
other design considerations,
average size and dimension
2. The control
requirements
Regulations
meet
cycle
to determine
the geometry
of the control
geometry
is selected subject to surface constraints
determined
as discussed
below. This selection is based upon historical
for similar types of aircraft.
moment provided
by the baseline design is checked
against minimum
static
that are stated as Military Specifications
(Milspecs)
or Federal Aviation
(FARs). If necessary,
the control surface area or the moment arm is increased
by
to
the requirements.
3. The control
the aircraft
moment effectiveness
with the flight control
is checked
by examining
the transient
system (FCS) in place. If the transient
meet requirements
by FCS gain adjustment
and design changes alone,
necessary
to increase
the control surface size and moment arm further
configuration
PAGE
geometry.
BLANPK NOT
FRMED
dynamic response
of
performance
can not
then it may be
or to change the
Geometric
control
surface
ao
Ailerons
discuss
the geometric
constraints
and historical
the
pass.
constraints.
caused
by the presence
and elevons
of other items
to the geometric
or practical
structural
planform
dimensions
of the
constraints.
The flap
is designed
first to give the appropriate
slow speed lift characteristics
for the landing or
takeoff process. This sets the inner span boundary
Ya/for most ailerons. The exception
is for
some jet transports
where inner and outer sets of ailerons are used inside and outside of the
flaps. For this case, the flaps also set the outer span boundary
for the inner aileron. For delta
wing aircraft,
elevons are used for both roll and pitch control. The geometric
constraints
imposed
by the flaps are the same, however. The outer limit of the aileron span Yao is the
wing halfspan
b. For inboard ailerons, the inner span boundary
is some reasonable
margin
from the fuselage wall.
Figure. 3.1
Sketch
of wing planform.
are the surface area Sa and the average chord
is measured
at the average aileron span
location of the rear wing spar. That is, the
wind spar. Thus, there is a structural
limit to
the forward dimension
of the aileron can be set
the basic
rudder
geometry
is computed,
it is limited
by the geometric
constraints.
Figure 3.2
Examples
of vertical
13
tail geometries
[Roskam 7]
C.
Elevator
and stabilator
 The elevator geometry is dictated
by the geometry
of the horizontal
tail. Normally,
the only constraint
is the inner span location;
this is dictated by the fuselage
wall or the vertical tail wall for Ttail design. The inner span elevator dimension
may be
limited so as to not interfere
with full rudder deflection.
For a stabilator,
the entire horizontal
tail is both the horizontal
stabilator
3.1.2.2
stabilizer
designing
the stabilizer
takes
care of the
design.
Historical
trends.
rudder,
and elevator
geometry
Fighter
Elevator
aircraft
Data
control
Rudder
surface
parameters
Data
Aileron
Data
SelSh
fr. Ch
Sr/Sv
fr. Cv
Sa/Sw
fr. b12
fr. Cw
elevons
.20
.22/.29
.14
.18/1.0
.13/1.0
Mir. F1C
1.0
stabilator
.16
.21L35
.031
.77/1.0
.23/.25
Mir.
elevons
.16
.21/.34
.13
.19/1.0
.13/1.0
Et.
1.0
stabilator
.18
.25/.49
.053
.57/.81
.23/.27
FR A10A
.32
.33
.28
.31L34
.094
.58/.91
.42/.40
Grum.
A6A
1.0
stabilator
.21
.28L21
Grum.
F14A
1.0
stabilator
.29
.29/.33
North.
F5E
1.0
stabilator
.15
.26/.30
.050
.76/.99
.34/.33
A7A
1.0
stabilator
.13
.21/.29
.053
.59/.90
.20/.24
McD
D F4E
1.0
stabilator
.20
.20/.29
.040
.63/.98
.23/.28
McD
D F15
1.0
stabilator
.25
.30/.50
.053
.60/.86
.25/.27
G DFB111A
1.0
stabilator
.21
.25L26
GDF16
1.0
stabilator
.25
.34/.33
.13
.30/.73
.21/.23
.25
.34/.31
.35
.37/.39
.061
.56/.91
.27/.32
.29
.26/.37
.26
.26/.41
.069
.58/.90
.24/.26
MIG25
1.0
stabilator
.15
.24
.053
.54/.79
.22/.21
Su7BMK
1.0
stabilator
.26
.28/.25
.11
.62/.97
.29/.35
Type
Dassault
Mir. IIIe
2000
Super
Vought
Cessna
A37B
Aermacchi
In the tables,
MB339K
the ratios
of control
surface
or vertical
tail areas
14
are given
For fighter aircraft, Table 3.1 shows that most types of aircraft use stabilators
rather than the
elevator.
Two Mirage types use elevons to combine the functions
of elevator and aileron into one
surface; these are delta wing configurations.
The rudder surface represents
about 22% of the
vertical stabilizer
surface on the average with the chord dimension
ranging
from 20% to 50% of
the total chord, depending
on the configuration.
For the fighter aircraft ailerons, the spanwise
dimension
ratio ranges from. 18 to .77 inboard and from .73 to 1.0 outboard.
The aileron surface
area averages
to about
7.6%
of the wing
Falcon
10
surface
jet aircraft
Data
Rudder
surface
listed
in Table
3.1.
parameters
Data
Aileron
Data
Se/Sh
fr. Ch
Sr/Sv
fr. cv
Sa/Sw
fr. b/2
fr. cw
.20
.31L29
.32
..34/.49
.051
.67/.95
.27L31
Falcon
20
.22
.28/.31
.23
.25L39
.057
.62/.92
.25
Falcon
50
.23
.31/.34
.12
.21/.32
.049
.68L97
.27
Cessna
Citation
.29
.32/.23
.36
.36
.096
.55/.94
.32/.30
.078
.56/.89
.32/.30
.70/.86
.21/.17
500
Citation
II
.36
..37/.35
.34
.35L31
Citation
.34
.39/.42
.30
.37/.38
.26
.36/.26
.17
.23/.22
.050
.63L89
.25/.23
Gates
Learjet
Learjet
35A
.33
.33
.17
.26/.25
.066
.55/.79
.30/.27
Learjet
55
.32
.31/.35
.17
.26/.25
.062
.49/.71
.30
.28
.30/.31
.26
.29/.31
.033
.73/.91
.23/.26
.42
.40/.44
.30
.36/.32
.033
.68/.91
.22/.20
.25
.30/.32
.21
.33/.32
.040
.67/.95
26/.25
.25
.29/.26
.18
.34/.44
.050
.59/.90
.21L31
.48
.37/.67
.22
.31/.37
.084
.66/1.0
.33/.46
.33
.33
.24
.28
,038
.66/.86
.24/.27
.37
.37
.25
.33/.28
.012
.86/.94
.20/.22
Canadair
Challenger
Aerospatiale
Israel
24
SN601
Airc.Astra
Westwind
Brit. Aero.
G.A.
III
MU Diam.I
125700
From Table 3.2 for business jets, all the designs are conventional
with elevator, rudder and
aileron surfaces.
The average elevator area is 30.8% of the horizontal
stabilizer
area. The average
rudder area is 24.0% of the vertical stabilizer
area. The average aileron area is 5.3% of the wing
area.
For jet transports,
Table 3.3 shows that this class of aircraft has a conventional
tail configuration.
The exception
is the L1011 which uses a stabilator.
The average elevator surface area is 32.4%
the horizontal
tail area. The average rudder surface area is 29.3% of the vertical tail area.
of
15
added
classification.
Jet transport
Elevator
aircraft
control
Rudder
surface
parameters
Inboard
Aileron
Se/Sh
fr. Ch
Sr/Sv
fr. Cv
SalSw
fr. b/2
fr. Cw
.25
.29/.31
.16
.29/.28
.043
.38/.46
.17/.24
737200
.27
.30/.32
.24
.25/.22
.024
none
none
737300
.24
.24/.34
.31
.26/.50
.021
none
none
747200B
.24
.29
.30
.30
.04O
.38/.44
.17/.25
747SP
.21
.32/.20
.27
.31/.34
.040
.38/.44
.17/.25
757200
.25
.29/.38
.34
.35L33
.027
none
none
767200
.23
.30/.25
.35
.33/.36
.041
.31/.40
.23/.20
McD
.34
.39/.38
.39
.49/.46
.030
none
none
DC950
.38
.41L47
.41
.45/.44
.038
none
none
DC1030
.22
.25/.30
.18
.35
.047
.32/.39
.20/.25
.26
.35
.30
.35/.36
.049
.29/.39
.23/.27
.26
.33/.30
.35
.33/.35
.027
.32/.40
.23/.27
1.0
stabilator
.23
.29L26
.051
.40/.49
.22/.23
.20
.34/.33
.16
.29/.31
.034
none
none
Type
Boeing
727200
D DC980
AIRBUS
A300B4
A310
Lockheed
Fokker
L1011
F28
BAC
111
.27
.41/.35
.28
.39/.37
.030
none
none
BAC
146200
.39
.42/.44
.44
.29
.046
none
none
.18
.27/.25
.27
.37
.036
none
none
Tu154
16
Continued.
Table 3.3
Outboard
Inboard
Aileron
Outboard
Spoiler
Spoiler
fT.b_
fT. Cw
.09/. 14
.48/.72
.16/.20
.40/.66
.14/.18
none
none
.23/.30
.38/.64
14
none
none
.70/.95
.11/. 17
.46/.67
.12/.16
none
none
747SP
.70/.95
.11/. 17
.46/.67
.12/.16
none
none
757200
.76/.97
.22/.36
41/.74
.12/.13
none
none
767200
.76/.98
.16/.13
.16/.31
.091.11
.44/.67
.12/.17
McD D
.64/.85
.31/.36
.35/.60
.10/.08
none
none
DC950
78/.95
.30/35
.35/.60
.10/.08
none
none
DC1030
75/93
.29/.27
17/.30
05/.06
43/.72
.11/.16
.83/.99
.32/.30
.57/.79
.16/.22
none
none
none
none
.62/.83
.16/.22
none
none
.77/.98
.26/.22
.13/.39
.08/.12
.50/.74
.14/.14
.66/.91
.29/.28
none
none
none
none
Type
fT. b12
fr. Cw
fr. b/2
fT.
Boeing727200
.76/.93
.23/.30
.14/.37
737200
.74/.94
.20/.28
737300
.72/.91
747200B
DC980
AIRBUS
A300B4
A310
Lockheed
Fokker
L1011
F28
Cw
BAC
111
.72/.92
.26
.37/.68
.06/.11
none
none
BAC
146200
.78/1.0
.33/.31
.14/.70
.22/.27
none
none
.76/.98
34/.27
.43/.70
.14/.20
none
none
Tu154
3.1.3
This section
outlines
a procedure
to follow
in the ACSYNT
geometry
design
code
for
specification
of the dimensions
of the control surfaces. This begins by picking average geometry
and specifying
the constraints
if the control surface has to be changed to produce
more control
power Average
geometry
is based on fractions
of wing and tail span and chord dimensions.
These terms are maintained
within the default parameter
data base within ACSYNT.
The user
has the option
to override
these default
values
for a particular
design
configuration.
The following
is limited to three classes of aircraft  fighters, business jets, and jet transports.
can be expanded
to include other aircraft classes using the basic methodology
of this study.
3.1.3.1
Ailerons
and spoilers.
These
two surfaces
aileron
surface
are designed
planform
and flap
span dimension
limit of inboard ailerons. The outboard
the inboard span dimension
limit of outboard
ailerons.
area is used to define
17
It
details.
span
Thus,
of
choice
surface
area to be 7.6%
Solve
dimension
span to produce
the desired
chord.
surface
area, taking
into account
the
taper.
for the outboard
aileron
span dimension.
Determine
the wing
half
span limit.
b. Business
jet aircraft. Assume that business jets only have outboard
ailerons. Use the average
aileron surface area to be 5.3% of the half wing area. Follow the same steps as for fighter
aircraft.
c. Jet transport
aircraft. Assume that large category
transports
have only outboard
ailerons and
spoilers.
Use the average aileron surface area to be 3.0% of the half wing area. Then follow
the same steps as for the fighter aircraft in designing
the aileron. For the spoilers, use the
average span and chord dimensions
from aircraft with inboard spoilers only to position and
dimension
the spoilers.
Control
control
into account
surface.
Derivatives
derivatives
in the aircraft
equations
of motion
that multiply
the
of the control
surface
geometry
and many
other parameters
as discussed
below.
are evaluated
to determine
if they produce
adequate control effectiveness
The fn'st is to determine
if the control surfaces produce
sufficient
steady
as documented
responsiveness
18
in the Milspecs
during certain
is
whenthe actionsof
air worthiness
is referred
to as
requirements.
It
criteria
compute
the control
computed
3.2.1
are described
aircraft;
control.
derivatives.
the control
This is followed
Then,
derivatives
Air Worthiness
It is convenient
below.
the method
by a summary
of the input
data required
by ACSYNT
to
to
is summarized.
Constraints
to refer
to these
constraints
in terms
of attitude
angular
moments
required
of the
that governs
Cmcg
the pitching
= CL(Xcg
Xacw)
moment
about
 17 S h CLh(Xach
the e.g. is
 Xcg)/S
w + other
(3.1)
terms
In Eq. (3.1), the fast and second terms account for the change in the e.g. location on the pitching
moments
caused by the wing and horizontal
tail. The second term includes the effective
tail
moment arm (Xach  Xcg) and the change in tail lift due to elevator deflection
in the term CLh.
The other terms include other moments
caused by the free wing, flap deflection
effect, fuselage,
engine thrust, and other engine rotor effects. For takeoff rotation,
additional
moment terms must
be added due to the upward force of the ground on the main landing gear (accounting
for partial
lift) and the backward
force due to rolling friction. In normal trimmed flight, Eq. 3.1 must equal
zero. For adequate
takeoff rotation torque, the moment due to added lift from full elevator
deflection
must counter the other terms.
In addition
deflection
to providing
adequate
torque, the angle of attack must
so that the total lift force is zero. This can be expressed
be adjusted
as
for a given
(3.2)
a. Determine
the governing
control during takeoff.
b. Tabulate
the range
elevator
regulation.
of flight
conditions
Here,
we are assuming
e.g. location,
flap position,
weight, altitude, temperature,
trim equations.
A typical weighte.g,
envelope
is shown
19
it is the requirement
for rotation
This includes
the terms
in the
z CW.L
,,,IN.
.
43
t_
_J
I3:
%q
ta
ow_
WE
FR.
Euu
(FS)
._ IN.
of weight/c.g,
envelope
[Roskam
7]
20
Figure 3.4
Example
trim diagram
for conventional
aircraft
[Roskam]
Aircraft
Light
II
Medium
10
Heavy
IV A
Fighterattack,
IV B
Airtoair
MILF8785
B roll requirements
Type
utility,
Required
observation,
bomber,
bomber,
[Raymer 7]
cargo,
cargo,
primary
trainer
transport,
ASW,
transport
interceptor
Roll
60* in 1.3 s
recon.
45* in 1.4 s
30* in 1.5 s
90* in 1.3 s
dogfighter
90* in 1.0 s
360* in 2.8 s
IV C
Fighter
with airtoground
stores
21
90* in 1.7 s
to
For conceptual
design it can be assumed that roll rate can be achieved
constant
aileron deflection.
To solve for the steady rate, use
instantaneously
from
(3.3)
lateral
must
to holding
which
be able to operate
an 11.5" sideslip
This constraint
Cn
trim condition
is evaluated
should
in crosswinds
at takeoff
be checked
equal
is the crosswind
to 20% of takeoff
landing
speed,
case.
which
The
is equivalent
speed.
by examining
the equation
=N/qSwb
= CnNz tY_a+ (Cnflw + Chief, s + Cnflv)fl
(3.4)
Xp))lq Sw
where
Cnflv = CFflv (tgflv/Ofl) Ov Sv (XacvThis latter
yawing
moment
coefficient
caused
by the deflected
in vertical
rudder.
It contains
term CFflv. To increase this force, one can increase the rudder
hinged rudder so that the maximum
deflection
can be greater.
3.2.2
(3.5)
Xcg) / Sw
chord
the
deflection
in the
To compute
the control derivatives
requires input from several sources throughout
the ACSYNT
code. This includes
the control surface geometry
and moment arms from the "geometry"
module,
the lumped mass weights and their moment arms to compute moments
of inertia from the
"weights"
module,
and the lift curve slopes of the wing and tail surfaces with aileron, elevator,
and rudder deflections.
The computation
of control derivatives
also requires the computation
of
certain stability derivatives
first. This is depicted
in the program
flowchart
in Fig. 3.5.
3.2.3
DATCOM Methodology
The DATCOM
flight.
The
methodology
following
is a summary
in Hoak. 8 It is summarized
of computing
22
the relevant
control
in Roskam
derivatives
7 for subsonic
using
this
procedure.The complete
However,
the following
WEIGHTS
SURFACE SIZES
[AERODYNAMICS
DERIVATIVES
STABILITY
3.2.3.1
3.5 Flow
AUeronlelevon
DERIVATIVES
chart
derivatives.
of input
required
to compute
control
associated
flight,
the rolling
moment
coefficient
Cl& is computed
derivatives.
with aileron
Cy&, CI&, and Cn&. The side force term Cy& is normally
zero except
the vertical tail, as in the F106. It will be assumed zero here.
For subsonic
PROPERTIES
Figure
here.
deflection
if the ailerons
using
are
are close to
the following
steps:
The term
(Clo3M
of the wing
covered
_/2]_
by the aileron.
A_
Also,
the sweep
= tan l(tan
23
(3.6)
Ac/4
(3.7)
at the mean
angle
I_)
geometric
center
of the part
as
(3.8)
Reproduced
from Reference
/
(per rad )
////
f
Z /
0
O
.2
.4
.o
AILERON LATERAL
Figure 3.5
Aileron
rolling
COORDINATE,
moment
24
parameter
.8
1.0
.mY._= T/
hi2
[DATCOM
8]
2. Denormalize
3. Determine
the coefficient
by multiplying
the effectiveness
by t and dividing
for partialchord
Clt_a = Iott_al Cl&
ailerons
by ft.
'
neFe,
term (CI_/CIStheory)
is found
(3.10)
chord
in Roskam;
to wing
chord
it is a function
slope
at the mean
aileron
span as
Figure 3.6
Correction
factor
for plain
25
of
4
(c6) theory
(per rad_
3
/
0
.1
.2
Figure 3.7
The yawing
moment
.3
.4
Lift effectiveness
coefficient
Cn& is found
.5
of a plain
as
(3.11)
k w "" .25'
i_/_
I I!,
1
_
I
_./
1_2,
I !!f,i j
0
.2,,'
.4
Yl
%12
.6
.8
1.0
.2
.4
.6
.8
1.0
Yi
%/2
26
.2
. .4
.6
.It
1.0
.2
.4
Yi
y,
%12
bw/2
.6
.8
B 1Q
1.0
Figure 3.8
Correlation
Constant
To compute
the rolling moment coefficient
data are taken directly from DATCOM:
Supersonic
linear
wing trailingedge
(using Fig. 3.9):
for Yawing
Moment
due to Aileron
number
exceeds
Deflection.
1.0, the following
/
/
f
/
\
\
rx,,
\
N
\
\
Figure
5.
3.9
Sketch
in supersonic
edges
flight.
of the control
surface
Mach
of the control
surfaces
control
surface
are supersonic
inboard to prevent
the wing tip.
do not cross
are streamwise.
27
the root
wing panel
or
ln=_x_l
(3.12)
where
Cl s
is the controlsurface
panel,
t_
t
based
effectiveness
is the theoretical
for the following
(a)
rolling
Tapered
of one control
surface
deflected
on one wing
rollingmoment
derivative
based
on total control
area
cases:
control
surfaces
with outboard
edge coincident
with wing
surfaces
with outboard
tip
Tapered
control
with wing
Untapered
control
(use Fig. 3.12a).
surfaces
with outboard
edge coincident
(d)
Untapered
control surfaces
wing tip (use Fig. 3.12b).
with outboard
edge
Sf
Sw
area
bf
bw
span (both
(both
root chord
28
not coincident
sides
of wing)
to the control
with wing
with
root chord
tip
in wing
area
span.
spans.
1C__/z)
is a thickness
C1___
correction
44(M
21)
2(M 2_ 1)2
_b/'E
is the trailingedge
CI 6
is the lifteffectiveness
(per radian)
angle in radians,
heats,
measured
normal
to the control
hinge
line.
7= 1.4.
of one symmetric,
straightsided
control.
This parameter
is obtained
from Figs.
and from Fig. 3.14 for controls located inboard
It should be noted
(with the exception
derivative.
(per radian)
(7+l)M
C2=
flatplate
control,
based
deflection
angle
and perpendicular
tip,
symmetry.
The yawing
function
moment
of Clta
due to aileron
and aileron
deflection
at supersonic
span dimensions.
29
speeds
is found
from
Fig. 3.15 as a
.04
_,,.
_c)
:05
.4
(per deg)
.04
.2_
\
TAN ATE
.08
I
 TAN
'.6
A H L
=0
/3
.2
.4
.6
.8
!.0
2kf
.08
.04
(per deg)
0
2 \2
.4
TAN ATE
.4 
.04
I
TAN AH L
.6
ts
.08
0
.'2
.4
.6
.8
I .0
Xt
30
TAN
AHL
=0
.O4
=_===.._
(per deg)
0
\
\
.04
.08
if
.6
.2
1.0
.8
Xr
.16
TAN AHL
=.6
.12
(per deg)
.08,
".2
.4
.6
.04
0
.2
.4
.6
.8
1.0
)'r
31
surfaces
having
.08 _
......I.... I 1.....
flc_
(per
deg)
/_.4
.04"
flAf
I0
i
.28
INBOARD
CONTROLS
_NN
TAN ANt
__.
.24
.20
C'
fl 16
(per
deg)
.16'
\
\
k
.12
.6\
k
O"
0
2
Rolling moment
having outboard
with wing tip
32
flAr
I0
derivative
for untapered
control surfaces
edge coincident
(a) and not coincident
(b)
TAN AHL
(a)
SUPERSONIC
 0.80
tl
SPEEDS
TAN ATE
.14
/j
.12
.10
.08
.06
.04
.02
.2
.4
.6
.8
Xf
1.0
TAN AHL
(b)
0.60
.12
(per deg)
.06
.04
0
0
.2
.4
.6
.8
1.0
Xf
Lift parameter
tip
33
TAN AHL
(g)_
0.40
.!0
TXN ATE
.60
.08_
_'__.._
.), \
.04 "_
.02 
Oi
.2
.4
.6
.8
1.0
Xf
TAN A HL
= 0.60
(h)l
TAN A' l _.
.10".60
I
.08 
....
l
_cL 6
..40 _/'
.06
(per deg)
.04
.02 
I\
I
00
.2
.6
.4
Xf
34
.8
.0
.32
.28
_cL_
(per deg)
.1
0
! .0
.8
.6
.4
.2
.2
.4
.6
.8
l.o
TAN ATF/fl
Lift parameters
from wing tip
for deflected
35
trailingedge
flaps
located
inboard
w

..J
=
Io
_ __1_'_.
m.
I
I
I
_._..i_',"'_._
\
\
I
I
8.
/
/
,,
/
/
',
N \
\'_
o 
/
/
K /
/
/
/
21, /
I/
/
/_.
/
,,4 /
.'/
/
/I. /
"
\ \1 _.. _ .o
/.
o0
/
o
/
/
<
/
r
g
i
I
I
't.,,
_"_'=7
""x"_
f
%

.._.
= :
I _
i
/
',,,
"\
\
\\.,
'\
/"
\ ,0
I _,X,
\,
\
j_
'X
/\
",
,
\
\
\
_l:.l
,,,,,\
It
Yawing
moment
36
due to aileron
deflection
at supersonic
speeds
3.2.3.2Rudder
derivatives.
the terms
is found
CLay=
from
are evaluated
deflection
are Cy&,
(Sv / S)
(3.13)
expression:
+ {Aeff2/32/k
ClStheory
with rudder
as follows:
as follows:
the following
2 _cAeff/[2
associated
is computed
2 (1 + tan2Acl2/132)
+ 4} 0"5]
(3.14)
1)05
=CLaatM
= CLa (1  M2) 0.5 for M < 1 or
is semichord
Aeff=
sweep
angle.
= ratio
(Avhf IAvf)
= ratio
Kvh = factor
b. k' accounts
for rudder
the fuselage
for relative
deflection
(3.15)
accounting
 1 }]
horizontal
tail area.
Fig. 3.17
c. Kb is the rudder
span factor
from Figs.
d. (ClSIClStheory)
is obtained
e. ClStheory
is obtained
f. Sv is the effective
vertical
37
and flaps.
_'Y_
_"_%,_
Reproduced
Reference
from
A_
by == VERTICAL TAIL
CENTERLINE
2r.
== FUSELAGE
Xv == MEASURED
VERTICAL
DEPTH
.,..
_._
of vertical
rom
tail aspect
TOTH__TO_FTIIE_PANF.L IN THE
..._,._.: o,+HEBODY
ALONE l
z/,

0
0
Figure 3.17
==PA.RAM.ETER
ACC_OUNTING
FOR
n_bArtv_
I'OSITIONS
OF THE
J
.2
HORIZONTAL
AND
.4
.6
TAILS
z_/t,v
.8
ratio in presence
38
2.,
., o.
HORiZONTAL_X_,TAIL

"_O
[,
Ir'_'_
I
!
FUSELAGE
.L
I
tail
e'_
/
/
VER'rICAL
,
to that of isolated
1
.,fir
'
of fuselage
4
TAIL
_/_,_z
_
ratio in presence
Reference
_,_..,Io.2,o_o! '
^
nv_}
FUSELAGE
OF VERTICAL
f .
Reproduced
_"",.L
IN REGION
FROM
FROMTAPER
FUSELAGE
TAIL
RATIO CENTERLINE
BASED ON SURFACE
Ratio
MEASURED
A v
Figure 3.16
SPAN
l
_,
_
.2,
i"
il
CENTERLIN]_
1.0
of fuselage
and horizontal
tail to that in
Reproduced
from
Reference
8 _
__
Kn y= FACTOR ACCOUNTING
. Vk SIZE OF HORIZONTAL
TAILS
_
f
Sb == HORIZONTAL
FOR RELATIV_
AND VERTICAL
TAIL AREA
g_ == VERTICAL
DISTANCE
BETWEEN
HORIZONTAL
SURFACE
ROOT CHORD
AND FUSELAGE
CENTERLINE,
POSITI_
FOR SURFACE
BELOW FUSELAGE
_ENTERLINE
01
Figure 3.18
Factor
which
accounts
for relative
size of horizontal
and vertical
1.0
.6
"20
L.40
I
COPIED
I
FROI_I REF._
0
0
20
40
FLAP DEFLECTION,
Figure 3.19
Correction
factor
for nonlinear
39
60
80
6.t (dcg)
lift behavior
of plain
flaps
tail
,0
I
!
Kb
I.
0
Figure 3.20
Procedure
l_o
for estimating
Kb
jS
Kb
,p_
Figure 3.21
.Z
I
,4
i I
.6
.8
i.O
40
To compute
the roll and yawing moments
due to rudder deflection,
use the geometry
in Fig. 3.22. Here, lv and Zv are the lever arms of the vertical tail aerodynamic
center
to the aircraft c.g.
The coefficient
coefficient
of rolling
moment
Similarly,
the yawing
coefficient)
{ (Zv cos
Cl& is a function
moment
a
coefficient
sin
a)
(3.16)
b } Cy&
due to rudder
deflection
Cn_r
(the rudder
control
stabilizer,
canard
(3.17)
Figure 3.22
Elevator,
Iv
is
Cn& = Cy&
3.2.3.3
deflection
Cy& as follows:
Cl&
power
due to rudder
illustrated
with respect
Geometry
for locating
and canardovator
vertical
derivatives.
tail
These
derivatives
that affect longitudinal
control. The method for computing
these terms are similar
the aileron and rudder terms in that they use the same approach
as used to determine
flap
effectiveness
on a wing section.
to
a. Stabilizer.
Deflection
of the stabilizer
from the trim point causes contributions
to drag, lift and
pitching moment;
the associated
coefficients
are CDih, CLih, and Cmih, respectively.
They are
computed
as follows:
The
drag increment
coefficient
CDih
is
71h
(3.18)
where
CLh
= lift coefficient
Ah
= horizontal
eh
of the horizontal
tail aspect
tail;
ratio;
mounted
tails
= the same
formula
as Eq. (3.14)
applied
41
to the horizontal
tail
//h
= ratio
of horizontal
tail dynamic
pressure
to wing
dynamic
pressure
(3.19)
= x h tan(_
ecl
= 1.62 CLw/_A
ZW
CDow
= wing
+ ecl  O_w)
zerolift
coefficient
drag coefficient
is
(3.20)
moment
coefficient
is
(3.21)
arm term
I_OTE :
in Fig. 3.23.
x_ h x=______c
h/_"
Figure 3.23
b. Elevator
presented
Definition
of geometric
Control Derivatives.
These
for the stabilizer.
That is,
terms
parameters
are computed
42
for volume
as functions
coefficient
of the terms
just
CD&
= a& CDih
(3.22)
DL&
= oc& CLih
(3.23)
Cm&
O_&
(3.24)
= o_& Cmih
= K b (ClS / ClStheory)
(3.25)
(a&L / a&l)
In Eq. (3.25),
Kb is the elevator
(Cl8
span factor
ClStheory
is derived
k' is derived
from
from Figs.
3.20  3.21;
slope
tail; and
elevator
effectiveness
2.0
factor
1.0J
' I

:\
'
._
\,ll
1.6
.4
"11
a6)C L
.6:
i td,t
.2 /,
r
.N I o
.8
1.0
.3 N
,4
lit..,
1.2
1.0
1.0 0
II
I0
A
Figure
C.
3.24
Effect
of aspect
43
71c
The drag
(3.26)
Here,
CLc
= lift coefficient
Ac
= canard
ec
= 0.5
Czo_
_7c
=1
of the canard;
aspect
ratio;
due to canard
CLi
The pitching
moment
as Eq. (3.14)
deflection
c =Tlc
due to canard
applied
to the canard
is
(Sc/S)
(3.27)
CLctc
deflection
is
the moment
arm
(3.28)
in Fig. 3.25.
III
_.'0
,_._
5;HC:_t.,,Jk)
C G
Figure 3.25
d. Canardovator.
canardovator
The drag,
are analogous
Definition
of canard
moments
Eqs.
geometric
coefficients
(3.223.25).
parameters
due to deflection
of the
That is,
CD&
= a& CDic
(3.29)
CL&
= a& CLic
(3.30)
Cm&
= a& Cmi c
(3.31)
44
3.2.3.4Control
equations
derivatives
derivative
adjustment
subject
to constraints.
In the previous
section,
the
derivatives
characteristics
of those
sections,
constraints
listed
arms
in
of the aircraft
weights
and inertias.
Conclusion
45
of
The main driver for the design of a stability and control module for ACSYNT
is the requirement
that it shall provide
a "handsoff"
or "black box" method to compute
feedback
gains for a flight
control system. This is a very difficult requirement
to meeteven
for a conceptual
aircraft m
because of the wide variety of aircraft a designer
can produce using ACSYNT.
In addition, the
dynamical
properties
of a single aircraft can change significantly
over its flight envelope.
For
example,
in the ten case studies done as a part of this work, six had unstable
longitudinal
dynamics
and one had nonminimum
phase dynamics.
For the lateral/directional
dynamics,
one
aircraft has a roll inertia that changes by a factor of three because
of different
fuel loadings for
the flight
conditions
Furthermore,
fielded flight control systems are very diverse. 9 The answers to the questions
of
what state variables
must be measured,
how to generate the required
moments
and forces, and
how the measurements
are used to form actuator commands
vary with aircraft, mission,
and
designer
experience.
In practice, flight control design is an iterative,
manintheloop
process
uses several mathematical
techniques.
Qualitative
judgments
are made at every point of the
that
process.
Deflectionj
Law
Control
Setpoint
Actuator
"1
Aircraft
,._
Dynamics
"
+_
I
I
Sensor
Control
system
Measurement
Figure 4.1:
Response
elements
The following
4.1
Dynamics
Aircraft
subsections
discuss
in turn.
PtlONIglm
p,_f._
_.ANIK
the significant
stability
seem to prefer.
FK_iED
and control
derivatives
in the nondimensional
form
47
PAGE
.....
_Ni _.:i'_
_iOi,u__,{ _t.AK4(
Table
4.1:
Dynamics
and control
Forces
Velocities
Perturbed
Steady
nomenclature
Distances
&
Moments
& Angles
Forward
Side
Vertical
Roll
;Pitch
Ig
Yaw
4.2:
The
significant
stability
Longitudinal
4.1.1
Decoupled
and control
Cnp
Cm
Cy r
Clfl
CD 6
Crau
Cyp
Cll _
CL
Cm a
Cy _
Clr
CL u
Cm_
Cnfl
CIp
CL a
Cmq
C.{j
C L i_
C rna
CLq
CDu
CL 6
CD a
derivatives
Lateral
Cy#
CD
and
llr
Dynamics
Equations
4.1 and 4.2 are the longitudinal
and the lateral/directional
dynamics,
respectively,
in
statespace
form. Table 4.1 shows the definitions
of the state variables;
the tSterms are control
effector deflections.
We use the statespace
form because many computational
algorithms
and
computer
tools use this form and because it facilitates
computer
simulation
of the dynamics.
,co,/00)]lx, ]
dw=
z,, zw
M u M w
0
u0+Zq gsin(Oo)l[ul+lzs ],
Mq
1
0
0
(4.1)
Y, Y, Y,.o gcos(eo)gsin(Oo)
iY_A
Y4,
"v 1
L aA L aR
Pl
Np
0
0
N r
_rl,
(4.2)
t
I01
Coupled
Dynamics
wind vector
Cross coupling
has two causes. First, inertial cross coupling
occurs
inerfias and differences
between moments
of inertia are significant
of
are high.
For example,
consider
the moment equations,
Eq. 4.3. When a roll moment, L, is applied, a yaw
moment, N, is produced
by the rollyaw
coupling
in the first and third equations
of Eq. 4.3 and
the nonzero cross product
of inertia, Jxz. When Ix and Iz are significantly
different
as in modern
fighter aircraft, a pitch moment, M, is also produced.
L=15 Ixl_Jxz
+QR(Izly)P
Q Jxz
(4.3)
M =(_Iy +PR(lxlz)+(P2R2)Jxz
N =l_Izl_Jxz
+e Q(IyIx)+QRJxz
Blakeloek
12 shows how to do a simplified
analysis of inertial cross coupling
for a constant
rate. He first assumes
that the steady velocities
P and U are constants
to eliminate
the roll
moment and forward
force equations.
This yields differential
equations
relating pitch rate,
rate,
side velocity
and vertical
roll
yaw
velocity:
gl+Por_=Mww
+M_
+M qq+M
_E
(IyIx]
f + Poq _z
+Uorw
+v PoUor=Zww
+Z v_ +Z qq+Z 8Erie
Blakeloek
further simplifies
the equations
by ignoring the control surface
the aerodynamic
side and vertical forces are zero. The latter assumptions
49
to inertial
cross
coupling,
aerodynamic
cross
coupling
occurs
when
the aircraft
rotates
around any axis except the velocity vector, e.g., body axis roll at nonzero angles of attack. In the
derivation
of Eqs. 4.4, Blakelock
assumed that the principle
axes of the aircraft were aligned with
the stability axes. For nonzero angles of attack, the aerodynamic
moments
are caused by the
wind vector, but are expressed
in the vehicle stability axes. The body axes are inclined to the
stability axes by the steadystate
angle of attack. Hence, the moments
can depend on roll, pitch
and yaw angle, e.g., sideslip becomes angle of attack and angle of attack becomes
sideslip at a
90* roll angle. In other words, terms depending
on 4, 0, and V ought to be included
in
Equation
44.
Nine examples
from
responses
possible:
Model
Learjet
Roskam
24 (cases
Power
approach
at sea level
Cruise
at 40,000
ft at maximum
Cruise
at 40,000
ft at low weight
747 (cases
approach
at sea level
o Cruise
at 40,000
ft
o Cruise
at 20,000
ft
McDonnell
Douglas
Power
Subsonic
Supersonic
of dynamical
weight
4 to 6)
o Power
the range
1 to 3)
Boeing
to determine
F4C
approach
cruise
cruise
(cases
7 to 9)
at sea level
at 35,000
ft
at 55,000
ft
frequencies
and damping
ratios
50
and lateral
dynamics
and plots
in
showing
checked
the frequency
responses
in each case are in the Appendix.
The MATLAB computations
with the computations
for one flight condition
for each aircraft that Roskam presented.
to indicates
an unstable first order mode. The italicized
entries in case 8 denote a
mode that splits into stable and unstable f'n'st order modes at that flight condition.
Table 4.3:
Dynamical
LONGITUDINAL
Phugoid
parameters
LATERAL
DYNAMICS
Short
studies
Dutch
Period
Roll
rad/s
11
DYNAMICS
Spiral
Roll
fl
fl
i rad/s
rad/s
Sub.
CASE
rad/s
0.239
0.0589
1.60
0.567
1.03
0.0542
0.745
0.0296
0.0906
0.0584
2.82
0.352
1.68
0.0347
0.502
0.00119
0.0854
2.95
0.400
2.27
0.0117
2.27
0.00201
0.132
0.773
0.617
0.752
0.0973
1.15
0.0431
0.173
1.32
0.355
1.02
0.108
0.508
0.00536
0.101
0.170
0.0343
rad/s
from Roskam.
0.0682
0.0272
1.24
0.468
1.05
0.119
0.940
0.0171
0.168
0.135
0.778
0.600
1.81
0.175
1.11
0.0152
0.0354
0.0448
2.85
0.222
i2.40
0.0482
1.34
0.0131
0.0268
0.0740
4.86
0.039
2.46
0.0562
0.782
0.00286
Actuators
Hydraulic solenoids
or electric motors move the control surfaces of modern aircraft. Each of
these actuators
has dynamics
that can affect control system performance.
Furthermore,
these
actuators
are constrained
to move the surfaces only within rate and deflection
limits. The control
surface limits are set to ensure that maximum
deflection
is within the stall limits of that surface.
Typical acceptability
deflection
is typically
51
Gain
Position limit
Rate limit
command
_I
Surface
I_J_'_b"
i_/i ii  o ,t,on
_1_
Figure 4.2
Control
Surface
surface
actuator
model
Figure 4.2 shows a model of the control actuator used to study flight control system design for a
generic fighter aircraft at NASA Dryden.14 In this model, the actuator dynamics
model is a first
order lag with rate limits and maximum
deflection
limits. Here, the first order lag is modeled
as
an integrator
in the forward loop and a gain of 20 producing
a 0.05 see time constant.
Mathematical
models of actuator dynamics can be quite complex.
actuator
model for a stabilizer with both symmetric
and differential
reports
X29A
actuators
that have
4th order
deg
Gain
Gain
13
dynamics.
8
+15/25
Surface
dynamics + 1S/ZS deg
H left
Gain
8Hc_
,_
24 deg/s
8Hright
Gain
8 Dcmnd_.._._+20/20
deg
24 deg/s
Figure 4.3
Actuator
model
dS;nffa
ace
v[.._
+15/25
I ,_,j
" L_
"
_,
deg
The important
question for conceptual
design is how much faster or slower is the actuator
dynamics
than the aircraft dynamics.
If the actuator response
is faster than the aircraft response,
the actuator dynamics
can be ignored because it will have only a small effect on aircraft
performance.
For performance
evaluation
by simulation
the complexity
also depends
on the
kinds of control surfaces used, as in Figure 4.3. Consequently,
the code for modeling
the actuator
system must be flexible so that more complex models can be added later as the need arises.
Table 4.4 presents
actuator data from Johnston 9 , Bosworth 13, and Brumbaugh.14
Johnston
presents
an uneven accumulation
of block diagrams
of flight control systems for some recent
aircraft. The figures are derived from a variety of sources and present data ranging from names
of hardware
items to transfer functions.
The slowest actuator is the C5A aileron with a 0.250 s
time constant.
This converts to a 4.0 rad/s bandwidth
which is slower than the F4C phugoid
mode, but about three times faster than any of the 747 modes. Most of the actuator bandwidths
reported
by Johnston
and Bosworth
are between
10 and 20 rad/s.
52
Exampleactuator
Table 4.4
model
Deflection
Time
Rate Limit
Constant
Aircraft
Type
0.05
F4
0.10
F105
0.07
B52
0.027
C5A
0.25
KC135
0.05
B747
Table
4.5 summarizes
the extreme
values
references.
It shows that the case studies
slowest actuators
we found.
Table 4.5:
Extreme
Elevator
Rudder
+ deg
+ deg
+ deg
20.
30
+15/25
10
7.5
2.2
30.
17.5
30.
30
37.
20.
25
+17/23
24.
X29
values
of airframe
have
and actuator
dynamics
of airframe
and actuator
Slowest
Actuator
Dynamics
Dynamics
rad/s
rad/s
Fighter
4.86
6.0
Transport
1.24
4.0
Sources
Roskam
Johnston
Bosworth
Bosworth
Class
dynamics
at least 20 percent
Fastest
Airframe
Aircraft
Limits
Aileron
deg/s
Gen. Fighter
parameters
found
slower
in these
than the
dynamics
Consequently,
the performance
results for the case studies reported
in this document
were
derived under the assumption
that the dynamics
of the actuators
was sufficiently
faster than the
dynamics
of the airframe
that it could be ignored.
The overall actuator lag should be included
as a design variable because actuator
speed
influences
cost, weight, and power; the control design methodology
we propose can easily
accommodate
different
actuator models by including
additional
actuator state variables
to the
aircraft dynamics.
For flight control system (FCS) conceptual
design, the simple actuator model
depicted
in Figure 4.2 is probably
adequate.
The linear ftrst order lag model can be used in the
gain computations.
Rate and deflection
limits on effectors
are also important
because they, along with position
and
area, determine
the effectiveness
(authority)
of the control surfaces. The effect of rate and
deflection
limits on performance
usually is determined
during simulation
analysis rather than the
53
Sensors
sM
sly +b +ba+v
(4.5)
The dynamics
may cause a lag between the measurement
and the aircraft state variable
measured.
Also, very fast (or very slow) changes in the state variables
may not be measurable.
Noise is a random variation
added to the state variable measured.
This can be reduced by adding
a filter, and, consequently,
more dynamics,
to the signal path. Bias is a constant offset from the
measured
state variable and the associated
drift is a slow change in the bias. A feedback
control
system will follow the bias because it assumes that the sensor is correct. The scale factor error
changes
the gain of the sensor, and the associated
drift is a slow change in this error.
All of these characteristics,
while important
during detailed control system design, can be
ignored when designing
inner loop control systems for aircraft conceptual
designs. First, most
sensors and noise filters have a wider bandwidth,
i.e., are faster, than aircraft dynamics.
Second,
noise can and is typically filtered; an excessively
noisy sensor will not be used, or it will be
augmented
with other sensors. A good estimate of a state variable from several sensors can be
obtained
using methods such as Kalman filtering.
Next, the effect on a feedback
system of bias is
so predictable
that modeling
the bias for a design concept is unnecessary.
Bias drifts depend on
the instrument,
the environment
and on age. The effect of bias can be reduced
by implementing
a
bias estimator
in an extended
Kalman filter. Finally, the scale factor error is usually a fraction of
a percent. The effect on the loop gain is negligible.
The results for the case studies
this report were obtained by assuming
the flight sensors are perfect.
4.4
The
FCS
Design
presented
in
Algorithm
design.
54
TheLQ
approach
It is a "handsoff"
Stability
Performance
It is a "handsoff"
gain computation.
is guaranteed.
is traceable
method
to the design
for computing
parameters.
feedback
gains
once
the control
design
parameters
are
process
will converge.
The theoretical
foundations
of the linearquadratic
method are well documented
in standard
references
such and Kwakernaak
15, and Boyd. 16 The next subsection
gives a brief outline of the
relevant
4.4.1
points.
The Linearquadratic
Method
subject
to the constraints
=A x +B u
y =Cx +D u
(4.7)
The aircraft dynamics, Eqs. 4.1 and 4.2, are already in the form
depends
on the stability derivatives
and the flight conditions;
the
derivatives.
The vectors x, u, and y are the state variables,
control
respectively.
If the state variables
are the outputs of interest, the
and the D matrix is the zero matrix. If other outputs such'a angle
sideslip angle, and lateral acceleration,
the C and D matrices
are
derivatives,
and instrument
scale factors.
Designers
pick the elements of the weighting
matrices
Q and R to achieve the relative deviations
of the state variables
and the control effort that they want; this is an iterative process that uses the
computations
necessary
to solve the optimization
problem
defined by Eqs. 4.6 and 4.7, and a
simulation
of the resulting
feedback
control system. In actuality,
the exact value of the integral
Eq. 4.6 is irrelevant;
what are important
loop frequencies
and damping ratios.
The optimization
on the solution,
of the simulation
problem
is solved by using Eq. 4.8 to compute
a gain matrix,
S, of the algebraic
matrix Riccati equation,
Eq. 4.9.
55
in
Kr=R1BT
O=SA +A TSSBR1BTS
This yields
a linear,
fullstate
feedback
(4.8)
(4.9)
+Q
u=K,.x
For example,
(4.10)
of the longitudinal
dynamics,
Equation
4.10 becomes
(4.11)
_E = k lu +k 2w +k 3q + k 40 + k 5_ O
where the last term in Equation
4.11 is an integral
error and where d_Eis the elevator deflection.
feedback
term added
to reduce
steadystate
Mux
cnstantl'_L._
Error
nou,,,,
this
of
to
their
of the
K_..
.......
_B
State Error _
 [y
_.._
in Pitch
ql_Gain
Elevator" I y = Cx+Du F
Command
Aircraft
Pitch
Pitch Gain
Sum
Integrator
Figure 4.4:
Inner
loop control
architecture
Integral Gain
implementing
a linear,
fullstate
feedback
law
in NASA's
COSMIC library.
56
4.4.2
damping
The designer
inputs
and R matrices
ratios,
time constants,
and numerator
the control
design
design
zeros
and lateral
eigenvalues,
dynamics
natural
and
in
of the dynamics.
parameters
(the elements
of the Q
process.
For example,
the default longitudinal
pitch controller
has a pitch integral
state to reduce
steadystate
error. Consequently,
Q is a 5 by 5 matrix, and R is a scalar because the elevator is
the only control. The gains are computed
by using weightings
(elements
of the Q matrix) of 1
on the pitch rate, pitch angle and pitch integral, i.e.,
00000
00000
Q = O01
O0
(4.12)
00010
00001
and a weighting
(design
parameter)
on the elevator
R =Z _+M
deflection
of
2/_
(4.13)
This particular
set of design parameters
have proven to be a reliable starting point for control
design iterations
for the nine case studies from Roskam 11 reported here and for an example
from McRuer. 10
2. Gains are computed
using LQ methods and the designated
or default performance
metrics
evaluated
using a fast simulation.
Seven metrics are important
for inner loop flight control
are
design:
percent
rise time
percent
peak
control
surface
peak
vertical
and lateral
closed
loop natural
closed
loop damping
Figure
overshoot
steadystate
4.5 shows
error
deflection
acceleration
frequencies
ratios
the standard
definitions
metrics
on results
case studies.
57
Boeinl_747
LO Controller
for Power
Approach
42i .............................
t
_ _................i................_
._ ove.il,,,o4_
il................ i................i................_.................i
i_
!i
i
i ................i...............
s_._s.+,,._
0_
0
[ __i
10
Figure 4.5:
.:_
120
30
Standard
3. If a constraint
is violated
used to determine
which
definitions
i ...........
i................
i................
i.................
i...............
i...............
40
50
Time (s)
for overshoot,
or if an optimum
design parameters
60
70
__
80
90
100
error.
procedure
is to perturb each weight twice (e.g., multiply and divide by 100) and compare
sensitivity.
The program
picks the greatest sensitivity
to satisfy constraints
first, and to
improve the performance
second.
the
4. The program
meets or exceeds the required change by taking a large step in the design
weights and backing off a little. After the new weights are computed,
the optimization
process
continues
with step 2. The iteration history is stored and reported to the designer.
4.4.3
Controllers
were designed using the LQ approach for the nine case studies from Roskam 11
described
in Subsection
4.1 and for one example from McRuer 1. The performance
of the pitch
controllers
designed
using the initial design parameters
is summarized
in Figure 4.6 and detailed
results
are presented
in the Appendix.
58
40

30
1
, i
I
i
I
10
0
0
Case
0.8
r!
*P'4
0.6
J
0.4
"_
0.2
t_.
_
7o0
[]
10
Results
I0
Case
Case
Figure 4.6:
4
o
<
10
Case
=0
V
of the longitudinal
pitch control
case studies
choice
of design
parameters
The convergence
of the method
was tested
by determining
the sensitivity
of the controller
performance
to changes in the design parametersthe
dements
of the Q and R matrices.
Figure 4.7 shows the effect on four performance
metrics of changing
only the pitch angle weight.
The aircraft is the F89 example
from McRuer. 1 Both the pitch overshoot
and the rise time
decrease
as the penalty on pitch angle increases.
To achieve this decrease,
both the peak vertical
acceleration
and the peak elevator deflection
must increase. If there were constraints
on vertical
acceleration
or elevator deflection,
graphs such as Figure 4.7 can show the achievable
minimum
overshoot
and rise time. If the minima were not acceptable,
either the constraints
must be
changed,
or the aircraft must be changed.
The graphs indicate
how much
constraints
and how much to increase
the control surface effectiveness.
59
to change
the
20
6l
15
10
Pitch Angle
_
1.4
1.2
500
500
1000
Pitch Angle
Weight
o
Weight
2.5
=o
<
"_
I000
2
1.5
O.8
.p,,q
>
[]
o.6
I
o.40
1000
500
Pitch Angle
Figuro 4.7:
Pitch
control
0.5
0
1000
Pitch Angle
Weight
performance
500
convergence
as functions
of pitch
Weight
angle
weight
Figure 4.6 shows the results for eight of the case studies from Roskam. Case 9, the F4 at
supersonic
cruise, is not shown because the controller
performance
for the initial design
parameters
was sufficiently
worse than the first eight cases that the performance
metric values
for case 9 would have been off scale. The dynamics
of the F4 at this flight condition
are called
nonminimum
phase dynamics
because at least one zero of the transfer function has a positive real
part. The existence
of such a zero limits the magnitude
of the feedback
gains. This is a limit
common
to all control design methods, including
classical,
modern and linearquadratic
approaches.
The LQ method still yields a stable controller;
however,
the performance
is difficult
to improve
without
modifying
the method.
60
......._.
AileronGains..__"_
IL
+ I
Aileron
_
Error
Aileron
DeMux
Command r._.._.._
m
I Command
Difference _
x' = Ax+Bu
y = Cx+Du
Aircraft
3 dps[_
Zero
Mux
Rudder Gains
_+
Rudder
DeMux
Figure 4.8
Lateral/directional
inner
loop flight
control
Rudder
Command
system
Model
24
Figure 4.8 shows a SIMULAB block diagram of an inner loop flight control system implementing
an LQ feedback
law for the lateral/directional
dynamics
of the Learjet Model 24. The Mux block
combines
5 scalar setpoints
into a 5vector;
the vector of measurements
of state variables
from
the Aircraft block is subracted
from the setpoint vector to form an error vector. Each element of
the error vector is multiplied
by two feedback
gainsone
for the aileron, and one for the
rudderto
form two 5vectors.
The DeMux blocks split the 5vectors
into two sets of 5 scalars
each. Each set of scalars is summed;
one sum forms the aileron deflection
command
and the
other sum forms the rudder deflection
command.
Both scalar commands
are combined
into a
2vector
by a Mux block
compromise
between sideslip and steadystate
yaw rate
decrease the steadystate
errors to much smaller values.
To achieve these results, only the lateral velocity and the yaw rate state variables
had nonzero
elements
in the Q matrix, and all elements of the R matrix were nonzero.
Specifically,
["
R=BTB=
"
" 2
Y6A'_+L6A,
'2
+N6A,
61
(4.14)
0.10
00
00000
0
O_
010500
(4.15)
00000
00000
Le_
turn
0
Ix0
a_
:=
2
t_
..=q
3
==......d.
50
__
100
50
Time (s)
100
Time (s)
0
4
D
5
=o
10
0
*_
"O
15
.."4
<
20
0
50
_
0
100
50
Time (s)
Fi0ure ,1.9
Detailed
includes
responses
4.5
3 deg/s
Time
turn performance
results
Model
100
(s)
24 at flight
condition
3.
Conclusion
This section
discussed
how aircraft
conditions,
stability
and control
derivatives,
and mass properties
are used to compute equations
describing
the aircraft dynamics.
Longitudinal,
lateral/directional,
and coupled dynamics
were covered. The section also presented
a method for computing
inner loop flight control system feedback
gains and an algorithm
for
improving
the control system performance.
Finally, the results of applying
this methodology
on
several case studies were discussed.
62
Summary
5.1
Summary
The effort
and Recommendations
summarized
in this report
has specified
the overall
process
to include
the inner
loop
the geometry
of the control
surfaces.
control
requirements
for adding an inner loop flight
program. Both user interface
and program
design
parameters,
classified
by type of aircraft,
to
promote
rapid design iterations
and to allow aircraft designers
to focus on improving
total
aircraft performance.
A capability
for overriding
any default value can be used to determine
sensitive
the aircraft design is to flight control design parameters.
how
method.
specifications.
First, considerations
of geometric
constraints
of the wing and tail on aileron, rudder,
design were discussed.
The historic trends in ratios of control surface to wing or tail
areas, chord and span dimension
fractions
are presented
for fighter, business jet, and
transport
aircraft. This is followed
by an outline of the logical procedure
that can be
ACSYNT
to design the control surface geometries.
and elevator
surface
commercial
followed
in
this
process so that the method used first to design control surface geometries
is set up to produce the
required
inputs for the control derivative
computations.
The air worthiness
constraints
that must
be met in pitch, roll, and yaw control moments
are given as minimums
to be met by the control
derivative
values. This is followed
by a summary
of the DATCOM
process to generate
control
63
deflections.
Both
subsonic
and supersonic
computation
steps
or
are given.
Section
4 of this report
discussed
the aircraft
dynamics
as the primary
ingredient
in the control
design process,
feedback
gain computation
using linearquadratic
methods,
a design
incorporating
an LQ method, and the results of a wide variety of case studies.
The dynamics
required
is a composite
of the airframe
dynamics
at the flight
algorithm
condition
of interest,
actuator dynamics
and sensor dynamics.
The section presented
a summary
of actuator time
constants
found in the open literature,
a discussion
of the bounds on the dynamics
of these
actuators
and on the dynamics
of the aircraft used in the case studies and conclusions
on the
relevance
of these bounds to concept design. These results lead to the conclusion
that simple
order dynamical
models for actuators
will suffice for aircraft conceptual
design.
gave a justification
for assuming that the flight sensors are ideal for the purpose
This section
of conceptual
first
also
design.
Next,
control
gain computations
using
linearquadratic
methods
were described.
These
methods
provide a "handsoff"
or "black box" approach
to the qualitative,
manintheloop
decisions
that
often have to be made during flight control design. The design parameters
in the LQ methodthe elements
of the Q and R penalty matricescan
be related easily to time domain performance
metrics. A design algorithm
that uses this relationship
was outlined.
Finally, this section
presented
the results of some case studies that indicate
that the algorithm
will be effective.
5.2
Recommendations
5.2.1
Work
Immediate Tasks
for Further
three
to implement
an FCS design
module
within
ACSYNT
are the
tasks:
Prototype
the LQ design process for generating
the closed inner loop FCS design. This task
would use a commercial
software program
MATLAB for control system synthesis
offline
and external to ACSYNT.
The goal is to create a semiautomatic
"black box" procedure
based on the previous
work. The design process would be perfected
added internal to ACSYNT
as a later task. This task would include
a. Develop
and document
the input
scripts
longitudinal
and lateral FCS. These
metrics to drive the design iteration.
produce
the necessary
and templates
before it is permanently
the following
steps:
for designing
inner
loop
input variables
and parameters
to drive
b. Use example
stability and control derivatives,
inertias, control actuator
FCS performance
metrics for transport,
business jet and fighter aircraft
dynamics,
and
types to test the
input scripts. Use the FCS design output to test the closed loop performance
aircraft. Develop
the design iteration process to produce the desired control
64
process.
of the
performance.
c. Develop
the logic to direct the FCS design process to account for different
aircraft
dynamics
properties,
mission requirements,
maneuvers,
and userspecified
output
choices. Include the method of specifying
need to change the control authority
(control
surface area, moment arms, etc.), if the closed loop design does not produce adequate
performance.
d. Specify the logic and code for ACSYNT
modification
to compute the control laws and
gains to replace the MATLAB tool and the prototyping process used in steps ac above.
This would consider use of public domain software modules,
such as those available
from
COSMIC, as appropriate.
e
5.2.2
After
Intermediate Tasks
the above
FCS design
1.
tasks
are complete,
implementation.
These
tasks
to complete
the
the following:
Complete
the design of a flight control system performance
metric module (PMM) to test the
output of the FCS design against some desired aircraft dynamic performance
standards.
This
would require providing
the facility to integrate
aircraft equations
of motion, including
action
of the FCS, in response
to selected aircraft guidance
functions.
The output of this module
would be used to verify the FCS works as predicted
by the design process, to judge the
aircraft performance
relative to given criteria, and to determine if design changes are needed
for performance
improvement.
2.
Develop
the technique
within
individual
mission maneuvers
3.
Add
to regulate
feedback
aircraft
design
changes
to meet
performance
requirements.
4.
Specify requirements
a cockpit simulator
5.
Expand
the ACSYNT
and performance
criteria
manual
in the aircraft
to describe
conceptual
65
the methodology
design
process.
to include
output
FCS effects
to
References
Raymer, Daniel P., 1989, Aircraft Design: A Conceptual
Approach,
American
Aeronautics
and Astronautics,
Inc., Washington,
D.C., ISBN 0930403517.
Hill, G.C.,
1992, "Improving
Designer
Gwarmey,
J.D., Hunter, C.G., and Sorensen,
J.A., 1992, "Comparison
Methods
Employed
by ACSYNT
and TASP," Report No. 9212101,
Incorporated,
1310 Hollenbeck
Ave., Sunnyvale,
CA 94087.
Roskam,
Performance
Engineering
and Power
USA.
10 McRuer,
11 Roskam.,
Aviation
12 Blakelock,
Airplane
14 Brumbaugh,
Control
and
Roskam
Aviation
and
Flight Control
revised.
University
Press,
Princeton,
Dynamics
Ottawa,
Thrust
Kansas,
Division,
Air
IIBlock
and Automatic
Control,
0691080836.
13 Bosworth,
Design and
Corporation,
of Stability,
D., Ashekenas,
Princeton
Ames
Characteristics,
Hoak, D.E.,
Force Flight
Johnston,
Diagram
NASA
Configuration
and Engineering
Characteristics:
FAR and Military Requirements,
Corporation,
Ottawa, Kansas, USA.
J., 1987, Airplane
Roskam,
Wiley
Design,
of
TM103929.
Synthesis
Program,"
Analysis
Branch.
Institute
Controls,
and Missiles,
second
Models
Part I, Roskam
edition,
John
of the X29A
Randal W., 1991, "An Aircraft Model for the AIAA Controls Design Challenge,"
AIAA Paper No. 912631,
AIAA Guidance,
Navigation
and Control Conference,
12 August
1991, New Orleans, Louisiana.
Also, NASA Contractor
Report 186019, Contract
NAS 212722.
Optimal
Control
Systems,
John Wiley
Inc.
16 Boyd, S.P., and Barratt, C.H., 1991, Linear
PrenticeHall,
Englewood
Cliffs, NJ, ISBN
Control Design:
013538687X.
Limits
of Performance,
and Sons,
Appendix
This Appendix
contains
the data, MATLAB scripts, and the results of the nine case studies
performed
as a part of this work. The data and some flight dynamics
equations
are presented
the form of photocopies
subsequent
computations.
1. Flight
2.
dynamics
Conversions
3. Dynamical
4.
Boeing
5.
McDonnell
6. Learjet
nomenclature
equations
from
dimensionless
parameter
computation
to dimensioned
and frequency
stability
response
and control
derivatives
scripts
747
Douglas
Model
7. Linearquadratic
Some of the explanatory
independent.
F4C
24
control
results
text in Sections
3, 4, and 5 is repeated
69
to make
those
sections
in
for the
more
A.1
Flight
Dynamics
Equations
71
I:_qBGB_qI_I6 PAGE
BLANK
NOT
FILMED
Table
6.4
g0cos81
= 
Development
Derivatives
+ Xu
of the Lonsitudlnal
and Matrix
Format
u +
 Ulq
=  gGsinO
= MuU
+ M T u + M_
X
Tuu +
I + ZuU
+ MT
Small
Perturbation
Equations
X a + X_E_ E
Zeu
in Dimensional
a)
Z'_u + Zqq
_ + M_a + Mqq
of Motion
b)
Z_E_ E
(6.72)
c)
+ M_E_ E
Equations
(6.72)
after
taking
the
Laplace
Transform:
x=(s)
g cosele(S)
X_E_E(S)
 ZuU(S)
 (Mu+M T)u(s)
 {M.=s+M_+M
T }_(s)
Equations
{(Zq
+ Ul)S
gsinel}O(s)
(S 2  MqS)e (s)
in Matrix
Format
Z_E6E(S)
M6E_E(S)
(1
(6.73)
(6.73)
:
m
mm
u(s)
(sx
x T )
x
LL_
g cos81
_E(S)
Z
{s(U 1
 (Mu+ _)
zs)  z )
{M.s_,+M=+_
u
. =(s)
{(Zq
+ Ul)S
+ g sing I}
e(s)
6E(S)
(s 2  MqS)
C_
m
(6.74)
v_
6E(S)
M
v_
Table
6.9
+ Ulr
Development
Dimenslonal
= gcSSl
of the LateralDirectional
SmallPerturbationEquations
Derivatives
andMatrix
Format
+ Y88
+ YpP
+ Yrr
+ Y_A6A
ofMotion
in
a)
+ Y6R_ R
I
xz
Alr
LB8
Lpp
+ Lrr
L_A_ A
AI = _
L6R_ R
b)
(6.141)
xx
I
XZ
BIP
= N88
Equations
NT8
(6.91)
after
(sU1  YS)S(s)
 LsS(s)
(N 8 + NTs)8(s)
Equations
TsU I  YS)
8 +
(6.92)
N r +
r
N6A6A
taking
the
Laplace
B1 = y
N6R_R
Transform:
+ S(Ul  Yr)_(s)
+ (s2  LpS)(s)
 (s2A 1 + SLr)_(s )
 (s2B 1 + NpS)(s)
Matrix
c)
zz
(SYp + gcosel)(s)
in
(SYp
Npp
(6.142)
(s2  SNr)_(s)
Format:
+ gcos8 I)
s(U I  Yr )
(s___l)
B
a(s)
Y6
J
L 8
s2  LPs
(s2A 1 +
SLr)
:.,
L6
I
!
.I>
.L0%
 N 8 NT8
Note:
(s2B 1 + NpS)
6:_ A for
aileron
_=_R
rudder
for
response
response
(s 2 
SNr)
calculations
calculations
a(s)
N6"
(6.143)
A.2
Conversions
Derivatives
PAG_E _,ANK
from
_T
Dimensionless
to Dimensioned
FI__ME_
?5
Stability
and Control
Table
6.3
Longitudinal
Dimensional
 ql s(cDu + 2CDI)
=
u
mU 1
Stability
Derivatives
(sec I)
IS(Cz + 2Cz )
Xu
XT
Xl
(X
(secl)
mU1
Iyy
m
qlS(CDa
(ft
qlSCCmT
 CLI)
X(x
(sec 2)
sec 2)
MT
(sec 2)
I
YY
 qlSCD_E
Xg E
sec 2
(ft
ft
or
sec2deg
1)
qlS_2Cm
qlS(CLu
Mo
2CLI)
.
a
(secl)
(sec I)
2IyyU 1
(sec I)
mU I
ql S(CLa
Z
qlS_2C m
CDI)
(ft
sec 2)
21yyU I
qlSCL, c
o
(ft
_.
r_
sec I)
qlSCCm_E
2mU I
M_E
lyy
(sec 2
or
sec2degl)
qlSCL
Z
qlSCL_E
Z6 E
m
m
sec I)
(ft
sec 2
ft
or
sec2deg
I)
qlSC(Cmu
M
(ft
2mU I
2Cml)
(ft I
sec I)
lyyU I
_isc(Cmzu+ 2cmzl)
(ft I
NTu
sec I)
IyyUI
CHAPTER
413
Table
6.8
LateralDirectional
Dimensional
Stability
qlSbC
qlSCy B
Y8
Derivatives
_A
(ft
sec 2)
L6A
(sec22 or
sec
deg I)
xx
qlSbCyp
Yp
2mUl
(ft
qlSbC6R
sec I)
2
(sec
L6 R
xx
sec
(sec2)
or
2
deg 1)
qlSbCy r
(ft sec I)
Yr
2mU 1
N8
ql SC
qlSbCn
I
zz
2
Y6A
(ft
sec
or
ft
sec
deg I)
qlSbCn
Y6 A
T8
NT
= ql Sc
2
2
Y6 R
Y6 R =
(ft sec
ft
sec 2
or
qlSb2Cn
deg I)
N
=
P
qlSbC
I
LS=
(sec 2)
Izz
(sec I)
(secl)
21zzU I
(sec2)
qlSb2Cn
xx
N
21zzUl
qlSb2C
L
=
P
(sec I)
21xxU 1
qlSbCn6A
2
(sec
N6A
I
ZZ
qlSb2C
Lr =
21xxUl r
sec
or
2
deg I)
(secl)
qlSbCn_R
N_R
CHAPTER
2
(sec
I
zz
see
or
2
deg I)
445
A.3
Dynamical
Parameter
Computation
and Frequency
Response
Scripts
dynamics
lateral/directional
The variables
used in
A.6. The eigenvalues
the poles of the system
imaginary,
the scripts
the eigenvalue
is less
eigenvalue.
dynamics
these scripts are created by the scripts listed in Subsections
A.4, A.5, and
of the dynamics
are also called the roots of the characteristic
polynomial
or
transfer function. When the eigenvalues
are real, rather than complex or
return a damping ratio of1 if the eigenvalue
is greater than zero and +1 if
than zero, and a natural frequency
that is the absolute value of the
The numerical
print outs and the graphs
Subsections
A.4, A.5, and A.6.
P_
eigenvalues,
PAGE i_.ANK
NOT
of the frequency
FMJVIED
79
responses
for each
aircraft
are in
OPEN
LOOP
ANALYSIS
eigenvalues
%natural
%and
OF
("ev
frequencies
damping
evfcl=eig
[Wnfcl,
AIRCRAFT
flight
("Wn
ratios
LONGITUDINAL
("Z
conditions
flight
flight
DYNAMICS
i,
conditions
2,
i,
conditions
i,
and
2,
2,
3"),
and
and
3"),
3").
(Afcl)
Zfcl
evfc2=eig
] =damp
(Afcl)
(Afc2)
[Wnfc2,Zfc2]=damp(Afc2);
evfc3=eig(Afc3)
[Wnfc3,Zfc3]=damp(Afc3);
temp='NATURAL
temp
[Wnfcl
FREQUENCIES';
Wnfc2
Wnfc3]
temp='DAMPING
RATIOS';
temp
[Zfcl
Zfc2
Zfc3]
%Compute
and plot
%The
input
matrix,
%minus
signs
%directly
so
to
aircraft
Bfc?,
that
the
longitudinal
and the
direct
phase
angles
frequency
response.
term
matrix,
Dfc?,
can
be
have
compared
MA&G.
om=logspace(4,2,512);
iu=l;
[mgfcl,phfcl]
BODE(Afcl,Bfcl,Cfcl,Dfcl,iu,
[mgfc2,phfc2]
BODE(Afc2,Bfc2,Cfc2,Dfc2,iu,om);
om);
[mgfc3,phfc3]
BODE(Afc3,Bfc3,Cfc3,Dfc3,iu,
om);
clg;subplot(211);
for
io=1:4,
loglog(om,
[mgfcl(:,io),mgfc2(:,io),mgfc3(:,io)]);
xlabel('Frequency
(tad/s)');
ylabel('Magnitude');
if io==l,
title('Longitudinal
Pitch
else
Angle'),
if io==2,
to Angle
else
if
Aircraft
Frequency
Response:
to
title('Longitudinal
Aircraft
Frequency
Response:
Elevator
of Attack'),
io==3,
title('Longitudinal
Aircraft
Frequency
Response:
Elevator
Frequency
Response:
Elevator
to Forward
Speed'),
else
title('Longitudinal
Aircraft
Vertical
Acceleration'),
end;end;end;
semilogx
Elevator
(om,
[phfcl
xlabel('Frequency
ylabel('Phase
( :, io) ,phfc2
(rad/s)
(deg)
( :, io) ,phfc3
( :, io) ] ) ;
') ;
') ;
pause;
end;
i i _ _
80
to
OPENLOOP
%Print
ANALYSIS
OF
eigenvalues
%natural
%and
("ev
frequencies
damping
AIRCRAFT
flight
("Wn
ratios
("Z
LATERAL
conditions
flight
flight
DYNAMICS
I,
conditions
conditions
2,
i,
I,
and
2,
2,
3"),
and
and
3"),
3").
evfcl=eig(Afcl)
[Wnfcl,Zfcl]=damp(Afcl);
evfc2=eig(Afc2)
[Wnfc2,Zfc2]=damp(Afc2);
evfc3=eig(Afc3)
[Wnfc3,Zfc3]=damp(Afc3);
temp='NATURAL
temp
[Wnfcl
FREQUENCIES';
Wnfc2
Wnfc3]
temp='DAMPING
temp
[Zfcl
RATIOS';
Zfc2
%Compute
Zfc3]
format
and
short
plot
aircraft
longitudinal
frequency
response.
om=logspace(4,2,512);
for
iu=l:2,
[mgfcl,phfcl]
BODE(Afcl,Bfcl,Cfcl,Dfcl,iu,
om);
[mgfc2,phfc2]
BODE(Afc2,Bfc2,Cfc2,Dfc2,iu,
om);
[mgfc3,phfc3]
BODE(Afc3,Bfc3,Cfc3,Dfc3,iu,
om);
clg;subplot(211);
for
io=1:4,
loglog(om,
[mgfcl(:,io),mgfc2(:,io),mgfc3(:,io)]);
xlabel('Frequency
(rad/s)');
ylabel('Magnitude');
if
io==l,
if
iu==l,
title('Lateral
Aircraft
Frequency
Response:
Aileron
else,
title('Lateral
Aircraft
Frequency
Response:
Rudder
title('Lateral
Aircraft
Frequency
Response:
Aileron
else,
title('Lateral
Aircraft
Frequency
Response:
Rudder
if iu==l,
title('Lateral
Aircraft
Frequency
Response:
Aileron
else,
title('Lateral
Aircraft
Frequency
Response:
Rudder
Aircraft
Frequency
Response:
Aileron
Aircraft
Frequency
Response:
Rudder
to
to
Sideslip'),
Sideslip'),
end;
else
if
if
io==2,
iu==l,
to
to
Roll
Roll
Angle'),
Angle'),
end;
else
if
io==3,
to
to
Yaw
Yaw
Angle'),
Angle'),
end;
else,
if
iu==l,
title('Lateral
to
Lateral
Acceleration'),
else,
title('Lateral
Acceleration'),
81
to
Lateral
end;
end;end;end;
semilogx(om,
xlabel('Frequency
ylabel('Phase
[phfcl(:,io),phfc2(:,io),phfc3(:,io)]);
(rad/s)');
(deg)');
pause;
end;end;
82
A.4
Boeing
The contents
747
of this section
Stability
and control
MATLAB
script
MATLAB
eigenvalue,
of the Appendix
are:
data
to form longitudinal
natural
dynamics
frequency
and damping
script
for longitudinal
script
for lateral
dynamics
Frequency
MATLAB
responses
script
of longitudinal
to form
lateral
MATLAB eigenvalue,
dynamics
natural
Frequency
of lateral
responses
dynamics
dynamics
frequency
and damping
out from
dynamics
E.2=Ax +Bu
y=Cx+Du
(Al)
Equation
A1 is an intermediate
form for the statespace
equation
that was formed because some
stability derivatives
depend on the derivatives
of the state variables
in the case of the longitudinal
dynamics
and because of the roll/yaw
coupling in moment equations
in the case of the lateral
dynamics.
The final form is obtained by multiplying
the first equation of the pair by the inverse
of E.
The frequency
The line styles
response
graphs show three tracesone
for each of the three
for the Boeing 747 cases denote the following:
Solid:
power
approach
at sea level
Dashes:
cruise
at 40,000
ft
Points:
cruise
at 20,000
ft
83
flight
conditions.
C6
DATA
FOR AIRPLANE
Figure
C6 shows a threeview
representative
of large widebody
and control
derivatives
for this
for Airplane
jettransport
airplane
are
F.
This airplane
is
airplanes.
Stability
presented
in Table C6.
.25_
ES.1339.9
MGC
B.L.491
50'
I00'
ES.3OZ9
ES. li39.9
FRL
W.L. 199.8
_
"C,L;
Cl
_
2.5
W.L.II6
TL
l'C,;C_O0 O0
Figure
C6
ThreeView
APPENDIX
of
Airplane
634
Table
Flight
Stability
and
Control
(ft)
Density
(slugs/ft
Speed
(fps)
Center
of
Initial
Gravity
Attitude
Geometry
and
(Xcg)
(ft 2)
Wing
Span
(ft)
Wing
Mean
Geometric
Power
Cruise
Approach
(High)
Cruise
(Low)
Sealevel
40,000
20,000
002389
000588
001268
221
871
673
.25
.25
.25
5,500
Chord
2.4
2.5
5,500
5,500
(ft)
196
196
196
27.3
27.3
27.3
636,636
636,636
564,000
(ibs)
(slug
Airplane
Inertias
Area
Ixx B
for
8.5
(deg)
Wing
Weight
3)
Deirvatives
Condition
Altitude
Air
C6
13.7
106
18.2
106
18.2
106
30.5
x 106
33.1
x 106
33.1
x 106
43.1
106
49.7
106
49.7
x 106
.83 x
10 6
.97 x
10 6
ft 2)
Iyy B (slug
ft 2)
(slug
ft 2)
(slug
ft 2)
zz B
I
10 6
.97 x
xz B
Steady
State
Coefficients
.52
.40
.263
045
.025
.263
.045
025
1.76
CL I
CD I
CT
C XI
mI
C
mT I
APPENDIX
635
Table
C6
Stability
Longitudinal
and
Control
Derivatives
Derivatives
for
Airplane
(Cont.)
2
 .09
071
3
+.013
m
u
1.45
I. 60
i.00
9.0
4.0
25.5
20.5
33
m.
21.4
C
m
q
C
.23
+.13
5.5
4.4
8.0
7.0
7.8
6.6
mT
u
mT
.22
CL
u
5.67
CL
6.7
CL .
5.65
CL
q
1.13
CD
.22
CD
.20
.50
0
0
CTx
u
.36
30
.32
CLUE
0
CD6E
C
0
_J
1.40
i. 20
0
i. 30
m6 E
APPENDIX
636
Table
C6
Stability
LateralDirectional
and
Control
Derivatives
Derivatives
for
Airplane
(Cont.)
.281
.095
.160
.502
.320
.340
C_ B
C_
P
C_
.195
.200
.130
.053
.014
.013
.005
.008
.210
.160
C_A
0
C_6R
C
nB
C
.184
.222
+.020
.026
.36
.33
.28
+.0083
.0028
+.0018
n6 A
C
.113
.095
.i00
.90
.90
P
C
n r
n6 R
1.08
C
YB
C
Yp
C
Yr
Y6 A
.179
.060
.120
Y6 R
APPENDIX
637
%LONGITUDINAL
%Boeing
DYNAMICS
747,
sea
levelpower
40,000
fthigh
20,000
ftlow
%Roskam,
J.,
%Airplane
%Part
<fcl
cruise
altitude
<fc2
cruise
<fc3
1979,
Flight
I,
approach
altitude
pp.
Dynamics
and
Automatic
Flight
Controls,
616642
format
short
%Enter
flight
condition,
geometry,
g=32.2;
mass
and
MOI
%gravity
parameters.
(ft/s^2)
theta0=[8.5
rho=[.002389
2.4
2.5]*pi/180;
.000588
.001268];
%equilibriumpitch
Uo=[221
673];
%equilibrium
871
%density
mass=[564000
Ixx=[13.7e6
636636
18.2e6
636636]/g;
18.2e6];
%weight
Iyy=[30.5e6
Izz=[43.1e6
33.1e6
49.7e6
33.1e6];
49.7e6];
%pitch
Ixz=[.83e6
.97e6
S=[5500
b=[196
5500
196
cbar=[27.3
%Enter
%wing
27.3];
steadystate
.52
.045
CTxi=[.263
.09
product
of
area
(ft^2)
%wing
span
(ft)
%mean
geometric
Cmad=[3.3
9.0
Cmq=[21.4
0
CmTa=[0
control
derivatives
20.5];
0];
0];
CLu=[.22
.23
CLa=[+5.67
CLad=[6.7
+5.5
+4.4];
8.0
7.0];
CLq=[5.65
7.8
6.6];
CDa=[I.13
.50
.20];
CDu=[0
.22
CTxu=[0
0];
CLde=[.36
CDde=[0
.30
0];
+.13];
0];
Cmde=[l.40
.32];
1.20
0
derivatives.
i.00];
0];
0];
1.30];
%No
numbers
in
Roskam
%No
numbers
in
Roskam
dimensioned
stability
and
qbar=0.5*rho.*Uo.^2;
88
ft^2)
ft^2)
inertia
chord
control
4.0];
25.5
CmTu=[0
and
+.013];
1.60
%Compute
(slug
.025];
Cma=[l.45
inertia
ft^2)
(slug
.025];
stability
(ft/s)
(slug
inertia
0];
Cmu=[.071
CDq=[0
inertia
coefficients.
dimensionless
CDad=[0
speed
0];
0
(deg)
(ibs)
.40];
.045
CmTI=[0
%cross
196];
CDI=[.263
%Enter
.97e6];
27.3
%yaw
5500];
CLI=[1.76
Cml=[0
%roll
angle
(slug/ft^3)
(ft)
(slug
ft^2)
Xu
=qbar.*S.*
XTu=
Xa
(CDu+2*CDI)
. / (mass.*Uo)
qbar.*S.*(CTxu+2*CTxl)
Zu
*S. * (CDaCLI)
r. So *CDde./mass
qbar. S.* (CLu+2*CLI)
Za
=qbar.
qbar.
./mass;
;
Xde=qba
S.*
Zq
. / (mass.*Uo)
(CLa+CDI)
./mass;
S.*CLad.*cbar.
Zad=qbar.
./(mass.*Uo);
/ (2*mass.*Uo)
=qbar.
S. *CLq. *cbar.
/ (2*mass.*Uo)
Zde=qba
r. S. *CLde./mass;
Mu = qbar. *S.*cbar.*(Cmu+2*Cml)./(Iyy.*Uo);
MTu =
qbar.*S.*cbar.*(CmTu+2*CmTl)./(lyy.*Uo);
Ma
qbar.*S.*cbar.*Cma./Iyy;
MTa=
qbar.*S.*cbar.*CmTa./Iyy;
Mad=
qbar.*S.*(cbar.^2).*Cmad./(2*Iyy.*Uo);
Mq
=
Mde=
qbar.*S.*(cbar.^2).*Cmq./(2*Iyy.*Uo);
qbar.*S.*cbar.*Cmde./Iyy;
%Compute
Afcl=
dynamics
for
[
Xu(1)+XTu(1)
g'cos
(theta0
(theta0
Efcl=
[
1
0
Za (i)/Uo
(i) ; Zde
(I)
Ma (I)/Uo
0
(i)
Uo (I) +Zq
(I) ;Mde
(i) +MTa
form.
(I)
i];
(1) /Uo
(I)/Uo
(I)
Mq(1)
1
(i) ; 0] ;
lZad(1)/Uo(1)
Mad
statespace
in
(i))
0
];
[Xde
(i))
Mu (i) +MTu
Bfcl=
condition
Xa(1)/Uo(1)
Zu(1)
g'sin
flight
(1)
Afcl=Efcl\Afcl;
Bfcl=Efcl\Bfcl;
%Compute
pitch
angle
angle
of
%
%
forward
vertical
%output
matrix
attack
speed
acceleration
and
direct
input
matrix.
Cfcl=[
i/Uo(1)
Afcl(2,:)[0
0 Uo (i)
0]
];
Dfcl=0*Cfcl*Bfcl;
Dfcl(4,1)=Bfcl(2,1);
%Compute
dynamics
for
flight
condition
Afc2=[
89
in
statespace
form.
Xu (2) +XTu
Xa (2)/Uo
(2)
g'cos
(theta0
Zu (2)
g'sin
(theta0
(2))
Mu (2) +MTu (2)
0
];
Bfc2=
[Xde
Efc2=
(2)
(2))
(2) ; Zde
Uo (2) +Zq
Ma(2)/Uo(2)+MTa(2)/Uo(2)
0
Mq(2)
1
(2) ;Mde
(2)
(2) ; 0] ;
lZad(2)/Uo(2)
0
0
Mad(2)/Uo(2)
1
0
0
1
];
Afc2=Efc2\Afc2;
Bfc2=Efc2\Bfc2;
%Compute
pitch
angle
angle
of
%
%
forward
vertical
%output
matrix
attack
speed
acceleration
and
direct
input
matrix.
Cfc2=[
0
i/Uo(2)
Afc2(2,
:)[0
0]
0 Uo(2)
];
Dfc2=0*Cfc2*Bfc2;
Dfc2(4,1)=Bfc2(2,1);
%Compute
Afc3=
dynamics
for
flight
condition
in
statespace
form.
[
Xu(3)+XTu(3)
g'cos
(theta0
Zu(3)
g'sin
Za (3)/Uo
(theta0
(3))
Mu (3) +MTu (3)
0
];
Bfc3
= [Xde
Efc3=
[
1
0
0
(3) ; Zde
(3)
Uo (3) +Zq
Ma(3)/Uo(3)+MTa(3)/Uo(3)
0
(3) ;Mde
(3) ; 0] ;
lZad(3)/Uo(3)
Mad(3)/Uo(3)
0
1
0
0
0 0
];
Xa(3)/Uo(3)
(3))
0 1
Afc3=Efc3\Afc3;
Bfc3=Efc3\Bfc3;
9O
Mq(3)
1
(3)
0
0
%Compute
pitch
angle
angle
of
%
%
forward
vertical
%output
matrix
attack
speed
acceleration
and
direct
input
matrix.
Cfc3=[
0
0
1
I/Uo(3)
0
0
0
0
0
Afc3(2,:)[0
0 Uo(3)
0]
];
Dfc3=0*Cfc3*Bfc3;
Dfc3(4,1)=Bfc3(2,1);
91
%LONGITUDINAL
%Boeing
DYNAMICS
747,
sea
RESULTS
levelpower
40,000
fthigh
20,000
ftiow
%Roskam,
J.,
%Airplane
%Part
pp.
E I GENVALUE
evfcl
<fcl
cruise
altitude
cruise
Dynamics
and
Automatic
616642
4.7750e01+
6.0834e01i
4.7750e01
6.0834e01i
2.2462e02+
1.6854e01i
2.2462e02
1.6854e01i
evfc2
4.6988e01+
1.2370e+00i
4.6988e01
1.2370e+00i
5.9712e03+
3.3808e02i
5.9712e03
3.3808e02i
evfc3
=
5.8206e01+
1.0971e+00i
5.8206e01
1.0971e+00i
1.8563e03+
6.8193e02i
1.8563e03
6.8193e02i
NATURAL
FREQUENCIES
7.7336e01
1.3232e+00
1.2420e+00
7.7336e01
1.3232e+00
1.2420e+00
1.7003e01
3.4331e02
6.8218e02
1.7003e01
3.4331e02
6.8218e02
6.1744e01
3.5510e01
4.6866e01
6.1744e01
3.5510e01
4.6866e01
1.3210e01
1.7393e01
2.7211e02
1.3210e01
1.7393e01
2.7211e02
DAMPING
<fc2
<fc3
1979,
Flight
I,
approach
altitude
RATIOS
92
Flight
Controls,
:0[
III
[0[
I
IIII
tO[
o0[
I
III
i
vO[
l i 
[OI

Ill
_0(
l
00_
",
 OOI_,
,__._....''":
.................
Ct_
.......
 OOI
Ox_
Ill
,,,,, , , , ,
os!mD opm!llV
.....
,,i,.,.,..,..,....."
00_
OOE
,,,"
""'
""'
""'
'
(s/p._) ,_ouonboz_I
_OI
[0[
oOI
tOI
rO[
vO[
t,O[
:OI
......
.............................
......................
.....'"
""
_OI _

m
u
4111
alfred
IIIl
qol!d ol
III
aOlehOl.'q
:osuodso}l
IIII
_:_uonbo.t_I
IIII
1J_.I:).I.IV
III
FuTPmTguo'I

t,O[
Longitudinal
101
10 o
Aircraft, Frequency
,,,,,,,,,
,
...........................
,,,.,,,,,
__.......:
......'i
i ..'
"
,,
"""
,,,,,_
''==''",,.
:
..<.
<<,
101_
";c.
=
<;..
%',
%%.
10_2_
%'_"
103 ==
B
104
104
till
IIII
103
102
IIII
101
Frequency
200
IIII
IIII
10 0
Ill
101
10 2
(rad/s)
100
II
.,
em
0
"%
o_
I p
":,
,,
100 200
10 4
"''_
".._.x
N.
IIII
103
IIII
102
IIIII
101
Frequency
IIIII
10 o
(rad/s)
...;"
Illl
101
III
10 2
zOI
tOI
III
IIII
III
zO[
,,,,,,,
tOI
oOI
I
IIII
, ,
cOI
,,,,,,,
, ,
_OI
00_; OOI
''',..
........................
0
'"
Cx.
 OOI
III
Jill
IIII
as[.ruD aPm!llV
IIII
IIII
III
00_;
(s/pe:O _ouonbo_[
:OI
tO[
III
oOI
IIII
III
_0[
I
:0[
IIII
1,0I
_OI
cOI
IIII
III
zOI
=

',4 ;_.
_:_,
ca.
t_
_
:fi
,,..
II
III
II
:ostIodsa_/[3uanbaa
................
III
d ljeioi[.V
III
leu[.png._uo'I
=
=
_,OI
LOI
(s/pea)
zOI
III
IIII
tOI
o0[
[OI
I
III
ouonboId
IIII
zO[
I
IIII
_0[
I
III
%
%
%
%
oo:
......
.............
.....
0
,.
"'..
''...
III
IIII
os!mD
opnl!lIV
fill
_oq
...................
I
pn_
q_!H
(s/p_)
zOI
tOI
o0[
,,,,,
III
,,,,,,
IIIII
pn_
'qogo_dd
Illl
V .lO_Od
IIII
'
:L_L _u!ool_I
00_
ouonbo_d
tOI
....
."
I
zOI
,,,,,,
o ,
cOI
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
l,OI
,
,Z;Ut

...
.
o..
..'
'....
.
......
....
.'

_0[
/"
...
".%
_s
.s_"
s 't
. UO"I
l,O[
%LATERAL
DYNAMICS
%Boeing
%
747,
sea
levelpower
40,000
fthigh
20,000
%Roskam,
J.,
%Airplane
%Part
pp.
altitude
cruise
short
%Enter
flight
Dynamics
and
Automatic
Flight
condition,
2.4
rho=[.002389
871
geometry,
mass
and
%density
.001268];
636636
18.2e6
18.2e6];
%roll
Izz=[43.1e6
49.7e6
49.7e6];
%yaw
.97e6
196
196];
cbar=[27.3
27.3
%Transform
relevant
for
ifc=l
27.3];
inertias
from
speed
inertia
(slug
product
of
%wing
area
(ft^2)
%wing
span
(ft)
%mean
geometric
frame
to
Tba2sa
(ifc)
(ang)
^2
sin
(ang)
^2
sin
(2*ang)
sin
(ang)
^2
cos
(ang)
^2
sin
(2*ang)
sin
(2*ang)
cos
(2*ang)
/2
sin
(2*ang)
/2
];
Isa=Tba2sa*
Ixx
[Ixx
(ifc)=Isa
(ifc)
; Izz (ifc)
; Ixz (ifc)
] ;
(i) ;
Izz(ifc)=Isa(2)
Ixz
(ifc)
;
=Isa
(3) ;
end;
%Enter
steadystate
CLI=[1.76
.52
CDI=[.263
.045
CTxi=[.263
Cml=[0
CmTI=[0
%Enter
.40];
.025];
.025];
0];
0
0];
dimensionless
Clb=[.281
Cip=[.502
Cir=[.195
.095
Cldr=[0
Cnb=[.184
Cnp=[.222
stability
and
control
.160];
.320
.340];
.200
.130];
Clda=[.053
Cnr=[.36
coefficients.
.045
.014
.005
.013];
.008];
.210
.020
.33
.160];
.026];
.28];
97
inertia
stability
[
cos
ft^2)
ft^2)
chord
:3,
ang=theta0
(ft/s)
(slug
inertia
body
(deg)
(ibs)
%cross
.97e6];
5500];
angle
(slug/ft^3)
%weight
636636]/g;
Ixx=[13.7e6
5500
parameters.
%equilibrium
673];
Ixz=[.83e6
MOI
%gravity
(ft/s^2)
%equilibriumpitch
2.5]*pi/180;
.000588
mass=J564000
b=[196
Controls,
g=32.2;
theta0=[8.5
S=[5500
<fc3
616642
format
Uo=[221
ftlow
<fcl
<fc2
cruise
1979,
Flight
I,
approach
altitude
derivatives.
(slug
(ft)
frame.
ft^2)
Cnda=[.0083
Cndr=[.ll3
.0028
.095
Cyb=[l.08
.90
Cyp=[0
0 0];
Cyr=[0
Cyda=[0
0];
Cydr=[.179
.060
0
%Compute
.90];
0];
0
CnTb=[0
.0018];
.i00];
0];
.120];
%No
numbers
dimensioned
in
Roskam
stability
and
derivatives
control
qbar=0.5*rho.*Uo.^2;
Yb
qbar.*S.*Cyb./mass;
Yp
qbar.*S.*b.*Cyp./(2*mass.*Uo);
Yr
qbar.*S.*b.*Cyr./(2*mass.*Uo);
Yda=
qbar.*S.*Cyda./mass;
Ydr=
qbar.*S.*Cydr./mass;
Lb
qbar.*S.*b.*Clb./Ixx;
Lp
qbar.*S.*(b.^2).*Clp./(2*Ixx.*Uo);
Lr
qbar.*S.*(b.^2).*Clr./(2*Ixx.*Uo);
Lda=
qbar.*S.*b.*Clda./Ixx;
Ldr=
qbar.*S.*b.*Cldr./Ixx;
Nb
qbar.*S.*b.*Cnb./Izz;
NTb =
qbar.*S.*b.*CnTb./Izz;
Np
qbar.*S.*(b.^2).*Cnp./(2*Izz.*Uo);
Nr
qbar.*S.*(b.^2)
.*Cnr./(2*Izz.*Uo);
Nda =
qbar.*S.*b.*Cnda./Izz;
Ndr=
qbar.*S.*b.*Cndr./Izz;
%Compute
dynamics
Afcl=
g'sin
(theta0
(i))
Lb(1)/Uo(1)
for
flight
Yb(1)/Uo(1)
(Nb(1)+NTb(1))/Uo(1)
0
0
];
condition
Yp(1)
Yr(1)Uo(1)
Lp(1)
Lr(1)
Np(1)
1
Nr(1)
0
Bfcl=[
Yda(1)
Ydr(1)
Lda(1)
Ldr(1)
Nda(1)
Ndr(1)
0*ones(2,2)
];
Efcl=
[
1
0
0
0
Ixz(1)/Izz(1)
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
Ixz(1)/Ixx(1)
];
98
in
statespace
g'cos
(theta0
form.
(i))
Afcl=Efcl\Afcl;
Bfcl=Efcl\Bfcl;
%Compute
sideslip
roll
%
%
yaw
angle
lateral
acceleration
%output
angle
angle
matrix
Cfcl=
and
direct
input
matrix.
I/Uo(1)
AfcI(I,
:)+[0
0 UO(1)
g
0]
];
Dfcl=0*Cfcl*Bfcl;
Dfcl
(4, : ) =Bfcl
%Compute
(i, : ) ;
dynamics
for
flight
condition
Afc2=
[
(2)
Yp(2)
Yr(2)Uo(2)
g'sin
(theta0
(2))
Lb (2)/Uo
(2)
Lp(2)
Lr(2)
Np(2)
1
Nr(2)
0
Yb(2)/Uo
(Nb(2)+NTb(2))/Uo(2)
0
0
];
Bfc2=
[
Yda(2)
Ydr(2)
Lda
(2)
Ldr
(2)
Nda
(2)
Ndr
(2)
0*ones
(2,2)
];
Efc2=[
1
0
0
];
0
0
1 0
0 1
Ixz(2)/Ixx(2)
Ixz(2)/Izz(2)
0
0
Afc2=Efc2\Afc2;
Bfc2=Efc2\Bfc2;
%Compute
sideslip
roll
%
%
yaw
angle
lateral
acceleration
%output
matrix
angle
angle
and
direct
input
matrix.
Cfc2=[
i/Uo(2)
99
in
statespace
form.
g*cos(theta0(2))
Afc2(l,
0 Uo (2)
:)+[0
g
0]
];
Dfc2=0*Cfc2*Bfc2
Dfc2
(4, : ) =Bfc2
%Compute
Afc3g'sin
(i, : ) ;
for
dynamics
[
Yb(3)/Uo
(theta0
flight
(3)
Yp(3)
Yr (3)Uo
(3)
(3))/Uo
(3)
0
0
];
Lp(3)
Lr(3)
Np(3)
1
Nr(3)
0
(3)
Lda(3)
Nda (3)
0*ones
Ydr
(3)
Ldr(3)
Ndr (3)
(2,2)
];
Efc3=
[
1
0
Ixz(3)/Ixx(3)
0 Ixz(3)/Izz(3)
];
Afc3=Efc3\Afc3;
Bfc3=Efc3\Bfc3;
%Compute
sideslip
roll
%
%
yaw
angle
lateral
acceleration
%output
matrix
angle
angle
and
direct
input
matrix.
Cfc3=[
I/Uo(3)
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
Afc3(l,
:)+[0
0 Uo(3)
g 0]
];
Dfc3=0*Cfc3*Bfc3;
Dfc3(4,
(3)
statespace
g'cos
0
0
0
o
[
Yda
in
(3))
Lb(3)/Uo
Bfc3=
condition
:)=Bfc3(l,:);
tO0
(theta0
form.
(3))
%LATERAL
DYNAMICS
%Boeing
747,
RESULTS
sea
levelpower
40,000
fthigh
20,000
ftlow
%Roskam,
J.,
%Airplane
%Part
pp.
E I GENVALUE
evfcl
<fcl
cruise
altitude
cruise
Dynamics
and
Automatic
Flight
616642
=
0
i.1493e+00
7.3124e02+
7.4809e01i
7.3124e02
7.4809e01i
4.3081e02
evfc2
=
0
5.0778e01
5.3563e03
i.0998e01+
1.0144e+00i
I.0998e01
1.0144e+00i
evfc3
=
0
9.3977e01
1.7097e02
1.2491e01+
i0437e+00i
1.2491e01
1.0437e+00i
NATURAL
FREQUENCIES
0
1.1493e+00
5.0778e01
9.3977e01
7.5165e01
5.3563e03
1.7097e02
7.5165e01
1.0204e+00
1.0511e+00
4.3081e02
1.0204e+00
1.0511e+00
DAMPING
RATIOS
NaN
1.0000e+00
9.7284e02
<fc2
<fc3
1979,
Flight
I,
approach
altitude
NaN
1.0000e+00
l.0000e+00
NaN
1.0000e+00
1.0000e+00
9.7284e02
1.0778e01
1.1883e01
1.0000e+00
1.0778e01
1.1883e01
101
Controls,
10 2
II
II
Later_
Aircraft
I
Frequency,
IIII
Response
i Aileron
I
II1!
i IIII
to Sideslip
I
IIII
IIIII
II_
i III
10 1
__..
10 4
m
107
10 4
I IIII
I IIII
103
I IIII
102
Boeing
"1 ...............
747: Power
I
LL.I.,L_
..
Ap,proach,
I
"_"_"'%
101
IIII
........
..
10 2
(rad/s)
. .
C,,ruise,
Ill
I
"'",
10 0
100 
101
Frequency
0
200 300 
""'",.o..
'''''''......
400
104
I IIlll
103
Itlll
102
I I Iill
101
Frequency
IIIII
10 0
(rad/s)
........................
IIIll
101
I Ill
10 2
10 4
Response:
_!e , , ,,,,,,__
, , ,,,,Lateral,Aircraft
,,,,,,, Frequency
, , , .,,,,,
, , Ai!erontoRol!,An,
,
101
10 .2
IIIll
Illll
103
I Illl
102
.L._..
IIIII
Illll
10 0
I I Ill
101
10 2
(rad/s)
ill
III
_..............
s...
150 l
104
100
200
101
Frequency
,_
_'_'_
""..._
..s
,:_
i
I11111
103
II1
102
,,llll
111111
10 o
101
Frequency
(rad/s)
I11
101
III
10 2
(s/p_a) 3uonbo:td
[0[
zO[
ill
[[]
.............................................
I1[
...
0[
zO[
[0[
o0[
III
]1][
III
 00_5 a
t_
0
%%
%
iltt
IIII
oszn.E)
III
opnlt.lIV
IIIII
IIIIII
h_o"I peg
IIII
V .Ioh_o(:[ :L_'L
OOZ;
_u!ool]
_,0[
[0[
zO[
_0[
..
.,_
::1:1
II
o[_W ,_X
Ill
It
ol uo.ml!V :asuodsa/t
II
II
 sO[
(s/p_s) ._3uonbo:[_[
_0[
III
oOI
tO[
I
IIII
III
IIII
vO[
vO[
tO[
I
IIII
III
''''''',.,%
00[t_
0
__
....
_Dw
00[
....
.....
.......
Ill
flit
IIII
llll
It
I I
. ..........
I
,_.,
I
..........
III
00_
(s/p_a) ,_ouonbo:td
[0[
_0[
Ill
IIII
o0[
I
IIII
tO[
I
IIII
:0[
I
IIII
_0[
I
IIII
:0[
_
_III
.
I
till
UOI.lglO[O::)::) v
IIIII
[I_IOlW" I O1 lIOIO[.I v
IIII
:OSIIOdSO_[
IIIII
,_3uo[lbo.I_
_glOa.t
Ilill
glOlW"

1,0[
(s/p_)
zO[
Ill
_OI
I
llll
_ouonbo_d
o0[
I
III
tO[
I
IIII
zOI
I
IIII
_0[
I
III
 OOI0
 00[
"'...
"''''.
III
IIIII
IIIII
IIIII
lilll
.........................
IIIII
00_;
(s/peI) _uonboI:I
zOI
III
tOI
I
IIII
oOI
I
III
_OI
I
IIII
zO[
I
IIII
_0[
I
III
zOI _.

.....
TII
fill
IIII
llll
=:.:.'_ .........................................................
IIII
IIII
I_,
t_
tOI
10 6
II
Lateral
Ill
Aircraft
I III
Fre,quencT, Response:
Rudder
I
III
to Rol! ,An,_!e
I.L
10 3
_ka
"_
10
103
106
illl
104
103
IIII
I III
101
102
Frequency
200
IIII
10 o
III
I II
101
10 2
(rad/s)
I I I
100
#.
0
100
200
104
III
103
IIIII
102
IIIII
101
Frequency
IIIII
10 o
(rad/s)
IIIII
101
III
10 2
(s/puz) ouonbo_I
III
Ill
o0[
[0[
_0[
I
IIII
llli
III
[0[
I
IIII
IIII
zO[
[0[
o0[
III
IIII
pu_
zO[
I
IIII
'qo_o.[dd
[0[
IIII
IIII
[0[
I
III
.[oA_Od:L_L _u!oo_[
zO[
I I I
t,0[
IIII
00_7
00[
[0[
III
tO[
_0[
I
zO[
tO[ _.
1,0[
_,,,,,
,,,,,,,
, ,
,,,,,,,
, ,
,,,,,,,
, ,
,,,,,, i , ,
'""''
o[_uV ,_,sA ol zoppn_[ :osuodso_[ Aouonbo_[ U_:[o.,TVI_:[o_._"I
'
'
= z.O[
tO[
III
o0[
IIII
[OI
Jill
:0[
IIII
_0[
IIII
II1
 00E 00E:L
.i.i.i.iiiiiiii
ill
IIII
as.truD
III
apnlt.l[V
"
"
"
O'Q
 00I
I.
(s/p_a) ,_ouonbo&I
_:0[
II
[0[
I
III
o0[
I
III
[0[
I
I1
vO[
I
III
t,OI
o0[
_0[
I
III
[0[
_
"_..77

_I
"._
t."
L ',1."
IIII
uo.qeaoiooo
III
:0[
_
III
:osuodso_I
till
Aouonboa_I
1jeao_V
III
I_aoJ,e"I
_0[
A.5
McDonnell
The contents
Stability
Douglas
F4C
of this section
and control
MATLAB
script
MATLAB
eigenvalue,
of the Appendix
are:
data
to form longitudinal
natural
dynamics
frequency
and damping
script
for longitudinal
script
for lateral
dynamics
Frequency
MATLAB
responses
script
of longitudinal
to form
lateral
dynamics
MATLAB eigenvalue,
dynamics
natural
Frequency
of lateral
responses
dynamics
frequency
and damping
dynamics
E.Cc=,Ax +Bu
y =Cx +D u
(Al)
Equation
A1 is an intermediate
form for the statespace
equation
that was formed because some
stability derivatives
depend on the derivatives
of the state variables
in the case of the longitudinal
dynamics
and because of the roll/yaw coupling
in moment equations
in the case of the lateral
dynamics.
The final form is obtained by multiplying
the fhst equation
of the pair by the inverse
of E.
The frequency
response
graphs show three tracesone
The line styles for the F4C cases denote the following:
Solid:
power
Dashes:
subsonic
approach
Points:
supersonic
cruise
cruise
at sea level
at 35,000
at 55,000
ft
ft
111
flight conditions.
C5
DATA
FOR
AIRPLANE
Figure
C5
presents
a threevlew
for Airplane
E.
This airplane
is representative
of a supersonic
fighterbomber
airplane.
Stability
and control
derivatives
for this airplane
are given
in Table C5.
.25_
ES. 509. 2
MGC
B.L. 88.4
5'
I0'
20'
ES.178.3
_
F_,z22 \
w.L.s,.4
"_ \
W.L.67.6
F.s.3ogz
I
._
,._
71
Zero W.L.
1"4
5.25
I=t
Figure
C5
ThreeView
APPENDIX
of Airplane
625
Table
Flight
C5
Stability
and
Control
Derivatives
Condition
Air
(ft)
Density
Speed
(slugs/ft
3)
Supersonic
Cruise
Sealevel
35,000
55,000
002378
000739
Initial
Gravity
Attitude
Geometry
and
(Xcg)
(deg)
876
1742
.29
29
.29
11.7
2.6
3.3
530
530
53O
Inertias
Wing
Area
(ft 2)
Wing
Span
(ft)
Wing
Mean
Geometric
Weight
.000287
230
o
of
Approach
(fps)
Center
Subsonic
Cruise
Power
Altitude
for Airplane
Chord
38.7
387
38.7
16.0
160
16.0
33,200
39,000
39,000
23,700
25,000
25,000
(ft)
(ibs)
Ixx B
(slug
ft2) 
(slug
ft 2)
117,500
122,200
122,200
(slug
ft 2)
133,700
139,800
139,800
(slug
ft 2)
YYB
I
zz B
I
1,600
2,200
2,200
xz B
Steady
State
Coefficients
1.0
.26
.17
.2
.03
048
.2
.03
048
CL I
CD I
CT
C XI
mI
C
APPENDIX
626
Table
C5
Stability
Longitudinal
and
Control
Derivatives
Derivatives
for Airplane
(Cont.)
.117
+. 054
.40
.78
m
u
. 098
.95
.25
1.3
m.
2.7
2.0
2.0
q
0
+.27
.18
2.8
3.75
2.8
mT
u
CL
u
CL
.555
.3
.4
+.027
. 054
CL.
CL
q
CD
CD
u
.24
.40
.25
CT X
u
CLiH
CDiH
C
.14
.i0
.15
.322
.58
.38
mi H
(Note:
longitudinal
control
through
APPENDIX
stabilizer
only)
627
Table
C5
Stability
LateralDirectional
and
Control
Derivatives
Derivatives
for Airplane
(Cont.)
.156
.080
.025
.272
.240
.200
C_ B
C_
P
.205
.070
.040
.057
.042
.015
.0009
.0060
.0030
.199
.125
.090
.013
.036
.320
.270
.260
+.0041
.0010
.0009
.072
.066
.025
.655
.68
.70
Yp
C
Yr
.0355
. 016
.010
.124
.095
.050
C_
r
C_A
C_R
C
nB
C
n
P
C
n
C
n6 A
C
n6 R "
C
YB.
YgA
C
Y_R
APPENDIX
628
%LONGITUDINAL
DYNAMICS
%McDonnell
%
Douglas
F4C,
%
format
short
%Enter
flight
power
approach
subsonic
cruise
<fcl
<fc2
Supersonic
<fc3
cruise
e
condition,
geometry,
mass
and
MOI
%gravity
g=32.2;
theta0=[ll.7
2.6
rho=[.002378
.000739
Uo=[230
876
mass=[33200
S=[530
2200
530
38.7
cbar=[16
16
%Enter
25000];
CLI=[I.0
2200];
38.7];
CTxl=[.2
0
CmTI=[0
span
(ft)
geometric
chord
0];
Cmu=[0
.117
.40
Cmad=[.95
1.3
Cmq =[2.0
2.7
0
0
control
derivatives.
.78];
.25];
2.0];
.18];
+3.75
and
0];
0];
+.27
CLa=[+2.8
stability
+.054];
Cma=[.098
CLq=[0
%wing
%mean
+2.8];
0];
0];
CDa=[+.555
+.3
+.4];
CDu=[0
+.027
.054];
CTxu=[0
0];
CLde=[+.24
+.40
+.25];
CDde=[.14
.i0
.15];
Cmde=[.322
CDad=[0
.58
0
CDq=[0
%Compute
0];
0];
.38];
%No
numbers
in
Roskam
%No
numbers
in
Roskam
dimensioned
stability
and
control
qbar=0.5*rho.*Uo.^2;
Xu
=qbar.*S.*(CDu+2*CDl)./(mass.*Uo);
XTu=
qbar.*S.*(CTxu+2*CTxl)./(mass.*Uo);
116
ft^2)
ft^2)
inertia
(ft^2)
.048];
dimensionless
CLad=[0
area
coefficients.
%Enter
CLu=[0
%wing
0];
0
CmTu=[0
CmTa=[0
(slug
of
.048];
.03
Cml=[0
ft^2)
(slug
.17];
.03
(deg)
(ft/s)
(slug
inertia
%yaw
inertia
%cross
product
16];
.26
CDI=[.2
%pitch
122200];
139800];
steadystate
speed
%weight
(ibs)
%roll
inertia
530];
b=[38.7
angle
(slug/ft^3)
%equilibrium
122200
139800
Ixz=[1600
%density
.000287];
39000]/g;
25000
Iyy=[l17500
Izz=[133700
(ft/s^2)
%equilibriumpitch
3.3]*pi/180;
1742];
39000
Ixx=[23700
parameters.
derivatives
(ft)
(slug
ft^2)
Xa
* (CDaCLI)
qbar.*S.
Zu
*S. *CDde./mass
* (CLu+2*CLI)
=qbar.*S.
Za
=qbar.*S.
./mass;
;
Xde=qbar.
*S. *CLad.
Zad=qbar.
Zq
./(mass.*Uo)
* (CLa+CDI)
./mass;
*cbar.
/ (2*mass.
*Uo)
=qbar.*S.
*CLq. *cbar.
/ (2*mass.*Uo)
;
;
Zde=qbar.
*S. *CLde./mass
*cbar.
* (Cmu+2*Cml)
. / (Iyy.*Uo)
Mu
= qbar.*S.
MTu=
Ma
(CmTu+2*CmTI)
*cbar.
 qbar.*S
. / (Iyy.*Uo)
*Cma./Iyy;
*CmTa.
/Iyy;
qbar. *S *cbar.
qbar.*S.*(cbar.^2).*Cmad./(2*Iyy.*Uo);
MTa=
Mad=
Mq
*cbar.*
qbar.*S.
qbar.*S.*(cbar.^2).*Cmq./(2*Iyy.*Uo);
Mde=
qbar.*S.*cbar.*Cmde./Iyy;
%Compute
Afcl=
dynamics
for
flight
condition
in
statespace
form.
[
Xu(1)+XTu(1)
Xa(1)/Uo(1)
g'cos
(theta0
Zu (i)
g'sin
(theta0
(i))
Mu(1)+MTu(1)
0
(I))
Za (I)/Uo
(I)
Uo (I) +Zq(1)
Ma(1)/Uo(1)+MTa(1)/Uo(1)
0
Mq(1)
1
];
Bfcl=
[Xde
(i) ; Zde
(i) ;Mde
(I) ; 0] ;
Efcl=[
1
lZad(1)/Uo(1)
I];
0
0
Mad
(1) /Uo
(1)
Afcl=Efcl\Afcl;
Bfcl=Efcl\Bfcl;
%Compute
pitch
angle
angle
of
%
%
forward
vertical
%output
matrix
attack
speed
acceleration
and
direct
input
matrix.
Cfcl=[
0
0
0
i/uo(i)
Afcl(2,
:)[0
0 Uo (i)
0]
];
Dfcl=0*Cfcl*Bfcl;
Dfcl(4,1)=Bfcl(2,1);
%Compute
Afc2
dynamics
= [
Xu (2) +XTu
g'cos
(theta0
for
(2)
flight
Xa (2)/Uo
condition
(2)
(2))
117
in
statespace
form.
Zu(2)
g'sin
Za(2)/Uo(2)
(theta0
(2))
Mu (2) +MTu (2)
Ma (2)/Uo
0
0
];
Bfc2=
[Xde
Efc2
[
1
(2) ; Zde
(2) ;Mde
Uo (2) +Zq
(2) +MTa
(2)/Uo
(2)
(2)
Mq(2)
1
(2) ; 0] ;
0 0
lZad(2)/Uo(2)
Mad(2)/Uo(2)
0 0
];
0 1
Afc2=Efc2\Afc2;
Bfc2=Efc2\Bfc2;
%Compute
%
pitch
angle
%
%
forward
vertical
%output
angle
of attack
matrix
speed
acceleration
and
direct
input
matrix.
Cfc2=[
0
1
i/Uo(2)
0
0]
0 UO (2)
Afc2(2,:)[0
];
Dfc2=0*Cfc2*Bfc2;
Dfc2(4,1)=Bfc2(2,1);
%Compute
Afc3=
dynamics
for
flight
condition
in
statespace
form.
[
Xu(3)+XTu(3)
g'cos
(theta0
g'sin
Xa(3)/Uo(3)
(3))
Zu (3)
Za (3)/Uo
(theta0
(3))
Mu(3)+MTu(3)
(3)
Uo (3) +Zq
Ma(3)/Uo(3)+MTa(3)/Uo(3)
Mq(3)
];
Bfc3
= [Xde
Efc3=
(3) ; 0] ;
lZad(3)/Uo(3)
Mad(3)/Uo(3)
0 0
];
0 1
Afc3=Efc3\Afc3;
Bfc3=Efc3\Bfc3;
%Compute
pitch
angle
angle
of
attack
118
(3)
%
%
forward
vertical
%output
Cfc3
matrix
speed
acceleration
and
direct
input
matrix.
= [
0
0
1
i/Uo
0
Afc3(2,
(3)
:)[0
0
0
0
0
0 Uo(3)
0]
];
Dfc3=0*Cfc3*Bfc3;
Dfc3
(4, I) =Bfc3
(2, I) ;
119
%LONGITUDINAL
DYNAMICS
%McDonnell
%
Douglas
RESULTS
F4C,
sea levelpower
35,000
ftsubsonic
55,000
%Roskam,
J.,
%Airplane
%Part
pp.
ftsupersonic
Dynamics
and
Automatic
616642
EIGENVALUES
evfcl
4.6662e01+
6.2290e01i
4.6662e01
6.2290e01i
2.2873e02+
1.6668e01i
2.2873e02
1.6668e01i
evfc2
6.3372e01+
2.7832e+00i
6.3372e01
2.7832e+00i
4.4867e02
3.5424e02
evfc3
3.1093e01+
3.1093e01
4.8536e+00i
4.8536e+00i
1.9914e03+
2.6812e02i
1.9914e03
2.6812e02i
NATURAL
FREQUENCIES
7.7830e01
2.8544e+00
7.7830e01
2.8544e+00
4.8636e+00
4.8636e+00
1.6824e01
4.4867e02
2.6886e02
1.6824e01
3.5424e02
2.6886e02
5.9954e01
2.2201e01
5.9954e01
6.3930e02
6.3930e02
1.3595e01
2.2201e01
l.0000e+00
7.4070e02
1.3595e01
1.0000e+00
7.4070e02
DAMPING
cruise
<fcl
<fc2
<fc3
1979,
Flight
I,
approach
cruise
RATIOS
120
Flight
Controls,
(s/p_J) fiouonb_.Id
tO[
zO[
III
IIII
o0[
I
I1
tO[
I
IlJl
_0[
I
IIII
....
cO[
I
III
00_
'.%
.,oo.
;%
.,'""
.
...................
......
(s/p_s) ,ouonbo_I
:0[
,i,,
[0[
i ,
,,,,,
o0[
I i
i,,,,
[0[
, ,
,,,,,
:0[
, ,
,,,,,
_0[
i i
,li,,
10[
i ,
lr'O[
i
tO[
..............................
(s/puJ) fi_uonbaJ_I
:OI
III
tO[
I
oOI
IIII
III
vOI
tOI
IIII
IIII
vOI
,,,,, , , , ,
_OI
OOZ;
.
""
.........
_llllllll,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,..,, _
00_
os!m D :3!uosJodn S ptm 'os!m D :_!uosqn S 'q:3_o:IddV JoA_Od :D_d S_l:_no(I IIOtmo(I:_IAT
(s/p_) 3uonbo_,_4
:OI
tOI
oOI
IIII
III
tOI
IIII
:OI
IIII
vOI
III

cOI
=
%%
i
_
_OI _.
_
.....
"".,,
:,
5
_
_
t I
I _
=
...
.............................................................
_
,
oOI
_,.< ....
_:3mlV jo oI
tOI
. uol
tOI
(s/pea) ,(3uonbo.k4
o0[
_0[
:0[
III
III
III
III
_0[
,,,,, , , , ,
zO[
[0[
I
IIII
0[
OOZ;
.o,,"
oo[}
I "
%%
I
I
I
I
I
:1
I
III
I ....
1/111
........................
I
III
IIII
III
III
_[o_od :_)lzz[s_I_noQ
00[
[[ouuo(]olAI
(s/p_a) ,_ouonboa_I
zO[
[0[
Illl
"
o0[
I
%,%
o..._
..
Illl
_0[
I
Illl
zO[
I
IIll
vOI
I
Illl
......

_._,,..
_e
"'.
41
IIII
IIII
IIII
22222 ...................................
=': 7.''L''
IIII
IIII
)J'e.to.t.rV [utq.pn]t._uo'[
"=
/.0[
(s/pea) houonlooa,.q
zO[
Ill
tOI
I
IIII
oOI
I
III
tO[
I
IIII
zO[
I
IIII
cOI
I
IIII
 ooz
0
'..
os!m D
3[uosIodn
rOI
,,,, , , , ,
tO[
,,,,, , , , ,
o01
,,,,, , , , ,
'q:_oldd
_oA_Od:Dlrd s _n
tOI
,,,,, , , , ,
_0I
,,,,, , , , ,
Ilotmo(IOlAI
cOI
,,,,, , , , ,
OOE
1,0I
zO[
tOI
1,0I
%LATERAL
DYNAMICS
%McDonnell
%
Douglas
F4C,
%
%Roskam,
J.,
%Airplane
%Part
pp.
short
%Enter
flight
.000739
876
Automatic
geometry,
Ixx=[23700
Izz=[133700
2200
530
%Transform
inertias
from
product
of
area
(ft^2)
%wing
span
(ft)
%mean
geometric
axis
to
(ifc)
(ang)
^2
sin
(ang)
^2
sin
(2*ang)
sin
(ang)
^2
cos
(ang)
^2
sin
(2*ang)
sin
(2*ang)
cos
(2*ang)
/2
sin
(2*ang)
/2
];
Isa=Tba2sa*
Ixx
(ifc)
[Ixx
=Isa
(ifc)
(ifc)
; Ixz (ifc)
];
(I) ;
Izz(ifc)=Isa(2)
Ixz
; Izz
(ifc)=Isa
(3) ;
end;
%Enter
steadystate
CLI=[I.0
.26
CDI=[.2
CTxI=[.2
.048];
.03
Cml=[0
CmTI=[0
.048];
0];
0
%Enter
coefficients.
.17];
.03
0];
dimensionless
Clb=[.156
Cip=[.272
Cir=[.205
Clda=[.057
Cldr=[.0009
.080
stability
control
.025];
.240
.200];
.070
.040];
.042
.015];
.0060
.0030];
Cnb=[.199
.125
.090];
Cnp=[.013
.036
0];
Cnr=[.320
and
.270
.260];
125
inertia
stability
= [
cos
ft^2)
chord
: 3,
ang=theta0
ft^2)
(slug
%wing
body
(ft/s)
(slug
inertia
%cross
16];
speed
inertia
%yaw
(deg)
angle
(ibs)
%roll
2200];
relevant
ifc=l
parameters.
(slug/ft^3)
%weight
38.7];
16
MOI
%equilibrium
39000]/g;
530];
38.7
and
%density
.000287];
25000
25000];
139800
139800];
cbar=[16
Controls,
%gravity
(ft/s^2)
%equilibriumpitch
3.3]*pi/180;
39000
Ixz=[1600
Flight
mass
1742];
mass=[33200
Tba2sa
and
condition,
rho=[.002378
for
cruise
2.6
S=[530
<fc3
Dynamics
g=32.2;
theta0=[ll.7
b=[38.7
Supersonic
616642
format
Uo=[230
<fcl
<fc2
1979,
Flight
I,
power
approach
subsonic
cruise
derivatives.
(ft)
axis.
(slug
ft^2)
Cnda=[.0041
Cndr=[.072
.0010
.066
Cyb=[.655
.68
Cyp=[0
0];
Cyr=[0
0];
Cyda=[.0355
.70];
.016
Cydr=[.124
CnTb=[0
.0009];
.025];
.095
0
%Compute
0];
.010];
.050];
%No
numbers
dimensioned
in
Roskam
stability
and
control
derivatives
qbar=0.5*rho.*Uo.^2;
Yb = qbar.*S.*Cyb./mass;
yp
qbar.*S.*b.*Cyp./(2*mass.*Uo);
Yr
qbar.*S.*b.*Cyr./(2*mass.*Uo);
Yda =
qbar.*S.*Cyda./mass;
Ydr =
qbar.*S.*Cydr./mass;
Lb
qbar.*S.*b.*Clb./Ixx;
Lp
qbar.*S.*(b.^2).*Clp./(2*Ixx.*Uo);
Lr
qbar.*S.*(b.^2).*Clr./(2*Ixx.*Uo);
Lda=
qbar.*S.*b.*Clda./Ixx;
Ldr=
qbar.*S.*b.*Cldr./Ixx;
=
qbar.
*S.*b.*Cnb./Izz;
NTb =
qbar.
*S.*b.*CnTb./Izz;
Np
qbar.
Nr
qbar.
*S.*(b.^2).*Cnp./(2*Izz.*Uo);
*S.*(b.^2).*Cnr.'/(2*Izz.*Uo);
Nda =
Ndr =
qbar.
qbar.
*S.*b.*Cnda./Izz;
*S.*b.*Cndr./Izz;
Nb
%Compute
Afcl=
g'sin
dynamics
for
flight
[
Yb(1)/Uo(1)
(theta0
Yp(1)
0
0
0
o
(i))
Lp(1)
Lr(1)
Np(1)
1
Nr(1)
0
[
Yda
(i)
Ydr
(i)
Lda
(i)
Ldr
(I)
0*ones
Ndr(1)
(2,2)
];
Efcl=
[
1
0
0
0
Ixz(1)/Izz(1)
0
0
statespace
g'cos
(Nb(1)+NTb(1))/Uo(1)
0
Nda(1)
in
Yr(1)Uo(1)
Lb(1)/Uo(1)
0
];
Bfcl=
condition
1
0
0
1
0
0
Ixz(1)/Ixx(1)
];
126
(theta0
form.
(I))
Afcl=Efcl\Afcl;
Bfcl=Efcl\Bfcl;
%Compute
%
sideslip
angle
roll
angle
%
%
yaw
angle
lateral
acceleration
%output
matrix
and
direct
input
matrix.
Cfcl=[
I/Uo(1)
0
0
Afcl(l,
0
0
0
0
:)+[0
0
1
0
0
0 Uo(1)
g
0]
];
Dfcl=0*Cfcl*Bfcl;
Dfcl(4,:)=Bfcl(l,:);
%Compute
Afc2=
g'sin
dynamics
[
Yb(2)/Uo
for
flight
(2)
(theta0
(2))
Lb(2)/Uo(2)
(Nb(2)+NTb(2))/Uo(2)
0
0
];
Bfc2=
[
Yda(2)
Ydr(2)
Lda(2)
Ldr(2)
Nda(2)
0*ones
condition
Yp(2)
Yr(2)Uo(2)
Lp(2)
Lr(2)
Np(2)
1
Nr(2)
0
[
1
Ndr(2)
(2,2)
Ixz
0
0
Ixz(2)/Ixx(2)
(2) /Izz
(2)
];
Afc2=Efc2\Afc2;
Bfc2=Efc2\Bfc2;
%Compute
sideslip
roll
%
%
yaw
angle
lateral
acceleration
%output
matrix
angle
angle
and
direct
input
matrix.
Cfc2=[
i/Uo(2)
statespace
form.
g*cos(theta0(2))
o
o
0
o
];
Efc2=
in
127
Afc2(l,
:)+[0
0 Uo (2)
g
0]
];
Dfc2=0*Cfc2*Bfc2
Dfc2
(4, : ) =Bfc2
%Compute
Afc3=
(i, : ) ;
dynamics
flight
condition
(3)
(theta0
(3))
Lb(3)/Uo(3)
Yp (3)
Yr (3)Uo
Lp(3)
Lr(3)
(Nb(3)+NTb(3))/Uo(3)
0
Np(3)
1
Nr(3)
0
[
Yda(3)
Lda
Ydr(3)
(3)
Nda(3)
Ldr
(3)
Ndr(3)
0*ones
(2,2)
];
Efc3=
statespace
[
1
0
0
Ixz(3)/Izz(3)
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
Ixz(3)/Ixx(3)
];
Afc3=Efc3\Afc3;
Bfc3=Efc3\Bfc3;
%Compute
sideslip
roll
%
%
yaw
angle
lateral
acceleration
%output
matrix
angle
angle
and
direct
input
matrix.
Cfc3=[
i/Uo(3)
0
0
0
0
0
0
Afc3
(i, :)+[0
0 Uo (3)
g
(3)
g'cos
0
0
0
o
];
Bfc3=
in
form.
[
Yb (3)/Uo
g'sin
for
0]
];
Dfc3=0*Cfc3*Bfc3;
Dfc3(4,:)=Bfc3(l,:);
128
(theta0
(3))
%LATERAL
DYNAMICS
%McDonnell
%
RESULTS
Douglas
F4C,
%
%Roskam,
J.,
%Airplane
%Part
pp.
E I GENVALUE
evfcl
<fcl
<fc2
(solid)
(dashed)
Supersonic
<fc3
(dotted)
cruise
1979,
Flight
I,
power
approach
subsonic
cruise
Dynamics
and
Automatic
Flight
616642
=
0
i. I098e+00
1.5240e02
3.1618e01+
io7808e+00i
3.1618e01
1.7808e+00i
evfc2
=
0
1.3391e+00
1.3123e02
i.1565e01+
2.3946e+00i
I.1565e01
2.3946e+00i
evfc3
=
0
7.8175e01
2.8623e03
1.3838e01+
2.4603e+00i
1.3838e01
24603e+00i
NATURAL
FREQUENCIES
0
i.i098e+00
1.3391e+00
7.8175e01
1.5240e02
1.8086e+00
1.3123e02
2.3974e+00
2.8623e03
2.4642e+00
1.8086e+00
2.3974e+00
2.4642e+00
DAMPING
RATIOS
NaN
NaN
NaN
1.0000e+00
1.0000e+00
1.0000e+00
1.0000e+00
1.0000e+00
1.0000e+00
1.7482e01
4.8239e02
5.6158e02
1.7482e01
4.8239e02
5.6158e02
129
Controls,
(slp_:O
X3uonbo_d
:0[
t0[
Jill
oOI
Ilil
Ill
tOI
I
vOI
lilll
0[
Illl
Ill
 OOZ;Og[
oo 0_;t
..,.
....
..
i "a'"r"t
....
I .......
(s/pg_) X_uonbo:[_
:OI
[OI
III
oOI
llll
Ill
[OI
l
llll
cO[
:0[
l
llll
III
_0[
I
_OI
..
_: '_..
_,,,
"_..

:OI
"_kk"
'""
""
"_'I
Ill
....
.'27
"L'':.._.,.
.......
.".....
 7.7.  7. .".
.............
i_
Illll
Illl
IIIII
Ill

tOI
_.
(s/p_:O _ouonbo_d
tO[
,,, , , , ,

tO[
,,,,, , , , ,
_/
o0[
,,,,, , , , ,
tO[
,,,,, , , , ,
zO[
,,,,, , , , ,
_OI
,,,,, , , , ,
..... ...
li'_,
t,OI
OOZ;!
 >_,,,.....
o t
''o
tl
"'"..
II
"'.....
O0[0_;
....;.....
III
Jill
os!ru D o[uos.todn
IIIII
IJlll
I't"'*
.....
t .......
flotmo(IoIAI
(s/pua) _ouonboz_I
tO[
i,ll
tOI
, ,
,i,,l
o0[
, i
,J,,1
tO[
, ,
zO[
,,,,l
, ,
vOI
,,,,i
, ,
,i,l,
t,OI
,
t'Ut
= _OI
[mde

...........
_....
: zO[
... ..   _

",.,..
.........................................
6.
oI
_0[
(s/pg_)
:OI
,,,, , , , ,
rOI
,,,,, , , , ,
oOI
,,,,, , , , ,
Aouonbo_
tOI
,,,,, , , , ,
vOI
,,,,, , , , ,
cOI
,,,,, , , , ,
_0[
0017 OOEga
 OOEt_
(m
00I
Ill
IIII
os!ru D omosaodn
S.
III
IIII
IIII
III
(s/pga) Abuonbo&q
:0I
I/I
tOI
I
IIII
o0I
I
III
tOI
I
IIII
_0I
I
IIII
cOI
I
III
_OI
_OI
vOI
tOI
_'"
........................
""'_
vOI
fl)
=1:111
IIIII
IIII
I111
_:)uaIlba_
IIIII
III
lJl_.I3.q.
V [l_OllV I
LOI
___
o[OI
(s/p_)
[0[
:0[
III
Illl
_3uanbal_I
o0[
I
III
tO[
I
III
zO[
I
III
[0[
I
III
 00[
t
t
I
t
I
%%
0
.,..

%
".t
00[
%%
,., ..:.._',_
.....
".,,..
III
as.re.E)
IIII
3[.uosiodrt
S peg
III
'osI.rLE)
3[.uosqns
IIII
'qo_o.zdd
Ia_o
IIII
IIII
d :_)_z:[ s_[_noo
00_
[[otItIo(]olA[
(s/puz) _:_uonbozzI
zO[
Ill
[0[
I
IIII
oOI
I
Illl
[0[
I
Illl
zOI
I
Illl
[0[
I
Illl
oOI
_
.;=
_
......
"_
[OI _.
:. .....
'.
zO[
,.
,
m
.,.,
"
UOI.Ig10[033
_I
a;; UOlO[l v.
:asuodso_[
_3uaflbal_
......................................
l_I_13_r[,v
[_Io)_'[
= _0[
,_ouonb_ d
(siPs1)
tOI
_0[
III
III
o0[
I
III
tO[
I
III
:OI
01
liil
III
/

_oot
""_'_'"_'"
00I
II
........
I
Ill
III
IIII
IIII
III
.[O,_Od :_)]z.,Isl3[_rlo(]
'qO13o.ldd v
[[ouuo(IolA [
OOZ;
(s/pea) ,_ouonbo:td
z0[
II
tOI
I
III
oOI
I
III
t OI
I
III
eOI
zOI
III
III
0I
vOI
tOI _
..,..'
....."
....
.,,,_.: .........
_.._.._...._"_
o0[
=
_.
."
(.'t
i.t
I
Ill
d.qsop.[g
III
ol Ioppn_l
III
IIII
III
tO[
Lateral Ai?c,r,a,ft,,
Fre,quency, Response:
10 4

Ill
"..........................
101
_
102
105
IIIII
IlllL
"'"..7. 7.  
IIIII
103
104
IIII
102
IIIII
101
IIIII
10 o
IIII
101
10 2
Frequency
(rad/s)
Approach,
100
........................
.........o.....
N'..'.>.,
0
r_
100
200
104
III
103
IIII
102
IIII
101
Frequency
III
100
(rad/s)
IIII
101
III
102
101o
Lateral
Aircraft
I
I1
Frequency
l
Response:
II
IIII
Rudder
to Yaw, ,An_!e
III
IlJ_
10 7
10 4
101
"
...,.
o
. .7......
' ........._
102
D
I
IIII
IIIII
103
IIIII
102
UU'r
Douglas
i
,,Ill
III
101
Frequency
1... McDonnell
III
Ill
IIIll
10 o
101
III
10 2
(rad/s)
Subsonic
I
300 
Cruise,
i
III
and Supersonic
I
_,.
Frequency
(rad/s)
III
C ,ruise
I
(s/p_s)
tOI
zOI
II
I$1
o01
I
,_ouonba:t d
zO[
I{I
tO[
I
III
vO[
IIII
IIII
fl)
O_
00[%
''.
,,.
*,..
,
III
os[.ru_)
IIII
o[.uos.todn
S ptm
IIII
'os.[ru
II
,,..,..,.
_"_L,IJi"_'I";I:._.I...
D o!uosqn
S 'q::)Eo.xdd
I[otmo(]olAI
(s/pea) L:)uonbo.L.q
zOI
II
tOI
I
III
o01
I
III
tOI
I
III
zO[
I
I1
vOI
I
III
B
D
J
tOt
K
lidtl
.j
_.
......
.............................
22__._
I :'l
1 fl
w
Fill
IIII
uo!lE_oIoooV
III
IeaOle'I ol lappn_I
IIII
:osuodso_l
IIII
AouonboI_I _;o_.V
III
IElOl_"l
 _OI
A.6
Learjet
The contents
Stability
Model
24
of this section
and control
MATLAB
script
MATLAB
eigenvalue,
of the Appendix
are:
data
to form longitudinal
natural
dynamics
frequency
and damping
script
for longitudinal
script
for lateral
dynamics
Frequency
responses
MATLAB
script
MATLAB
eigenvalue,
of longitudinal
to form
lateral
natural
dynamics
dynamics
frequency
and damping
dynamics
Frequency
responses
of lateral dynamics
(Al)
Equation
A1 is an intermediate
form for the statespace
equation
that was formed because some
stability derivatives
depend on the derivatives
of the state variables
in the case of the longitudinal
dynamics
and because of the roll/yaw
coupling in moment equations
in the case of the lateral
dynamics.
The final form is obtained by multiplying
the first equation of the pair by the inverse
of E.
The frequency
The line styles
response
graphs show three tracesone
for each of the three
for the Learjet Model 24 cases denote the following:
Solid:
power
approach
Dashes:
Cruise
at 40,000
ft at maximum
Points:
Cruise
at 40,000
ft at low weight
IIL/gr4K NOT
conditions.
at sea level
139
PAGE
flight
FILMED
weight
LJ_
C4
DATA
A
FOR
AIRPLANE
threeview
airplane
business
presented
for
D
Airplane
is representative
jet.
Stability
in Table
is presented
in
Figure
C4.
of a medium
sized high performance
and control
derivatives
for Airplane
This
D are
C4.
nn n
Fisure
C4
nn
ThreeView
APPENDIX
of
Airplane
616
Table
Flight
C4
Stability
and
Control
Derivatives
Condition
Air
(ft)
Density
Speed
(slugs/ft
3)
Airplane
Approach
Cruise
Max. Wht.
Cruise
Low Wht.
Sealevel
40,000
40,000
002378
000588
000588
170
(fps)
677
(M = .7)
Center
of
Initial
Gravity
Attitude
Geometry
and
Area
(ft 2)
Wing
Span
(ft)
Wing
Mean
Geometric
I
I
.32
677
(M = .7)
.32
(aft)
.32
(aft)
(aft)
1.8
2.7
1.5
230
230
230
34
34
34
(Xcg)
(deg)
Inertias
Wing
Weight
Power
Altitude
for
Chord
(ft)
(ibs)
13,000
13,000
9,000
(slug
ft 2)
28,000
28,000
6,000
(slug
ft 2)
17,800
18,800
17,800
(slug
ft 2)
47,000
47,000
25,000
(slug
ft 2)
1,300
1,300
1,400
1.64
.41
.28
.0335
.0279
.0335
.0279
YYB
I
zz B
I
xz B
Steady
State
Coefficients
CL I
.256
CD I
CT
.256
X1
m1
C
mT 1
APPENDIX
617
Table
C4
Stability
Longitudinal
and
Control
Derivatives
Derivatives
for
Airplane
(Cont.)
.01
.05
.O7
.66
.64
 .64
C
m
5.0
6.7
6.7
13.5
15.5
15.5
m.
C
m
q
.0O6
C
u
. 003
. 003
mT
.04
CL
.28
.40
CL
CL.
5.04
5.84
5.84
1.6
2.2
2.2
4.1
4.7
4.7
CL
q
CD
CD
1.06
.30
.22
.104
.104
CT X
u
.46
.40
.46
CL_, E
0
CD_E
C
.98
0
i. 24
0
i. 24
m_ E
APPENDIX
618
Table
C4
Stability
LateralDirectlonal
and
Control
Derivatives
for
Airplane
(Cont.)
 .173
 .ii0
 .i00
.39
.45
 .45
Derivatives
C_ B
C_
P
.45
.16
.14
.149
.178
.178
.014
.019
.021
.150
.127
.124
C
r
C_6A
Cg_R
C
n8
C
.13
. 008
.022
.26
.20
.20
.05
.02
.02
.074
.074
.074
n6 R
C
.73
.73
.73
C
Yp
C
Yr
P
C
n
r
C
n6 A
YB
.4
Y6 A
.140
.4
.4
.140
.140
Y6 R
APPENDIX
619
%LONGITUDINDAL
DYNAMICS
%Learjet
%
24,
Model
%
%Roskam,
J.,
%Airplane
%Part
pp.
short
%Enter
flight
cruise
<fc3
Flight
Controls,
Dynamics
2.7
677
Ixx=[28000
Iyy=[17800
Izz=[47000
geometry,
230
17800];
25000];
%yaw
steadystate
.0335
CTxi=[.256
speed
inertia
(slug
product
%wing
area
%wing
%mean
span
(ft)
geometric
of
dimensionless
0];
0 0];
Cmu=[.01
.05
Cma=[.66
.64
stability
Cmq=[13.5
15.5
15.5];
CmTu=[.006
.003
.003];
CLu=[.04
.40
CLad=[l.6
2.2
4.7];
.30
.104
0
0];
0];
Cmde=[.98
.22];
.104];
.46
CDde=[0
.46];
1.24
CDad=[0
0
0
derivatives
5.84];
2.2];
4.7
CDa=[I.06
CLde=[.40
control
.28];
5.84
CTxu=[0
6.7];
0];
CLa=[5.04
CLq=[4.1
derivatives.
.64];
6.7
control
.07];
Cmad=[5.0
CmTa=[0
and
0];
0];
1.24];
%No
numbers
in
Roskam
%No
numbers
in
Roskam
dimensioned
stability
and
qbar=0.5*rho.*Uo.^2;
144
inertia
chord
.0279];
%Enter
ft^2)
ft^2)
(ft^2)
.0279];
ft^2)
(slug
.28];
Cml=[0
CmTI=[0
(deg)
(ft/s)
(slug
coefficients.
.0335
angle
(slug/ft^3)
inertia
%cross
7];
.41
%Compute
%pitch
230];
CDI=[.256
parameters.
%weight
(ibs)
%roll
inertia
1400];
CLI=[1.64
MOI
%density
.000588];
34];
7
and
%gravity
(ft/s^2)
%equilibrium
pitch
6000];
1300
cbar=[7
CDq=[0
mass
%equilibrium
18800
47000
CDu=[0
Automatic
9000]/g;
28000
34
and
677];
13000
Ixz=[1300
ftlow
1.5]*pi/180;
.000588
mass=[13000
%Enter
weight
condition,
rho=[.002378
S=[230
40,000
g=32.2;
theta0=[l.8
b=[34
<fcl
<fc2
616642
format
Uo=[170
approach
weight
cruise
1979,
Flight
I,
sea
levelpower
40,000
ftmax
(ft)
(slug
ft^2)
XU
=qbar.*S.
XTu =
Xa
* (CDu+2*CDI)
. / (mass.*Uo)
qbar.*S.*(CTxu+2*CTxl)
=qbar.*S.
* (CDaCLI)
Xde=qbar.
*S. *CDde./mass
Zu
=qbar.
*S. * (CLu+2*CLI)
Za
=qbar.*S.
;
./ (mass.*Uo)
Ma
*cbar.
/ (2*mass.
/ (2*mass.
./(Iyy.*Uo)
qbar.*S.*cbar.*Cma./Iyy;
MTa =
qbar.*S.*cbar.*CmTa./Iyy;
Mad=
qbar.*S.*(cbar.^2)
Mq
*Uo) ;
*Uo) ;
/ (Iyy.*Uo)
qbar.*S.*cbar.*(CmTu+2*CmTl)
=
./mass;
Zde=qbar.
*S. *CLde./mass;
Mu
= qbar.*S.
*cbar.*
(Cmu+2*Cml)
MTu=
./mass;
* (CLa+CDI)
Zad=qbar.
*S. *CLad.
Zq =qbar.*S.*CLq.*cbar.
./(mass.*Uo)
Mde=
qbar.*S.*
qbar.
%Compute
Afcl=
.*Cmad./(2*Iyy.*Uo)
(cbar.
*S. *cbar.
^2) .*Cmq.
/ (2*Iyy.
;
*Uo)
*Cmde./Iyy;
dynamics
for
flight
condition
1 in
statespace
form.
Xu (I)+XTu (I)
g'cos
(theta0
zu(1)
g'sin
Xa (I)/Uo
Za (i)/Uo
(theta0
(I))
Mu (I) +MTu (I)
[Xde
(i) ; Zde
(i)
Uo (I) +Zq
Ma(1)/UO(1)+MTa(1)/UO(1)
0
0
];
Bfcl=
(i)
(I))
(i) ;Mde
(i)
Mq(1)
1
0
0
(i) ; 0] ;
Efcl=[
1
lZad(1)/Uo(1)
i];
0
0
Mad
(1) /Uo
(1)
Afcl=Efcl\Afcl;
Bfcl=Efcl\Bfcl;
%Compute
%
pitch
angle
angle
of attack
forward
vertical
%output
Cfcl=
matrix
speed
acceleration
and
direct
input
matrix.
0
0
0
i/uo (i)
0
0
1
0
Afcl(2,
:)[0
0 Uo(1)
0]
];
Dfcl=0*Cfcl*Bfcl
Dfcl(4,1)=Bfcl(2,1)
%Compute
dynamics
;
;
for
flight
condition
Afc2=[
145
in
statespace
form.
Xu (2) +XTu
(2)
g'cos
(theta0
Zu (2)
g'sin
(theta0
(2))
Mu (2) +MTu (2)
[Xde
Efc2
(2)
Za (2)/Uo
(2)
Uo (2) +Zq
Ma(2)/Uo(2)+MTa(2)/Uo(2)
0
0
];
Bfc2=
Xa(2)/Uo
(2))
(2) ; Zde
(2) ;Mde
Mq(2)
1
(2) ; 0] ;
10
0
0
(2)
00
lZad(2)/Uo(2)
Mad(2)/Uo(2)
00
10
00
01
];
Afc2=Efc2\Afc2;
Bfc2=Efc2\Bfc2;
%Compute
pitch
angle
angle
of
%
%
forward
vertical
%output
matrix
attack
speed
acceleration
and
direct
input
matrix.
Cfc2=[
0
0
1
i/Uo(2)
0
0
0
0
0
Afc2(2,:)[00
0]
Uo(2)
];
Dfc2=0*Cfc2*Bfc2;
Dfc2(4,1)=Bfc2(2,1);
%Compute
Afc3=
dynamics
for
g'sin
condition
in
statespace
[
Xu(3)+XTu(3)
g'cos
flight
Xa(3)/Uo(3)
Zu (3)
za (3)/Uo (3)
Uo (3)+zq (3)
(theta0
(3))
Mu(3)+MTu(3)
0
Ma(3)/Uo(3)+MTa(3)/Uo(3)
0
Mq(3)
1
(theta0
(3))
];
Bfc3=
[Xde
Efc3
[
10
(3) ; Zde
(3) ;Mde
(3) ; 0] ;
00
lZad(3)/Uo(3)
00
Mad(3)/Uo(3)
10
00
01
];
Afc3=Efc3\Afc3;
Bfc3=Efc3\Bfc3;
146
form.
%Compute
pitch
angle
angle
of
%
%
forward
vertical
%output
matrix
attack
speed
acceleration
and
direct
input
matrix.
Cfc3=[
0
0
1
I/Uo(3)
0
0
0
0
0
Afc3(2,:)[0
0 Uo(3)
0]
];
Dfc3=0*Cfc3*Bfc3;
Dfc3(4,1)=Bfc3(2,1);
147
% LONGITUDINAL
%Learjet
%
DYNAMICS
Model
24,
%
%Roskam,
J.,
%Airplane
%Part
I,
approach
weight
cruise
<fcl
<fc2
40,000
weight
<fc3
ftlow
Dynamics
and
Automatic
616642
E IGENVALUES
evfcl
=
9.0759e01+
1.3200e+00i
9.0759e011.4080e02+
1.3200e+00i
2.3850e01i
1.4080e02
2.3850e01i
evfc2
9.9457e01+
9.9457e015.2956e03+
5.2956e03
evfc3
2.6413e+00i
2.6413e+00i
9.0481e02i
9.0481e02i
i.1777e+00+
2.7009e+00i
l.1777e+00
2.7009e+00i
8.6035e03+
1.0032e01i
8.6035e03
1.0032e01i
NATURAL
FREQUENCIES
1.6019e+00
2.8223e+00
2.9465e+00
1.6019e+00
2.8223e+00
2.9465e+00
2.3891e01
9.0636e02
1.0069e01
2.3891e01
9.0636e02
1.0069e01
5.6657e01
3.5239e01
3.9971e01
5.6657e01
3.5239e01
3.9971e01
5.8933e02
5.8427e02
8.5446e02
5.8933e02
5.8427e02
8.5446e02
DAMPING
cruise
1979,
Flight
pp.
sea
levelpower
40,000
ftmax
RATIOS
148
Flight
Controls,
(s/p_)
:0[
_0[
III
ll
3uonbo_d
o0[
I
III
vOI
[0[
I
illl
[0[
IIII
III
 00[
%,
,_.;_.;..._.;.;;_;_:_"_
'..
.t
.
"!
".$
....
.:.'._
 00[
 OOZ;
II
IIII
[01
I
IIII
o0(
I
'q;:)l_o.Idd
III
OOE
gouonbo_I
[0(
IIIII
rO[
IIIII
IIII
_0[
I
IIIII
[OI
_e

_._ _


_", _............
.......',_.

"'.
.9
_0[
m
II
o[_uv
till
III
llll
_ouonboJtI
till
1ll_.Io.I.l_
Ill
lem.pmt._uo'[

_OI
(s/p_I)
zO[
Ill
_0[
I
oOI
Illl
Illl
_3uonbo._ d
vOI
,,,,,,,
tOI
I
Illl
, ,
gOI
,,,,,,,
_OI
OOZ;
, ,
 OOI
lit
till
lq_!o3A
Illll
IIIII
IIIII
Ill
OOZ:
A_o'[ ptm x_iA [ lu os!m D ptm 'qouozdd V zoA_o d :_Z IopoIA[ lo[_a"I
(s/p_a) ,_ouonboad
zOI
1 I
tOI
I
III
tO[
,,,,,,,
oOI
I
III
, ,
zOI
,,,,,,,
, ,
cOI
,,,,,,,
, ,
_OI
_ _0I
.),_.....
.
.,.
.,. _ ,_.''_"
......_.._...........
E
OI
oOI
. _: _" ............................................
:1
..._1
_ll
)P_llV
IIII
IIIII
IIIII
,_ouonboa:I
IIII
1J_:to_V
IIIII
l_m.pm!_uo"I
"
_0[
(s/p_a)
:0[
tO[
III
_{ouonbo_I
oOI
IIIII
III
_0[
LOI
I
IIII
IIII
cO[
I
III
tOI
00_
, ,
 OOI0
c_
O_
"I
OOI
".t
"
",I

III
Jill
lq_!oA_ _oq
lilt
IIII
IIII
lilt
'
V aoA_Od :_
IOpOlAIlo[_moq
:OI
cOI
00_
(s/p_a) ,_ouonbo_d
tOI
:OI
III
IIII
tO[
oOI
I
III
IIII
IIII
Ill
_0[
_0[
_OI
_OI _.
i
_
._..,.
,,_
"
_1
"'"?'"
aol_^oI_t :osuo
IIII
llil
'
'
_0[
/.OI
(s/p_:O Xouonbo;_I
:0I
Ill
oOI
tO[
I
Ill
II
:0[
_0[
lii
_OI
till
Ill
"'..%
,.%
oo:
"%**
_'_*_'_,_._._._
.....
_w_
'.%
Lt
t_
LI
......
.....
L.t
___"
........'"'
Ill
II
Ill
llf
III
ill
'
00_
%LATERAL
DYNAMICS
%Learjet
%
Model
24,
%
%Roskam,
J.,
%Airplane
%Part
pp.
<fcl
<fc2
40,000
weight
cruise
<fc3
Flight
Controls,
short
%Enter
flight
Dynamics
condition,
2.7
rho=[.002378
677
geometry,
6000];
47000
25000];
34
%wing
area
(ft^2)
(ft)
%wing
span
7];
%mean
geometric
relevant
inertias
from
body
axis
to
(ifc)
stability
cos
(ang)
sin
sin
(ang) ^2
(2*ang)
/2
^2
sin
(ang)
cos
sin
^2
sin
(2*ang)
sin
(2*ang)
cos
(2*ang)
(ang) ^2
(2*ang)
/2
];
Isa=Tba2sa*
Ixx
(ifc)
[Ixx
=Isa
(ifc)
(ifc)
(ifc)
; Ixz (ifc)
];
(i) ;
Izz(ifc)=Isa(2)
Ixz
; Izz
=Isa
(3) ;
end;
%Enter
steadystate
CLI=[1.64
.41
CDI=[.256
.0335
CTxi=[.256
Cml=[0
CmTl=[0
%Enter
coefficients.
.28];
.0279];
.0335
.0279];
0];
0
0];
dimensionless
Cib=[.173
Clp=[.39
Clr=[.45
stability
.ii0
.45
.16
and
control
.I00];
.45];
.14];
Clda=[.149
.178
.178];
Cldr=[.014
.019
.021];
Cnb=[.150
.127
.124];
Cnp=[.13
Cnr=[.26
.008
.20
.022];
.20];
153
ft^2)
ft^2)
inertia
chord
: 3,
ang=theta0
Tba2sa=
[
(deg)
(ft/s)
(slug
(slug
of
34];
7
ifc=l
speed
%yaw
inertia
%cross
product
1400];
angle
(slug/ft^3)
%weight
(ibs)
%roll
inertia
230];
%Transform
for
parameters.
%equilibrium
28000
cbar=[7
MOI
%density
9000]/g;
Izz=[47000
1300
and
%gravity
(ft/s^2)
%equilibrium
pitch
.000588];
Ixx=[28000
b=[34
mass
677];
13000
230
Automatic
1.5]*pi/180;
.000588
mass=[13000
S=[230
and
g=32.2;
theta0=[l.8
Ixz=[1300
ftlow
616642
format
Uo=[170
approach
weight
cruise
1979,
Flight
I,
sea
levelpower
40,000
ftmax
derivatives.
(ft)
axis.
(slug
ft^2)
Cnda=[.05
.02
Cndr=[.074
Cyb=[.73
.73
Cyp=[0
.02];
.074
.074];
.73];
0 0];
Cyr=[.4
.4
Cyda=[0
.4];
0];
Cydr=[.140
CnTb=[0
.140
0
%Compute
0];
.140];
%No
numbers
dimensioned
in
Roskam
stability
and
control
derivatives
qbar=0.5*rho.*Uo.^2;
Yb
Yp
=
=
qbar.*S.*Cyb./mass;
qbar.*S.*b.*Cyp./(2*mass.*Uo);
Yr
qbar.*S.*b.*Cyr./(2*mass.*Uo);
Yda =
qbar.*S.*Cyda./mass;
Ydr=
qbar.*S.*Cydr./mass;
Lb
qbar.*S.*b.*Clb./Ixx;
Lp
qbar.*S.*(b.^2).*Clp./(2*Ixx.*Uo);
Lr
qbar.*S.*(b.^2).*Clr./(2*Ixx.*Uo);
Lda=
qbar.*S.*b.*Clda./Ixx;
Ldr=
qbar.*S.*b.*Cldr./Ixx;
=
qbar.*S.
*b.*Cnb./Izz;
NTb =
qbar.*S.
*b.*CnTb./Izz;
Np
qbar.*S.
Nr
qbar.*S.
*(b.^2).*Cnp./(2*Izz.*Uo);
*(b.^2).*Cnr./(2*Izz.*Uo);
Nda=
qbar.*S.
*b.*Cnda./Izz;
Ndr=
qbar.*S.
*b.*Cndr./Izz;
Nb
%Compute
Afcl
dynamics
for
flight
(theta0
(i))
Lb (I)/Uo
(i)
(Nb(1)+NTb(1))/Uo(1)
0
0
];
Bfcl=
1 in
Yp(1)
Yr(1)Uo(1)
Lp(1)
Lr(1)
Np(1)
Nr(1)
1
0
0
1
[
Yda(1)
Ydr(1)
Lda(1)
Ldr(1)
Nda(1)
Ndr(1)
0*ones
(2,2)
];
Efcl=
statespace
form.
= [
Yb(1)/Uo(1)
g'sin
condition
[
1
Ixz
0
0
1 0
Ixz(1)/Ixx(1)
(I)/Izz
(I)
];
154
g'cos
(theta0
(i))
Afcl=Efcl\Afcl;
Bfcl=Efcl\Bfcl;
%Compute
sideslip
roll
%
%
yaw
angle
lateral
acceleration
%output
angle
angle
matrix
and
direct
matrix.
input
Cfcl=[
I/Uo(1)
0
0
Afcl(l,
0
0
0
0
:)+[0
0
1
0
0
1
g
0 Uo(1)
0]
];
DfcI=0*CfcI*Bfcl;
Dfcl(4,:)=Bfcl(l,:);
%Compute
dynamics
for
flight
condition
Afc2=
[
Yb(2)/Uo(2)
Yp(2)
g'sin
(theta0
(2))
Lb(2)/Uo(2)
Yr(2)Uo(2)
Lp(2)
Lr(2)
(Nb(2)+NTb(2))/Uo(2)
0
Np(2)
1
Nr(2)
0
];
Bfc2=
[
Yda(2)
Lda(2)
Nda(2)
0*ones
Ydr(2)
Ldr(2)
Ndr(2)
(2,2)
];
Efc2=
[
1
0
0
Ixz
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
Ixz(2)/Ixx(2)
(2) /Izz
(2)
];
Afc2=Efc2\Afc2;
Bfc2=Efc2\Bfc2;
%Compute
sideslip
roll
%
%
yaw
angle
lateral
acceleration
%output
matrix
angle
angle
and
direct
input
matrix.
Cfc2=[
i/Uo(2)
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
155
in
statespace
g'cos
(theta0
form.
(2))
Afc2(l,
:)+[0
0 UO(2)
g
0]
];
Dfc2=0*Cfc2
Dfc2(4,
*Bfc2
:) ;
dynamics
for
%Compute
Afc3
:)=Bfc2(l,
flight
condition
Yb(3)/Uo
Yp(3)
(3)
(theta0
(3))
Lb(3)/Uo(3)
(Nb(3)+NTb(3))/Uo(3)
0
0
];
Bfc3=
Yr(3)Uo(3)
Lp(3)
Lr(3)
Np(3)
1
Nr(3)
0
[
Yda(3)
Ydr(3)
Lda
Ldr
(3)
Nda(3)
(3)
Ndr(3)
0*ones
(2,2)
];
Efc3=[
1
0
Ixz(3)/Ixx(3)
0 Ixz(3)/Izz(3)
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
];
Afc3=Efc3\Afc3;
Bfc3=Efc3\Bfc3;
%Compute
sideslip
roll
%
%
yaw
angle
lateral
acceleration
%output
matrix
angle
angle
and
direct
input
matrix.
= [
i/Uo
(3)
Afc3(l,
:)+[0
0 Uo(3)
g
0]
];
Dfc3=0*Cfc3*Bfc3;
Dfc3
statespace
form.
= [
g'sin
Cfc3
in
(4, : ) =Bfc3
(i, : ) ;
156
g*cos(theta0(3))
%LATERAL
DYNAMICS
%Learjet
Model
24,
sea
levelpower
approach
<fcl
40,000
ftmax
weight
cruise
<fc2
40,000
ftlow
weight
cruise
<fc3
Flight
Controls,
%Roskam,
J.,
%Airplane
%Part
1979,
Flight
I,
pp.
Dynamics
and
Automatic
616642
EIGENVALUES
evfcl
=
0
5.5832e02+
1.0288e+00i
5.5832e02
1.0288e+00i
7.4454e01
2.9636e02
evfc2
=
0
5.0232e01
I.1878e03
5.8493e02+
1.6836e+00i
5.8493e02
1.6836e+00i
evfc3
=
0
2.2733e+00
2.6623e02+
2.2741e+00i
2.6623e02
2.2741e+00i
2.0106e03
NATURAL
FREQUENCIES
0
1.0303e+00
5.0232e01
2.2733e+00
1.0303e+00
1.1878e03
2.2743e+00
7.4454e01
1.6846e+00
2.2743e+00
2.9636e02
1.6846e+00
2.0106e03
DAMPING
RATIOS
NaN
NaN
NaN
5.4190e02
1.0000e+00
1.0000e+00
5.4190e02
1.0000e+00
1.0000e+00
3.4722e02
1.1706e02
1.1706e02
l.0000e+00
3.4722e02
1.0000e+00
157
(s/p_a) 3uonboa_I
oOI
ill
IIII
III
tOI
III
:0[
I
IIII
gOI
I
III
**...o.
o,..
"OO,o,,
..
I
I
I
I
"
I
,o_
/
III
IIIII
IIII
IIII
IIII
IIIII
00_
_a_o d :17E[aPIA_la!_rea_I
(s/p_a) _uonboa_I
:OI
tOI
tOI
oOI
IIII

",%
IIII
_:OI
I
IIII
_,OI
_OI
_OI
I
IIII
:0[
%%
m

..:;
..
II
IIII
_"
_OI
III
IIII
IIII
III
 _0[
(s/p_J)
fiouonboJzI
:0[
III
00[
:_,g IOpOlAIlo[_ol
(s/pua) ,_uonboa,.q
_0[
zO[
I
III
oOI
I
III
zO[
tO[
I
III
Illl
vO[
I
Illl
'.,,
tOI
zOI _.
t_
=
_0[
D
B
B
:1:11
llll
Olgtrv
III
IIII
llll
III
sO[
(s/p_)
zO[
o0[
_0[
j j j
III
IIII
....
gouonbo_I
tOI
I
j j I
zOf
J
J]
 J
cO
J
_Ol
JJJJ  J J J
009
...
",.,,.
"'.,,.
OOE0
Ill
l
I,
IIII
ltI_!OA_ _ol
OOE
IIII
till
Illl
Ill
0017
(s/p_)
zOI
,,,, , , ,
tO[
,,,,, , , ,
o0[
,,,,, , , , ,
._ouonboa,_4
vO[
,,,,, , , ,
zO[
,,,,, , , ,
cO[
,,,,, , , ,
_,0[
_;0[
zO[
_,0I
_OI
,
::gill
Itll
IIIII
Itll
lilt
IIIIt
otO[
(s/pua) ,_ouonboa_
zO[
Ill
[0[
I
IIl
o01
I
III
[0[
I
Illl
zO[
I
IIll
vOI
I
Illl
",,,.,
'''"....
0
!
I
OOZ
(m
001_
III
IIII
III
IIII
ptm 'qo_o_dd
IIII
III
009
(s/p_a) Abuonboa_I
zOI
Ill
tO[
I
"_
"
_" _
_' _. ,_.._.
'...
Illl
oOI
I
Illl
[0[
I
Illl
vO[
I
Illl
cOI
I
Illl
_. ,..
o0[
_
'%
...................
Inl_o
_0[
m
uo!luzoIoooV
90I
zO[
_0[
II
o0[
IIII
III
"
"
I

0[
zOf
tO[
Ilil
illl
III
 OOI
I
I
I
.,._
r_
OOI
""?.?.?...
"'__
..... _
 00_;
ill!
Ill
lq_[.oAk _o"I
III
III
III
III
OOE
(s/pea) ._ouonboa.q
zOI
I I
oOI
[OI
I
li
III
[OI
I
zOI
IIII
IIII
_OI
I
III

"_'1
II
tl
.:
."

IIII
d[.[sop.[ S ol
Ill
ill
IIII
1jeao.arV'I_amwI
IIII
:0[
tO[
Ill
IIII
tO[
o0[
I
Ill
IIII
vO[
I
IIII
[0[
I
III
_OI
I
00_
".o..
00[0
oo[
00_;
III
t.
III1
Illl
IIIII
tllll
IIII
00[
lq_t.OA_ A_oq ptm x_IAI 1_ ost.mD ptm 'qo_o_tdd V IoA_Od :lTE;IopoIAI lo!_mo"I
zOI
tO[
I
IIII
oOI
I
III
I I
zO[
tO[
I
IIII
Illl
vOI
I
Illl
....
zOI
tOI
_.
Oi
m
m
"'"
(s/puz)
t0[
z0I
Ill
o0[
IIIII
,_uonbo_d
_0[
IIIII
z0[
IIIII
[0[
IIIII
_0[
IIII
00_7
 00g
t
I
I
I
I
00Z
I
....
'_* p,_
.
_._...
%
00[(m
LIII
, ,
lqgIoM
""'
'
""'
V zO_Od
:17_ IopoI_
lo!_ol
001
(s/pea) ,_ouonboId
z0I
[0I
o0I
[0[
z0I
_0I
_0I
_0[
z0I
[0I
_0[
___
z0I
:
:Till
IIII
III
IIII
:osuodso_l
IIII
III
"

o_0I
(s/p_i) ,_3uonbaad
o0[
tO[
III
IIII
tO[
lilt
vO[
zO[
IIII
Illl
Illl
,=,_%
l
 OOE
I
t
i
I
I
 OOZ:
":.:k ....
_..
oo[
"'":"....:.:.:.,.._..,.
_'__
Ill
IIII
III
III
ptm 'q_o_dd
IIII
III
._m
00[
(s/p_a) Louonboa4
zO[
III
tO[
I
Illl
o0[
I
IIll
tOI
I
IIII
zO[
I
Illl
cO[
I
Illl
_0[
o0[
tO[
',.,,,"
"....
...
".:/,:
::

cO[
_.
t,O[
A.7
Linearquadratic
The contents
Control
of this subsection
Results
of the Appendix
are:
linear quadratic
controller
for longitudinal
pitch control
controller
for lateral/directional
results
Boeing 747
McDonnell
Douglas F4C
Learjet Model 24
MATLAB script to compute linear quadratic
control
Both the analyses and simulations use SIMULAB block diagrams. The block diagrams
automatically use the dynamics parameters and the feedback gain that are computed in MATLAB.
The open loop transfer function evaluation is performed by linearizing a SIMULAB block diagram
with the appropriate feedback path cut. For these case studies, the path is either the elevator, the
aileron, or the rudder.
rA_
%LINEAR
QUADRATIC
%Augment
%for
aircraft
zero
format
REGULATOR
dynamics
steadystate
short
Aaug=[Alo,
SOLUTION
with
TO
an
AIRCRAFT
integral
PITCH
CONTROL
state
error.
0*ones(4,1);[0
0 0
0]]
Baug=[Blo;0]
Caug=[Clo(l,
Daug=Dlo
:)
0]
(i, : )
evaug=eig
(Aaug)
%Compute
feedback
%the
steadystate
%Weight
only
%states
so
the
pitch
that
%weighting
if
gains
for the
augmented
solution
for the
linear,
in
the
the
rate,
gains
pitch
on
the
workspace
angle
speed
(a.k.a.)
aircraft
quadratic
and
pitch
states
stack,
dynamics
using
regulator.
integral
are
if
small.
they
Use
exist.
exist('Qaug')*exist('Raug')~=l,
Qaug=diag([0
i])
Raug=Baug'*Baug
end;
%Compute
feedback
gains
%selected
error
and
[Kr, S ] =lqr
Kr
(Aaug,
Baug,
evcl=eig
for
control
Qaug,
the
augmented
weightings
Raug)
dynamics
using
and
the
MATLAB
the
function
(AaugBaug*Kr)
%Compute
and
plot
open
%Note
that
Col
and
Dol
%evaluates
GH
rather
loop
have
than
frequency
response.
minus
signs
so that
GH
(see
block
"bode"
diagram).
[Aol,Bol,Col,Dol]=linmod('RegulatorOL');
[mgol,phol]=bode(Aol,Bol,Col,Dol,
l,om);
clg;
subplot
if
(211)
exist
loglog
elseif
( 'mgollast'
(om,
) *exist
[mgol,mgollast
mgol0]
) ==I,
);
exist('mgollast')==l,
loglog(om,
else
[mgol,mgollast]);
loglog(om,
end;
mgol);
title('Open
Loop
Linear
xlabel('Frequency
if
( 'mgol0'
Quadratic
Regulator
Frequency
(rad/s)');ylabel('Magnitude');
exist('phollast')*exist('phol0')==l,
semilogx(om,
elseif
[phol,phollast
phol0]);
exist('phollast')==l,
semilogx(om,
else
semilogx(om,
end;
xlabel('Frequency
[phol,phollast]);
phol);
(rad/s)');ylabel('Phase
(deg)');
168
Response');
"lqr".
"I
C
Difference
Mux
r _.
state Erro
"" _;_
r_
Pitch
Integrator
OPEN
LOOP
ANALYSIS
OF A LINEARQUADRATIC
=j
x' = Ax+Bu
y = Cx+Du
Aircraft
vl
in
ECI
eVma
tad
Integral Gain
REGULATOR
Sum
FOR AIRCRAFT
LONGITUDINAL
DYNAMIC
Constant
DeMux _
w Gain
To Workspace3
/
0.1 rad Step 
State
sp
error
Erro
14_
_
_._
To Workspace4
_
Clock
 _
To Workspace2_
To Workspace
L._..I _
Error Scope
,_qGain
_mJ
_
Elevator
I Y = Cx+Du
Command
Aircraft
__...._
Pitch
Reg States
Pitch Gain
_(b,i
t/=
I_.__
''_"
+
I
Sum
Integrator
SIMULATION
OF
LINEARQUADRATIC
x' = Ax+Bo
REGULATOR
Integral
FOR
Gain
AIRCRAFT
states
To Workspacel
LONGITUDINAL
DYNAMIC
Linear
quadratic
28
1993:
May
Ruu=
747
"s"
(Qxx)
0
at
"d"
4.0817e+01
diag
controller
Boeing
3. 4183e+02
flight
conditions
p6.3480e+02
=
0
Mr =
i. 1353e03
I. 9992e03
8. 3901e01
9. 1237e01
i. 5652e01
6. 5992e05
5.2964e04
I. 4940e01
5. 4586e01
5. 4087e02
i. 6488e04
3.5187e04
i .2544e01
3.2152e01
3. 9690e02
evcll=
4.7744e01+
6. 1289e01i
4. 7744e01
6. 1289e01i
2. 7794e02
1.2530e01+
I. 9079e01i
1.2530e01
I. 9079e01i
evcl2=
4. 7196e01+
1.2373e+00i
4. 7196e01
1.2373e+00i
I. 5814e02
8. 1573e02+
8. 3750e02i
8. 1573e02
8. 3750e02i
evcl3=
5. 8381e01+
i. 0976e+00i
5. 8381e01
I. 0976e+00i
5.2319e03
9. 5320e02+
i. i139e01i
9. 5320e02
I. I139e01i
171
(s) ore!
OOI
06
!
08
!
OL
09
O_
017
O_
0/;
OI
T
0
t_
.
J.
1.
gI'O
(s) oug.,L
OOI
06
08
OL
09
0_;
017
I
0_;
0_;
OI
I
_0"0
suo!l!puoD
lq_!kI
_ aoj SaOllOalUOD 03
Lt, L _lm..oo_I
I'O
(s) ore!
(s) om!
OOI
OOI
05
05
._.
"'
5I
Z;
OI
t'
oxl
I
9
(s) om!
OOI
00[
05
0
0
>
OI
ot
O'Q
Z;'O
5I
(s) om!,L
OOI
Og
00[
o
_0"0
IO'O
4
4
EO'O
,_._,,_. _
" "_
" ".........
_.
['0
l ;"
 EO'O
,
g['O
(s) ore!&
(s) ore!
OOI
OOI
Og
J
/I
II
,'"
.."
170"0
_,
Og
,
Og_
O_
.......
..'
.," ..""
,'.."
<
';I
II
I I
II
II
o17
O9
10 6

I III
Quadrat!c
III
Regulator
I
Frequency
Ill
Response
III
I I
10 3
.o.
%
,%
'.
10 o
103
IIIII
IIII
103
104
IIII
102
III
IIII
IIII
10 o
101
II
10 2
(rad/s)
7,4,7 LQ Contro!!ersfor
Boein8
101
Frequency
300
3 ,Fli ght,Conditions,,,,
Ill
200
100
i
.'''''"
.,llr
100
200 i
104
III
103
! I
II
102
IIII
101
Frequency
IIII
10 o
(rad/s)
IIII
10 a
III
10 2
Linear
quadratic
28
1993:
May
Ruu=
controller
McDonnell
Douglas
"s"
"d"
8.2823e+01
2.7471e+03
diag
(Qxx)
F4C
at
flight
conditions
,,p,,
3.2182e+03
Mr =
3.1177e04
7.4538e04
3.9478e01
4.5979e01
i.0988e01
1.2293e04
2.4100e04
1.9405e02
2.2510e01
1.9079e02
1.1595e03
2.7233e05
6.5360e03
4.8405e02
1.7628e02
evcll
3.2772e01+
4.8526e+00i
3.2772e01
4.8526e+00i
2.8641e02+
3.9603e02i
2.8641e02
3.9603e02i
1.2046e02
evcl2=
6.4453e01+
6.4453e01
2.7815e+00i
2.7815e+00i
3.5108e03
8.8100e02+
7.5306e02i
8.8100e02
7.5306e02i
evlc3=
4.7276e01+
6.5055e01i
4.7276e01
6.5055e01i
4.1305e02
2.3426e01+
2.0184e01i
2.3426e01
2.0184e01i
176
(s) otu!
00[
06
08
OL
09
1'
O_
017
,
OE
_
O_
_
O[
,
_0"00
__.A
J.
m'
_['0
(s) otu!,L
O0[
06
08
OL
i
0_;
09
017
I
Og
I
OZ;
O[
0
ffO'O
.....
........:.............................................
*,
."" _

"t
'
'
suo!l!puoD _
'
'
E .tog s.mllOalUOD 0i
D_,_IG_
'
t'o
'
!;['O
0
001
O,g
.........
_'"
O01
Og
09_
.
/ !
' .. i
O[
s:taIIO 1
'......
Z:
(s) ou_.
OOI
OOI
Og
g'O
9"0
O!;
<
_.
""w"
iI
_
_'l. I
II
II

i I
i,,,
VO
>
o*
II I
_1
I

.'**
;
EO
_"
.t
."
I
m
.
.
..,.,"
,.,,.o"
,..o,,.
Z;'O
,
"%.
60
200
..o..oOO.....
100
40
3
o
" _'_ _ ......
.....
>
20
..
.
100
:
,,
s
",
,'
,,,, _
._ S'_
.o, _"
11
II
II
II
IIII
Illl
I s_
.."
I'".
_._"
o_,,q
............
""
s "
., s
"'
_s
s S
I "

j
_. _. "

200
20
300
50
100
50
100
Time (s)
Time (s)
0.15
0.08
MD F4C LQ Controllers
_"
0.06
r_
0.04
0.02
f
0
0
,..
0.02
0
50
Time (s)
)0
100
Time (s)
(s/puJ)
Ill
_ouonboJ,_q
0
00[
OOE
II
0017
(s/pg:O ,(ouonboa_l
_OI
tO[
1'l.l..l
IIII
oOI
I
IIII
tO[
I
IIII
vOI
I
IIII
cO[
I
III
.... _K ........
o0[
_o
Trll
III
IIII
osuodso_l _uonbo_I
IIII
IIII
III
dooq uod 0
Linear
quadratic
28
1993:
May
Ruu=
controller
Learjet
Model
24
"s"
"d"
7.0040e+01
1.4479e+03
diag
(Qxx)
0
at
flight
conditions
,,p,,
2. 8194e+03
Kr =
8.9272e04
1.5410e03
1.4820e01
4.4474e01
i.1949e01
1.5093e04
2.1149e04
1.9179e02
1.6567e01
2.6280e02
1.4555e04
1.4727e04
1.6057e02
1.2080e01
1.8833e02
evcll
9.3324e01+
1.3187e+00i
9.3324e01
1.3187e+00i
3.7861e02
1.5995e01+
2.6089e01i
1.5995e01
2.6089e01i
evcl2 =
i.0154e+00+
2.6362e+00i
l.0154e+001.4053e02
2.6362e+00i
i. I070e01+
1.3727e01i
I.I070e01
1.3727e01i
evcl3=
I.1882e+00+
2.6982e+00i
l.1882e+00
2.6982e+00i
1.7549e02
i.0674e01+
1.4303e01i
I.0674e01
1.4303e01i
181
(s) om!,L
00[
06
08
OL
09
O_
017
T
O_
0_;
OI
1'
e'"
t_
gO'O
_I'O
L__
(s) om!,L
OOI
06
I
08
!
OL
09
I
OK
017
OE
O[
I
_.,t.
o
=,
".._
.._
._
.._
u
i
suo!l.tpuoD
lq_!H
I
t_Iaoj SaOllOalUO
D 0II
I
17EIopoIAI
lo !_
'I
_0"0 _"
I'O
(s) ore!A,
0
OOI
O_
OOI
_
_
<
_.
t,_'J_'_
o_
9
(s) ore!
(s) ore!
00[
OOI
O_
05
<
II
II
II
II
5
.II
J

................
__/_
>
I"
.r i
I
1 ^I
_
_"
_'0
o
O'Q
_'0
0_;
00[
OOI
0
0
Z;O'O
] gO'O
['0
'
17EIopOIAIlo!_ol
SaOllOnUOD0I
N.._.
1,o"o
_"
90"0
80"0
_;['0
(s) oua!,L
OOI
00[
Og
OOZl
,"r]
.o''
...'"
.... "
....
""
s
.."'"
S j
S
.ff
s
f
,..''"'
....,'""
"',,
l\".i
,.
"i
::i
o[
_.
 0?;
<
0E
I"1
II
II
W
00[,
"..%
lto
"..._
 0"_
0_;
<
o
(s/pua) ,_3uonboa_I
_0[
Ill
IIII
[OI
o0[
tOI
i
ill
i I
lilt
zOI
I
till
00[
_...a_TX.
t
_
r_
00[
00_;
III
h_o'I p[m x_IAI1_ os!ruD ptm 'qo_o_dd V _aA_Od :t'i_ IoPIAIla.Lma'I_ Ioj s_aIIO_lUOD
I
III
I I
lit
t i
IIII
(s/p_)
IIII
Ill
,_ouonboa_I
oOI
Ill
IIIll
Illl
lilt
Ilil
_ou!q
II;I
doo"I uodo
_0[
%LINEAR
QUADRATIC
%Copy
aircraft
format
short
REGULATOR
SOLUTION
TO
AIRCRAFT
TURN
CONTROL
dynamics
e
Aaug=Ala;
Baug=Bla;
Caug=Cla
(2 : 3, : ) ;
Daug=Dla
(2:3,
:) ;
evaug=eig
(Aaug)
%Compute
feedback
%the
%weight
only
%weightings
if
gains
steadystate
exist
the
in
( ' Qaug'
Raug=diag([l
end;
[vcl,
evcl]
evcl=diag
[Wncl,
yaw
rate
(a.k.a.
( 'Raug'
dynamics
linear,
using
quadratic
states.
stack),
regulator.
Use
if
they
) ~=I,
0])
gains
for
and control
(Aaug,
=eig
Baug,
Qaug,
the
augmented
weightings,
Raug)
(AaugBaug*Kr)
dynamics
using
the
and
the
function
(evcl)
Zcl] =damp
(evcl)
[Wncl, Zcl]
abs (vcl)
%Compute
and
plot
open
loop
frequency
response.
%Note
that
Col
and
Dol
have
minus
signs
so that
"bode"
%evaluates
GH
rather
than
GH
(see block
diagram).
%The
%and
loop
once
is
at
broken
twice:
once
the
rudder
command.
at
the
aileron
[Aol,Bol,Col,Dol]=linmod('RollyawOLa');
[mgola,phola]=bode(Aol,Bol,Col,Dol,
l,om);
clg;
subplot(221);
if exist('mgolalast')*exist('mgola0')
loglog(om,
elseif
[mgola,mgolalast
==I,
mgola0]);
exist('mgolalast')==l,
loglog(om,
else
[mgola,mgolalast]);
loglog(om,
end;
mgola);
title('Open
Loop
xlabel('Frequency
LQR
FR:
Aileron');
(rad/s)');ylabel('Magnitude');
subplot(223);
if exist('pholalast')*exist('phola0')
semilogx(om,
elseif
exist.
i]) ;
feedback
error
[Kr, S] =lqr
Kr
aircraft
the
and
workspace
) *exist
0
the
for
sideslip
the
Qaug=diag([l
%Compute
%selected
for
solution
[phola,pholalast
==I,
phola0]);
exist('pholalast')==l,
semilogx(om,
else
[phola,pholalast]);
186
command
_lqr".
semilogx
end;
(om, phola)
xlabel('Frequency
[Aol, Bol,
[mgolr,
pholr
subplot
if
(om,
') ;ylabel('Phase
( 'RollyawOLr'
(Aol, Bol,
(deg)
') ;
);
('mgolrlast')
loglog
elseif
Dol ] =linmod
] =bode
(222)
exist
(rad/s)
Col,
*exist
[mgolr,
( 'mgolr0'
mgolrlast
mgolr0
) ==i,
]) ;
exist('mgolrlast')==l,
loglog
else
(om,
loglog
[mgolr,mgolrlast]
(om, mgolr)
);
end;
title
( 'Open
Loop
LQR
xlabel('Frequency
subplot
if
(224)
exist
Rudder'
);
') ;ylabel('Magnitude')
( 'pholrlast'
semilogx(om,
elseif
FR:
(rad/s)
) *exist
( 'pholr0'
[pholr,pholrlast
) ==i,
pholr0])
exist('pholrlast')=l,
semilogx
else
semilogx
(om,
[pholr,
(om, pholr)
pholrlast]
);
end;
xlabel('Frequency
(rad/s)
') ;ylabel('Phase
187
(deg)
') ;
Learjet
Model
24
deg/s
Open
loop
2.7189e02+
eigenvalues
2.2741e+00i
2.7189e02
2.2741e+00i
turn
in
flight
condition
2.2733e+00
8.5389e04
5.0717e20
_diag(Qaug)'=
1.0000e01
Raug
=
1.0001e+03
1.0256e+02
1.0256e+02
2.6065e+03
Feedback
Kr =
1.0000e+05
gains
6.4222e03
8.6736e02
1.8039e03
4.1943e02
Closed
loop
1.8701e+01
2.7898e01
1.0996e+00
7.1804e02
6.1807e+00
7.3053e03
1.8803e03
eigenvalues
1.3476e+00+
1.5102e+00i
1.3476e+00
1.5102e+00i
2.6708e+00
I.1946eii
Closed
loop
1.8701e+01
2.0240e+00
natural
frequencies
1.0000e+00
damping
ratios
6.6579e01
2.0240e+00
6.6579e01
2.6708e+00
1.0000e+00
1.1946eii
1.0000e+00
Closed
loop
9.9837e01
and
eigenvectors
9.9044e01
9.9044e01
9.7748e01
4.1873eIi
4.7360e02
1.2365e01
1.2365e01
1.9765e01
3.1258e13
3.1748e02
4.8493e04
4.8493e04
6.5683e05
1.1942eii
2.5325e03
6.1092e02
6.1092e02
7.4003e02
2.6177e02
1.6977e03
2.3958e04
2.3958e04
2.4593e05
9.9966e01
188
Jb.
v
DeMux
*i
+_
Outport
Aileron Gains
"_ +
m
I
Aileron
DeMux
Error
Aileron J=
x' = Ax+Bul
Mux m
v
Constan
Command_.M.._
Differen,
_e
Command
Mux
Mux
v
==,,=
v
4
4
4
y = Cx+Du
Aircraft
Rudder Gains
Rudder
DeMux
OPEN LOOP ANALYSIS
OF A LINEAR,
QUADRATIC
Rudder
Command
REGULATOR
FOR AIRCRAFT
LATERAL
DYNAMIC
_)eMuxl
+1
+1
+1 m
+;
Aileron Gains
m
m
Aileron
DeMux
Error
Aileron
Command
Mux
Constan
Differen_
_e
y
Cx+Du
Aircraft
Mux
x' = Ax+Bu 1
v
Inport
w.
m
DeMux
Outport
Rudder Gains
v
4
Rudder
DeMux
OPEN
LOOP
ANALYSIS
OF
A LINEAR,
QUADRATIC
Rudder
Command
REGULATOR
FOR
AIRCRAFT
LATERAL
DYNAMIC
_rro_I1"_
I .rror
_ i__l__xl_
To Workspace2
Error
Mux
_+
DeMux
.
.
_
Error
DeMux
[__
_x
m
Error
Constant
I[_
Differen
aux
Zl,ro
Aileron
Command
',e
' = Ax+Bu
y = Cx+Du
Aircraft
Command
Mux
State Scope
DeMux
To Workspace3
Workspacel
Aileron
DeMux
=._
v
+
sp
delta
states
14
To Workspace
Rudder Gains
time
Clock
To Workspace4
v
Rudder
DeMux
SIMULATION
OF
LINEARQUADRATIC
REGULATOR
Rudder
Command
FOR
AIRCRAFT
LATERAL
DYNAMICS
(s) otu!
00[
OOI
Og
>
O_
t_
0
m
.J
OQ
17
0
(s) _mt.
OOI
00[
Og
T
I,..a,
=L
m
O_
t_
m
(s)OmLL
OOI
O_
OOI
0
m
o_
._
O_
I
O_
OgT
OOI
00_
O_
Og_
(s) ore!
(s) om!,L
OOI
Og
!
0_'
t_
O'Q
OOI
0
O_
I
0
0[iO
I
io_
I
,  OZ
t_
 0_;
I
017
X)
0
t_
Learjet
0.2
3 deg/s turn
t_
0.1
_o
1
<
._,,q
0.1
2
o
ra_
0.2
50
50
100
100
Time (s)
Time (s)
250
0_
200
o
o
o
O
o
>
150
100
5O
40
50
Time (s)
100
50
Time (s)
100
(s/p_a) ._uonbo.k4
(s/p_a) ._ouonbo.IH
I
_...,.'=_
[0[
_0[
tO[
_0[
II
oo[
00[
 00_
O'Q
J
II
II
'
OOg
tOI
II
(s/pe.O ._:3uonbo.k4
(s/p_a) 2(ouonboad
_0[
_0[
t,OI
tOI
_0[
I
II
_OI
_:01
tO[
o0I
K
o0[
_0[
_
m
m
II
doo"I
uodo
= _OI
:::I i
II
:0[
_.