Exercises 59 motion. The form of the equation lends itself to representing the longitudinal and lateral dynamics of the aircraft directly as state equations, with the other variables being obtained from associated output equations. Once the state and output equations are known it is possible to determine any transfer function relating a particular output variable to a particular control input. ‘Not every stability derivative is significant in terms of its influence on the dynamics of the aircraft and only the most important need to be studied for their likely effects on the subsequent performance of an AFCS. Thrust changes do affect the motion of an aircraft, of course, but the thrust line does not always act, through the c.g. of the aircraft, the origin of the stability axis system upon which the equations of motion are based. Consequently, special techniques are needed to introduced threse thrust effects into the equations of motion. 2.13 EXERCISES 2.1 Write down the state equation representing the small perturbation longitudinal ‘motion of the aircraft CHARLIE-3, 22 Derive the transfer function relating the vertical velocity, w, in ms“, to the elevator deflection, 8x, in radians, for the aircraft CHARLIE-4, 23° Using the stability derivatives of aireraft pRAVO-4 calculate the state and output equations, if the output variable is defined as the normal acceleration of the aircraft at its c.g 24 The stability derivatives for VTOL aircraft in hovering fight are given below. Any stability derivative not listed should be taken as zero, X,=-02 g=98lms? MM, = 001 Zu =~ 01 M, Zag = 2.6 Ms, = 0.75 04 (@) Calculate the transfer function relating normal acceleration, a,., to elevator deflection, 5 (b). Sketch the response of a. t0 a step deflection of the elevator of 0.03846 radian, (©) Ifthe aireraft is hovering at @ height of 100 m, calculate the sinking speed at and the time of, ground contact after the application of a step deflection of the elevator. State any assumptions made. (a) In your opinion is the sinking speed obtained in part (c) excessive? Give a reason for your answer. 2.5 The lateral motion of the aircraft FoxrKoT-2 is to be considered, Its rudder is not uused at high Mach numbers. Derive the corresponding state and output equations, if the output variables of interest are heading angle, A, and change in roll angle, 6. 2.6 For exercise 2.5 derive the corresponding transfer function relating, a,., 10 aileron deflection, 860 Equations of Motion of an Aircraft 2.7 An experimental VTOL aircraft in hovering motion has the following stability derivatives: 0.4 jp = 0.001 00 Ny = 0.002 Yq = 1.02 Np = - 0.66 Ty=- 002 Ni, — 0.05 p= 702 Nig= 053 083 Uy=03ms* 7 Lig = ~ 0.12 7, ®, and 6 have their usual meanings of rol rate, yaw rate, sdeslip angle and roll attitude, respectively. 8, denotes the aileron deflection and 8, denotes the rudder defection, (@) Calculate the transfer function relating the yaw rate to the rudder deflection. (©) Ifthe rudder deflection is an impulse function of 0.0225, caleulate by how ‘much the heading of the aircraft will have changed some 10 after the control defection is applied. 2.8 A Sightoraiccraft, fying at 200m s“* and at a height of 10m has the following short period equations of motion batg 4 =~ 5a 0.6q ~ 12.085 (2) Derive the transfer function relating the pitch ate to the elevator deflection. () Ie the aircrafts static stability is reduced to zero determine the piteh rate response of the modified aircraft to a step deflection of the elevator of = 10" (©) Calculate the resulting steady state normal acceleration which the aircraft ‘would sense at its eg. as a result of the manoeuvee of part (b) (@) Evaluate the response ratio (the acceleration sensitivity) of the aircraft. If the angle of attack is changed by 5.73, caleulate by how much the load factor would change. 2.9 ‘The linearized equations of perturbed longitudinal motion are given (in ST units) by: 9 = - 0659 -0.24-a- 1285 = 225.084 + 0.0350 ~ 9.810 — 0.180 & = 4 = 02u = 060 ~ 0.035 5¢ beg (a) Determine the equilibrium flight speed of the aircraft. (b) Calculate the transfer function relating changes in forward speed to changes in thrust.Notes 2.10 2 212 er FFor the aircraft CHARLIF-I (a) Derive the state and output equations so that a change in fight path angle, +, a8 a result of a deflection, 6, of the elevator can be evaluated. (b) Find a transfer function relating change in > to a change in piteh attitude using the equations found in part (a). (©) Comment on the validity of the transfer function found in part (b). (@) Find the value of elevator deflection needed to produce steady state value (Gf any) of — 1.0° of pitch attitude. Find the corresponding value (if any) of the flight path angle. ‘A large jet cargo aircraft, DELTA, is powered by four engines, each having a thrust of I82KN. The mass of the aircraft is 264000 kg. The flight condition is FIC#2. (@) Determine an appropriate state equation for the aireralt’s motion. (b) Thence find the transfer function relating changes in forward speed, u, to a change in thrust, (©) The pilot is located 25.0m forward of the aircraft's c.g. and 2.5m above it. Caleulate the steady normal acceleration experienced by the pilot if the angle of attack of the aircraft is changed suddenly by 2.85°. A high performance fighter is on approach at 165 knots. The linearized equations fof perturbed lateral motion are given by: B= — 0.168 + 0174p ~ r+ 0.1146 ~ 0.001684 + 0.0338 ~ 0.103 Bax p= = 12.7B~213p +2197 + 4.388, + 1.18q + 4.098 1.44 B + 0.065 p — 0.567 ~ 0.2184 ~ 1.28R + 0.2280 p+ 0.767 Where Bay denotes differential defection of the horizontal tai. (@) sit possible to find a combination of control surface deflections which will result in there being no lateral acceleration in the steady state, even though some of the state variables have finite values? (b) If your answer to part (a) was in the affirmative, determine the corresponding values of the steady surface deflections required, (©) Determine the transfer functions relating the lateral acceleration at the c.g, to each control surface independently, ie, fin: Bul) SyglB) Mya) BAO)" Bal) Bal) Can you decide from these transfer functions which control surface is the ‘most important for manocuvring the aircraft on approach? NOTES For example, see chapter 4 of MeRuer et al. (1973). ‘This depends upon the assumption of constant aircraft mass62 Equations of Motion of an Aireraft 3. has been used to denote the perturbation in the pitching moment, M, to avoid confusion with the aircraft's mass, m. ‘This form applies to linear, time-invariant systems only; when the system is non linear, the appropriate form is & = f(x, u, 1). 5 For linear, time invariant systems only; when the output relationship is non-linear the appropriate form is y = g(x, u, 2) 6. Ifthe output equation is non-linear, the presence of measurement noise modifies y.to become: y = g(x, u, & 1) 4 This assumes that the matrix (s1 ~ A) is non-singular, which can be proved by recalling that £-*([s! — A) = e% 8. Although Up is used in these equations, the correct value to be used is the true airspeed. For small perturbations, the errors are insignificant if Uy is used instead of Vi 9. Ifthe elevator is located forward of the c.g iis renamed canard. This description is increasingly common, although canard referred originally to an aircraft configuration which flew “tail firs’, the forward tail surface being called a forcplanc. It is this foreplane which is now considered to be a canard. 2.18 REFERENCES BABISTER, A.W. 1961. Aircraft Suability and Control. Oxford: Pergamon Press FOGARTY, LE. and RM. HOWE. 1969. Computer mechanization of six-degree-of freedom flight equations, NASA CR-1344, May. GAINES, TG. and 8. HOFFMAN. 1972, Summary of transformation equations and equations of motion. NASA Sp-3070, MERUER, D-., LL. ASHKENAS and D.C. GRAHAM, 1973. Aircraft Dynamics and Automatic Control. Princeton University Pres. MeRUER, D.T,, Cl. BATES atd LL, ASHKENAS, 1953, Dynamics of the airframe. Bur. Acro. Rpt. AE-61-4 (Vol. II) USA. THELANDER, 1.4, 1965. Aircraft motion analysis. FDL-TDR-67-70, WPAEB, Ohio, USA. March,3 Aircraft Stability and Dynamics 3.1 INTRODUCTION ‘The equations of motion have been derived in some detail in Chapter 2. Only under a large number of assumptions about how an aircraft is being flown is it possible to arrive at a set of linear differential equations which can adequately represent the motion that results from the deflection of a control surface or from the aircraft's encountering atmospheric turbulence during its fight. This resulting motion is composed of small perturbations about the equilibrium (trim) values. To achieve such equilibrium values requires the use of certain steady deflections, of the appropriate control surfaces. Consequently, the entire range of the angle of deftection of any particular control surface will not necessarily be available for the purposes of automatic control, since much of that range is required to trim the aircraft. What is meant, then, by small perturbation is that any angle be sufficiently small to guarantee that the assumptions concerning any trigonometrical functions involved remain valid. For practical purposes, a change of angle of 15° or more should be regarded as large, and the designer should then consider the likely effects of continuing to use the small perturbation theory whenever such angular values can occur. Similarly, translational velocity should always be small in relation to the steady speeds; when the steady speed, such as Vo or Wo, is zero, then changes of velocity of 5m s~' should be regarded as being the limit of validity. However, it must be strongly emphasized that these are not firm rules bbut depend upon the type of aircraft being considered, its fight condition, and the ‘manoeuvres in which itis involved. For the remainder of this chapter it is considered that all the assumptions of Chapter 2 hold, that any aircraft being considered is fixed wing and flying straight and level in a trimmed condition, and that its motion is properly characterized by eqs (2-109) and (2.110). For example, for longitudinal motion, eq. (2.112) is taken as the definition of the state vector x, i. i (2.112) q ® and the control vector w is defined as:64 Aircratt Stability and Dynamics uA [8g] (2.113) ‘he sate coefeent matrix Ais then given by Kh 0-8 fee et co) My My My 0 0010 tnd the driving matic B by: Xo Zoe B= a 2) ° For lateral motion, the appropriate equations are (2.143) and (2.154), respectively where the coefficient matrix is: ¥, 0 —1g/U rAiseL: 20) A= 63) Np Np Nr 0 0100 and the driving matrix is: Yt, Ye, Li, bs, B=|% “x G4) Ni, Mba oo 3.2 LONGITUDINAL STABILITY 32. ‘Short Period and Phugoid Modes ‘The dynamic stability of perturbed longitudinal motion is most effectively established from a knowledge of the eigenvalues of the coelficient matrix A. They can be found by solving the linear equation: IM AL=0 G3) Tis a 4X 4 identity matrix. By expanding the determinant, the longitudinalLongitudinal Stability 65 stability quartic, a fourth degree polynomial in A, can be expressed as: A + aid? + agd? + ash + ay = 0 (3.6) ‘An aircraft may be said to be dynamically stable if all its eigenvalues, 2,, being real, have negative values, or, if they be complex, have negative real parts. Zero, or positive, values of the real part of any complex eigenvalue means that the aircraft will be dynamically unstable.’ Rather than solving the polynomial by numerical methods it is more effective to use a numerical routine to compute the four eigenvalues of A It has been observed that for the majority of aircraft types, the quartic of eq, (3.6) invariably factorizes into two quadratic factors in the following manner: 2 + pnp + OB) OA? + WapOsph + op) G7) ‘The first factor corresponds 10 a mode of motion which is characterized by an oscillation of long period. The damping of this mode is usually very low, and is sometimes negative, so that the mode is unstable and the oscillation grows with time. The low frequency associated with the long period motion is defined as the natural frequency, «py; the damping ratio has been denoted as {y,. The mode is referred to as the phugoid mode, a name improperly given to it by the English aerodynamicist, Lanchester, who coined it from the Greek word which he believed meant “fight-like’. Unfortunately, dvr implies flight as demonstrated by a fugitive, not a bird (Sutton, 1949). The second factor corresponds to a rapid, relatively welldamped motion’ associated with the short period mode whose frequency is «, and damping ration is lp 'As an example, consider the passenger transport aircraft, referred to as aircraft DELTA in Appendix B. If flight condition 4 is considered, the aircraft is flying straight and level in its cruise phase, at Mach 0.8 and at a height of 13000 m. From the values of the stability derivatives quoted in the appendix, A is found to be: 0.033 0.0001 «0 — 9.81 0.168 © -0.387 260.0 0 Gs) 55 x 10-* — 0.0064 — 0.551 0 0 o 1 0 The eigenvalues corresponding to this matrix are found to be: Ay, Ao = + 0.0033 + 70.0672 GB." As, Aa = — 0.373 + j0.889 (3.10? ‘The eigenvalues of eq. (3.9) are seen to be those associated with the phugoid mode since the damping ratio, although positive, is very small (0.0489) and the frequency is very low (0.067 rad s~'), hence the period is long. Such an inference can be drawn because the solution of any quadratic equation of the form:66 Aircraft Stability and Dynamics + Mor +o? =0 . G11) is given by: * = — lo + joV(l ~ 2) 6.12) w= -tw-jova- 2) ee whenever £< 1.0. Complex roots occur only when the damping ratio has positive value less than unity. From eq. (3.10) the eigenvalues can be deduced to be those associated with the short period mode, for which the frequency is 0.964 rad s~! and the damping ratio is 0.387 3.2.2 Tuck Mode Supersonic aircraft, or aircraft which fly at speeds close to Mach 1.0, occasionally have a value of the stability derivative, M,, such that M, takes a large value which is sufficiently negative to result in the term af in the phugoid quadratic becoming negative too (see Section 3.6). When this happens, the roots of the quadratic equation are both real, with one being negative and the other positive. Hence the phugoid mode is no longer oscillatory but has become composed of two real modes; one being convergent, which corresponds to the negative real root, and the other being divergent, which corresponds to the postive real root. The unstable mode is referred to a the ‘tuck mode’ because the corresponding motion results in the nose of the aircraft dropping (tucking under) as airspeed increases. Aireraft DELTA in Appendix B will exhibit a divergent tuck mode in flight condition 3. 3.2.3. A Third Oscillatory Mode The ¢.g. of a modern combat aircraft is often designed to lie aft of the neutral point (n.p.) (see Section 3.3). When this is the case the stability derivative, M., can take a Value which will result in every root of the longitudinal stability quartic being real. As the c.g. is then moved further aft of the n.p., the value of M,, changes s0 that one of the real roots of the short period mode, and one of the real roots of the phugoid mode, migrate in the complex plane (0 a point where they form a new complex pair, corresponding to the third oscillatory mode. When this has occurred, that mode is the main influence upon the dynamic response of any AFCS which is used. The phugoid mode has now become a very slow aperiodic mode, and there also exists another extremely rapid real mode. Too positive a value of M, can result in dynamic instability, for one of these real eigenvalues can become positive (see Section 3.5.2).Longitudinal Stability 7 3.2.4 splane Diagram ‘The location of eigenvalues in the complex frequency domain is often represented by means of an s-plane diagram (which is simply a special Argand diagram). In Figure 3.1 are shown the locations (denoted by x) of eigenvalues for a typical conventional aircraft. For an aircraft which exhibits a tuck mode the locations are denoted by © and for an aircraft with a third oscillatory mode they are denoted by 4. X Cometional aircraft x © Altraft wth tack mode Aiea with Sed oncilating pir Figure 3.1. s-plane diagram. A popular method of investigating how sensitive is an aircraft’s stability to values of some particular stability derivative (and, consequently, some aero- dynamic, inertial, or geometric parameter) is to illustrate how the eigenvalues travel around the s-plane as the values of the stability derivative are changed. This is a form of root locus diagram. Another effective way of determining to which stability derivative the aircraft's dynamic response is most sensitive is to carry out a sensitivity analysis on coefficient matrix, A (Barnett and Storey, 1966). It is important to remember that when the aircraft dynamics can be assumed to be linear those stability derivatives associated with the control surfaces play no part in governing the stability properties of the aircraft. Their importance for achieving effective automatic fight control, including stability augmentation, is paramount nevertheless.