See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/303688168

Stability analysis for a twin boom H- tail Medium Scale UAV through
simulated dynamic model

Conference Paper · April 2016

DOI: 10.1109/MERCon.2016.7480177

CITATION READS

1 2,437

3 authors, including:

R. Munasinghe
University of Moratuwa
54 PUBLICATIONS   398 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Adaptive Traffic Control View project

System design for unmanned aerial vehicles in long range applications View project

All content following this page was uploaded by R. Munasinghe on 17 May 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Stability Analysis for a Twin Boom H- tail Medium
Scale UAV through Simulated Dynamic Model
P. L. Kurukularachchi, S.R. Munasinghe, H.R.P.S De Silva
Dept. of Electronic and Telecommunication
University of Moratuwa
Sri Lanka
ka_lasantha@sltnet.lk , rohan@uom.lk, rajeeve@zebra.com

Abstract— this paper presents on the stability analysis for

RAVAN twin boom H-Tail Medium Scale UAV which has been
developed by University of Moratuwa. It is required to
understand the UAV behavior for the small perturbations in high
altitudes while it is flying to be invisible. Indeed, without doing a
proper stability analysis in different flying conditions, there is a
high risk to fail the UAV for perturbations. Not only that but also
it will help to optimize aerodynamic behavior for prolonging the
flight endurance and effective deployment. The proper stability
analysis will facilitate to increase the control flexibility.XFLR5
computational fluid dynamic software is used to do this stability
analysis.

Keywords—UAV, dynamic model, Aerodynamic stability,

Longitudinal natural mode, Lateral natural mode
Fig. 1 Ravan – Twin boom H-tail medium scale UAV

I. INTRODUCTION Optimum throttle level, less power consumption, maximum

possible angle of attack, platform geometry and minimum time to
In general, these kinds of UAVs are being used for military reach to the targets are the key performances of the medium scale
applications but using them for public safety, rescue UAV. Therefore the stability information of RAVAN is very
operations in disaster areas, data acquisition and map building important for its optimization for the above mentions features.
in unreached areas, traffic surveillance and so on are The methodology of this analysis is based on the stability in
becoming more demanding today. terms of aerodynamic principles in this UAV dynamic model.
The flight dynamic model for RAVAN was simulated on
Usually, the UAV are been designed with some level of XFLR5 open source flight dynamic software [3] and tested the
inherent instability behaviors to achieve more control model responses for the given flight data in various flying
flexibility for effective deployments. Thus it is vitally conditions.
important to understand the fully aerodynamic stability for the
given flight envelope. The most difficult task of the UAV
designing is to identify and quantify the aerodynamic behavior II. METHODOLOGY
of it. The aerodynamic model of RAVAN is crucial to
elucidate the stability and it is highly non linear and showing
de-coupling effect. But the aerodynamic theories can achieve
most desirable and accurate mathematical narration for that
particular UAV. However, accepted degree of accuracy of
dynamic model has achieved to realize the stability response
of this UAV[6].

The purpose of this stability analysis is to understand the

static and dynamic stabilities within time response of RAVAN
for the particular wind perturbations. The stability response of
the UAV helps to adjust the performance of the UAV in
autonomous navigation missons and it can ensure the stability
for the small perturbation while in different flying conditions Fig. 2 Structure of the methodology
and also it helps to understand the control measures.

978-1-5090-0645-8/16/$31.00 ©2016 IEEE

415
 The UAV flight responses were analyzed in both static and
dynamic stability modes and also measured the flight reaction
for the given perturbation command and improved the
performance of the UAV in critical unstable areas with
maintaining the required control measures. (Fig.2).
The static stability explains the UAV ability to return to its
equilibrium potion for a small perturbation from the trim. Not
only that but also it will give an idea about the natural point of
the UAV is going to confuse with center of the gravity and the
center of the pressure in any flying condition.
The dynamic stability describes the method of recovering in
any perturbation while it is flying and the UAV behavior after
it has been disturbed in longitudinal and lateral directions
steady non-oscillating flight. The dynamic stability test is
more important to understand the UAV behavior in transient
motion for a sudden perturbation in certain flying conditions.
Both stability analysis give the basic idea of maneuverability
of the UAV and what level of autopilot control actions are
required in certain longitudinal and lateral modes [7].And also
it will minimize the UAV failure rick due to sudden
perturbation.
III. AERODYNAMIC MODEL VS ITS STABILITY
Aerodynamic model of UAV gives vital information
through the set of mathematical equations used to calculate the
aerodynamic forces and moments which acting on the
platform geometry. The aerodynamic of the UAV makes a
fundamental involvement for the stability and also it is directly
linked with aerodynamic equations which are described in
stability [2].
In this paper, the aerodynamic model of RAVAN is
derived with fundamental flight dynamic techniques based on
Lagrange –Euler approach [2] which includes the mechanics
of rotating and translating rigid body, driven by the propeller
which has mounted in latter part of the fuselage that produce
torques and forces [6].
Г = − (1)
L=T-V (2)
Where, qi : generalized coordinates and L: generalized force
given by non-conservative forces ;
T : total kinetic energy and V : total potential energy
The essential characteristic of the aerodynamic model is
defined with the appropriate explanation of the aerodynamic
derivatives as a function of model parameters. Therefore in the
UAV model, most significant features are the values of the
derivatives and these values should be compatible with scope
of the aerodynamic parameters to be derived [9].
416
Fig. 3 Pitching moment coefficient (Cm) Vs angle of
attack (Alpha) form -17˚ to +25˚ for RAVAN
The method concerned in the aerodynamic measurement of
derivatives provides a significant contribution to entirely
understand of UAV behavior and its stability [7].
IV. STABILITY ANALYSIS FOR RAVAN IN XFLR5
XFLR5 graphical interface is easy to analyze any
complex stability issue in RAVAN through the simulated
model and it has been tested for given flight data.
A. Static Stability
The combination of the two concepts of pitching moment
coefficient (Cm) and aerodynamic center (the point at which
Cm doesn’t vary from Alpha) make essential information about
the stability and it can interpret through the graph Cm Vs
Alpha (Fig.3) and also it will help to desire the maximum
possible angle of attack for this UAV. In stable UAV, the Cm
Vs Alpha plot’s gradient must be negative for the given
perturbation. The pitching moment curve shows almost
straight line and the magnitude of the pitching moment is
reduced in its stability margin and it becomes zero at the
aerodynamic center [7].
The RAVAN has been simulated for different flight conditions
and always these flight conditions show the negative gradient
with average magnitude (Fig 3 ). A higher degree of stability
will be needed for more control action to manoeuvre and also
too much stability tends to reduce the flight endurance.
Therefore this UAV is in the best performance margin and the
static stability is acceptable because the gradient of the above
mention graph is negative for the given angle of attack margin
[9]. The aerodynamic center of the airfoil is closed to 25% of
the chord behind leading edge in RAVAN as usually other
aircraft. Then it is clearly proven that the pitching moment Cm
Vs angle of attack alpha is well enough for the RAVAN.
Other important features in static stability are the static
margin and the position of the controls fixed natural stable
point. The natural point, Center of pressure and the center of
gravity are the three key points which must not be confused
together in stable UAV [3]. RAVAN has been tested for -17˚
to + 25˚ angle of attack range. But it never confused these
three points (Fig.4) at any time.
 Fig. 4 RAVAN simulation on XFLR5

The longitudinal characteristic polynomial of this UAV can be

B. Dynamic Stability
described by fourth order longitudinal response transfer
Dynamic stability in UAV is the overall tendency of it to function; [7]
return to its equilibrium position, after a series of damped out
oscillations. Dynamic stability analysis enables to describe the ( 2 )( 2 )=0 (4)
sequential response for the atmospheric turbulence to be found
for various flying conditions [1]. Where the p and p are phugoid damping ratio and phugoid
undamped natural frequency respectively;
This UAV has been tested in XFLR5 for the dynamic natural
s and s are short period pitching oscillation damping ratio
modes in longitudinal and lateral dynamics. The well and short period pitching oscillation undamped natural
designed UAV should be tested on longitudinal dynamic frequency.
modes and lateral dynamic modes [5]. Both modes are
equally important to get an idea as to how it will behave in And the diagonal eigenvalue is;
perturbation while it is flying in different atmospheric
behavior. 0 0 0
∗
C. Longitudinal Dynamics 0 0 0
ʌ= 0 0 0 (5)
There are two types of distinct oscillations in the ∗
0 0 0
longitudinal dynamic mode. The phugoid mode refers a long–
period oscillation and a short-period oscillation is referred to
as the short-period mode in the longitudinal dynamics [4]. Then the values of the diagonal eigenvalue matrix s, ∗ , p,
∗
are respectively;
The XFLR5 can derive the small perturbation equations of The response of the UAV to a 2˚ step elevator input as a
motion to obtain the response transfer function for RAVAN. sudden perturbation is shown in Eq.7. These diagonal values
The transfer function describes the dynamic relationship in are calculated by using the FXLR5 computational simulation
between the input and output variables [7] in this UAV and it with MATLAB interactively.
enable to find the eigenvector to be obtained (Eq.3).
−0.0461 0.3012 0 −9.81 6.734 Where, the magnitude of eigenvalues corresponding to the
=
−0.7670 −0.7322 24.211 0 −13.876 short period and phugoid modes are as follows (Eq.6). It
0.3579 −10.247 −8.512 0 −5.984 differs in each response variables [7].
0 0 1 0 0

(3) | −0.01701 − 0.5752
∗
Where; | −0.01701 0.5752
=
| −7.92100 − 15.740
(6)
u, w, q and θ are respectively axial velocity perturbation, ∗
| −7.92100 15.740
Normal velocity perturbation, Pitch rate perturbation and Pitch
angle perturbation. And is the elevator angle control And the corresponding eigenvector matrix is v calculated;
perturbation.

417

Fig. 5 Longitudinal Phugoid Mode Behavior
=
1 0 1 0 | 1 0 1 0
110.4 − 32.18 110.4 32.18 | 0.0069 0.0016 0.0069 − 0.0016
Fig. 8 Longitudinal Short Period Mode Behavior
−23.6 − 70.99 −23.6 70.99 | 0.0338 0.0003 0.0338 − 0.0003

4.202 0.613 4.202 − 0.6139 | −0.0023 0.0586 −0.0023 − 0.0586
E. Longitudinal Short Period Mode for RAVAN
Short period mode Phugoid mode (7) According these observations the RAVAN is very well
response for the small perturbations in phugoid modes.
The short-period mode describes with heavily damped
D. Longitudinal Phugoid Mode for RAVAN
oscillation with a short period (Fig .8) in a sudden
The Phugoid mode describes a lightly damped and low perturbation. Whenever, the UAV oscillates from its pitch
frequency oscillation for large amplitude difference of air equilibrium potion as a second order oscillation [7].
speed, pitch angle and altitudes. But, approximately there is no If the period is so short then the speed does not have sufficient
angle-of attack difference [4].An important characteristic of the time to vary, so the oscillation is in effect an angle-of-attack
Phugoid mode is phenomenon, the incidence angle remains difference.
significantly no change during an occurred perturbation. This Clearly, the short oscillating period mode also shows the
clarification is easily verified through the eigenvectors (Eq.7) tendency to converge within very short period. Axial velocity
in the given equations of motion (Eq.3).In the Phugid mode, a perturbation shows critically damping (Fig.9) and normal
sudden perturbation applies to the longitudinal direction while velocity perturbation shows under damping but less than 0.1
the UAV flying in the steady level at a constant speed for the m/s variation (Fig.10). It is in significantly small and almost
low frequencies and test the ability to come to its original straight.
position (Fig.5). And also, for the first 10 seconds or so, q and θ are favorable
Clearly, longitudinal Phugoid mode shows under damping indicating that the aerodynamic model of RAVAN is
oscillations (Fig.6 & Fig.7) but the magnitudes of w and u acceptable for the short period mode.
oscillations are very small and q and θ are also in the similar
order in this test.

Fig. 9 Axial velocity perturbation Vs Time in Short Period

Mode
Fig. 6 axial velocity perturbation Vs time in Phugoid Mode

Fig. 10 Normal velocity perturbation Vs time in Short Period

Mode
Fig. 7 Normal velocity perturbation Vs time in Phugoid Mode

418
F. Lateral Dynamics
The method of the lateral – directional dynamics
explanation and derivation of the UAV is very similar to the
method which used to derive the longitudinal dynamics is
always explain with rolling motions and yawing motions.
Motions of rolling axes generally couples with yawing axes
therefore these motions are usually explained with the Lateral-
Directional modes.

The equations of motion and the aerodynamic data for

RAVAN were obtained from XFLR5. The equation of motion Fig. 11 Initial perturbation of stability test for Dutch roll mode
in the wind axes is explained in terms of concise derivatives in
state space format ( Eq.8). The above Dutch roll test for RAVAN is generated with a
unit step (1˚) deviations to aileron and rudder. In Dutch roll
−0.3188 −0.05627 −25.3986 9.81 mode, ν, p, r and Vs time demonstrate the average
−1.4150 −36.120 8.67167 0 response and oscillations are not so smooth. But it is
=
1.5457 −5.8372 −0.0995 0 settling less than 10 sec in all perturbations (Fig.12 & 13).
0 1 0 0
0 11.5832
0.561 0.4961
(8)
−0.374 −0.864
0 0
Where, ν, p, r and are respectively lateral velocity
perturbation, roll rate perturbation, yaw rate perturbation
and roll angle perturbation and , are respectively
aileron angle perturbation and rubber angle perturbation.
The lateral directional characteristic polynomial also can
be described by two real roots and a pair of complex roots;
Fig. 12 Lateral velocity perturbation Vs time in Dutch roll
1 1 ( 2 ) = 0 (9) mode

Where , Ts , Tr are spiral mode time constant and Roll mode

time constant and , Dutch roll damping ratio and
Dutch roll undamped natural frequency. [7]
Basically, three types of motion are explained in the lateral-
directional dynamic: Roll damping mode, Spiral mode, and
Dutch roll mode. The mode constant in each variables is given
most precisely by eigenvector (Eq.10) which was derived
from the XFLR5 simulation platform.
=
1 0 1 0 | 1 | 1 :
−0.04657 0.0566 −0.04657 − 0.0566 | 7.766 | 0.2306 :
0.01858 0.267 0.01858 − 0.267 | 1.258 | 1.126 : Fig. 13 Roll rate perturbation Vs time in Dutch roll mode
−0.007286 − 0.0077 −0.0072 0.0077 | −0.2225 | 2.956 : ∅

Dutch roll mode Roll mode Spiral H. Roll Damping

mode

(10)

G. Dutch Roll Mode

The Dutch roll is the combination of roll and yaw motions
in this mode and it could be created with a small perturbation
for yaw and roll motions to the right hand direction [7],
followed by returning towards to the equilibrium position, then
it could an overshooting in the same condition and as a result
of this yaw and roll motions occurred to the left hand direction, Fig. 14 Initial roll perturbation of stability test for roll
and back to the original position, and so on (Fig.11). damping mode

419
 Fig. 15 Lateral velocity perturbation Vs time in roll damping
mode
Roll damping mode is explained with the roll damping of
the rolling motion. Here, 1˚ small perturbation was applied to
the lateral direction and observed the tendency to return its
original position (Fig.14).The roll damping mode shows
critical damping for lateral velocity perturbation (Fig.15) and
other perturbations which are related to this mode also
illustrate the well behaviors for the given step response.
I. Spiral Mode
The spiral mode of RAVAN is non-oscillatory and initiated by
the heading angle and continues slide slip (Fig.16) and it is
explained by the real root in the characteristic polynomial (Eq.9).
The spiral mode usually shows very slow convergence and its
results are totally unpredictable and inherent [7].
Normally, the spiral modes in medium scale UAVs are
unstable (Fig.17). But it is important in UAV design stage to
understand the behavior in time domain to defined the control
commands through autopilot [3].
Fig. 17 Lateral velocity perturbation Vs time in spiral mode
In the dynamic stability excluding spiral mode another
modes are well stable. Generally, spiral mode is in medium
scale flight are unstable and if we try to stable in spiral mode it
will be effect for controlling. That means, more stability may
limit the controllability. Therefore the RAVAN is stable in
expected degree.
REFERENCES
[1] Alemdaroglu. N, “Measurements of dynamic stability derivatives using
direct forced oscillation technique,” in 19th International Congress on
ICIASF 2001., Cleveland., OH, 2001, pp.275-282.
[2] Christopher Korpela, Matko Orsag, Miles Pekala, and Paul Oh’
“Dynamic Stability of a Mobile Manipulating Unmanned Aerial
Vehicle,” in 2013 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and
Automation (ICRA).,Karlsruhe., Germany, 2013, pp.4907-4912.
[3] A. Deperrois. (2010). XFLR5 and stability analysis. Available:
http://www.xflr5.com

V. CONCLUSION [4] R.Fadjar, R.Triputra, Bambang, Trilaksono, A.Rianto, Sasongko, M.

RAVAN has been tested for the static and dynamic
stabilities and the degree of it is in safe margin. A more stable
UAV is reluctant to sudden respond for the control command [7].
The quick response to the given command is most essential for
the flight optimization but it should not compromise the stability.
[5]
Thus the degree of stability of RAVAN is well enough for the
effective deployment. In the static stability observations accord
very well responses and the maximum possible angle of attack
is very equal to AROSONDE MARK UAV.
[6]
Dahsyat, “Longitudinal Dynamic System Modeling of a Fixed-Wing
UAV towards Autonomous Flight ControlSystem Development– A Case
Study of BPPT Wulung UAV Platform,” in 2012 International
Conference on System Engineering and Technology;IEEE., Bandung.,
Indonesia,2012, pp.1-6.
B.Green, and J.Chung, “CFD Predictions of the Stability and Control
Characteristics of the Pre-Production F/A-18E,” in AIAA Atmospheric
Flight Mechanics Conference and Exhibit., San Francisco., California,
2005.
L. Kurukularachchi, R. Prince, S.R. Munasinghe, “Stability and Control
Analysis in Twin-Boom Vertical Stabilizer Unmanned Aerial Vehicle
(UAV),” International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications
ISSN 2250-3153, vol 4,issue 2,2014.

[7] M.V Cook , “Longitudinal Dynamics and Lateral Dynamics” in Flight

dynamic principles: A linear system approach air craft stability and
control , 2nd Ed. Oxford,UK ; Elservier ,2007, ch.6-7,pp.138-206.

[8] Q. Ou, X. C.Chen, D. Park, A. Marburg, J. Pinchin, "Integrated Flight

Dynamics Modeling for Unmanned Aerial Vehicles," in IEEE/ASME
International Conference on Mechatronic and Embedded Systems and
Applications(MESA08)., Beijing., China, 2008, pp. 570-575
Fig. 16 Initial perturbation of stability test for spiral mode
[9] J. Roskam , “Stability and Control during Steady State Flight” in
Airplane Flight Dynamics and Automatic Controls,4th Ed. Lawrence,
KS 66049, USA, DAR cooperation, 2003, ch.4,pp.224-231.

420

View publication stats