AIAA Modeling and Simulation Technologies Confrence and Esibe (MST), 2007, Hit Head, South Caine A General Solution to the Aircraft Trim Problem Agostino De Marco* laples Federico Il, Department of Aerospace Engineering Via Claudio, 21 80125 Naples, Italy Eugene L. Duket Rain Mountain Systems Inconporated, Glasgon, Virginia, 2 Jon 8. Berndt JSBSim Project Team Lead, League City, TX, USA University of 509, USA ‘Trim defines conditions for both design and analysis based on aircraft models. In fact, we often define these analysis points more broadly than the conditions normally associated with trim conditions to facilitate that analysis or design. In simulations, these analysis nts establish initial con propulsion systems models of be used to provide the data needed to define the operating envelope or the performance characteristics. Linear models are typically derived at trim points. Control systems are designed and evaluated at points defined by trim conditions. And these trim conditions provide us a starting point for comparing one model against implementation of a model against another jlementation of the same model, and the model to flight-derived data, Tn this paper we define what we mean by trl \e a variety of trim conditions that have proved useful and derive the equations defining those trim conditions. Finally swe present a general approach to trim through constrained minimization of a cast functi based on the nonlinear, six-dogroe-of freedom state equations coupled with the aerodynamic and propulsion system models, We provide an example of how a trim algorithm is used with a simulation by showing an example from JSBS! List of Symbols Le] a goneric 8 3 matrix [le tho antisymmetric matrix that expresses the cross product by vector () in frame Fy ive. Ge V becomes [M2] (Vy im the wind frame (tilde operator). [M]-{c} standard matrix product, row-by-column, of matrix [MJ times colu matrix {e}. [Cex-r.] transformation matrix from frame Fy to frame Bo, ie. {V}o, = [Crs-ril-{V}p, [l]y aircraft inertia tensor in the body-axis frame (masslength?). ta ertia tensor of a generie rotating subpart, ¢.g. engine rotor or propeller, in a reference fraime ‘with axes parallel to the main body axes and origin somewhere on the part's axis of rotation (mass-length?). bo, 805 85 angular dellections of elevator, ailerons, and rudder (radians). br throttle setting (mapped in the range (0, 1)) 4 flight path angle (radians). 9,7 vector valued lunctions representing implicit and expliet, respectively, alreraft state equations “Assistant Profesor, Univenaily of Naples Falerlco TI, Department of Aerospace Engineering, agostino.dewarcogunine.1¢ ‘Chief Enginocr, duke@raianouncainsyecens con, Member AIAA, "Actospace Engineer, ISHSim Development Coordinator, on@jebesa.org, Senior Member AIAA, Copyright © 2007 by Agestino De Marco, Published by the American Intitte of Acromastics and Astronantics, Ie. with 1 of American Insite of Acronanitcs anc Astronanties Paper ALAA-2007-6703rne-dimensional vector of aircraft control inputs, craft n-dimensional state voetor. m cost funetion g t £,.M,N — components of the resultant moment ¥.M7 in the body-axis frame. a, vwlocity (radians; 688 craft Buler angles (radi rv rotor spin axis unit vector 3” angular rotation vector relative to the main body of a generic rotating subpart, e.g. engine rotor or propeller (radians/sec), resultant forces on aircraft duc to gravity, aerodynamic and thrust forces, respectively (inde pendent on reference frame). generic cost function undependent, variables. ng vector (°) projected onto the reference frame F. a1 8 column matrix represen acrodynamic forces, drag, cross-foree and lift (Force). centripetal foree in a tur (force). gravitational acceleration (length /see2). altitude, equal to ~2p (length) moment of iuertia of a generle rotating subpart, eg. engine rotor or propeller (mass-longth rat moments of inertia about body axes (mass-Jength?).. th?) fey ly Thy Tay --.5 To entries of matrix [7]! (mas Toys Fees Tye alteraft products of inertia about body axes (mass-length?) m alreraft mass (mass). n load factor, Ne number of alreraft control inputs re umber of trim algorithi control variables. P.4 1 components of the aircraft angular velocity @ in the body-fixed reference frame (radians/sec), R radius of steady-state turn (length). t ti u,v, components of the aireraft center of mass velocity Vo in the body-fixed reference frame (length/sce), X,Y, Z components of the resultant force ¥/" in the body-axis frame. 20. uc, 20 coordinates of aircraft center of mass C' into a fixed reference frame (length). 2p, Ue, 2 coordinates of airplane’s center of mass in the Earth frame in flat-Earth hypothesis (length). Subscripts Oc; Oas Or die, respectively, to gravity, aerodynamic and thrust (propuli (Qe Ox dynamic and kinematic part of state vector @ or of function g (eth element of state vector a or of function g, oF initia! value of a simulation variable On, Cw n body axes and in wind axes Ov, Or n local vertical and in Earth frame Coa ‘equilibrium value or value at trim. ©) netions. Superseripts QF transpose of a matrix. (rotating subpart of the aireraft. () time derivative oO A vector of the throedimensional Enclidean space; a quantity that does not depend upon ‘the reference frame where it is represented, I. Introduction tate flight conditions, oF also trimmed states, is of primary importance in ‘Trim defines conditions for both design and analysis based on aireraft Determining aircraft steady: iy of engineering. studies 206 40 American Insitute of Aeronautics ane Astronantics Paper ALAA-2007-6703,models. In fact, we often define these analysis points more broadly than the conditions normally associated with trim conditions to facilitate that analysis or design, In simulations, these analysis points establish initial conditions comparable to flight conditions. Based on aerodynamic and propulsion systems models of an aircraft, trim analysis can be used to provide the data needed to define the operating envelope or the performance characteristics. Lincar models are typically derived at trim points. Control systems are designed and evaluated at points defined by trim conditions. And these trim conditions provide us a starting point for comparing one modol against another, one implementation of a model against another implementation, of the same model, and the model to flight-derived data. ‘The task of trimming a vehicle model in symmetric and asymmetric flight conditions represents, however, a nontrivial job. This paper discusses the definition of trim conditions and derivation of constraint equations for a steady-state flight applicable to conventional and unconventional aircraft shapes of symmetric and asymmetric layout. Classical textbooks often follow a simplified approach to discuss the aircraft trim problem and pose with special emphasis on static stability and control, treating the longitudinal and lateral-directional axes as two separate topics, assuming that they are uncoupled, ‘This is an engineering correct. approach in many eases and is supported by practical evidence, but it does not address the general problem, ie. is not valid for some real cases or unconventional configurations. Many example exist in fact showing that geometrical and/or aerodynamic asymmetries imply asymmetric trimmed attitudes. In these cases the longitudinal and lateral- ional axes are coupled naturally from the start, even if the desired trimmed state is a steady straight ircraft trim problem both classical ones and even ticated, up-to-date, analytical frameworks with the capability to trim the aireraft in six degroos- oF freedom!" — are presented and implemented by making, uso of static stability derivatives, of damping, dorivatives and of control derivatives (control effectiveness) concepts, resulting in a set of nonlinear algebraic oquations for the unknown attitude angles, aerodynamic surface deflections and Uhrust output ensuring the ‘Those treatments are valid in regimes of flight where “ents vary linearly and are not cable to situations in which the aerodynamic derivatives are not constant with angle of attack, angle of sideslip or Mach number. Even more general situations, for example airplanes for which unconventional configuration variations may occur in flight. such as thruster tilt have to be addressed by a more general approach, ‘The general treatment of aircraft trian proposed here starts from the standard equations of motion of an airplane in atmospheric fight but does not. make any limiting assumptions on the geometrical properties of the aircraft nor on the acrodynamic coefficient curves. Regarding the latter, in general, all that. one really expects is an acrodynamie model that provides nondimensional acrodynamie coefficients, no those parameters come from or how they are derived. Tn practice, a convenient aerodynamic model should De available in the form of tabulated data for the widest possible ranges of aerodynamic angles and velocities and for all possible aireraft configurations. ‘The combination of attitude angles, acrodynamie surface deflections and thrust output/direetion for the desired trim condition is obtained numerically by minimizing a conveniently defined cost funetion. ‘This general approach naturally ineludes the classical results (symmotrie aireraft and linear aerodynamic particular case. ‘The generality of the proposed approach stems both from the general trim states embraced by all possible minima of the eost function and from the generic model chosen. We show how these trim functions are implemented in JSBSim, an open-source, nonlinear dynamic simulation model, and include results from various aircraft models joty of trim conditions. ‘The research pi is the development of a practical tool with the capability to trim a generic aireraft model in six degrees-oF-freedom. Such a tool is meant to be used as a building block for the earization of an airplane aerodynamic model around some given sensible trim points within the flight envelope, ‘The ultimate objective is to assist in the development of perf 1 stability and control design solutions for advanced conventional and unconventional aircraft. configuration shapes, 1 where 206 40 American Insitute of Aeronautics ane Astronantics Paper ALAA-2007-6703,Il. The trim problem na general state-space form, ‘A. General equations, unknowns and inputs In general terms, the aircraft state equations can be expressed by the following implicit system a(t, 2,4) =0 oO) In the above equation a is the aircraft state vector; g is a vector of a, scalar nonlinear funetions g, resulting, from aireraft nonlinear, six-degree-of froedom state equations projected onto a convenient reference frame; and u is the column of n, control variables. The system of equations (1) is generally implicit when, in some of the 1, scalar equations, the aerodynamic model is such that one component of the vector # of state variable timo derivatives cannot be expressed explicitly in terms of the remaining quantities. This happens, for instance, when the model of aerodynamic forces presents a general dependence on the angle of attack time derivative. The latter is function of one of the components of &. The most widespread choice of the state veetor 2, which is not absolutely the only one possible and generally depends on the adopted set of equations of motions, is represented by the following arrangement rat] 2) i.e. a column voctor projected onto the st ing, a dynamic and a kinematic part, When the aircraft equations of motion are ard hody-fixed reference frame we have for example [uewparl, melee. 20.6.0.07" ®) ta with (40,1) and (p,q,r) the body-axis frame components of aircraft conter of mass velocity Vo and of the aireraft angular velocity ©, respectively: (zc, yo,c) the evolving coordinates of the eenter of mass C (4,0, the standard alreraft Ener angles representing the evolving body attitude with respect to the inertial reference frame. Tn modern fight simulation practice the representation of the airplane's rotational degrees of freedom hy the Euler angles and the related kinematic forinulation has been subsided by the approach based on quaternions and quaternion algebra. When this is the ease the last three entries in 2 are replaced by the four components of a quaternion.*® Consequently, the last three components of the vector-valued function 4 in (1) are replaced by four other functions, which are defined according to the quaternion the purposes of this paper we will not go into the details of quaternion formulations, rather we will use the classical Buler angle kinematic equations to derive the desired trim conditions. Regarding the vector w of control inputs, its entries may depend in munber by the type of aircraft. For « conventional configuration aircraft the minimum arrangement of the inputs is usually given by [5r. 8.554. 5,]" ) ng and da, Su; Sz are the angular deflections of elevator, ailerons, and rudder, have standard signs and their range depensl on the particular aircraft under lation practice their variation is associated with the normalized setting of a corresponcling control in the cockpit. Usually the range of throttle setting goes from 0 (dle) to +1 (maximum power), while the stick excursions arc all mapped to a range that goes from —1 to +1. ‘These mappings often dopend on the presence of control laws that may alter the final effect of pilot action on the actual effector deficctions and thrust output. When talking about trim, we will always refer to the inputs as some roquired combination of aerodynamic surface deflections and thrust output. In this context 6p may be considered as the current fraction of the maximum thrust output available at the actual fight speed and altitude. In mathematical terms, whether the actual acrosurface deflections and thrust output or the normalized command ranges are considered, they are scen as a set of bounds for the control variables in the vector u. When we use these quantities as independent variables to implement a trim algorithm, checking that their values are within bounds becomes an important step in the assessment of physical significance of the final result. 406 0 American Insitute of Aeronautics ane Astronantics Paper ALAA-2007-6703,B. ‘Trimmed states A classical concept introduced in the theory of nonlinear systems, in our case the airplane whose model is given by (1), is the equilibrium point or trim point. For an autonomous (no external control inputs), time-invariant system the equilibriun point is denoted a gq and is defined as the particular 2 vector which satisfies 9(0, gy eg) = 0 with digg =O and tag = 0 oF = up 6) Condition (5) abo defines a st of control settings ty that make the steady state possible. 'The stave ofthe system defined by (5) corresponds to the generalized idea of rest, Le. the condition when all the derivatives are identically zero. In our case this concept may apply only to the dynamic part arg of the alrraft state ndependent vatlables ruled by Newton's laws. As will be shown In the rst of the paper, he kinematic variables in i mnay oF may not have zero time derivatives in trimmed flight. For example, the derivatives - and jc will never be zero unless the aircraft is at rest on the ground or is fiying along a vertical trajectory. In some trim conditions the time derivatives of Euler angles may be all zero, in some other one of them is equal to a prescribed nonzero value the rest bing zero. Steady-state flight is defined as a condition in which all of the aircraft motion variables are constant or zero, That is, the incar and angular velocities are constant or zcro and all the acceleration components are zero. This definition, which is quite general, is usually made more restrictive by making some simplifying assumptions. The first typical assumption considers the aircraft mass as a constant. A further simplification is related to the choice of inertial frame to which the flight is referenced. When the aircraft motion is modelled by the round-Earth equations, because of the Earth's angular velocity, only minor-cirele, constant latitude‘ flight around the Earth is actually a true steady-state condition. When the Earth’s oblatencss is takon into account, minor citcles are the only trajectories along which gravity remains strictly constant in magnitude Usually the flat-Earth equations are considered satisfactory forall control system design purposes, con- sequently those equations are satisfactory also for the derivation of trim conditions. ‘Then, in the flat-Earth Iiypothests, the definition of equllbrium state cortainly allows wings-level horizontal jligh, tn any direction, and constant altitude turning flight to be two candidate for a steady state condition. Furthermore, if the change in atmospheric density with altitude is neglected, then also wings-eel climb and elimbing tna are permnitted as steady state flight condition In the above hypotheses, given definitions (2)-(3), the standard NED (North-East-Down) postion equa tions for (#e.ye, 2) in system (I), do not couple back into the rest of equations of motion and need not be used in finding a steady-state condition.’ When we assume a flat-Earth we call the aircraft position (eee) In the case of ilat-Earth only the position equation for zp, ie. the altitude equation, is relevant development of a flight dynamics model trimming capability. ‘The general steady-state flight condition resulting from the above discussion is given as follows: vector, Le. to those seoderations + 9,06 (or Voa,8) =0, ave (or pwsdvstw) =O, linear velocities = u,v, ( or Via4, prescribed constant values, angular velocities = p,g,r( oF pw qw.rw) = prescribed eonstant values aircraft controls + 57,905. = appropriate constant values ‘The steady-state conditions #,4,# = 0 require the angular rates to be zero or constant (as in steady turns), and therefore the aerodynamic and thrust moments must be zero or constant, On the other hand, the steady-state conditions 1, @, vi = 0 require the airspeed, angle of attack, and sideslip angle to be constant, and hence the acrodynamic forces must be zero or constant. While an actual pilot may not find it very difficult to put an aireraft into a steady-state flight condition, trimming an aircraft mathematical model requires the solution of the simultancous nonlinear equations (5), simplified according to the chosen formulation (flat-Earth in our ease). In general, because of the arity, a steady-state solution can only be found by using a numerical method on a digital computer. Multiple solutions may exist, and a feasible solution will emerge only when practical constraints are placed fon the variables. In the next section we go further in the details of trim constraint derivation by making the system (1) explicit, We will present a complete formulation of the trim problem (5) by introducing the equations of motion written in an appropriate reference frame. 5 of 40 American Insitute of Aeronautics ane Astronantics Paper ALAA-2007-6703,III. Constraint Equation Derivation In this section, we define the general steady-state, dynamic equations for an aircraft. First, we define some basic translational and rotational equations, then we use these baste equations for the definition of the constraint oquations defining the specific types of trim. Even though these trim types may represent only transitory conditions, we can describe those conditions in such a way that we can use these results to mplement a trimming algorithm in a simulation or linearization program. oy ty Figure 1. The standard body, wind-, and local vertical-axts reference frames. The alreraft motion represented Js a stoady crabbing flight towards North with nonzero elim rate. ‘A. General equations of unsteady motion ‘The reader may refer to a number of well known textbooks for a detailed devivation of the general equations of motion of a system of rigid bodies or of the equations of unsteady motion of an aireraft. Examples of such textbooks are those by Goldstein! and Marion? and those by Btkin? Stevens and Lewis,! Stengel® and Phillips® Here we will reeall the equations of motion of a rigid, constant mass airplane in proximity of a flat-Karth without making any particular assumption on body shape, ine propulsion modes. jas or aerodynamics and 4. Translational Equations Using the results from the above elted textbooks we ean write the equation defining the translational accel eration of the alreraft In the inertial reference system as may ~ BF 7) whore 2F is the resulta 1e f. The general accepted expression of the resultant force, when no particular external action is present, such as towing by another airerafe or gear contact forces, is the following, BF = Fe + Fy + Fr (8) 60640 Ameria Institnte of Aeronatcs and Astronanties Paper ALAA-2007-6703where Fo, Py and Fy are the resultant forces due to gravity, aerodynamics and thrust, respectively. hoose, for example, to express vector equation (7) in the standard wind-axis frame, being the latter a rotating frame, the translational acceleration vector becomes mV bw + lw: Ww) = BF hw (9) where the term [Oy - [V]}w, a skew-symmetric, square matrix times a column, is the representation of the cexoss product > V in the chosen frame. ‘The same formulation (9) will apply, with subseripts ()p in place of ()w when the general vector equation (7) is projected onto the standard aizeraft body-axls frame. In the wind-axis and hody-axis reference frames we will have v mw 2 p Whe=4 0b. (w=4 aw } and V}p=-v b, hy= “| (10) 0 tw w r and the cross product matrices [jw and [G]p will be defined! as 0 wow - O-r g rv 0 -pw]s n=] + 0 -p (a) —w pw 0 a p 0 matter of convenience. ive wind direct the body-xis reference ©. Therefore we have ‘The choice of the suitable roference frame to expand the necessary equations i ‘The acrodynamie foree, because aerodynamic data are often referred to the rel veniently defined in the wind-axis reference frame. ‘The thrust is typically defined framo. Tho action of gravity is, instead, simply defined in the local vertical Fra -D Xr 0 {Fhw=) © fs {Phn=) Ye ps (Felv=4} 0 2) -L ar mg When the body frame is chosen, a matrix equation similar to (9) expands further to the following, m({V}n + [as (hu) = [Cow] (Pahw + {Pr} t [Cov] -{Pe}y aaa) where [Cgw] and [Cpy] are transformation matrices from the wind and from the local vertical frame, respectively, to the body frame. ‘These matrices, representing rotations that bring one frame onto another, are orthogonal matrices, ie. dei inverse coincides with the transpose. ‘They are defined as follows cosarcos/3 sing sina cos 3 [Cw cosasing cos —sinasing |. [Crow] =[Cwon]™ «ay no cos cosdeosys (sinsinBcosy (cosdsind cosy —cosésiny)) + singsinw) Cyn] =| cososiny (sinesindsinys (cosdisind sins) [Cov] =[ev-n]" (15) Feosdeos:) — —sindcos J) sind singcosd cos peos0 ‘The chasical system of scalar force equations in the body-xis reference arising, from (13) is the following, a A(Xn+Xo) = wq + vr — gsind A (a +¥0) —ur-+un + peosdsing (is) A (a+ 21) — ev tug gcosteass 706 40 American Insitute of Aeronautics ane Astronantics Paper ALAA-2007-6703,‘We can also derive translational equations, which aro equivalent to the system (16), but are written in terms of V, a and g and their time derivatives. By using the translational equations from Duke et ali” we have — Deos 8 + Csin 8 + Xr eosereas + Yersin 8+ Zrsinereos 2 ~g( sin Be0s. cos — cas sin sin —c0s0cos sina c0s | t= 4—tanB (peosar+rsina) L = b+ Zpeosaa— Xv sina +mg( cost cos cosa + sin si an Vin = +psina —reose + 7h [Dsing + Ceos 9 — Xy cosasin s+ Yeas ~ Zysinasing ‘+g (sind cosassin + cos sin 008 5 — cos cos dsina sin 8)] where the aerodynamic force components in the wind-axis frame appear explicitly and w= Vcos S cosa sing, w= VeosGsina (18) ‘The equations (17) are more general than those found in Etkin* or Stovens and Lewis.‘ 2. Rotational Equations Again, using the results from classical textbooks we can write the equation defining, the rotational acceleration of the aircraft in the chosen inertial reference system as ait Gf ~Eat r) where D7 is the sum of all the moments acting upon the aircraft and /7 is the total angular momentum about the center of gravity. For a rotating reference frame such as those used in our analysis, e.g. the body-axis system, equation (19) is written in matrix form as {7}, + (Ay ( bn =O y (20) As pointed out by Etkin,® the total angular momentum projected in the body-axis system can be generally expressed as the following sum {Hy - [a(n + hy ey of a Srigi-body component”, [[]p {9}, and of a “deformation component,” (H*}n. Matrices Te Tey —les 1 oh lk Nya] aby ty he |) [De wip | 2 & (22) aTee hy I acti Is Is Is represent the aireraft inertia tensor in the body-axs frame and its inverse, with dot [7], = Tell. — Tel?, — I.E, —Iyl2. — yclecTey + lycles, Is loylys + leples Tealys + layles (28) [gah hat -2, sof 40 American Insite of Aeronautics and Astronantics Paper ALAA-2007-6703,ven when the effects of aircraft aeroelastic shape modifi of the angular momentum 7, ie. the starred term {H*}n in (21), might have a relevant role, ‘This is the case when the rotation of thowe rigid aircraft sybsystems like engine rotors or propellers has to be taken into account, Ordinarily the mass centers of spinning bodies ‘own axis of rotation. When one of these parts, say the k-th, rotates with angular velocity Jf relative to the main body it is easily shown that its contribution to {H™}x is {you = Waa fo. (24) whore [J"]p.4 isthe inertia matrix with respect to a reference frame with axes parallel to the main body axes and origin somewhere on the part’s axis of rotation. From (24), the equation (20) for a rigid aircraft with a number n, of spinning rotors, expands to the following form mare neglected, the deformation component i vl} +P Hos {07 + Me (Molo +E Wo. {"}ou) =2O9n 25) Morcover the spin axis s,typially, also a principal axs of inertia of the rotor. ‘Therefore the vector Hz is collinear with Of and has magnitude {ff, where If isthe moment of inertia of the rotor about the spin axis, Equation (24) is then rewritton as {Hay = Heo, (26) with {2"}n¢ the rotation axis unit vector represented in the body-axis reference. In equation (25), assuming that rotors have a constant inertia, we have, besides the typical (p. 4.7), the additional sealar unknowns Wf. In simulation these are found by coupling to the system (25) a suitable engine model that ealeulates Of and updates wf. When a numerical, iterative trim algorithin i applied to the equations of motion, it Is Important to make sure that, given the throttle setting dr at each step, the engine model i driven to 2 steady state (2f = 0). ‘The resultant moment ¥.AF on the body-axis frame, coming from aerodynamic, propulsive and control actions, will have components £, M, AV in the body-axis system. Usually the control moments are included In the aerodynamic actions so that £=Lyt+hr, M=Mat Mr, N=Na+, (27) Considering (24) and (27), the equation (25) will expand further to the final matelx equation é 1 fies Late t 4 ~ Gay hh ks Mat Mr pd lian) it é lh bb Nat Ne e an Or 9 Te ley Tes] [ -| r O-p Tey ty lye @ (28) ee r Or a) fa -Lz| ro ~ | de e -o p of lid, 3. Ausiliary kinematic equations ‘The force and moment equations, when projected onto a moving roference frame, do not form a complete system until chey are coupled with some convenient auxiliary equations. ‘The latter are kinematic in nature and, when the body-axis formulation is considered, they relate the components of airplane's velocity and 9 0640 American Insitute of Aeronautics ane Astronantics Paper ALAA-2007-6703,angular rate vectors in the moving frame, respectively, to the veloci and to the rates of change of Buler angle (Ve = {Vv vector components in the fixed frame ‘The first relationship is obviously the orthogonal transformation Cyan]: {V}, which expands to the following, costes (sin@sinBcosy (cosdsindcosy i —cosésin ¥) ind sin) au i cosdsing (sindsindsingy (cos dsin dsiny v (29) a teoseosy) — —singeosy)) w “sind sindeos@ cos eos also known as the system of navigation or position equations. As wo have pointed out in section B, for the flat-Earth formulation only the third of equations (29) has to be considered to obtain a trim constraint. The socond kinematic relationship is the following well known systom of gimbal equations? 1 stosind covgsing é cond cond > b=] 0 cose sing a (30) ¥ sing cos ¢ r ° cos) cos Fin modern flight simulation codes the above syst quaternion updates, equations (30) are still conveniently ‘Trim conditions for particular cases, when 0 = -tx/2, are to be found with a defferent convention on the definition of Euler angles or with a quaternion formulation, B, Equilibrium equations ‘The genoal translational equilibrium equations are found from (17) by imposing 7 the system |. Wo obtain = Deos + CsinB + Xp cosercos + Yi-sin J+ Zrsinereas 9 mg sin Deasercos 3 — cos6 sing: A —coxBeosdsineccas)) (31) 1 Zyoosa + Xpsina = mg( cos6 cosdoosa +sindsin cr) + Vin[ qoos 6 — n(poosa trsina) | (32) Dsin 8 + Ceos 8 — Xpeosasin § — ¥y cos 3 ~ Zy sinarsin 3 = —mg ( sind cosacsin 8 + cos sin bcos 3 — cos cos dsinasin?) —Vm(psina—reosa) (38) ‘The general rotational equilibrium equations are found from (28) Imposing j the sysi 0. We obtain cater or 4 > MatMr ¢= r 0 -p q Na tr a p O r (a) o-+ a] fe syn) ro pl ke « -q pO ), Any algorithm devised to find a requir steady-state ight condition will assume some aircraft state and control variablas as given and some others aa unknown, As we will ce in section D these unknown are seen as the trim algorithm control vartables ¢ (j ~ 1,..., m4). Equations (3t)-(34) play the role of a set of constraint onto the tim controls €,, upon which the aerodynamics and propulsion terms may depend. 1 of 0 American Insitute of Aeronautics ane Astronantics Paper ALAA-2007-6703,©. Other Equations ‘We define the normal load factor tho wind-axis frame, n, as ‘This equation is used to define several of the maneuvers in this paper. Flight path angle, 7, can be defined in terms of altitude rate, i () X From the expression (15) of [Cy.-n] and knowing from (14) that [Cw] — [Cwn]" we have the altitude rate defined as ya sin f= —Viy = [00 —1]- [Cyc] - [Caw] - {yp = V (cosercos #sin# — sin sin pease — sin areos .e0s.e08 0) om so that when 4 =0 (constant altitude condition) (38) @=0 —(wings-tevel condition) (39) when we combine equations (36) and (37), we get sin-y — cos f (eosersin— sina cos) (40) and when we use equation (38) we get o=0 (a1) If we use equations (41) and (39), equations (31), (82), and (88) become — Deos 8 + Csing + Xpcosacos + Yrsin d+ Zysinacos 5 = 0 (42) L~ Zycosa+ Xpsina =mg— Vn [acos —sin B( pooser +rsina) ] (43) Dain + Ceo) — Xpeosasin 9 — Ypeos)— Zpsinasing =—Vin(psina—reosa) (44) expressing the translational constraint equations for a horizontal wings-Level flight. D. Discussion of the equations Not considering for simplicity the cases of stickree and reversible Hight controls, we have that the system formed by the dynamic equations, ic. (16)—or the equivalent (17)—and (28), and by the kinematie auxiliary cxquations updating airplane's position and attitude, ic. (29) and (30), is a closed set of twelve dilferential, a [eh at]"=[[ueepacrl [nee 80.0) ] (45) defined by (2)-(3), and the inputs, for a traditional configuration, are [6r. 5e, 44, 8,)" () In the system defined above a crucial role is played by the aecuraey and completeness of the acrodynarnies and propulsion models. These models consist formally in a set of laws expressing the dependenee of terms like (-), and (jr from the state, the control variables and their time derivatives. The experience has shown, that the force and moment components Involved in equations (16)-(28) depend to some extent from all oF some of the variables listed in Table L oto Ameria Institnte of Aeronatcs and Astronanties Paper ALAA-2007-6703Table 1. Dependency of force and moment compencnts upon aircraft state and control variables (@= dependent on swmbols: O=could depend on, may vary with configuration most always not dependent om When 9 is wot zero Whew thrusters work in nonacal ew. © When a nonsyuametrictheust is applied. When ground floc is modkllod © When engine state is altitude dependent. In the dependency summary reported in Table 1 we have the altitude, 7+ = —2p, but not ehe other two coordinates, (rz, i:)- Furthermore we have in some eases a sguifieant dependence on the aerodynamic angle rates ¢ and A. ‘The table also reports the cases of models that might present a particular dependence or right be influenced by the particular aireraft configuration ‘When the dependence onto the rates 4 and is completely goncral, the equations of unstendy motion (16), (28), 29) and (20) indeed form a systern of implicit equations like (1). Often the unsteady aerodynamic esfoets are well approximated by means of constant multipliers, eg. the stability derivatives C,,, and Cr, and the syster of equations is such that all the state variable rates are expliitly expressed in terms ofthe ‘quantities. ‘Then we have the following explicit state equation #=f(x,u) (46) fis fas. .fial”. Since trim conditions must derive from equilibrium, steady-state fight, for i) = 0, a state equation in the form (46) is sufficient for the 0, or equival ing aircraft trimmed states. ition of trim (6), given the models of aircraft aerodynamics and propulsion, ind by: purpose of| According to the general d aan equilibrium state will be fo (i) dectaring, the desired trajectory of the airplane’s center of mass, assigning the values of some state variables (e.g, V, f), of some kinematic variable rates (e.g. A for a climbing, trimmed flight) or of some related rates (e.g. yw in a turn), and possibly of some aircraft control (e.g, when a trimmed state with aileron failure is wanted, with 6, = 0) (#) constraining the values of some other state variables according to the kinematic equations (e.g. deriving the values of p, a, and (i) solving the system 6 a) of six nonlinear, transcendent, algebrale equations stemming from the dynamic part of (46), Le. from the coupled constraint equations (31)-(34). ‘The system (47) will generally provide information on the 12060 American Insitute of Aeronautics ane Astronantics Paper ALAA-2007-6703,unknown control settings and the remaining state variable values ens fight. ing the desired steady-state ‘The above steps still describe a generic situation. From (47) we can only expect that, alter assigning a first sot of state variables and controls €: and constrai second sot of state variables 2, the number of unknowns to be found, i. the entries of a column voetor € defined ss 1, & = two distinct subsets of [x",uT]” + ¢ =the remaining subset of [27,u"] (48) is not greater than six. The dimension of € may depend on the desired trim condition and, in the general case, on the aircraft configuration and number of controls. In this context we call a trim algorithm one that is capable of solving the problem presented above. ‘Then we define the me unknowns € as the trim controls, Finally equations (47) become fil$)=0, for k= 1.0.46 (49) McBarland” defines the trim problem as overdetermined if a system like (49) has more equations than trim controls, determined if the number of equations equals the number of controls, underdetermined if the number of equations is less than the number of controls. ‘To clarify with an example the type of problem we have to face with, let us consider a particular ease. Suppose that conditions for a steady-state flight along, a rectilinear trajectory are desired, for a traditional configuration aireraft. Speed V, altitude A, flight path angle ~ and flight path heading yw are assigned. No particular requirements are preseribed to the acrodynamie control surface deflections or to the attitude, In 9 be, dw, aw =O] (0) and a set of derived values &=[p=0,9=0,r=0] (1) We have assigned the velocity vector 7 of airplane's mass conter, in magnitude and direction with respect to arth, atnd we have deicted forthe type of fight condition required thatthe angular rates have tobe zoro. To ensure thatthe fight dyna 1s able to accomplish the desired trimmed state we have to find the coroctairraft attitude in space and the correct set of eantol surface deflections and thrust utp. ‘Then we have the following st of trim controls €= [0.0 5180.54 Se] (52) Note that a given aireraft attitude in terms of Baler angles corresponds to a precise attitude with respeet to V, that is, toa particular couple (a, 3). According to (52) our trim problem is underdetermines, being € a set of seven trim controls as opposed to the six equilibrium equations (49). ‘This means that there is the chance that more than one set of € will satisfy the posed problem. One such situation is depicted in Figure 1. ‘There is also the chance that the assigned velocity and flight path angle are stich that no possible combination of trim controls will give a trimmed state If wo restate the problem by adding the requirement of wings being level, @ = 0, we lower by one the dimension of and make (19) a determined system. Even in this ease more than one possible solution to the problem may exist. For example ifa nonzero sdeslip condition turns out to satisfy trim equations (419), possibly with nonzero rudder and aileron deflections, also the condition with opposite sign of beta. will be a candidate trim condition, In his paper MeFarkind presents a solution to the trim problem based on a variational approach. ‘The method of solution propesed here is based instend on the derivation of one single algebraic equation from the system (49), which is solved in the space of €'s, subject to some hounds. ‘This method is presented in section B for a completely general case. Examples of application of this solution method to some simplified aireraft models are found in the textbooks by Stevens and Lewist and Stengel. E. Generation of trim conditions using minimization (One of the most widely accepted numerical method to find a generic steady-state flight condition is based on the minimization of a cost function. This function is typically defined as a general scalar dependence 13 of 0 American Insitute of Aeronautics ane Astronantics Paper ALAA-2007-6703,..) Upon M4. parameters. ‘The independent variables include the unknown aircraft control settings cost function is, by definition, always non negative and evaluates to zero when in a steady-state mization algorithm finds the values of control inputs and of some state variables that make the cost function zero. ‘Typically the cost function is derived from the dyi quadratic function nie equations of motion. A good choice is the TP pw Pe (63) or more generally I= {ial IW) tia} () with [IY] a symmetric, positive-defnit, squaro matrix of weights yiolding a non nogative 7. The role of [V7] in the sum (54), as opposed to the simple sum (53), is mainly that of making the single addonds of ame order of magnitude, accounting for differences in units of measure and providing control of the nimization, Te has to be noted that choosing Vand (in place of ay anew in th perfectly equivalent ‘The scalar function 7 defined above depe above nition is erally on both dynamic and kinematie state variables, and on control settings. ‘Therefore the cost function is formally a Jaa, 22, u). For the purpose of trimming this dependence has to be restricted to a subset & ofall the independent variables, the remaining ones being thought of as fixed parameters. When function J(€ to control variable bounds and to flight-path constraints then the trim con As dis ‘met, ised in section IV, there are differont possible steady-state flight: condi ns and, according to the desired one, some stato variables may be prescribed or constrained. Each desired trim condition is associated to a different set € of independent variables, For all trim conditions the velocity V andl altitude ‘hare invariably specified. Morcover, tho initial geographical position does not influence the trim, Hence V, 7p, op and 3p, never appear among, the variables &,. IV. Trim conditions In this section we present some of the most interesting trim conditions from the standpoint of engineering design and of flight dynamics model evaluation. For each of them we clarify the sct of independent variables to be adjusted in a cost function minimization algorithm. Details on the algorithm that we have chosen for the application of the concepts discussed in this paper will be given in a subsequent section. ‘The conditions presented here are not comprehensive of all possible steady-state flight situations. Nev- ertheless the results of this paper are easily extended to special cases. AL Straight flight 4. General straight flight (any y, possibly asymmetric attitude) When a steady-state fight along a straight path is desired! one may wish to specify, besides velocity and altitude, the flight-path angle 7 and the wind frame heading yw. ‘The latter quantity is the divcetion in the plane eye towards which the aircraft velocity veetor must point. Tt turns out that the angle wy does not influence the trim strategy and ean be set to zero without loss of generality. We refer to the trimmed flight of an aircraft along a straight path, with a possibly nonzero and possibly nonzero 6, @ and), as the general stright fight, see Figuee A geneval straight fight, achieved with attitude asymmetries with respect to the vertical plane containing the velocity veetor, see Figure 2, is such that the angles yyw, 0 and y are not zero and their trimmed values result from the equilibrium conditions. The possible asymmetries are due to one o some of the folloxing situations: (7) the aireraft configuration is not syrmmotrie with respect to the body-fixed longitudinal plane, ((#) some lateral or directional acrodynamic actions do not vanish with zero sideslip (ths situation is genorally coupled with the provious one, for example: different incidence sottings of the to wings, opening failure of one of the two landing gears, @ prominent probe on one of the two wings, ete), (iti) the propulsive actions are asymmetric (for example: a rolling moment due to propeller, the failre of one of the engines). In general the heading difference y— yy is related to the sideslip angle ¥ roquired to achieve the overall f Iateral-dircetional actions on the aircraft, In the particular ease when a flight with zero sidesip bal ot 0 American Insitute of Aeronautics ane Astronantics Paper ALAA-2007-6703,angle is required, the difference ys — Uw will be zero, i.e. y = 0, and and the two remaining, clevation @ and bank @, are to be set properly for the achievement of equilibrium. Other particular trim conditions are those that require the wings to be leveled. In these cases 6 will be set to zero and the two Euler angles y and @ will remain as free paran When the cost function is minimizod for « straight trimmed flight, all the angular rates p,q and r are set to zero and are left out of &. As discussed above, depending on aircraft configuration and possible asymmetries, the Euler angles ¢}, @ and ¢ may not be zoro and they aro treated as independent variables. ‘They are incorporated in the vector € and made part of the set of adjustable parameters controlled by the cost function numerical minimization algorithm. Therefore, assuming an airplane configuration with the traditional four controls, the minimization control veetor is Euler angles, €=[6.9, Sn Be] (55) The presence in (55) of all the attitude angles permits the intrinsic adjustment of the two aerodynamic angles a and 3. In goneral, for a given aircraft acrodynamics and propulsion model, and given a fight- path angle 7 to be maintained at the assigned velocity V, there is no a priori knowledge of the airplane attitude and control settings that guarantee a steady-state fight. A trim algorithm based on cost function minimization finds the combination of parameters (55) that makes (54) zoro within a given tolerance. ‘When the airplane has symmetrical characteristics, both geometric and aerodynamic, and the thrust is symmetric, the steady-state flight along a straight path can be certainly achioved with zero sideslip and bank angles, 3 0, and lateral-dircetional controls at their neutral positions, 6, = 6, = 0. Then, conceptually, the trimmed angle of attack a is deducible from the equ ‘of longitudinal forces and moments and the attitude angle 0 is found by the sum +a. When this is the case, itis often more practical considering the zero bank as a requirement, putting @ = yw ), assigning, 0, and letting the trim control variable voctor (55) become Stone = [0 87, 5e]" (56) In this context wo refer to the adjustment of trim control parameters (56) as the Longitudinal trim algorithm. ‘When there are asymmetries of any type in the flight dynamics mode, itis a suitable combination of all the &'s in (65) that assures the steady-state straight fight. The sketch reported in fig. 2 lustrates this general situation. To reach the desired trimmed flight along a straight line the minimization control parameters are adjusted until all the equilibriu steady-state flight Vann O. By ~ eit ad wt Figure 2. Possible attitude angles of a trimmed translational flight in a generic asymmetric condition. The desired volocity V and flight path angle ~ are attained by trimming both longitudinal and Intcral-directional actions on the airplane. In asymmetric conditions the acrodynamie actions (4 are balanced by gravity and actions only at nonzero roll and xideslip 3, ie. bending deviati tw. The cost function n should proceed by adjusting all parameters in (58) until the consequent perturbations in terms fof forces and moments result In a set of reasonably balanced actions. ‘Table 2 sui warizes the equations used for stralght-and-level trim, 15 of 0 American Insitute of Aeronautics ane Astronantics Paper ALAA-2007-6703,‘Table 2. Initial conditions, constraint equations, and computed parameters for steady-state, straight Aight ‘Type Parameters [Definitions In V=%, 1= 70, Ww 1 Conditions Derived parameters: | Pp ConstraineExuations [ose (I)-G)-G, (4), with he above cond ‘Trim Control Parame [$= [6.00.85 66,8, 56] Computed Parameters | eynamie state variables and a Straight-and-level flight What is termed generically straight-and-level flight may not metric attitude and with wings kept horizontal) or level ( straight-and-level flight the ease in which Here we will mean for o-0 (7) y= 0 (98) that is, wings level and constant altitude, with no particular requirement on the sideslip angle. According to the discussion reported in the previous section, when we have a symmetric aircraft model about its 2 body-axis plane, in mass distribution, aerodynamics, and thrust, and when the aircraft is flying with a zero flight-path angle then we may have certainly a straight-and-level fight with zero sidesip, i. with b= ow. For a generic straight-and-lovel ight, we have, besides the basic requirements stated above, the following trivial derived conditions (9) and a vector of trim controls € Br Be 8a be] (60) From conditions (59) we can rewrite the constraint equilibrium equations (43) and (44) as 1. Zveose + Xvsina=mg (1) Dain + Coos — Xv cosarsinS ~ Ye cos = Zr sina sin =0 (2) whore a and ¢ will be determined by the presence in § of the Kuler angles @ and y. Table 3 summarizes the equations used for straight-and-lovel trim. oto American Insite of Acronanitcs anc Astronanties Paper ALAA-2007-6703‘Table Initial condi nm, constraint equations, and computed parameters for steady-state, straight: ‘Type Parameters [Definitions Initial Conditions Derived parameters: ‘Constraint Equations Deos—C: Xr cosereos 3 + Ye-sin f+ Zysinercas 8 se (42)-(48)-(44), (24) L—mg — Zreosa — Xysina Dsin § + C e083 = Xyeosarsin§ + Yip cos $+ Zrsinasins La +L =0, My +My =0,Ny +N 5p, 86.505)" ‘Trim Control Parameters | € = [0 Compute Parancters | egnamie stato variables (and a = 8) B. Push-Over/Pull-Up wneuver ean be performed with the wings level, zero sideslip, or in the ease of an nerodynamics, and thrust both, We will examine the wings-level A pust-over or a pulkup m aireraft symmotric in mass distribution cease with a zero flight. path angle: o 0 (63) By definition, a load factor n> 1 is associated with a pull-up maneuver and load factor n <1 is associated with a push-over maneuver. In addition to these definitions, we have the following derived constraints: =o (oa) p- If we begin with equation (43) and the defining characteristics of the push-over and pull-up maneuvers wwe get L~ Zreose + Xpsina = mg + qVmeoss (6s) Which, using the definition of load faetor from equation (35), gives us ” [man = 1) + Zrcosa— Xersina] (66) Vincos? unarize theso results in Table 4 showing the initial condi straint equations, and the computed parameters ons, the derived parameters, the con iro 0 American Insite of Acronanitcs anc Astronanties Paper ALAA-2007-6703‘Table 4. Initial conditions, derived parameters, constraint equations, and computed parameters for punleover of pull-up condition ‘Type Parameters [Definitions Initial Conditions V = Vo, hho, dw 0 Derived Parameters Trceg [man 1) + Zreosa~ Xrsina], sce (66) Constraint Equations Doos 3 — Cain = Xpeosacosp + ¥osin § + Zysinaccos 8 soe (42)-(43)-(44), (34) Dsin8 + Ccos 8 = Xpcosasin§ + Vp cos 3+ Zy sinasing bat br WP + Dy Meh he Mat+Mr=0 Nat Ne = Ly? Dy Wettig ‘Trim Control Parameters | €= [8.1 81s be. 8ay Be] Computed Parameter | dynamic state variables 3 (and a = 0) Taal walls ae ferred to the condition reported fa Figure 9, Lev at Gin fy when the plane yyy hori Figure 8. Forces in the wings-level pull-up condition. 1s of 0 American Insite of Aeronautics and Astronantics Paper ALAA-2007-6703,Figure 4. Three dimensional sketch of forces in steady-state, level, coordinated turn C. Steady-State turn For the steady-state turn lot ns start examining Figure 4, depicting a flight situation known as level turn ith lond factor, m, greater han one). ‘This scheme of forces assanes thatthe turn i, in fet, teve, fe. with zero fight path angle, 7 = 0. Moreover, the turn represented in figure is ealled coordinated tur, being 2 maneuver with zero sideslip angle, 3 = 0 A steady-state, evel turn isa particular case of a more general steady-state turn, A generic stendy turn will be performed with a nonzero elimi rate and possibly with nonzero sideslip angle, the aixplane center of mass following a helical path with constant speed. For our mathematical derivations co will discuss the general case first’ and we will consider the level, coordinated turn as a particular case. From the kinematic standpoint we can start deriving some nontrivial trigonometzic expressions relating he angles, éw, v, 8 6, «and . For this purpose we have reported Figure 5. Tn a generic steady turn, aasiuming the Instant of tine when the velocity heading angle is zero, the wind frame plane yey is banked about the velocity vector V7, and the wind fraine attitude with respect to the local vertical frame Is given by the Euler angle triad: (day, 4iy — 7, 6w — 0). In the plane yey so place in the three-dimensional space, we have the axis aw, which also belongs to the aireraft body plane zn. The two planes zen and zw=w have the axis sw as their intersection line and form what in Geometry i called a dihedral angle given by 3. According, to the above observations, a trim algorithm considers the variables and oy as given quanti- ties, and takes at least one of the three aircraft Euler angles, for instance t, as a free, adjustable parameter a the gencrie stop. ‘The adjustment of @ will depend on the specific mininnization algorithm chosen. At cach step, once this parameter is set, the remaining two attitude angles @ and @ have to be assigned for the cevalitation of the cost funtion Ifthe turn is coordinated, fs zero and the two planes yaw and rp2n will coincide, that #6, from Figure 5, the points A and A’ will coincide. When this is the ease, the aireraft elevation @ will be necessarily qual to the angle @ represented in figure. As we will later in this section, the remaining aireraft Buler angle 6, known 7, dw, W and 8, will he determined from one of the available transformations between the frames Ov, Ow and ()p. Therefore, the sideslip angle is vero, the body reference frame will have nonzero Euler angle y and obviously nonzero values of @ and ¢. The latter is in general not equal to dy. 19 of 0 American Insite of Aeronautics and Astronantics Paper ALAA-2007-6703,plane 2429 plane aww Figure 5. Wind frame and body fixed frame Euler angles in a turn, When 9 = 0 the turn is said to be coordinated and the axis zy belongs to plane 2w=y- In coordinated tums, given 7, dy and the elevation & is constrained to be equal to #. When the turn mancuver is noncoordinated, then also the clevation @ has to be considered as a trim control variable, together with v. This is definitely the situation depicted in Figure 5, where # 0 and 0-40. Finally, from the same figure we note that both zw and 2y belong to the aircraft longitudinal plane pen and that the axis 24 is obtained by rotating 2w about the transversal, nonhorizontal axis yp of the angle a. Let us now derive some important equations that relate aircraft Euler angles and flow angles in a turn. By definition of transformation matrices, we have that the unit vectors of the various reference frames considered in this paper are formally expressod by the following equations ip v is iw iw wv in b= [Cnv)-4 ie be in b= [nw } aie b> 4 ae f= [Cwev)-y ay} 7) ke ky ka kw kw ky Consequently we have the following matrix identity [Cov] = [Cx—w] - [wv] (68) that gives us nine possible relationships between the attitude angles. In the general case of steady-state turn we can only substitute in equations (68) vy = 0. For a coor- dinated, level turn, being also Oy 0, and = 0, matrices [Cw—y] and [Cp—w] have much simpler expressions. Knowing that the unit vectors fy and f,, are the normals to the planes 2w=w and r12n, respectively, wwe have that the cosine of their dihodral angle is given by 608 = Fy Fs (69) 2006 0 Ameria Institnte of Aeronatcs and Astronanties Paper ALAA-2007-6703When the two planes are described by their canonical equations in local vertieal frame coordinates, artbytertd 0, mpm: alrtil'ytelstd'=0 (70) we have aa! £bb! pec! JERE Va OTC Exxpressing the cocflicients (a,6,¢,d) and (a',6’,c',d’) according to cquation (67), it easily shown that the angle (Fis given by the following cquation (71) n guy cosy + Co cosy + Cy sin ow sin y J@s@40 (G+G+G eos 8 = (72) rived from (71), with cos dw sin yc0s sin + sin dw cos cos wt cos Gy 08-7 C088 C02) + cos dy i sin (73) sin dw sind + cox yy cosy eos sin eb Given 7, dw, # and 9 the angle is determined by the inverse cosine of the right-hand side of (72). ‘Moreover, considering the entry (2,3) of both sides of equation (68) we obtain the iy £08 — sin sin y cos “” giving ¢ in terms of the remaining quantities. At this point, having set y and @, and having determined 6, we have placed the aircraft in the space. In particular we have placed the aircraft with respect to the velocity vector, the acrodynamic angles # and a being given, respectively, by (72) and by the following equation + a) = Tay X Tey (75) ‘The trim control vector for the research of a general steady-stato turn condition will be given by e=[6 5 Br Be bas 8e] (76) In terms of attitude angles, at each step of the cost function numerical minimization algorithm the set of quantities (76) together with the given values of yw and will enable the determination of @, 8 and a. The vector of trim controls in the case of a coordinated, level turn is casily derived from the above discussion by assuming y = 6 = 0 (77) As we have pointed out above, when sideslip angle is vero the sole Buler angle to be considered as free adjustable parameter is y> whi (78) In steady-state turning flight the heading will be changing at a constant prescribed rate dw. In the general ease the difference ys — Uw may not be zero but will be constant. Given the turn heading rate vw, the wind-axis frame angular rates are constrained from the following, Euler angle rate equation rw 1 oo ~siny ow gw $=] 0 cosdw cosysindw 4 (79) tw 0 sing casreosew | (vay ‘And, because forthe steady-state ti ja dw=0 (30) ai otu0 American Insite of Aeronautics and Astronantics Paper ALAA-2007-6703,‘we have the following equations for the general case of a climbing turn (81) we nw = dweon-yeo8 ow Using the transformation from the wind-axis reference syste to the body axis system, [Cw] given by (14), we can get the body axis rates » pw pw casa.cos8 — qw cosasin 8 — rw sina a} [Cvw) sy aw b= pwn + vem 8 (2) , ne Pwasinceeos i — gw sinasin + rw cosa: {And using the results from equations (81), e ean write the equations forthe body axis rates in esation (82) » in-ycosercos f+ 006-y4In fw cosasin B + c06-yc08 dy sina «op =iw sin yn 6 — 0087 sin dy 009 ws) r sin sn.c008 8 + co8 in dy sin cin B — 008 cos dy cos ‘Then substituting the results from equations (110) > : sin 7 cosercos f+ cosy sin dyy cose sin + 0087 eos dy since a} Zand sin-7 in ~ cos in 6 e083 ws ' sin sin ca + e08-.n snes — com-/c08 dv coe Multiplying through each equation by the trtn tan yy and simplifying yids 2 [xn tangy con acos + 228787 oweosasinD A ain yin | (65) tan Sf nose y 4 £007 sin? uy 008 ' sin tan dy sin — 208280? dw os 86) # [orton cme 6) 2 4 conn? ay sn crn 8 4 [sm tan gy sco 84 TE OE cosy dy coxa] (87) ‘These results for the body-axis rates are different from those obtained by Chen and Josko! and used by Duke ef af? Chen and Jeske assume that the steady-state turn is a “coordinated turn” and that the angle of sideslip, 8, is zero. Tn our approach, we make no assumption on the angle of sideslip. Our final task is to determine the Buler angles for the steady-state turn, To accomplish this, we need to first examine the equations defining the body-axis rates Euler angle rates given by the following equations from Stevens and Lewis:+ d=ptasingtand +reosdtand ss) 6 =qoos@—rsind (89) b—gsind + roosqsocd (90) Fora steady-state tam (91) rom equation (89), we ean gt (92) and from equation (88), we can get omer" (Castres) “) of w American Insite of Aeronanitics and Astronantios Paper ALAA-2007-6702Inequations (92) as in equation (100), the plus sign indicates. right-hand turn and the minus sign a left-hand, turn. We can use the force equations to solve for two key terms that define the maneuver: the wind-axi altitude, dw, and the time derivative of wind-axis heading (sometimes refered to as wind-axis yy. From these parameters, we can determine the constraint equations for the mancuver. Noting from Figure 4 the vertical forces and assuming that the entire wind-roference systems z-axis force results from lift, for a steady-state condition we must have L cosow = mg (oa) If wo use the definition of load factor from equation (35), we can write equation (94) as img cos dw (95) (96) with 7) (Co (08) If we are only interested in level turns, equation (98) gives us the results we need. However, wecan extend these results to the more general case of nonzero 7 by recog instead of equation (94), we would have the equation ng that in Figure 4, Leos dy cos Ow = mg (99) and by replacing 4 with that would result in the following equation, (n? cos?) cosy tan bw (200) From this equation, we get the equation for the wi axis bank attitude ieee ~ where the plus sign indicates a right-hand turn and the minus sign a left-hand turn. Noting from Figure 4 the horizontal forces, we can write the centripetal force equation tow ye oa (402) for a vehicle moving along a circular path of radius R with angular velocity, Vv e=a (103) Force Fy is also given by Poa mV (104) ‘Then using the horizontal component of the lift vector, we can write L sin ow = mV (105) 2306 0 American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronauties Paper ALAA-2007-6708Recognizing, that . w= dw (106) we can write the centripetal foree equation as Lsindw =m V iw (107) ‘Then, using the equation for load factor [equation (35)] we have amg singw = mV dw (108) (109) (110) able Initial conditions and constraint eqnations for stondy-xéate t ‘Type Parameters | Definitions Initial V=Vo,h= ho, ¥= 0 Conditions (85), con sin? yr eosin Bye, lok [sartend coscrass 4 ST AEC 5 cosysimow inal (93) cos sin? dy €0s (3 sin ten oy sin tle wees cosryain? gy sin asin 2 fsnrsin tandayereos 9-4 S878? ewsinassing comrsineoona] cos ‘Trim Control Parameters dynamic st Kinematic variables: ‘Computed Parameters ‘Table 5 provides a summary of the initial conditions and the derived parameters in a steady-state turn, ‘This table also list the parameters computed by the optimization function, V. Cost function minimization methods A. Gradient-based minimization methods ‘The problem of multidimensional minimization requires finding a point € such that the sealar funetion TGxs---»G) takes a value which is lower than at any neighboring point.” Assuming that J is a smooth function, the gradient VJ should vanish at the minimum. In general there are no bracketi available for the sional functions. ‘The algorithms proceed from an initial guess using a search algorithim which attempts to move in a downhill direction. Algorithms making use of the gradient of the function perforin a one-dimensional line miaginization along this direction until che lowest methods nimization of neditas 2b of wo American Insite of Acronanitcs anc Astronanties Paper ALAA-2007-6703point is found to a suitable tolerance. ‘Phe search direction is then updated with local information from the funetion and its derivatives, and the whole process repeated until the true n-dimensional minimum is found. When such methods are selected there is the need to know the vector-valued function OI\_[ar aT | as ar dT aE J Las" BO" BBP” Be, For the sake of elariication, let us consider the derivation of (638) with respect to one of the variables pon which the cost function depends, for example p. ‘The application of the chain rule gives PS _ 9, Whe 4,2 Uli oj Ble 06 ab aa a6 yy wn 06 whore the fmetions that expliity give the rates V4, A, fy dy # are denoted a8 fis fig «-» So aed derived by rearranging the equations of motion (1). Henee the equation (112) Is the particularization of the general rule au) vr = {5 +20 2 (112) apt aa BE yg Ph gy Phe gay Db 5 9p He 52g Mle 99 Oh as) Oy Oy a ag Fag Fog that gives the generic component of vector VJ = {0.7/2}. When V, a and 8 are considered in place of state variables u, w and w the above rule is sco to PF _ 4, Aly yy, dhe Ae 1 94 2be 4 9; fe = 2 ey 9 Pt yo 4 2p Bley 0g lt 05 ag Pag tag * oe tae + Nag, 8? Og ‘The partial derivatives appearing in (L11), in particu noteworthy NASA paper by Duke ef ali.® The necessary forr au) equation (114), are determined following the las are reported next, cosy cosy sin fy — cosy sin dy sino cos.) (115) (aie) (7) (us) Vi cos fy me Bfa a He A (snd cosy cosy —0 sin) (120) - a) 1 ay axy ates ( = 156, Heosoo Zt sno 5) 2) an, Ea — 8 (sty easy esi + rst snd sing sin) (123) 25 of Ameria Institnte of Aeronatcs and Astronanties Paper ALAA-2007-6703aay) oh ax) aa [xs (sin jr Cog, + e054 0%, ) moon sn RE sin BE son sin | (13) aig (nica, Het, +100, ) (128 we oh of (129) ee ee 0) % She Ps (ist) ging (big, +seCm, +ebC,,) (a2) whore 5, is the generic control input. entation of the above functions requires the determination of the derivatives of some nero- dynamic coefficients and of propulsive force components. Depending on the aircraft: model these deriva might not be directly available and have to be reconstructed numerically, ‘This circumstance ive a minimization a technique that docs not use derivatives. This approach is 0 ined in next B. Gradient-free m ization methods: Direct Search Among the methods that try to minimize a multi-variate scalar funetion /(€) there are those named direct search methods, also known as optimization techniques that do not explicitly use derivatives. Direct scarch methods were formally proposed and widely applied in the 1960s but fell out of favor with the mathematical optimization community by the early 1970s because they lacked coherent mathematical analysis. Nonetheless, uuscrs remained loyal to these methods, most of which were easy to program, some of which were reliable. Being straightforward to implement and not requiring derivatives are not necessarily two compelling features today. Sophisticated implementations of derivative-based methods, with line search or trust region globalization strategies and options to generate approximations to the gradient and/or the Hessian, are widely available and relatively easy to use. Furthermore, today there are automatic diffe as well as modeling languages that. compute derivatives automatically. ‘Thus, a user only needs to provide fa procedure that ealeulates the funetion values. ‘Today, most people’s first recommendation to solve an unconstrained problem for which accurate first derivatives ean be obtained would not be a direct. search ation tools 2606 0 American Insitute of Aeronautics ane Astronantics Paper ALAA-2007-6703,method, but rather a gradient-based method. If second derivatives were also available, the top choice would he a Newton-based method. But this does not mean that direct search methorls are no longer needed. ‘They still have their niche. In particular, the maturation of simulation-based optimization has led to optimization problems with features that, make it difficult to apply methods that require derivative information, ‘There arc also optimization problems where methods based on derivatives cannot be used because the objective function being optimized is not numerical in nature. ‘The term simulation-based optimézation is currently applied to the methodology in which complex physical systems are designed, analyzed, and controlled by optimizing the results of computer simulations. In the simulation-based optimization sotting, a computer simulation must be run, repeatedly, in order to compute the various quantities needed by the optimization algorithm. Furthermore, the resulting simulation output mst then be postprocessed to arrive finally at valucs of the objective and constraint functions. These complications can make obtaining derivatives for gradient-based methods at the very least difficult, even when the underlying objective and constraint functions are smooth (i.c., continuously differentiable) A comprchensive review of direet search methods is given by Kolda, Lewis and Torcon..” ‘The reader is referred to that article and to the works by Nelder and Mead,!® Gurson,!* and Dolan’? for more det oon some classical and modern methods ancl on the available algorithmic options. ‘The results presented here were obtained by using the DirectSearch C++ library developed by ‘Torecon et ali2™?! ‘The aircraft trim problem falls right into the context of simulation-based optimization, where the term “optimization equals to determine the combination of fight control settings and other state variables that make the steady-state flight possible. ‘This paper proposes a practical solution of the trim problem by m of the JSBSim flight dynamies model library." In JSBSim, like in any other flight simulation software, ‘when it comes to solving the problem of trim one has to choose necessarily the cost function minimization technique. ‘The choice could fall obviously on a gradiont-based technique or on a gradient-free technique, ‘The first option entails the difficulty of implementing all the functions (115)-(132), taking, into account the overall structure of the chosen simulation code and its design philosophy. On the contrary, the direct search cls of methods implemented in the above mentioned DirvetScarch library appeared to be a suitable choice for the solution of the aircraft trim problem based on JSBSim. DirveiSenrch implements a fairly satisfying treatment of trim control variable bounds based on a penalty approach." ‘This feature allows obt results that are physically correct (cost fnetion minima eorrensponding to feasible ac and thrust settings), and that reflect the limitations of the available aerodynamic model (angles of attack and sideslip within the range of available data). ‘We want to emphasize here that the advanced flight simulation libraries tend to have a complex structure. In JSBSim this is duc to the advanced capability of managing a completely data-driven aireraft model and to its general, extensible physies/math model. Therefore, the choice of a direct search method as opposed to a gradient-based method was not only more suitable but, with the aim of spending the minimum effort in audditional coding, it was really our only eh VI. Trim Algorithm Implementation in JSBSim A trimming capability based on the approach presented in this paper has been coded into JSBSim. A. preoxisting trinuning capability in JSBSkn was developed by ‘Tony Peden in the class FGTram. Currently this class and the related one, FGTeimaxis, are still usable and left unmodified in their own place in the ISBSimn source tree. The alm of the new trim eapability is to provide the flight dynamles model library with, default, accurate algorithm for the determination of alreralt equilibrium states A. Essential implementation details ‘The new trim algorithm has been implemented in a trim class named FGTrimAnalysis, whose user interface has been adapted from the pre-existing one to allow a smooth transition to the new functionality. ‘This class uses a related class named F6TriminalysisControl. ‘The new trim classes provide the user with a number of pre-programmed fypes of trim conditions, each one associated with some given constraint equations and a given set of trim controls (€). For each trim condition, a dedicated algorithm will vary the appropriate Parameters to find the combination of values that minimizes the related cost function, ‘The minimum represents the desired trimmed state 2 of American Insite of Acronanitcs anc Astronanties Paper ALAA-2007-6703All trim conditions are identified with a C++ ennmerated type in JSBSim's namespace, (in the fist code ings reported below, see the use of JSBSin: :F6TrimAnalysisMode), and are exposed to the user as the following set of integers: TD seesseeeeessseseees cece = Deseription .o.cscooee . ©, for the longitudinal trim (only longitudinal quantities involved, i.c. 57, 5., 0), fight along a straight path; ight along. straight path; + for full trim (all main controls and Euler angles involved), 2, >, for full trim, wings-level (¢ = 0) flight along a straight path; 3, for coordinated turn tri enforced), fight along a helical path; (all main controls and Euler angles involved and 3 4, for tum trim (all main controls and Buler angles involved, helical path; 0 not enforced), flight along a 5, for wings-level pull-up/push-over trim (all main controls and Euler angles involved, 1 = @ = enforced), flight along, a circular path in a vertical Low level coding of new trim conditions is possible and relatively easy through the structure and interfaces of the two elasses FGTrimAnalysie and FGTrimAnalyeisControl, In Listing 1 we report an example of high level coding that shows how the user of JSBSim ean set up a. trim problem for a given alreraft model (in the particular ease we have chosen the default ¢172p model), Listing 1. Simple code in C++, An example of how JSBSim library is used to set up a trim problem. Hinclade ‘fuclude Using namespace std; aot main(int arge, chare argv) i U0 Set ap isasen String sirorattvene eed string alveraftPath string enginePach 77 the sin enecuttve ‘JonSia:iPGPDHBxece fdaExec = new JORSin fdnbxec~>SetairerattPath( alreraftPath ); fanExec->SotEnginoPath( enginePath ); ea7ap*s UU hardcoded A/C name c172p init 001"; 7/ hardcoded toe. fale name eirerate": engine’ PORDMBxe€ (0: sing A/C date ‘fdabrec ~>LoadModel ( aircraftPath , onginoPath, aircraft¥ame ) ) { cerr £< "Initialization uneuccessful* << end SEtCD: 42 The trem ongect, sats tren moge ‘S5pSin: :FoTrinAnalyele fgtaC fdaBrec , (JSBSin::TrimAnalysicMode)1 ): Yeo: Longetudinal 1! Fall, 20 fail, ¥ings “Level - 11 3 Coordinated Tern, 4: Tern, 5: Pall-ap/Pesh—over YU The se fg fate conten fgea.Load( initFiletane ) se Ee Scere fe Or teta poten) cout ce "Trin Failed" << endl; gta Report return 0; 26 of American Insitute of Aeronautics ane Astronantics Paper ALAA-2007-6703,A desticated initialization class, FGInitial Condition, is used to retrieve the initial state of the si see use of pointer ic in Listing 1. Some initial quantities are specified by the user through an initi n XML format. In all cases the user should supply the flight speed, the flight path angle, th angle, and the altitude, Regarding the trim, for a desired trimmed state, the user is required to incorporate in tho initialization file a set of configuration parameters and initial values delimited by the tags: . This section of the initialization file has been specifically added to configure the trim algorithm. In Listing 2 we report an example of a possible initialization file c172p_init_001 x1 (seo anitFaleNane in Listing 1). ground track ing 2. A typical ISBSimn initialization fie in XML format a0"t tor tull_trim'> DEg">” Or0 DEG" 00 FI'> 6600.0 DEG"> 0.0 DEG"> “010 810. DEG"? 8.0. Dege> 010. eypai> ‘Sinitian valuee> cnd> Sfelevater_end> Sfruaderscaa> eyailaron oe 2 awa Figure 12. Trim algorithen results for the defnult Cosa 172 Aight dynias fice model cists rated! with JSRSinn. Horizontal, wings-level fight required: Vzag = 88 Knots, lias, = 5000 fl. Convergence history of normalized control positions. 108 7 r T (Cont Funct 10,9, 875 8es¥a,8;) —— 10° wo? F web w-? + 10-8 L L L ° 20 ano) Figure 13. Trim algorithm results for the default Cessna 172 flight dynamtes model Horizontal, winge-level flight required: Vras 8S knots, kas, v of 0 American Insite of Acronanitcs anc Astronanties Paper ALAA-2007-6703 1400 5500 ft. Convergence hintory of cont function20.00 som E 4 oF 6 90 » fe/10 4 20.0 15.00 £ 4 x00 & 4 0001000 20.00 3.00 -40.00—60.00 60.00 70.00 Figure 14, ‘Time historfes of Ewler angles. Initial conditions are taken from the results of the trim algorithm, of Figures 11-13, 8.00 i) 280 4 650 4 09 4 so 4 aso H 4 0 Hype 4 sop LAE ed re eT Hterations Figure 16, ‘Trim algorithm results for the default Cessna 172 fight dynamfes model distributed with ISBSim. Pullup, wings-lovel light required; m — 1.5, Vas — 90 knots, hast, ~ 55lN0 ft. Convergence history of Bler angles. bof 0 American Insite of Acronanitcs anc Astronanties Paper ALAA-2007-6703100.00 0.00 Sr fem) 100 —— fel} 100 — Bx fend} 100 = 10000 3, fema}x100 ——— oi 200 a0) an erations Figure 10, ‘Trim algorithm results for the default Cossna 172 fight dynamice model distributed with ISBSim, Pullup, wingslovel Aight required; » ~ U5, Vras ~ 90 knots, hash — 5800 ft, Convergence histery af normalized control pos 108 T T T r tion T(O,5r, Se, Bu, 5x) wo F q woe bh q web 4 so F q 0-7! ® 1002003004007 iter Figure 17, ‘Trim algorithm results for the default Cessna 172 fight dynamfes model distributed with JSBSim. Pulleup, wingslevel fight required; m= 1.5, Vas =) knots, hast, = 5500 ft. Convergence history of cost of American Insite of Acronanitcs anc Astronanties Paper ALAA-2007-670320.00 25.00 20,00 15.00 10.00 5.00 0.00 —s.00 0.00 Figure 18. fron 50.00 45.00 40.00 20.00 15.00 10.00 5.00 the rorulte of the 2.00 trim algoritl 100600) ‘Time histories of Euler angles, acrodynanie and flight-path angles of Figuren 15-17, S00 1000 12.0010 Initial conditions are taken © ea) 10150 20 aD Figure 19, ‘Trim algorithm results for the default Cessna 172 flight dynamics Non-coordinated turn: n= 15, ras ~ i knots, hast 6 of American Insite of Acronaitcs and Astronanties Paper ALAA-200 nodel distributed with JSBSim. [000 ft, Convergence history of Euler angles. 708Figure 20. Trim algorithm results for the default Cossna 172 flight dynamics model distributed with JSBSin Non-coordinated turn m positions Figure 21. Trim algorithan renults for the defnult Comma 172 8 Noncoordinated ¢ of fp ‘femal 100 == = — 40.00 [era 100, 4 4 lema)xi00 = — — 2.00 4 = 20.00 f- 4 =o0.00 4 80.00 ° 1015028 5, Vas = 91 knots, hast, ~ 5000 fe. Convergence history of normalized control 1000 7 7 7 1 (Cont Paneton 10.8, Ba Se) vw H 4 10 . o © wo 10 20 20 a am amo lt dynamics model distributed with ISBSimn. ‘84 kaots, hast = 5000 ft. Convergence history of eost fumetion J. na 15, Vea ar of wo American Insite of Acronanitcs anc Astronanties Paper ALAA-2007-67030.00 so.00 sooo F 30.00 > \N 20.00 LON N LOY 10.00 \ \ VON 0.00 OS 00200 4.00 6.0). LL. 1c histories of Buler angles, aerodynamic and fi frou the results of the trim algorith 1s 10 0.40 os 0.20 oo ast [km] a at at North [km] evolves in n left turns and ia 28 of American Insite of Acronanitcs anc Astronanties Paper ALAA-2007-67031m rostlts for for the dofiult Cossna 172 Right dynamics model trim results trim targets attitude T normalized controls postion Vo [kts] ho [tt] @ [deg] [deg] [deg] Sr be. ba be Dougitvdinal 8856000 ful 88 5800-0807 1.465.885 0.698 04152 -O0dT -0.108 fl 885500 LAA OLE 0.608 OLAS 0.0 -0.016 ving pullup 905500150 = 658-00 -DOHT 051 0.000 \A7 0,003 tum 8850005 ABBE EBL 8506 0.99 "Now coordinated turn. Convergence not obtained (see Figures 19-21). VII. Conclusions In this paper wo have examined a varicty of general trim conditions and we have derived the equations defining them, regardless of the aircraft shape and aerodynamic model peculiaritics. We have presented a general approach to trim through constrained minimization of a cost function, Finally we have provided an cxample of how a trim algorithm is used with an open source flight dynamics modcl like JSBSim. VIII. Acknowledgments ike to thank Giancarlo Troise for testing the trim code with JSBsim, ‘Tony Peden ig strategies, and Bill Galbraith for giving his tangible moral support. for this ‘The authors would for his helpful hints on trina research, References Goldstein, H: Classical Mechanics, Addison Wesley Publishing Company, lnc. 1950 Marion, J. Bs Classicel Dyuamies of Particles and Systens, Academie Press, 107, Seikin, Bs Dynomies of Atmospheric Flight, Dover Publications, 2005. ‘Stevens, B. Le; Lewis, F. Lz Aireraft Control ond Simulation. Jol Wiley fe Son, 1992 gtengel, RLF. Might Dynamics, Princeton University Prom, 2004, “Philips, W. Ps Mechanics of Bight, John Wiley & Sons, 2004 "McFarland, R. E. Trmaaing an Airevaft Modal for Flight Simulation. NASA Toshnieal Memorandum 'TM-S0406, NASA. ‘Anes Research Contes, 1987, "Duke, F. 1.; Antonlewies, R. F Keambeer, KD: Derivation and Definition of a Linear Alrraft Model, Techea! Report NASA Roference Publication RP-1207, Research Engincariag, NASA Ames Ressarch Center and NASA Dryden Flight esearch Facility, 198. "Duke, E. Ly Patterson, B. Ps Antoniowicz, R. F. User's Manual for LINEAR, a FORTRAN Programa to Derive Lincar Aieraft Models. NASA TP-2708, Deceraber 1987 Cyn, Robert TNs Jeske, James A.: Kinematic Propertios of the Helicopter in Coordinated Turns. NASA P1773, April 1981 "Cuudoba, B; Cook M. V.z “Trim Equations of Motion For Aireraft Desiga: Steady State Straight-Line Flight” ALAA, jeri Flight Mechanics Conference and Exhibit, 11-14 August 2003, Austin, Texas. ludoba, B.; Cook M. Vs “Trin Equations of Motion Far Alreraft Design: Turalng Flight, PullUp and Push-Over™ AIAA Atsnspheric Plight Mochanice Conference nnd Exhibit, LLL Angus 2008, Astin, ‘Texas 9 of Ameria Institnte of Aeronatcs and Astronanties Paper ALAA-2007-6703"Shiller, G. Ds Jacaves, D. Re; Pachter, Me “Aircraft Trim Control” AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conforence ITLL Angst 3008, Asti home pags: Rtep://iweJeboi "Born, J. Ss “ISBSim: An Open Source Flight Dynamies Model in C4" ALAA Modoling and Simulation Technology Conforencs, 16-19 Augnst 16, 2004, Provideneo, Rhode Island "SNelder, J. A;:Mead, RA simplex method for Function Minimivation.” Comput. 1, vol. 7, 196, pp. 208-212 "Kolda, T. G.; Lewis, RM; Torcuon, Vz Optimization by Direct Search: New Perspectives on Some Classical and Modern Methais. SIAM Review, 45 (2008), pp. 885-182, Society for Tnstrial and Applied Matheratis, 2008. Gur, A. Ps Sigler Search Behavior in Nonlinear Optimization. Honors Tesi, Department of Computer Science, College of William & Mary, Willamsburg, VA, 2000, "Dolan, E. Di: Paltern Search Behavior in Nonlinear Op Collegeof William de Mary, Williamsburg, VA, 1999, WTurcaom, Vs Dolan, Le; Garon, A; Shepherd, A. Sifert, C; Yates, As C+ DieetSearch Clase Snare aallable at nttp://auy.co.¥a-eau/"va/sortware/DivectSear2n/ 2" hopherd, P. Le Class Docunentation for DiectSearch and its derived classes. Avnilable at hetp://ewe.c8.an,edu/"plebep/ mization. Honors Thesis, Department of Computer Science, 40 of 0 Ameria Institnte of Aeronatcs and Astronanties Paper ALAA-2007-6703