Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 6

m

coordinated lateral motion is a lateral motion with zero sideslip, or = 0 . A

Basic Lateral Controllers (II) Lateral coordination controllern Preliminaries about coordination of lateral motion

Coordination of lateral flights will reduce adverse sideslip, thereby minimizing the coupling between the yaw and the roll motions, and enhancing the yaw responsiveness. It is much desirable to suppress sideslip in most lateral maneuvers. Dutch roll/yaw damper along will not achieve coordination. Closed-loop response of an A/C controlled by a Dutch roll damper with washout filter.
2.5 2 0.4

0 -1

A pulse a 1 sec r Open-loop Aircraft

(t)

0.3

(t)

1.5 0.2

Rudder er Servo

1 0.5 0 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 -0.1 0 5 10 15 20 0.1

10

15

20

0 0.3 0.25

10

15

20

s 0.635 s+0.4

r(t)

0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 -0.05 -0.1 0 5 10 15 20

Washed out

r(t)

--- A pulse aileron input is used for this closed-loop response simulation. --- A pulse aileron input is a typical pilots input to initiate a turn, a typical lateral maneuver. ==>Substantial sideslip still remains. ==>Other means of control is needed to suppress the sideslip. ==>We will seek only reduction in sideslip. In general, it is not practical to expect 0 .
83

Typical block diagram:

Lateral coordination controller A basic design concept


Pilot's aileron command Pilot's rudder command er Aileron a Servo Open-loop Rudder r Aircraft Servo s r Kd s+1/ K

--- Feedback of is used to suppress the sideslip. --- The controlling input is still the rudder, a most effective input for . --- The Dutch roll damper is included as the innerloop of this design.

A/C model -- for the example plant iniKj Closed-loop system of the Dutch roll damper: --- Open-loop rudder to yaw transfer function:

3.471[ s + 0.0584 + 0.305 j ] 10 r ( s ), r ( s) = er ( s ) ( s 0.0019 )[ s + 0.335 + 1.97 j ] s + 10 s --- Dutch roll damper design: er ( s ) = K d ez ( s ) s + 1 / --- Closed-loop system of the Dutch roll damper (with = 2.5 : and K d = 0.635 ): r ( s) 34.71( s + 0.4 )[ s + 0.0584 + 0.305 j ] = e z ( s ) ( s 0.0017)( s + 0.692 )( s + 6.31)[ s + 2.01)( s + 2.06) r ( s) =
--- Note that the pole of the washout filter appears in the closed-loop system as a zero. The same will be true for any filter pole(s) placed in the feedback loop.
84

For the outer-loop design, we need to convert the plant output from r to : --- From the open-loop lateral dynamic:

(s ) 3.471( s 0.017) = r ( s ) ( s 0.0019)[ s + 0.335 + 1.97 j ] (s ) s 0.0017 = r ( s) [ s + 0.0584 + 0 .305 j ]

The roll mode remains nearly cancelled by a zero in the numerator. --- As a result, the ratio between r to becomes:

--- The plant model for the outer-loop design thus will be

( s ) r( s) ( s ) 34.71( s 0.0017)( s + 0.4 ) = = e z ( s ) e z ( s ) r( s) ( s 0.0017 )( s + 0.692)( s + 6.31)[ s + 2.01)( s + 2.06)

The spiral mode is also nearly cancelled, and will not be affected by this design. Outer-loop design analysis:
Note that the dominant locus moves straight outward. If we did not over damp the Dutch roll mode, we would not have chance to obtain a satisfactory design here.

Solution at = 2.5, Kd = 0.635 and K = 0.42 -7 ez -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 34.71( s + 0.4 ) ( s + 0.692)( s + 6.31)[ s + 2.01)( s + 2.06) K

2 j 1 -1 -2
85

Closed-loop response of the coordination controller to a pulse aileron input:


3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 0 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.35

(t)

0.4 0.3

r(t)
No feedback With feedback
5 10 15 20

0.3 0.25 0.2

0.2 0.1 0 5 10 15 20 -0.1 0

0.15 0.1 0.05 0 0

(t)
5 10 15 20

--- feedback does not change and r very much. --- Reduction in is also limited, especially as the steady state value is concerned. Inclusion of a lag filter, ( s + ) /( s + ), 0 << 1, > , may help in decreasing in the steady state. Note that hen = 0 , the filter becomes an integrator:
3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 0 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.35 0.3

(t)

0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0

r(t)
= 0.05, = 0.5 = 0, = 0.5 Direct feedback
5 10 15 20

0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 -0.05 0

No feedback

10

15

20

-0.1 0

(t)
5 10 15 20

feedback through a filter

--- Normally, the value of were chosen small to preserve the dominant locus. ==>In the plot shown, we have used = 0.05 , = 0.5 and = 0 , = 0.5 . --- The steady state (red curve) has been greatly reduced with the inclusion of the lag filter. --- The slow climb of in steady sate is due to the still unstable spiral mode. --- The transient activity of remains large ==>Other method is needed to reduce it.
86

Br ( s)r ( s) + Ba ( s )a ( s) ( s ) --- ( s ), Br ( s ), Ba ( s ) : Polynomials of s . B (s ) A tactic to remove (s ) : Actuating the aileron so that a ( s ) = r r ( s) Ba ( s) B ( s)r ( s ) + Ba ( s)a ( s) Br ( s) r ( s) Br ( s )r ( s) ==>Then, ( s ) = r = 0 ( s ) ( s ) (s ) --- In theory, we can completely eliminate (s ) with this control. In reality, complete elimination of (s ) is not possible, due to the following difficulties: (a) Implementation of the method will be in trouble if Ba (s ) is non-Hurwitz. --- When Ba (s ) do have RHP root(s), a Hurwitz approximate of Ba (s ) will be used in place of the real Ba (s ) . The approximation decreases the effectiveness of the design.

Method for removing transient sideslipj Lateral coordination control with a matching aileron input
i

From open-loop lateral dynamics: ( s ) =

(b) The proposed method is a feed forward control approach, and therefore will be highly sensitive to error in the parameters of Ba (s ) and Br (s ) . -- In general, errors in the parameters of Ba (s ) and Br (s ) are inevitable and large. Nevertheless, the use of this control, even with an erroneous Br (s ) and an approximated Ba (s ) , may help in reducing the peak value of during the transient. This feed forward control can work in conjunction with the feedback method discussed previously.
87

spiral motion remains unstable. The

Further discussions about the lateral coordination controlj

The problem with the opposite-signed deflection prohibits the stabilization of the spiral mode through actuation of the rudder. The spiral mode will be stabilized by actuation of the aileron. --- See theuYaw Orientation Autopilotvdesign Other approaches for lateral coordination control exist: (1) Feedback lateral acceleration to achieve coordination: Replace the feedback with v . && --- Coordinated motion means no lateral acceleration. Therefore, a feedback design to suppress lateral acceleration can be used to improve coordination. --- True lateral acceleration is difficult to measure <==The drawback of the mothod. (2) Using computed yaw rate to achieve coordination: . L --- For an A/C with a certain bank angle and air speed, mg . there is only one value of yaw rate for which mU0 Y coordination can be achieved. & a) L sin = mU 0 and L cos = mg

& = ( g tan ) / U 0 & Z b) r = cos r = ( g / U 0 ) sin --- This desired value of r , denoted as rdes = ( g / U 0 ) sin , can be computed from the known values of and U 0 , and be used as a reference signal to a yaw rate holding control system.

Due to the implementation difficulties and other problems, these two methods are rarely used. For details of these methods, please refer to Section 4.3 of the textbook.
88