Flight dynamics and parametric modeling of a 2-DOF lab aircraft

Abstract

This paper presents two degrees-of-freedom (2-DOF) modeling of a lab aircraft extending corresponding author’s previous work on 1-DOF. The yaw motion is an additional DOF introduced along with the earlier work on pitch plane alone. The test-rig is designed, developed, instrumented, and interfaced with PC employing data acquisition card and real-time visualization software. Detailed mathematical models from first principles are developed incorporating important stability and control derivatives. The theoretical models are iteratively improved and validated through experimentation. The comparison reveals close agreement between math models and experimental ones. The developed high-fidelity models are to be employed for closed-loop control design and evaluation of system performance.

Keywords

Aerodynamic modeling 2-DOF lab aircraft unmanned air vehicles wind tunnel aircraft stability

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Nelson

. Flight stability and automatic control 1998; vol. 2, New York: WCB/McGraw Hill.

Cook

. Flight dynamics principles: A linear systems approach to aircraft stability and control, Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann, 2012.

Stevens

Lewis

Johnson

. Aircraft control and simulation: Dynamics, controls design, and autonomous systems, New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2015.

Etkin

Reid

. Dynamics of flight: Stability and control 1996; vol. 3, New York: Wiley.

Ahmad

. Flight dynamics, parametric modelling and real-time control of a 1-DOF tailplane. Math Comput Model Dyn Syst 2013; 19: 220–237.

Kaminer

et al.

Trajectory tracking for autonomous vehicles: An integrated approach to guidance and control. J Guid Control Dyn 1998; 21: 29–38.

Hallberg

Kaminer

Pascoal

. Development of a flight test system for unmanned air vehicles. IEEE Control Syst 1999; 19: 55–65.

Atkins EM, et al. Solus: An autonomous aircraft for flight control and trajectory planning research. In: Proceedings of the American control conference, 1998. New York: IEEE.

Linehan R, Burnham K and James D. 4-Dimensional control of a remotely piloted vehicle, UKACC International Conference On Control Exeter, UK, 2–5 September 1996.

10.

Tomac

Stenfelt

. Predictions of stability and control for a flying wing. Aerosp Sci Technol 2014; 39: 179–186.

11.

Vicroy D. Blended-wing-body low-speed flight dynamics: Summary of ground tests and sample results (Invited). In: 47th AIAA aerospace sciences meeting including the new horizons forum and aerospace exposition, 2009. Reston, VA: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.

12.

Stenfelt

Ringertz

. Lateral stability and control of a tailless aircraft configuration. J Aircraft 2009; 46: 2161–2164.

13.

Sufendi, et al. Design and implementation of hardware in-the-loop-simulation for uav using pid control method. In: 3rd international conference on instrumentation, communications, information technology and biomedical engineering (ICICI-BME), Bandung Institute of Technology, Bandung, Indonesia 7–8 November 2013.

14.

Bittar

de Oliveira

NMF

de Figueiredo

. Hardware-in-the-loop simulation with X-plane of attitude control of a SUAV exploring atmospheric conditions. J Intell Robot Syst 2014; 73: 271–287.

15.

Atlas

et al.

Hardware-in-the-loop test platform design for UAV applications. Appl Mech Mater 2015; 789–790: 681–687.

16.

Gans

et al.

A hardware in the loop simulation platform for vision-based control of unmanned air vehicles. Mechatronics 2009; 19: 1043–1056.

17.

Kamali

Jain

. Hardware in the loop simulation for a mini UAV. IFAC-PapersOnLine 2016; 49: 700–705.

18.

Johnson EN and Fontaine S. Use of flight simulation to complement flight testing of low-cost UAVs. In: AIAA Modeling and Simulation Technologies Conference, Montreal Canada, 6–9 August 2001.

19.

Liang

J.-W

. Damping estimation via energy-dissipation method. J Sound Vib 2007; 307: 349–364.

20.

Fay

. Coulomb damping. Int J Math Educ Sci Technol 2012; 43: 923–936.