The highly maneuverable fighter aircraft is exposed to unexpected pitch motion such as over-Nz (normal acceleration) and Nz-drop characteristics in transonic and supersonic flight conditions with moderate angle of attack. These characteristics not only degrade flying qualities by destabilizing the aircraft but also threaten flight safety by increasing the structural load. This article proposes an additional augmentation control in the incremental nonlinear dynamic inversion structure, which feeds back the error of pitch angular acceleration to mitigate unexpected pitch motion in slow down turn maneuver. We evaluate the stability, flying qualities, and robustness of the proposed control system by performing the frequency-domain linear analysis and the time-domain numerical simulations based on the mathematical model of advanced trainer aircraft. As a result of the evaluation, the additional augmentation control further improves flying qualities and deceleration performance of the aircraft by decreasing over-Nz and Nz-drop characteristics in high-Nz maneuvering in the transonic flight condition as well as ensuring the stability and robustness of the control system against the major uncertainty factors of the aircraft system compared to the existing transonic pitching moment compensation (TPMC) control in which the predefined scheduling for Nz feedback is used.
BrayRSAndersonSB. A flight evaluation of the longitudinal stability characteristics associated with the pitch-up of a swept-wing airplane in maneuvering flight at transonic speeds. Washington, D.C.: National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, 1955.
2.
McRuerDMyersTT. Flying qualities of relaxed static stability aircraft. Volume 2. Ramifications of flight-essential/critical heavily-augmented airplane characteristics on flying qualities. Hawthorne, CA: Systems Technology inc., 1982.
3.
GorajZZakrzewskiP. Aircraft fuel systems and their influence on stability margin. Transactions of the Institute of Aviation2005; 183: 29–40.
4.
GilbertWPOgburnMEBrownPW, et al. Simulator Study of Stall/Post-Stall Characteristics of a Fighter Airplane with Relaxed Longitudinal Static Stability. National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 1979.
5.
PearceyHHHolderDW. Examples of the effects of shock-induced boundary layer separation in transonic flight. London: Ministry of Technology, 1967; A.R.C. 16,: 446.
6.
HallRMWoodsonSH. Introduction to the abrupt wing stall program. J Aircr2004; 41(3): 425–435.
7.
ChambersJRHallRM. Historical review of uncommanded lateral-directional motions at transonic conditions. J Aircr2004; 41(3): 436–447.
8.
HallRMBrandonJMOwensDB, et al.Transonic free-to-roll analysis of the F/A-18E and F-35 configurations. In: AIAA atmospheric flight mechanics conference and exhibit, 16–19 August 2004, Providence, Rhode Island, 2004.
9.
AndersonSBErnstEAVan Dyke, et al. Flight measurements of the wing-dropping tendency of a straight-wing jet airplane at high subsonic mach numbers. Washington, D.C: National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, 1951.
10.
BrayRSRathertGeorgeAJr, et al. The effectiveness of wing vortex generators in improving the maneuvering characteristics of a swept-wing airplane at transonic speeds. Washington, D.C.: National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, 1955.
11.
ADVISORY GROUP FOR AEROSPACE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT NEUILLY-SUR-SEINE (FRANCE). The effects of buffeting and other transonic phenomena on maneuvering combat aircraft. 1975.
12.
RahnR. Society of experimental test pilots symposium.oversimplification can sometimes be hazardous to your health-the XA4D skyhawk story.
13.
Phillips EH Team correcting deficiencies in Navy's T-45A trainer aircraft, aviation week and space technology, 1989.
14.
SeficWJFriendEL. Flight measurements of buffet characteristics of the F-104 airplanefor selected. Washington, D.C.: National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics.
Korea Aerospac Industries. Avionics system user manual for the FA-50 program, 2012.
17.
HanelMNeuhuberWOsterhuberR, et al.Asymmetric stiffness pitch control-transonic pitch-up mitigation for the EF2000,” AIAA guidance, navigation, and control conference and exhibit. In: AIAA guidance, navigation, and control conference and exhibit, Providence, Rhode Island, 16 August 2004–19 August 2004, 2004. DOI: 10.2514/6.2004-4752.
18.
MillerCJ. Nonlinear dynamic inversion baseline control law: flight-test results for the full-scale advanced systems. In: AIAA guidance, navigation, and control conference, Portland, Oregon, 08 August 2011–11 August 2011: Testbed F/A-18 Airplane., 2011.
19.
MundaySMerkleSWackerR. X-38 application of dynamic inversion flight control; 2001.
BrinkerJSWiseKA. Flight testing of reconfigurable control law on the X-36 tailless aircraft. J Guid Contr Dyn2001; 24: 903–909.
22.
GregoryWDavidA. X-35B STOVL flight control law design and flying qualities. In: 2002 biennial international powered lift conference and exhibit, Williamsburg, VA, 5–7 November 2002. New York: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
23.
HarrisJJStandfordsJR. F-35 flight control law design and verification. In: Aviation technology, integration, and operations conference, Atlanta, GA, USA, June 25–29, 2018: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Aviation Forum, 2018.
24.
SmithPBerryA.Flight test experience of a non-linear dynamic inversion control law on the VAAC harrier. In: Atmospheric flight mechanics conference, Denver, CONew York, 14–17 August 2000: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
25.
P SmithPR. A simplified approach to non-linear dynamic inversion based flight control. In: Proceedings of the 1998 american institute of aeronautics and astronautics, atmospheric flight mechanics conference, Boston, MA, New York, 10–12 August 1998. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, pp. 762–770.
26.
BuffingtonJF. AIR FORCE RESEARCH LAB WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB OH AIR VEHICLES DIRECTORATE. Modular control law design for the innovative control effectors (ICE) tailless fighter aircraft configuration 101-3. Ohio: Air Force Research Laboratory, Air Vehicles Directorate, Wright-Patterson AFB, 1999.
27.
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics. Design and flight testing of incremental nonlinear dynamic inversion based control laws for a passenger aircraft. In: American institute of aeronautics and astronautics (AIAA), San Diego, California, 7–11 January 2019, 2018, p. 1.
28.
KimCJiCKimBS. Development of a control law to improve the handling qualities for short-range air-to-air combat maneuvers. Advances in Mechanical Engineering2020; 12(7): 168781402093679.
29.
KimC. Flight control system design and verification process. Journal of Institutes of Control, Robotics and Systems2008; 12(8): 824–836.
30.
Consultancy Report – Intermediate Control Law Analysis and Design. Netherlands aerospace centre, 2019.
31.
Department of Defense Handbook - Airworthiness Certification Criteria. United States department of defense, MIL-HDBK-516C, 12 December 2014.
BurgeSEFeltonRD. Reduction of Structural Coupling in Advanced Fighter Aircraft by Active Structural Mode Control. London: IEE, 1996.
34.
KimCSJiCHYangIS, et al.“Guideline to Establish Requirements of Stability Margin for Airworthiness Certification”. In: Proceedings of Asian joint symposium on aerospace engineering, HICO Gyeongju, October. 31–November. 3: Republic of Korea, 2018.
35.
KimCYangIKohG, et al.Development of the model-/sensor-based nonlinear dynamic inversion control technique for highly maneuverability fighter. Journal of Institute of Control, Robotics and Systems2018; 24(7): 639–654.
36.
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics. Stability and robustness analysis and improvements for incremental nonlinear dynamic inversion control. In: American institute of aeronautics and astronautics (AIAA), Kissimmee, Florida, 8–12 January 2018, 2018, p. 1.
