Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
U
(1)
where J is the inertial matrix of the helicopter, M is the
mass,
T
[ , , ]
b
u v w = v and [ , , ]
b T
p q r = are the translational
1769
and angular velocity vectors of the helicopter in
b
,
respectively. [ , ]
b b b T
= F f U is the external wrench subjected
by the helicopter in
b
. Moreover, ( ) S < is a skew symmetric
matrix, and
3 2
3
3 1
2 1
0
( ) 0 for .
0
x x
S x x x x
x x
| |
|
= e
|
\ .
\ (2)
Let (3) R SO e denote the rotation matrix mapping
vectors expressed in
b
into vectors expressed in
e
, we have
the auxiliary equation
( )
b
R RS =
. (3)
Parameterize R with the orientation angles of the helicopter,
we get
c s c c c s s c c s s s
R c s s s s c c c s s s c
s s c c c
u | u | | u |
u | u | | u |
u | u | u
+ | |
| = +
|
\ .
(4)
where sin s = < < and cos c = < < , | , u and are the roll, pitch,
and yaw, respectively. Substituting (4) into (3), after some
rearrangement we obtain the state equation of the Euler
angles, col( , , ) | u O = , as
b
O = I
(5)
where
1
0
0
s t c t
c s
s c c c
| u | u
| |
| u | u
| |
| I =
|
\ .
(6)
where sin s = < < , cos c = < < and tan t = < < .
It is worth noticing that I is singular at 2 u t = . We
assume that ( 2, 2) u t t e to avoid the singularities of I .
This assumption is compliant with the real condition in normal
helicopter flight.
Force and Moment Generation
There are four control inputs in the coaxial rotor/ducted
fan helicopter: main rotor collective pitch (
0MR
u ), longitudinal
and lateral cyclic pitches (
lon
u ,
lat
u ), and ducted fan collective
pitch (
0, DF
u ). Let
MR
T and
DF
T denote the lifts generated by the
main rotor and the ducted fan, respectively. The direction of
the thrust
MR
T is governed by
lon
u and
lat
u by means of tilting
the swash plate, which consequently controls the pitch/roll
attitude and translational movement of the helicopter. The
magnitude of
MR
T and
DF
T are controlled by
0MR
u and
0, DF
u ,
respectively.
The external wrench
b
F can be written as the sum of the
contributions from the different helicopter components. The
resultant force
b
f acting on in the COG can is the sum of the
thrusts generated by the rotor and the ducted fan and
aerodynamic force generated by the duct fuselage. The
resultant torque
b
U about the COG consists of the torques
caused by the forces and that due to aerodynamic drag
generated by the rotor and the ducted fan. In hover or low
speed flight, the force and torque generated by the fuselage
can be ignored. Then, we have
, ,
b b b b
MR DF G
b b b b b b
MR DF D MR D DF GYRO
= + +
= + + + +
f f f f
U U U U U U
(7)
where
b
MR
f ,
b
DF
f and
b
G
f are the forces generated by the rotor,
the ducted fan and the gravity, respectively.
b
MR
U ,
b
DF
U ,
,
b
D MR
U ,
,
b
D DF
U and
b
GYRO
U are the torques caused by the thrusts, the
counter torques by the drags on the rotor and the ducted fan,
and the gyroscopic torque, respectively.
Decompose the forces and the torques along the three axes
in
b
, we can express them as
1
1
1 1
,
1.5
, ,
,
1.5
, ,
0 0
, 0 , 0 ,
0
0 ( ) ,
( )
0
0 ( ) ,
( )
(
MR s
b b b T
MR MR s DF G
DF MR s s
b b b b
D MR MR MR MR
Q MR MR Q MR
b b b b
D DF DF DF DF
Q DF DF Q DF
b
GYRO MR
T sa
T sb R
T Mg T ca cb
S p
T
S p
T
J
o |
o |
| | | | | |
| | | = = =
| | |
\ . \ . \ .
| |
|
= =
|
+
\ .
| |
|
= =
|
+
\ .
=
f f f
f
f
U U
U U
U )
0
DF
q
J p
| |
| O
|
\ .
(8)
where
1s
a and
1s
b are the longitudinal and lateral tilt of the tip
path plane of the rotor with respect to the shaft, which are
controlled by longitudinal and lateral cyclic of the rotor.
MR
J and
DF
J are the inertial momentums,
b
MR
p and
b
DF
p the
positions of the centre of the rotor and the fan in
b
,
respectively. O is the constant rotation speed.
, Q i
o and
, Q i
| ,
{ } , i MR DF e , are coefficients expressing the relationships
between the thrusts and the anti-torques [9],
The thrusts,
MR
T and
DF
T , can be calculated based on the
so-called global momentum theory or more refined blade
element theory as shown in [9], while in this paper, they are
obtained from wind tunnel experiment by means of
identification, as in [10].
The simultaneous differential equations combined by (1),
(3), (5) and (7), form the overall mathematical model of the
coaxial rotor/ducted fan helicopter.
III. HELICOPTER DYNAMICS ANALYSIS
In this section, the linearized model of the hovering
helicopter is presented. Then the linearized system is utilized
to perform flight dynamics analysis.
A. Linearized model
As shown in Section II, the nonlinear model of the
coaxial rotor ducted/fan helicopter is intricate and offers very
little insight into the helicopter dynamics because of
complicated dynamical couplings between the forces and the
torques on the 6-DOF rigid body of the helicopter and its main
1770
rotor and ducted fan. In order to reduce the complexity, small
perturbation theory and Taylor series expansion are used to
linearize the open helicopter in hover.
The linearized model for the hovering helicopter is
derived based on the nonlinear differential equations given
previously, as
p p p p p
p p p p p
x A x B u
y C x D u
= +
= +
(9)
where
4
[ , , , , , , , , ]
T
p
x u v w p q r | u = e\ is the state vector,
4
0, 0,
[ , , , ]
T
p MR lat lon DF
u u u u u = e\ the input vector.
p
A is the
system matrix,
p
B is the control matrix.
p
A ,
p
B ,
p
C and
p
D
are of appropriate dimensions and are given in the Appendix.
B. Open Helicopter Dynamics Analysis
The stability of the system (9) is determined by the signs
of the real parts of eigenvalues of the matrix
p
A . The
eigenvalues are given by
0
0.977
0.173
( )
0.174 0.472i
0.291 0.413i
0.538 0.073i
p
A
(
(
=
(
. (10)
Thus, we can conclude that the helicopter in hover is highly
unstable because of the four eigenvalues with positive real
part.
Fig. 2 shows the open coaxial rotor/ducted-fan helicopter
response to the control inputs
0MR
u ,
lon
u ,
lat
u and
0, DF
u ,
respectively. We can observe that the response of the open
helicopter diverge rapidly. Besides, the open helicopter
exhibits very strong coupling characters. The upper-right and
lower-right figures in Fig. 2 show the response to one degree
lateral and longitudinal cyclic step inputs, respectively. It can
be seen that the cross-coupled response after one second, i.e.
q to
lat
u and p to
lon
u , has a similar magnitude for both pitch
and roll in the present case about 6~7
theory
for the coaxial rotor/ducted fan helicopter under hover and
low speed condition.
A. Problem Formulation
As discussed in Section II and III, several issues must be
taken into account in the helicopter control system design.
First of all, controller to be designed should be able to
stabilize the open system because of the unstability of the
hovering helicopter dynamics. Secondly, robustness must be
considered, since the reduced mathematical helicopter model
unavoidably has uncertainty due to the empirical
representation of aerodynamic forces and moments as well as
experimental approximation. Thirdly, for high performance
helicopters, excellent performance requirements should be
achieved, such as tracking performance and disturbance
rejection capability, as prescribed in aeronautical design
standard, ADS-33E.
Fig. 3 shows the system structure utilized in the helicopter
control design, in the form of closed-loop interconnection.
G is the open helicopter plant, K is the to-be-designed
controller, r is the reference input signal, d is a disturbance
at the plant input, n is measurement noise, y is the measured
tracking error, i.e. ( ) ' y r y n = . Output signals are
weighted by the weighting matrices
1
W ,
2
W and
3
W ,
respectively.
1771
Fig. 3 General closed-loop interconnection.
Fig. 4 General closed-loop interconnection.
It is straightforward to arrive at the following input-
output description of the open-loop interconnection
corresponding to the system in Fig. 3.
1 1 1 1 1
2 2
3 3 3
0 0 0
0 0
z W W W WG d
z W n
z W W G r
u y I I I G
( ( (
( ( (
=
( ( (
( (
(11)
Let
1 2 3
[ , , ]
T
z z z z = and [ , , ]
T
w d n r = , the open-loop system
interconnection described by (11) can be transformed into a
more compact form, as
11 12
21 22
( ) ( )
( )
( ) ( )
P s P s z w w
P s
y u P s P s u
( ( ( (
= =
( ( ( (
. (12)
The general closed-loop interconnection is then obtained by
closing the loop as
u Ky = . (13)
The corresponding closed-loop interconnection is described
by Fig. 4.
Let
,
( , )
z w
T P K denote the input-output description of the
closed-loop interconnection, we have
1
, 11 12 22 21
( , ) [ ( ) ]
z w
T P K P P K I P K P
= + (14)
In order to meet the control objectives stated in previous
paragraph, the following inequations should be satisfied
,
2
( , ) 1, for all 1
z w
T P K w
s s , (15)
Then the helicopter control design problem is formulated to a
general H
s .
Let S , T and R denote the sensitivity, complementary
sensitivity and control input function of the system described
by Fig. 3, i.e.
1
( ) S I GK
= + ,
1
( ) T GK I GK
= + and
1
( ) R K I GK
+ +
+ +
`
+ +
)
(17)
Selection of
2
W
The weighting matrix
2
W is used to weight the control
input signals. It can be considered as the limitation of actuator
position, velocity and acceleration. Besides,
2
W indicates
constraint to system additive perturbation.
2
W is set as
2
{0.85, 0.85, 0.85, 0.75} W diag = .
Selection of
3
W
The selection of
3
W is concerned with the bound of
multiplicative uncertainty that can be stabilized by the
controller. In general, the weighting matrix
3
W can be
determined by means of experiment, finding a high-pass
function to include all the multiplicative uncertainty. Here
3
W is chosen as
1772
Fig. 5 Closed-loop helicopter system input response.
3 4
0.2 1.4
118.1
s
W I
s
+
=
+
Based on the weighting matrices chosen above, the
H
(
(
=
(
9 9 9 4
0.000 2.129 2.885 0
0.000 0.5206 9.993 0
-122.016 0 0 11.869
0.000 7.596 -5.608 0
, , . 0.000 3.858 5.226 0
26.003 0.000 0.000 10.772
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
p p p
B C E D O
(
(
(
(
(
(
= = =
(
(
(
(
REFERENCES
[1] S. Lee, C. Ha, and B. S. Kim, "Adaptive nonlinear control system design
for helicopter robust command augmentation," Aerospace Science and
Technology, vol. 9, pp. 241-251, 2005
[2] A. Isidori, L. Marconi, and A. Serrani, "Robust nonlinear motion control
of a helicopter," IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 48, pp.
413- 426, 2003.
[3] M. C. Mickle, R. Huang, and J. J. Zhu, "Unstable, nonminimum phase,
nonlinear tracking by trajectory linearization control," presented at
International Conference on Control Applications, IEEE, Tappei, Taiwan,
2004.
[4] C. M. Spaulding, M. H. Mansur, M. B. Tischler, R. A. Hess, and J. A.
Franklin, "Nonlinear Inversion Control for a Ducted Fan UAV," presented
at AIAA Atmospheric Flight Mechanics Conference, San Francisco, CA,
2005.
[5] R. Enns and S. Jennie, "Helicopter trimming and tracking control using
direct neural dynamic programming," IEEE Transactions on Neural
Networks, vol. 14, pp. 929- 939, 2003.
[6] A. J. Calise, "Neural networks in nonlinear aircraft flight control," IEEE
Aerospace and Electronic Systems Magazine, vol. 11, pp. 5-10, 1996.
[7] J. Fleming, T. Jones, W. Ng, P. Gelhausen, and D. Enns, "Improving
control system effectiveness for ducted fan VTOL UAVs operating in
crosswinds," presented at 2nd AIAA "Unmanned Unlimited" Systems,
Technologies, and Operations - Aerospace, Land, and Sea Conference,
Workshop and Exhibition, San Diego, CA, 2003.
[8] T. J. Koo and S. Sastry, "Output tracking control design of a helicopter
model based on approximate linearization," presented at Proceedings of
the 37th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, 1998.
[9] G. D. Padfield, Helicopter Flight Dynamics: The Theory and Application
of Flying Qualities and Simulation Modeling. Washington, USA: AIAA,
1996.
[10] J. Li, Z. Gao, Z. Tang, and Y. Lu, "Experimental Investigation on Lift and
Drag of Ducted Fan System," Journal of Nanjing University of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, vol. 36, 2004.
1773