Some notes on aircraft stability and control

II: Dynamic stability

Contents

Contents i

List of Figures i

1 Introduction to dynamic stability 1

1.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 Axes and notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.3 Aerodynamic derivatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.4 Longitudinal symmetric motion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Phugoid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Short period oscillation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.5 Lateral motion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Dutch roll . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Spiral mode and roll subsidence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1.6 Dihedral effect and weathercock stability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Dihedral effect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Weathercock stability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

List of Figures
1 Notation for analysis of dynamic stability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
2 Phugoid oscillation trajectory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3 Short period oscillation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4 Rolling subsidence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5 Stability of the lateral modes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6 dihedral effect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
7 Wing sweep effects on Lv . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
8 Wing-fuselage interference effects on Lv . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
9 Use of twin fins at high speed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
10 Intake effects on Nv . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

i
 1

z
Axis Perturbation Mean Perturbation Rotation Angular Moment Moment
force velocity velocity angle velocity of inertia
x X U u φ p A L
y Y V v θ q B M
z Z W w ψ r C N
Figure 1: Notation for analysis of dynamic stability

1 Introduction to dynamic stability

1.1 Introduction
In the first part of the course, we examined the static stability of aircraft, which means that we
have considered whether an aircraft tends to return to its equilibrium position after a pertur-
bation, §1.1. We are now going to analyze the dynamic stability of aircraft and see how they
respond over time to perturbations in flight.

1.2 Axes and notation

The axes and notation for the analysis of dynamic stability of an aircraft are given in Figure 1
and follow a logical order. Once the x, y and z-axes are defined we then have, for example,
L, M and N —the rolling moment about the x-axis, the pitching moment about the y-axis and
the yawing moment about the z-axis respectively.
2 1. INTRODUCTION TO DYNAMIC STABILITY

The axis system uses what are known as ‘body axes’. This axis system is not locked in
position in space, but moves with the aircraft. The origin of the axis system is at the centre of
gravity of the aircraft, since all rotations take place about the c.g.
A rigid aircraft has six degrees of freedom. To simplify the equations used when perform-
ing analysis of the dynamic modes of an aircraft, these degrees of freedom are expressed as
perturbation quantities in relation to steady straight flight (i.e. velocity perturbations u, v and
w and rotational velocities p = φ̇, q = θ̇ and r = ψ̇).

1.3 Aerodynamic derivatives

We now have a co-ordinate system that allows us to define any perturbation of the aircraft
from straight and level flight. To continue, we need to find out what forces are acting on the
aircraft for a given perturbation1 .
If we assume that the effects of each perturbation are linear (true for small perturbations),
then:
∂M ∂M ∂M ∂M ∂M ∂M
M= u+ v+ w+ p+ q+ r.
∂u ∂v ∂w ∂p ∂q ∂r
The partial derivatives in this expression are known as ‘aerodynamic derivatives’ or ‘stability
derivatives’. We have already met the derivative ∂M/∂q, often known as ‘pitch damping’, in
our analysis of control deflections for tailless aircraft. Therefore, if we know the aerodynamic
derivatives and the perturbations, we can calculate all of the forces and moments acting on
the aircraft (6 equations). If, in addition, we know the mass of the aircraft and its inertia in
roll, pitch and yaw (A, B, C) we can calculate the acceleration of the aircraft, and hence its
dynamic response.
The forces on the aircraft are the aerodynamic force F and mg:
F = Xi + Y j + Zk, (1)
mg = mg1 i + mg2 j + mg3 k, (2)
where the components of g are needed because the reference frame is fixed to the aircraft and
is not necessarily horizontal. The other quantitites we need for the aircraft are:
v = ui + vj + wk, velocity
Ω = pi + qj + rk, angular velocity
h = h1 i + h2 j + h3 k, angular momentum.
The equations of motion in translation and rotation are then:
d
(mv) = mv̇ + Ω × (mv) = F + mg, (3a)
dt
dh
= ḣ + Ω × h = L, (3b)
dt
1
The analysis which follows is taken from M ILNE -T HOMSON , L. M., Theoretical aerodynamics, MacMillan
and Company, 1966.
1.3. AERODYNAMIC DERIVATIVES 3

where the boxed terms are required because the frame of reference is rotating. The applied
moment L is

L = Li + M j + N k.

Equations 3 are the general equations of motion for an aircraft and could, in principle, be used
to calculate the motion given enough information about the aerodynamics and mass distribu-
tion. We, however, want to know if the aircraft is dynamically stable, so we need to make
some approximations to see how the aircraft behaves when perturbed from steady flight.
In steady flight, we write:

v = V, Ω = 0, F + mg = 0,

and add the small perturbation quantities so that:

V = V1 + u;
V1 = U i,
u = ui + vj + wk;
ω = pi + qj + rk.

For a small rotation χ,

χ = φi + θj + ψk,
ω = φ̇i + θ̇j + ψ̇k.

Similarly, the perturbation forces are:

F + δF, m(g + δg)

and it can be shown that

δg + χ × g = 0.

Inserting these assumptions in Equations 3 yields the equations of motion under small pertur-
bations:

mu̇ + m(χ̇ × V1 + χ × g) = δF, (4a)

ḣ = δL. (4b)

We can now simplify the system by making certain (reasonable) assumptions. First, we as-
sume that the forces and moments depend only on velocities and not on accelerations, with
the exception of the dependence of pitching moment on ẇ, the downwash velocity. Then:

δF = δXi + δY j + δZk,
δL = δLi + δM j + δN k,
4 1. INTRODUCTION TO DYNAMIC STABILITY

and, for example,

δX = Xu u + Xv v + Xw w + Xp p + Xq q + Xr r,
δM = Mu u + Mv v + Mw w + Mẇ ẇ + Mp p + Mq q + Mr r.
Secondly, we are assuming that the aircraft is symmetric so that a symmetric perturbation can
only cause a symmetric response. This means that a pitch disturbance, for example, cannot
cause a response in yaw or roll. Also, the symmetric response to an asymmetric input has to
be symmetric: if the aircraft rolls at a given rate, the pitch response must be the same whether
it rolls in a positive or negative sense. The first of these statements implies that Y u , Yw , Yq ; Lu ,
Lw , Lq ; Nu , Nw , Nq are all zero. From the second requirement, we can say that Xp , Xq , Xr ;
Zp , Zq , Zr ; Mp , Mq , Mr are likewise all zero.
Eliminating zero terms, we can write:
δF = (Xu u + Xw w + Xq θ̇)i + (Yv v + Yp φ̇ + Yr ψ̇)j
+ (Zu u + Zw w + Zq θ̇)k,
δL = (Lp φ̇ + Lr ψ̇ + Lv v)i + (Mq θ̇ + Mu u + Mw w + Mẇ ẇ)j
+ (Np φ̇ + Nr ψ̇ + Nv v)k.
We need one more assumption about the aircraft, which is that there is no inertial coupling
between yaw and roll. This means that the only moments of inertia we need consider are A,
B and C, the moments of inertia about the coordinate axes.
Now, assuming disturbed horizontal flight and expanding the cross products in Equations 4
yields the equations of motion for each translational and rotational component:
mu̇ = Xu u + Xw w + Xq q − mgθ, (5a)
m(ẇ − U q) = Zu u + Zw w + Zq , (5b)
B q̇ = Mq q + Mu u + Mw w + Mẇ ẇ. (5c)
and
m(v̇ + U r) = Yv v + Yp p + Yr r + mgφ, (6a)
Aṗ = Lp p + Lr r + Lv v, (6b)
C ṙ = Np p + Nr r + Nv v. (6c)
The first of these sets of equations covers symmetric motion, e.g. pitch oscillations, while the
second covers lateral motion, such as yaw and roll. An important point to note is that these
equations are uncoupled, longitudinal motion does not affect lateral and vice versa.

1.4 Longitudinal symmetric motion

The important information about the dynamic response of a system is the set of modes in which
it oscillates2 . These can be found by the usual method of inserting an assumed solution into
2
The following analysis, with different notation, is based on G RAHAM , W., ‘Asymptotic analysis of the
classical aircraft stability equations’, Aeronautical Journal, February 1999, pp95–103.
1.4. LONGITUDINAL SYMMETRIC MOTION 5

the differential equations and finding combinations of parameters which satisfy the system.
The most convenient form of solution is:
u = u0 eλt , v = v0 eλt , θ = θ0 eλt .
Inserting these assumptions into Equation 5a, for example, yields:
mu0 λeλt = Xu u0 eλt + Xw w0 eλt + Xq θ0 λeλt − mgθ0 eλt .
Now, we can divide through by exp λt and, as always, non-dimensionalize the parameters, to
give the non-dimensional equations of motion:
 
0 0 xq Λ C L
(Λ − xu )u − xw w − − θ0 = 0, (7a)
µc 2
 
0 0 zq
−zu u + (Λ − zw )w − Λ 1 + θ0 = 0, (7b)
µc
m  Λ(bΛ − mq )
ẇ
− µc + m w w 0 + = 0. (7c)
Λ µc
The non-dimensional parameters are:
Xu Xw Zu Zw
xu = , xw = , zu = , zw = ,
ρU S ρU S ρU S ρU S
Xq Zq Mu Mw
xq = , zq = , mu = , mw = ,
ρU Sc ρU Sc ρU Sc ρU Sc
Mq
mq = ,
ρU Sc2
Mẇ
mẇ = ,
ρSc
B
b=
mc2
and
mλ m
Λ= , µc = .
ρU S ρSc

Phugoid
The first approximate solution we consider is a low frequency oscillation. We state without
proof that there is a solution with Λ and u0 /θ of order one and w 0 /θ0 of order 1/µc . This
means that, in this case, the vertical motion is negligible or, equivalently, the incidence is
almost constant. We can rewrite Equations 7 in matrix form, with the negligible terms in each
equation removed:
   0  
Λ − xu 0 −CL /2 u 0
 −zu 0 −Λ   w = 0 .
0 
0 −mw Λ(bΛ − mq )/µc θ0 0
6 1. INTRODUCTION TO DYNAMIC STABILITY

This equation can only have a non-trivial solution if the determinant of the matrix is zero:
zu
Λ2 − xu Λ − CL = 0.
2
Solving for Λ gives:
"  2 #1/2
(−xu ) −xu
Λ=− ± jΩph 1 − ,
2 2Ωph

which specifies oscillatory motion with:

 1/2
−zu CL
Ωph = , natural frequency, (8a)
2
−xu
cph = , damping. (8b)
2Ωph
This solution defines the phugoid mode, which is a lightly damped long period oscillation.
The incidence is almost constant and the aircraft varies altitude at constant energy, trading
potential for kinetic and back again, Figure 2.
hmax , Vmin

hmin , Vmax

Figure 2: Phugoid oscillation trajectory

An important point to note is that the damping is proportional to (−z u ), the rate of change
of vertical force with small changes in horizontal speed. Remembering that the z axis points
vertically down, we can see that zu < 0 and the damping is positive. Although it is not proven
on the basis of these results, a statically stable aircraft always has a stable phugoid.

Short period oscillation

1/2
The second solution for longitudinal oscillation is for the case where Λ is of order µ c , u0 /θ0
−1/2
is of order µc and w0 /θ0 is of order one. In this case, the approximation to equations 7 is:
  
xq Λ C L
Λ − x u −xw − µ c − 2   u0   0 
 w = 0 .
   0  
 0 Λ − z w −Λ
Λ(bΛ − mq ) θ0 0
 
− mµẇ Λ + mw
 
0 µ
c c

Again, we find the natural frequency by requiring that the determinant of the matrix be zero:
   
2 mq + mẇ z w mq − m w µc
Λ(Λ − xu ) Λ − zw + + = 0,
b b
1.5. LATERAL MOTION 7

which, on solving the quadratic, gives a result for the non-dimensional natural frequency and
damping:

µc (−mw ) + mq zw
Ωspo = , natural frequency, (9a)
b 
1 mq + mẇ
cspo =− zw + , damping. (9b)
2Ωspo b

This is the short period oscillation and is a heavily damped mode with period typically of a
few seconds. The aircraft pitches rapidly about its centre of gravity which continues to fly
at almost constant speed in a straight line. The periodic time is typically a few seconds, but
must not be less than about 1.25 seconds, otherwise there is a risk of Pilot Induced Oscillation
(PIO).

Figure 3: Short period oscillation

1/2
The frequency is proportional to Kn , and increases with dynamic pressure, ρV 2 /2.
Therefore the aircraft will have the highest frequency SPO, and hence the shortest time period,
at high speed with the centre of gravity in the furthest forward position. The SPO is always
stable for a statically stable aircraft.

1.5 Lateral motion

In the case of lateral motion, we again need to insert the assumed form for the solution:

v = v0 eλt , φ = φ0 eλt , r = r0 eλt ,

and non-dimensionalize quantities in equations 6, which we do in the same way as before

except that our reference length is now s, the wingspan:
   
0 yp Λ CL yr
(Λ − yv )v − + φ0 + 1 − r 0 = 0, (10a)
µs 2 µs
Λ lr
−lv v 0 + (aΛ − lp ) φ0 − r 0 = 0, (10b)
µs µs
np Λ cΛ − nr 0
−nv v 0 − φ0 + r = 0. (10c)
µs µs
8 1. INTRODUCTION TO DYNAMIC STABILITY

The non-dimensional quantities are:

Yv
yv = ,
ρU S
Yp Yr Lv Nv
yp = , yr = , lv = , nv = ,
ρU Ss ρU Ss ρU Ss ρU Ss
Lp Lr Np Nr
lp = , lr = , np = , nr = ,
ρU Ss 2 ρU Ss 2 ρU Ss 2 ρU Ss2
A C
a= , c = ,
ms2 ms2
v0 mr0 m
v0 = , r0 = , µs = .
U ρU S ρSs

Dutch roll
The first lateral mode we consider is Dutch roll which has oscillations of roughly equal mag-
nitude in pitch, yaw and roll. In this case, equations 10 reduce to:
  0  
Λ 0 1 v 0
 −lv aΛ2 /µs 0  φ0  = 0 .
−nv 0 cΛ/µs r0 0

As before the determinant of the matrix must be zero for a non-trivial solution to exist:

Λ2 (cΛ2 + µs nv ) = 0,

and the frequency of the oscillation is, on the approximations we are using:
 µ n 1/2
s v
Ωdr = . (11)
c
In Dutch roll, yawing oscillation (analogous to the longitudinal SPO) causes alternating sideslip.
This in turn causes a rolling oscillation via Lv v. The periodic time is typically a few seconds,
but as for the SPO it should not have a period of less than 1.25 seconds due to PIO.
Dutch roll is not permitted to be divergent. Divergent Dutch roll can be ‘fixed’ by a yaw
damper on the rudder which damps the yawing oscillation, and hence the roll response as well.

Spiral mode and roll subsidence

There are two further solutions to the dynamic equations which have small values of Λ. These
are dominated by yaw and roll with weak sideslip and the corresponding approximations to
equations 10 are:
  0  
0 CL /2 1 v 0
 −lv (aΛ − lp )Λ/µs −lr /µs   φ0 = 0  .
 
−nv −np Λ/µs (cΛ − nr )/µs r0 0
1.6. DIHEDRAL EFFECT AND WEATHERCOCK STABILITY 9

The requirement for non-trivial solution is then that:

anv Λ2 + [lv (np − cCL /2) − lp nv ]Λ + (lv nr − lr nv )CL /2 = 0.
The two roots of this equation can be approximated as:
(−lp )nv + (−lv )[cCL /2 + (−np )
Λrs = − (12)
anv
and
CL lv n r − l r n v
Λsm = − . (13)
2 (−lp )nv + (−lv )[cCL /2 + (−np )]
Note that both of these roots are real and so they do not describe oscillations. The first, Λ rs , de-
scribes rolling subsidence which is a pure rolling motion that is generally heavily damped, and
is therefore generally stable. The damping is primarily from the wings, where the incidence
along the wing is changed due to the roll-rate, as shown in figure 4.
Roll rate p Rolling moment Lp p < 0

∆α Loading

Figure 4: Rolling subsidence

This roll-rate results in a rolling moment Lp p. Therefore, if Lp is negative the rolling

subsidence mode is stable. This is generally the case. However, if L p becomes negative,
generally due to non-linearities in the lift curve slopes at high roll rates, auto rotational rolling
can occur. This is what happens when an aircraft spins.
The second root Λsm , which is much smaller than Λrs , corresponds to the spiral mode of
the aircraft. This is a combined yaw and roll motion which is allowed to be unstable (i.e.
negatively damped) as long as it does not double amplitude in less than twenty seconds, so
that it can be controlled out.
The dynamics of the spiral mode are that if the aircraft rolls slightly, it will start to sideslip,
and the fin then tries to turn the aircraft into the relative wind due to a yawing moment N v v.
However, the rolling moment due to sideslip Lv v tries to roll the wings back level. Depending
on which of the effects ‘wins’, the aircraft will be spirally unstable or stable, as can be seen
from the numerator of equation 13.

1.6 Dihedral effect and weathercock stability

The aerodynamic derivatives Lv and Nv define whether an aircraft is stable or unstable in
rolling subsidence and Dutch roll. Lv and Nv are known as the ‘dihedral effect’ and ‘weath-
ercock stability’ respectively. The effect of the two aerodynamic derivatives on the lateral
stability of the aircraft is shown in figure 5.
10 1. INTRODUCTION TO DYNAMIC STABILITY

Unstable Dutch roll

−Lv
Increasing altitude

All lateral modes stable

Unstable spiral mode

Nv

Figure 5: Stability of the lateral modes

Dihedral effect
Lv is known as the dihedral effect since the majority of the rolling moment due to sideslip
comes from dihedral (on an aircraft with unswept wings), as shown in figure 6. Positive dihe-
dral combined with positive sideslip results in a negative rolling moment (and hence negative
Lv ).

Lv < 0

Relative wind
Γ

Positive sideslip

Figure 6: dihedral effect

Wing sweep has a large, negative, effect on Lv due to reduced or increased effective sweep
for positive sideslip. this is shown in figure 7.
Wing/fuselage interference effects give contributions to Lv due to changes in wing effec-
tive incidence near the root. These contributions are negative for high mounted wings and
positive for low mounted wings, as shown in figure 8.
1.6. DIHEDRAL EFFECT AND WEATHERCOCK STABILITY 11

Positive sideslip

Increased effective sweep: Reduced effective sweep:

reduced lift increased lift

Lv < 0

Figure 7: Wing sweep effects on Lv

Lv > 0
Lv < 0

High wing Low wing

Figure 8: Wing-fuselage interference effects on Lv

A reasonable level of Lv may be achieved by using anhedral with swept and high mounted
wings (e.g. Harrier). Ground clearance issues may limit anhedral on low wing aircraft, result-
ing in an unstable Dutch roll mode.

Weathercock stability
The aerodynamic derivative Nv is known as weathercock stability since it is, effectively, the
ability of an aircraft to turn into the wind. It is produced mainly by the sideways lift-force
of the fin in sideslip, and should always be negative. However, as shown in §1.6, if N v is too
large the aircraft may be spirally unstable.
The fin contribution to Nv generally reduces with increasing Mach number, since the fin’s
lift curve slope is reducing. Therefore an aircraft with a large fin may be spirally stable at high
speeds but unstable at low speeds. This can be solved by using ‘paired’ fins close together. At
low speeds their mutual interference reduces their effectiveness, while at supersonic speeds
this interference is progressively removed, increasing their effectiveness to combat the de-
creasing lift curve slope. This is shown in figure 9.
12 1. INTRODUCTION TO DYNAMIC STABILITY

fin a1

Mach cone

1.0 M

Figure 9: Use of twin fins at high speed

For VSTOL aircraft (e.g.Harrier) engine air intake mass flow may give a negative contri-
bution to Nv making the aircraft directionally unstable in the hover and at low forward speeds.
This is because the air undergoes a change in direction and hence a momentum change to go
down the intake, giving a sideforce acting ahead of the aircraft c.g., as shown in figure 10.

Nv < 0 Nv Fin
Sidef Directionally
orce
unstable
Total

Flight speed
Intak
e flow
Intake flow

Figure 10: Intake effects on Nv