THOR I. FOSSEN
Professor of Guidance, Navigation and Control
Centre for Autonomous Marine Operations and Systems
Department of Engineering Cybernetics
Norwegian University of Science and Technology
April 2013
3rd edition
Contents
Figures
iii
1 Introduction
2 Aircraft Modeling
2.1 Denition of Aircraft StateSpace Vectors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.2 BodyFixed Coordinate Systems for Aircraft . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.2.1 Rotation matrices for wind and stability axes . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3
3
4
5
6
6
7
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
7
8
8
9
9
11
12
13
Lateral equations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
cients
. . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
14
16
16
17
18
19
20
21
21
21
22
23
23
23
ii
CONTENTS
2.9.1 Dynamic equation for coordinated turn
2.9.2 Dynamic equation for altitude control .
2.10 Aircraft Stability Properties . . . . . . . . . .
2.10.1 Longitudinal stability analysis . . . . .
2.10.2 Lateral stability analysis . . . . . . . .
2.11 Design of ight control systems . . . . . . . .
(banktoturn)
. . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
24
25
26
27
28
29
3 Satellite Modeling
3.1 Attitude Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.1.1 Eulers 2nd Axiom applied to satellites . . . . . . . .
3.1.2 Skewsymmetric representation of the satellite model
3.2 Actuator Dynamics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.3 Design of Satellite Attitude Control Systems . . . . . . . . .
3.3.1 Nonlinear quaternion setpoint regulator . . . . . . .
3.3.2 PDcontroller of Wen and KreutzDelago (1991) . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
31
31
31
32
32
34
34
35
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
37
37
37
38
38
39
40
41
41
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
List of Figures
1.1 Sketch showing a modern ghter aircraft (Stevens and Lewis 1992). . . . . .
2.1 Denition of aircraft body axes, generalized velocities, forces, moments and
Euler angles (McLean 1990). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.2 Denition of stability and wind axes for an aircraft (Stevens and Lewis 1992).
2.3 Control inputs for conventional aircraft. Notice that the two ailerons can be
controlled by using one control input: A = 1=2( AL + AR ): . . . . . . . . .
2.4 Lift and drag as a function of angle of attack. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.5 Aircraft longitudinal eigenvalue conguration plotted in the complex plane. .
14
22
28
31
40
iii
4
5
iv
LIST OF FIGURES
Chapter 1
Introduction
This booklet is a collection of lecture notes used in the course TTK4109 Guidance and Control of Vehicles, which is given at the Department of Engineering Cybernetics, NTNU. The
kinematic and kinetic equations of a marine craft (ships, highspeed craft and underwater
vehicles) can be modied to describe aircraft and satellites by minor adjustments of notation and assumptions. Consequently, the vectorial notation introduced in the two Wiley
textbooks:
Fossen, T. I. (1994). Guidance and Control of Ocean Vehicles
Fossen, T. I. (2011). Handbook of Marine Craft Hydrodynamics and Motion Control
is used to describe the aircraft and satellite equations of motion.
Figure 1.1: Sketch showing a modern ghter aircraft (Stevens and Lewis 1992).
The booklet is organized according to:
Chapter 2: Aircraft Modeling
Chapter 3: Satellite Modeling
Chapter 4: Matlab Simulation Models
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
Other useful references on ight control are:
Blakelock, J. H. (1991). Aircraft and Missiles (John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)
Etkin, B. and L. D. Reid (1996). Dynamics of Flight: Stability and Control (John
Wiley & Sons Ltd.)
Fortescue, P., G. Swinerd and J. Stark (2011). Spacecraft Systems Engineering (John
Wiley & Sons Ltd.)
Hughes, P. C. (1986). Spacecraft Attitude Dynamics (John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)
McLean, D. (1990). Automatic Flight Control Systems (Prentice Hall Inc.)
McRuer, D., D. Ashkenas and A. I. Graham (1973). Aircraft Dynamics and Automatic Control (Princeton University Press)
Nelson, R. C. (1998). Flight Stability and Automatic Control (McGrawHill Int.)
Roskam, J. (1999). Airplane Flight Dynamics and Automatic Flight Controls (Darcorporation)
Schmidt, D. K. (2012). Modern Flight Dynamics (McGrawHill Int.)
Stevens, B. L. and F. L. Lewis (2003). Aircraft Control and Simulation (John Wiley
& Sons Ltd.)
Information about the graduate coursesTTK4109 Guidance and Control of Vehicles and
TK8109 Advanced Topics in Guidance and Navigation are found on the Wikipages
URL: http://www.itk.ntnu.no/emner/ttk4190
URL: http://www.itk.ntnu.no/emner/tk8109
Thor I. Fossen
Trondheim 3 April 2013
Chapter 2
Aircraft Modeling
This chapter gives an introduction to aircraft modeling. The equations of motion are linearized using perturbation theory and the nal results are statespace models for the longitudinal and lateral motions. The models can be used for aircraft simulation and design of
ight control systems.
2.1
The aircraft generalized velocity vector is dened according to (see Figure 2.1):
2
6
6
6
:= 6
6
6
4
6
6
6
:= 6
6
6
4
3
longitudinal (forward) velocity
7 6 lateral (transverse) velocity
7
7 6
7
7 6 vertical velocity
7
7=6
7
7 6 roll rate
7
7 6
7
5 4 pitch rate
5
yaw rate
3 2
3
XE
Earthxed xposition
7 6 Earthxed yposition
7
YE
7 6
7
6
7
ZE ; h 7 6 Earthxed zposition (axis downwards), altitude 7
7
7 = 6 roll angle
7
7 6
7
5 4 pitch angle
5
yaw angle
U
V
W
P
Q
R
(2.1)
(2.2)
3
7
7
7
7
7
7
5
(2.3)
Comment 1: Notice that the capital letters L; M; N for the moments are dierent from
3
Figure 2.1: Denition of aircraft body axes, generalized velocities, forces, moments and Euler
angles (McLean 1990).
those used for marine craftthat is, K; M; N: The reason for this is that L is reserved as
length parameter for ships and underwater vehicles.
Comment 2: For aircraft it is common to use capital letters for the states U; V; W; etc.
while it is common to use small letters for marine craft.
2.2
tan( ) :=
where
VT =
U2 + V 2 + W 2
(2.4)
(2.5)
(2.6)
Figure 2.2: Denition of stability and wind axes for an aircraft (Stevens and Lewis 1992).
is the total speed of the aircraft. Aerodynamic eects are classied according to the Mach
number:
VT
(2.7)
M :=
a
where a = 340 m/s = 1224 km/h is the speed of sound in air at a temperature of 20o C on
the ocean surface. The following terminology is used for varying speed:
Subsonic speed
Transonic speed
Supersonic speed
Hypersonic speed
M < 1:0
0:8 M
1:0 M
5:0 M
1:2
5:0
An aircraft will break the sound barrier at M = 1:0 and this is clearly heard as a sharp
crack. If you y at low altitude and break the sound barrier, windows in building will break
due to pressureinduced waves.
2.2.1
The relationship between vectors expressed in dierent coordinate systems can be derived
using rotation matrices. The BODY axes are rst rotated a negative sideslip angle
about
the zaxis. The new coordinate system is then rotated a positive angle of attack about
the new yaxis such that the resulting xaxis points in the direction of the total speed VT .
The rst rotation denes the WIND axes while the second rotation denes the STABILITY
Rwb = Rz;
3
sin( ) 0
cos( ) 0 5 ps
0
1
3
0 sin( )
5 pb
1
0
0 cos( )
Ry;
(2.8)
(2.9)
(2.10)
Hence,
pw = Rwb pb
m
2
32
3
cos( ) sin( ) 0
cos( ) 0 sin( )
5 pb
0
1
0
pw = 4 sin( ) cos( ) 0 5 4
0
0
1
sin( ) 0 cos( )
m
2
3
cos( ) cos( ) sin( ) sin( ) cos( )
sin( ) sin( ) 5 pb
pw = 4 cos( ) sin( ) cos( )
sin( )
0
cos( )
(2.11)
(2.12)
(2.13)
This gives the following relationship between the velocities in body and wind axes:
2
3
U
>
vb = 4 V 5 = (Rwb )> vw = R>
y; Rz;
W
Consequently,
3 2
3
VT
VT cos( ) cos( )
4 0 5 = 4 VT sin( )
5
0
VT sin( ) cos( )
U = VT cos( ) cos( )
V = VT sin( )
W = VT sin( ) cos( )
2.3
2.3.1
(2.14)
(2.15)
The kinematic equations for translation and rotation of a bodyxed coordinate system
BODY with respect to a local geographic coordinate system NED (NorthEastDown) can
be expressed in terms or the Euler angles:
2
3
2
3
2
3
X_ E
U
U
4 Y_ E 5 = Rnb 4 V 5 = Rz; Ry; Rx; 4 V 5
(2.16)
_
W
W
ZE
2.3.2
32
0
c
0 54 0
1
s
32
0 s
1 0
1 0 54 0 c
0 c
0 s
s c +c s s
c c +s s s
c s
32
3
U
54 V 5
W
0
s
c
s s +c c s
c s +s s c
c c
32
(2.17)
U
54 V 5
W
which gives:
2.3.3
3 2
_
1 s t
4 _ 5=4 0
c
_
0 s =c
2
c t
s
c =c
32
3
P
54 Q 5;
R
6= 0
(2.18)
(2.19)
Rigidbody kinetics
1)
=
2) =
(2.20)
(2.21)
1
2
where 1 := [U; V; W ]T ; 2 := [P; Q; R]T ; 1 := [X; Y; Z]T and 2 := [L; M; N ]T : It is assumed that the coordinate system is located in the aircraft center of gravity (CG). The
resulting model is written:
MRB _ + CRB ( ) = RB
(2.22)
where
MRB =
mI3
O3
3
3
O3 3
ICG
CRB ( ) =
mS(
O3
2)
3
O3 3
S(ICG 2 )
(2.23)
The inertia tensor is dened as (assume that Ixy = Iyz = 0 which corresponds to xz plane
symmetry):
2
3
Ix
0
Ixz
Iy
0 5
ICG := 4 0
(2.24)
Ixz 0
Iz
The forces and moments acting on the aircraft can be expressed as:
RB
g( ) +
(2.25)
where is a generalized vector that includes aerodynamic and control forces. The gravitational force fG = [0 0 mg]T acts in the CG (origin of the bodyxed coordinate system) and
this gives the following vector expressed in NED:
2
3
mg sin( )
6 mg cos( ) sin( ) 7
7
6
6 mg cos( ) cos( ) 7
fG
n >
7
g( ) = (Rb )
=6
(2.26)
6
7
O3 1
0
6
7
4
5
0
0
(2.27)
MRB _ + CRB ( ) + g( ) =
or in component form:
m(U_ + QW RV + g sin( ))
m(V_ + U R W P g cos( ) sin( ))
_ + V P QU g cos( ) cos( ))
m(W
Ix P_ Ixz (R_ + P Q) + (Iz Iy )QR
Iy Q_ + Ixz (P 2 R2 ) + (Ix Iz )P R
Iz R_ Ixz P_ + (Iy Ix )P Q + Ixz QR
2.3.4
=
=
=
=
=
=
X
Y
Z
L
M
N
(2.28)
It is common that aircraft sensor systems are equipped with three accelerometers. If the
accelerometers are located in the CG, the measurement equations take the following form:
X
= U_ + QW
m
Y
=
= V_ + U R
m
Z
_ +VP
=
=W
m
axCG =
ayCG
azCG
RV + g sin( )
(2.29)
WP
g cos( ) sin( )
(2.30)
QU
g cos( ) cos( )
(2.31)
In addition to these sensors, an aircraft is equipped with gyros, magnetometers and a sensor
for altitude h and wind speed VT : These sensors are used in inertial navigation systems (INS)
which again use a Kalman lter to compute estimates of U; V; W; P; Q and R as well as the
Euler angles , and : Other measurement systems that are used onboard aircraft are
global navigation satellite systems (GNSS), radar and sensors for angle of attack.
2.4
The nonlinear equations of motion can be linearized by using perturbation theory. This is
illustrated below.
2.4.1
According to linear theory it is possible to write the states as the sum of a nominal value
(usually constant) and a perturbation (deviation from the nominal value). Moreover,
Total state = Nominal value + Perturbation
The following denitions are made:
2
3 2
X0
6 Y0 7 6
6
7 6
6 Z0 7 6
6
7+6
:= 0 +
=6
7 6
L
0
6
7 6
4 M0 5 4
N0
X
Y
Z
L
M
N
7
7
7
7;
7
7
5
5 := 4
:=
0
0
0
6
6
6
=6
6
6
4
5+4
U0
V0
W0
P0
Q0
R0
7 6
7 6
7 6
7+6
7 6
7 6
5 4
3
5
u
v
w
p
q
r
3
7
7
7
7
7
7
5
(2.32)
(2.33)
2.4.2
0) 0
+ g(
0)
(2.34)
=
=
=
=
=
=
X0
Y0
Z0
L0
M0
N0
(2.35)
10
Perturbed equations
The perturbed equationsthat is, the linearized equations of motion are usually derived by
a 1storder Taylor series expansion about the nominal values. Alternatively, it is possible
to substitute (2.32) and (2.35) into (2.27) and neglect higherorder terms of the perturbed
states. This is illustrated for the rst degree of freedom (DOF):
Example 1 (Linearization of surge using perturbation theory)
m[U_ + QW
RV + g sin( )] = X
+
(2.36)
(R0 + r)(V0 + v) + g sin( 0 + )] = X0 + X
+ ) = sin(
0 ) cos(
) + cos(
0 ) sin(
small
sin(
0)
+ cos(
(2.37)
0)
Since U_ 0 = 0 and
m(Q0 W0
R0 V0 + g sin(
0 ))
(2.38)
= X0
R0 v
V0 r
vr + g cos(
0)
(2.39)
]= X
If it is assumed that the 2ndorder terms wq and vr are negligible, the linearized model
becomes:
m[u_ + Q0 w + W0 q R0 v V0 r + g cos( 0 ) ] = X
(2.40)
=
=
=
=
=
=
X
Y
Z
L (2.41)
M
N
(2.42)
MRB
6
6
6 0
= 6
6
6
4
2
NRB
6
6
6
= 6
6
6
4
6
6
6
G = 6
6
6
4
0
m
0
03
0
mR0
mQ0
03
03
0
0
m
3
03
Ix
0
Ixz
mR0 mQ0
0
P0
mP0
0
0
Iy
0
11
Ixz
0
Iz
7
7
7
7
7
7
5
0
W0
mV0
Ixz Q0
(Iz
(Ix Iz )R0
(Iy Ix )Q0 (Iy
mW0
mV0
0
U0
mU0
0
Iy )R0 Ixz P0
(Iz Iy )Q0
03 3
2Ixz P0
(Ix Iz )P0 2Ixz R0
Ix )P0 + Ixz R0
Ixz Q0
3
0
mg cos( 0 )
0
mg cos( 0 ) cos( 0 ) mg sin( 0 ) sin( 0 ) 0 7
7
mg cos( 0 ) sin( 0 ) mg sin( 0 ) cos( 0 ) 0 7
7
7
7
5
03 3
2.4.3
W = VT
Furthermore, the statespace vector:
2
u
6
6
6
x=6
6 p
6
4 q
r
7 6
7 6
7 6
7=6
7 6
7 6
5 4
V
VT
W
VT
surge velocity
sideslip angle
angle of attack
roll rate
pitch rate
yaw rate
(2.43)
3
7
7
7
7
7
7
5
(2.44)
is chosen to describe motions in 6 DOF. The relationship between the bodyxed velocity
vector:
= [u; v; w; p; q; r]T
(2.45)
and the new statespace vector x can be written as:
= Tx = diagf1; VT ; VT ; 1; 1; 1; 1gx
(2.46)
3
7
7
7
7
7
7
5
12
where VT > 0: If the total speed is VT = U0 = constant (linear theory), it is seen that:
_
_
V_ T
1
w_
VT
1
=
v_
VT
= 0
=
(2.47)
(2.48)
(2.49)
_
UW
W U_
U2 + W 2
V_ VT V V_ T
=
VT2 cos
_
U U_ + V V_ + W W
=
VT
=
(2.50)
(2.51)
(2.52)
(2.53)
x_ = Ax + Bu
(2.54)
to
where
A = T 1 FT;
B = T 1G
(2.55)
For V_ T 6= 0 this transformation is much more complicated. The linear statespace transformation is commonly used by aircraft manufactures. An example is the Boeing B767 model
(see Chapter 4).
2.5
For an aircraft it is common to assume that the longitudinal modes (DOFs 1, 3 and 5)
are decoupled from the lateral modes (DOFs 2, 4 and 6). The key assumption is that the
fuselage is slenderthat is, the length is much larger than the width and the height of the
aircraft. It is also assumed that the longitudinal velocity is much larger than the vertical
and transversal velocities.
In order to decouple the rigidbody kinetics (2.41) in longitudinal and lateral modes it
will be assumed that the states v; p; r and are negligible in the longitudinal channel while
u; w; q and are negligible when considering the lateral channel. This gives two subsystems:
2.5.1
13
Longitudinal equations
Kinetics:
m[w_
m[u_ + Q0 w + W0 q + g cos(
U0 q Q0 u + g sin( 0 ) cos(
32
3 2
m 0 0
u_
4 0 m 0 5 4 w_ 5 + 4
0 0 Iy
q_
0)
] =
0) ] =
Iy q_ =
32
0
mQ0 mW0
mQ0
0
mU0 5 4
0
0
0
2
3
mg cos( 0 )
4 mg sin( 0 ) cos( 0 ) 5
0
X
Z
M
3
u
w 5+
q
2
3
X
=4 Z 5
M
(2.56)
(2.57)
Kinematics:
_ =q
2.5.2
(2.58)
Lateral equations
Kinetics:
m
4 0
0
0
Ix
Ixz
Y
L
N
32 3 2
32 3
0
v_
0
mW0
mU0
v
5
4
5
4
5
4
Ixz
p_ + 0
Ixz Q0
(Iz Iy )Q0
p 5+
Iz
r_
0 (Iy Ix )Q0
Ixz Q0
r
2
3
2
3
mg cos( 0 ) cos( 0 )
Y
4
5 =4 L 5
0
0
N
(2.59)
(2.60)
Kinematics:
_
_
1 tan( 0 )
0 1= cos( 0 )
p
r
(2.61)
14
Figure 2.3: Control inputs for conventional aircraft. Notice that the two ailerons can be
controlled by using one control input: A = 1=2( AL + AR ):
2.6
In the forthcoming sections, the following abbreviations and notation will be used to describe
the aerodynamic coe cients:
Xindex =
@X
@ index
Lindex =
@L
@ index
Yindex =
@Y
@ index
Mindex =
@M
@ index
Zindex =
@Z
@ index
Nindex =
@N
@ index
In order to illustrate how control surfaces inuence the aircraft, an aircraft equipped with
the following control inputs will be considered (see Figure 2.3):
Thrust
Elevator
Aileron
Flaps
Rudder
15
Jet/propeller
Control surfaces on the rear of the aircraft used for pitch and
altitude control
Hinged control surfaces attached to the trailing edge of the wing used
for roll/bank control
Hinged surfaces on the trailing edge of the wings used for braking
and banktoturn
Vertical control surface at the rear of the aircraft used for turning
A conventional aircraft has control surfaces such as ailerons A , elevators E , aps F and
rudders R . A positive deection of the control surfaces are to give a negative aerodynamic
moment on the aircraft. Some of the control surfaces, like the ailerons, deects simultaneously in an asymmetric manner. If an aircraft has two ailerons AL and AR , the aileron
deection is computed by:
1
(2.62)
AL )
A = ( AR
2
Other control surfaces, such as elevators, deect symmetrically. If an aircraft has two elevators EL and ER , the elevator deections become:
E
1
= (
2
ER
(2.63)
EL )
Linear theory
The number of aerodynamic coe cients is reduced if linear theory is assumed. The control
inputs and aerodynamic forces and moments can be written as:
=
MF _
NF
(2.64)
+ Bu
(2.65)
u)
where uc is commanded input, u is the actual control input produced by the actuators and
T = diag{T1 ; T2 ; :::; Tr } is a diagonal matrix of positive time constants. Substitution of (2.64)
into the model (2.42) gives:
(MRB + MF ) _ + (NRB + NF ) + G
M_ + N + G
= Bu
m
= Bu
(2.66)
The matrices M and N are dened as M = MRB + MF and N = NRB + NF . The linearized
kinematics takes the following form:
_ =J
The resulting statespace models are:
+J
(2.67)
16
(2.68)
2.6.1
J
M 1G
J
M 1N
0
M 1B
(2.69)
(2.70)
which corresponds to the matrices MF ; NF and B in (2.64). If the aircraft cruise speed
U0 = constant, then T = 0: Altitude can be controlled by using the elevators E : Flaps F
can be used to reduce the speed during landing. The aps can also be used to turn harder
for instance by moving one ap while the other is kept at the zero position. This is common
in banktoturn maneuvers. For conventional aircraft the following aerodynamic coe cients
can be neglected:
Xu_ ; Xq ; Xw_ ; X E ; Zu_ ; Zw_ ; Mu_
(2.71)
Hence, the model for altitude control reduces to:
2
3 2
32
3 2
32
3 2
3
dX
0 0
Xq_
u_
X u Xw 0
u
XE
4 dZ 5 = 4 0 0
Zq_ 5 4 w_ 5 + 4 Zu Zw Zq 5 4 w 5 + 4 Z E 5
dM
0 Mw_ Mq_
q_
Mq Mw Mq
q
ME
(2.72)
If the actuator dynamics is important, aerodynamic coe cients such as X _ T ; X _ E ; ::: must
be included in the model.
2.6.2
17
3 2
32 3 2
32 3 2
3
dY
Yv_ Yp_ Yr_
v_
Yv Yp Yr
v
YA YR
4 dL 5 = 4 Lv_ Lp_ Lr_ 5 4 p_ 5 + 4 Lv Lp Lr 5 4 p 5 + 4 L A L R 5
dN
Nv_ Np_ Nr_
r_
Nv Np Nr
r
NA NR
A
R
(2.73)
which corresponds to the matrices MF ; NF and B in (2.64). For conventional aircraft
the following aerodynamic coe cients can be neglected:
Yv_ ; Yp ; Yp_ ; Yr ; Yr_ ; Y
A;
(2.74)
This gives:
2
3 2
32 3 2
32 3 2
3
0
YR
dY
0 0
0
v_
Yv 0
0
v
4 dL 5 = 4 0 Lp_ 0 5 4 p_ 5 + 4 Lv Lp Lr 5 4 p 5 + 4 L
LR 5
A
dN
0 Np_ 0
r_
Nv Np Nr
r
NA NR
2.7
(2.75)
Propeller Thrust
(2.76)
Assuming that the trust force acts in the horizontal plane of fbg, and parallel with the
xb axis, it can be expressed in fbg as:
3 2
2
3
Xt
T
ftb = 4 Yt 5 = 4 0 5
(2.77)
Zt
0
If the line of action of the thrust is not directed through CO, it will in addition generate an
applied moment given by
2
3
Lt
mbt = 4 Mt 5 = rbt=b ftb = S(rbt=b )ftb
Nt
2
3
0
= 4 T rtz 5
(2.78)
T rty
18
where rbt=b = [rtx ; rty ; rtz ]> is the location of the propeller with respect to CO.
Sometimes the eects due to the rotating mass caused by the propeller must be considered
as an applied moment. This is because the equations of motion has been derived by assuming
that the aircraft is a rigid body with no internal moving parts. The applied moment due to
the rotating mass caused by the propeller is given by:
i
mbp =
d b
h
dt p
(2.79)
where hbp is the angular momentum of the rotating mass, and is given in fbg as:
2
Ip
b
4
0
hp =
0
3
5
(2.80)
where Ip is the inertia of the rotating mass and p is the angular velocity. Assuming the
angular velocity of the rotating mass is constant:
2
3
Lp
i
b
d
d
mbp = 4 Mp 5 = hbp = hbp + ! bb=n hbp
dt
dt
Np
= ! bb=n
2
0
4
Ip p R 5
=
Ip p Q
2.8
(2.81)
are:
ftb
S(rbt=g )ftb + S(! bb=n )hbp
(2.82)
Dierent methods can be used to estimate the aerodynamic coe cients such as wind tunnel
experiments or system identication based on logged experimental data from the aircraft.
The aircraft equations of motion can be quite simple if the aircraft is not highly maneuverable. The more maneuverable aircraft, the more coe cients are needed to accurately
describe the aerodynamic forces and moments.
The aerodynamic coe cients are usually linear at small angles of angle of attack and
sideslip. The most important parameters used to describe an airfoil are:
b
c
c
S
AR = b2 =S
19
Aircraft with deltashaped wings often have a lowaspect ratio, AR. A lowaspect ratio
permits very high roll rates, but have a greatly reduced liftoverdrag. High liftoverdrag
gives an aircraft that has eective cruise performance, that is passenger jets.
The aerodynamic forces and moments are often proportional to the freestream mass
density, a , and the square of the freestream airspeed, VT . It is thus convenient to dene the
dynamic pressure, q, which is later used to calculate the aerodynamic forces and moments:
1
(2.83)
q = a VT2
2
2.8.1
The aerodynamic forces and moments acting on an aircraft can be parametrized as:
2
3
2
3
Xa
CX
fab = 4 Ya 5 = qS 4 CY 5
(2.84)
Za
Cz
2
3
2
3
La
bCl
mba = 4 Ma 5 = qS 4 cCm 5
(2.85)
Na
bCn
where the aerodynamic coe cients CX and CZ often are replaced by expressions that are
functions of the drag coe cient CD and the lift coe cient CL (see Figure 2.4). Positive drag
and lift coe cients are directed along the xs and zs stability axes, respectively, such that:
2
3
2
3
CD
CX
4 0 5 = Rsb 4 0 5
CL
CZ
2
32
3
cos( ) 0 sin( )
CX
54 0 5
0
1
0
=4
(2.86)
sin( ) 0 cos( )
CZ
3
CD
0 5
CL
(2.87)
fab
mba
(2.88)
20
where SD is the area of the disc swept out by a propeller blade. Therefore, the aerodynamic
coe cients are functions:
Ci = Ci ( ; ; M; h; S ; TC )
(2.90)
where i = D; Y; L; l; m; n. Consequently, the aerodynamic coe cients may have complicated
dependences, which are hard to model with great accuracy. If the aircraft has restricted
ight modes, thts is restricted to low Mach numbers and small angles of attack and sideslip,
the aerodynamic coe cients may be greatly simplied. The complicated dependency may
then be broken into a sum of simpler linear terms.
2.8.2
The drag of an aircraft is one of the most important features to model. By reducing drag,
the fuel consumption is reduced, thus giving higher range, and in addition higher maximum
cruise speed. The total drag of an aircraft is usually taken as the sum of the following drag
components:
Parasite drag = friction drag + form drag
Induced drag (eect of wingtip vortices)
Wave drag (eect of shock waves)
where
Friction drag also known as skin friction, describes the friction of the uid against the
surface of the aircraft. The friction drag is proportional to the area in contact with
the uid, also known as the wetted area.
Form drag is the pressure drag caused by ow separation at high alpha.
Induced Drag also known as vortex drag, is the pressure drag caused by the tip vortices
of a nite wing when it is producing lift.
Wave drag is the pressure drag caused if shock waves are present over the surface of the
aircraft. The wave drag becomes signicant at Mach numbers M > 0:4 for a ghter
aircraft, where the ow reaches supersonic speed.
The friction drag often varies parabolically with the lift coe cient, while the induced
drag can often be modeled as:
CL2
(2.91)
CDi =
eAR
where e is the e ciency factor, close to unity, and AR is the aspect ratio. The total drag of
an aircraft takes the form:
CD (CL ; M ) = k(M ) (CL
CLDM )2 + CDM (M )
(2.92)
21
where k(M ) is a proportionality constant that varies with the Mach number. In addition,
the drag coe cient may be a function of the control surfaces and landing gear. A more
general equation for the drag coe cient is:
CD = CD ( ; ; M; h) +
CD (M;
E)
CD (M;
R)
CD (
F)
CD (gear) +
(2.93)
2.8.3
+ CD
+ CD
+ CD
(2.94)
The lift coe cient, CL , is in general mainly determined by the fuselage, wings and their
interference eects. It is also a function of Mach and the angle of attack. The lift coe cient
is usually quite linear with a until near stall, where it drops sharply, and then may rise again
before falling to zero at large angles of attack (see Figure 2.4). A general equation for the
lift coe cient is given in
CL = CL ( ; ; M; TC ) +
CL (
F)
CLge (h)
(2.95)
where CLge (h) is the increment of lift due to ground eect. A typical simple linear model
structure for the lift coe cient is given in
CL = CL0 + CL
2.8.4
+ CL
(2.96)
The sideforce coe cient, CY , is in general mainly determined by sideslip and rudder deection. It is often quite linear in sideslip angle , and a positive sideslip will give a negative
sideforce. A typical expression for the sideforce coe cient is:
b
CYp ( ; M )P + CYr ( ; M )R
2VT
(2.97)
A typical simple linear model structure for the sideforce coe cient is given in
CY = CY ( ; ; M )+ CY R ( ; ; M;
R )+
C Y = C Y0 + C Y
2.8.5
CY A ( ; ; M;
+ CY
A )+
+ CY
(2.98)
The rolling moment coe cient, Cl , is in general mainly determined by sideslip and by control
action of the ailerons and the rudder. It is often quite linear in sideslip angle and a positive
sideslip will give a negative rolling moment. A typical expression for the rolling moment
coe cient is:
Cl = Cl ( ; ; M )+ Cl A ( ; ; M;
A )+
Cl R ( ; ; M;
R )+
b
Clp ( ; M )P + Clr ( ; M )R
2VT
(2.99)
22
2.8.6
+ Cl
+ Cl
+ Clp
b
b
P + Cl r
R
2VT
2VT
(2.100)
The pitching moment coe cient, Cm , is in general mainly determined by angle of attack
and by control action of the elevators. It may be quite linear in angle of attack, and
a positive angle of attack will give a negative pitching moment. A typical model for the
pitching moment coe cient is:
Cm = Cm ( ; M; h; F ; TC ) + Cm e ( ; M; h; E )
c
xR
+
Cmq ( ; M; h)Q + Cm _ ( ; M; h) _ +
CL
2VT
c
+ Cmth ru st ( T ; M; h) + Cmg e a r (h)
(2.101)
The term xcR CL is used to correct for any xdisplacement of the aircraft CG from the aerodynamic data reference position. The second last term represents the eect of the engine thrust
vector not passing through the aircraft CG, while the last term represents the moment due
to the landinggear doors and the landing gear. A linear model for the pitching moment
coe cient takes the form:
c
Cm = Cm0 + Cm + Cm e e + Cmq
Q
(2.102)
2VT
2.8.7
23
The yawing moment coe cient, Cn , is in general mainly determined by the sideslip angle
and by control action of the rudders. It is quite linear in sideslip for small angles of attack
, where a positive sideslip will give a positive yawing moment. A general equation for
the yawing moment coe cient is given by:
Cn = Cn ( ; ; M; TC ) + Cn R ( ; ; M; R ) +
b
+
Cnp ( ; M )P + Cnr ( ; M )R
2VT
Cn A ( ; ; M;
A)
(2.103)
A linear model for the yawing moment coe cient is gven by:
Cn = Cn0 + Cn
2.8.8
+ Cn
+ Cn
+ Cn p
b
b
P + Cnr
R
2VT
2VT
(2.104)
The resulting equations of motion including the aerodynamic coe cients are:
T
qS
+
CX
m
m
qS
V_ = W P U R + g cos( ) sin( ) +
CY
m
_ = U Q V P + g cos( ) cos( ) + qS CZ
W
m
Iz Iy
Ixz
qbS
Ixz _
R=
QR +
PQ +
Cl
Ix
Ix
Ix
Ix
Ix Iz
Ixz 2
T rtz
Ip
qSc
Q_ =
PR
(P
R2 ) +
+
Cm
pR +
Iy
Iy
Iy
Iy
Iy
T rty
Ixz _
Iy Ix
Ixz
Ip
qSb
P =
PQ
QR
Cn
pQ +
Iz
Iz
Iz
Iz
Iz
Iz
U_ = V R
P_
R_
2.9
WQ
g sin( ) +
2. Symmetric ight:
= Q0 = R0 = 0
0
= V0 = 0
= P0 = 0
(2.105)
(2.106)
(2.107)
(2.108)
(2.109)
(2.110)
24
2.9.1
A frequently used maneuver is coordinated turn where the acceleration in the ydirection is
zero ( _ = 0), sideslip = 0 and zero steadystate pitch and roll anglesthat is,
=
=
_ =0
0 = 0
(2.111)
(2.112)
WP
g cos( ) sin( )] = Y
+
(W0 + w)(P0 + p) g cos( ) sin( )] = Y0
(2.113)
(2.114)
Assume that the longitudinal and lateral motions are decoupledthat is, u = w = q = = 0:
If perturbation theory is applied under the assumption that the 2ndorder terms ur = pw =
0;we get:
m(U0 R0 + U0 r W0 P0 W0 p g sin( )) = Y0
(2.115)
The equilibrium equation (2.35) gives the steadystate condition:
m(U0 R0
(2.116)
W0 P0 ) = Y0
W0 p
or
r=
W0
g
p+
sin( )
U0
U0
(2.117)
g sin( )) = 0
g
sin( )
U0
small
g
U0
(2.118)
0
(2.119)
which is a very important result since it states that a roll angle angle dierent from zero
will induce a yaw rate r which again turns the aircraft (banktoturn). With other words, we
can use a moment in roll, for instance generated by the ailerons, to turn the aircraft. The
yaw angle is given by:
_ =r
(2.120)
An alternative method is of course to turn the aircraft by using the rear rudder to generate
a yaw moment. The banktoturn principle is used in many missile control systems since it
improves maneuverability, in particular in combination with a rudder controlled system.
25
2.9.2
v_
p_
r_
_
_
7 6
7 6
7=6
7 6
5 4
0
0
0
0
0
32
76
76
76
76
54
v
p
r
b11
b21
b31
0
0
7 6
7 6
7+6
7 6
5 4
3
7
7
7
7
5
(2.122)
Aircraft altitude control systems are designed by considering the equation for the vertical
acceleration in the center of gravity expressed in NED coordinates; see (2.28). This gives:
_ +VP
azCG = W
QU
(2.123)
g cos( ) cos( )
_ 0 = 0,
If the acceleration is perturbed according to azCG = az0 + az and we assume that W
the following equilibrium condition is obtained:
az0 = V0 P0
Q0 U0
g cos(
0 ) cos(
(2.124)
0)
(Q0 + q)(U0 + u)
g cos(
+ ) cos(
+ ) (2.125)
Furthermore, assume that the altitude is changed by symmetric straightline ight with
horizontal wings such that V0 = 0 = 0 = P0 = Q0 = 0: This gives:
az0 + az = w_ + vp
q(U0 + u)
g cos( ) cos( )
(2.126)
26
Assume that the 2ndorder terms vp and uq can be neglected and subtract the equilibrium
condition (2.124) from (2.126) such that:
az = w_
(2.127)
U0 q
Dierentiating the altitude twice with respect to time gives the relationship:
=
h
az = U0 q
(2.128)
w_
_
If we integrate this expression under the assumption that h(0)
= U0 (0)
h_ = U0
w(0) = 0, we get:
(2.129)
:=
where
= w=U0 : This gives the resulting dierential equation for altitude control:
h_ = U0
(2.131)
2.10
u_
w_
q_
_
h_
7 6
7 6
7+6
7 6
5 4
0
0
0
0
0
32
76
76
76
76
54
u
w
q
h
7 6
7 6
7+6
7 6
5 4
b11 b12
b21 b22
b31 b32
0
0
0
0
3
7
7
7
7
5
(2.132)
The aircraft stability properties can be investigated by computing the eigenvalues of the
system matrix A using:
det( I
For a matrix A of dimension n
A) = 0
n there is n solutions of :
(2.133)
2.10.1
27
+2
ph ! ph
+ ! 2ph )(
+2
sp ! sp
+ ! 2sp ) = 0
(2.134)
0.1121
0.7771
3.6595
0
damp(a)
Eigenvalue
0.0064 + 0.0593i
0.0064  0.0593i
0.8678 + 1.9061i
0.8678  1.9061i
0.0003
0.9945
0.9544
1.0000
Damping
0.1070
0.1070
0.4143
0.4143
0.5608
0.0015
0
0]
Freq. (rad/sec)
0.0596
0.0596
2.0943
2.0943
ph
sp
= 0:4143:
Tuck Mode: Supersonic aircraft may have a very large aerodynamic coe cient Mu :
This implies that the oscillatory Phugoid equation gives two real solutions where one
is positive (unstable) and one is negative (stable). This is referred to as the tuck mode
since the phenomenon is observed as a downwards pointing nose (tucking under) for
increasing speed.
28
Figure 2.5: Aircraft longitudinal eigenvalue conguration plotted in the complex plane.
A third oscillatory mode: For ghter aircraft the center of gravity is often located
behind the neutral point or the aerodynamic centerthat is, the point where the trim
moment Mw w is zero. When this happens, the aerodynamic coe cient Mw takes a
value such that the roots of the characteristic equation has four real solutions. When
the center of gravity is moved backwards one of the roots of the Phugoid and shortperiod modes become imaginary and they form a new complex conjugated pair. This
is usually referred to as the 3rd oscillatory mode. The locations of the eigenvalues are
illustrated in Figure 2.5.
2.10.2
( + e)( + f )(
+2
+
D !D
= 0
+
+ ! 2D ) = 0
0
(2.135)
(2.136)
where the term in the last equation corresponds to a pure integrator in rollthat is, _ = r.
The term ( + e) is the aircraft spiral/divergence mode. This is usually a very slow mode.
Spiral/divergence corresponds to horizontally leveled wings followed by roll and a diverging
spiral maneuver.
The term ( +f ) describes the subsidiary roll mode while the 2ndorder system is referred
to as Dutch roll. This is an oscillatory system with a small relative damping factor D : The
natural frequency in Dutch roll is denoted ! D :
If the lateral B767 Matlab model in Chapter 4 is considered, the Matlab command
damp.m gives:
29
a = [
0.1245 0.0350 0.0414 0.9962
15.2138 2.0587 0.0032 0.6450
0 1.0000 0
0.0357
1.6447 0.0447 0.0022 0.1416
damp(a)
Eigenvalue
0.0143
0.1121 + 1.4996i
0.1121  1.4996i
2.0863
Damping
1.0000
0.0745
0.0745
1.0000
Freq. (rad/sec)
0.0143
1.5038
1.5038
2.0863
In this example we only get four eigenvalues since the pure integrator in yaw is not
include in the system matrix. It is seen that the spiral mode is given by e = 0:0143 while
the subsidiary roll mode is given by f = 2:0863. Dutch roll is recognized by ! D = 0:0745
and D = 1:5038.
2.11
A detailed introduction to design of ight control systems are given by [7], [11], [8] and [12].
The control system are based on linear design techniques using linearized models similar to
those discussed in the sections above.
30
Chapter 3
Satellite Modeling
When stabilizing satellites in geostationary orbits only the attitude of the satellite is of
interest since the position is given by the Earths rotation. Figure 3.1 shows the NUTS
CubeSat project at NTNU.
3.1
3.1.1
Attitude Model
Eulers 2nd Axiom applied to satellites
(ICG !) =
(3.1)
(3.3)
32
(3.4)
cos( ) 6= 0
(3.5)
(3.6)
The satellite has three controllable moments = [ 1 ; 2 ; 3 ]> ; which can be generated using
dierent actuators. Magnetic actuators are described in Section 3.2.
3.1.2
(ICG !)
(3.7)
!=
ICG !_ + S(!)! =
The matrix S(!) must satisfy the condition:
S(!)!
(ICG !)
3.2
(3.9)
3
Iyz r + Ixy p Iy q
Ixz r Ixy q + Ix p 5
0
(3.10)
Actuator Dynamics
Magnetic actuators are used to control the NUTS cubesatellite, which is a student satellite
project at NTNU. The magnetic actuators are cheap, solidstate and energye cient. Due
to variations of the magnetic eld for a moving satellite, modeling and control may be
challenging. An analogy could be an airplane moving through a various density atmospheres,
suddenly leaving you with limited control of either roll, pitch or yaw.
When applying an electrical current through the windings of the coils, a magnetic dipole
moment is generated. When this eld reacts with the magnetic eld surrounding the Earth,
a magnetic torque is generated, which makes the satellite move. Let the Earths magnetic
33
eld in BODY coordinates be denoted by Bb = [Bx ; By ; Bz ]> while the magnetic eld mb =
[mx ; my ; mz ]> set up by the actuators is:
2
Nx Ax Vx
Rx
Ny Ay Vy
Ry
Nz Az Vz
Rz
6
mb = 4
= Kcoil V
where
and for n = x; y; z;
6
Kcoil = 4
N x Ax
Rx
0
0
0
N y Ay
Ry
0
0
N z Az
Rz
3
7
5
7
5;
(3.11)
(3.12)
2
3
Vx
V = 4 Vy 5
Vz
(3.13)
Bb
= S( Bb )mb
where
0
b
4
Bz
S( B ) =
By
Bz
0
Bx
(3.14)
3
By
Bx 5
0
(3.15)
For control purposes, we usually assign , however, the satellite only accepts voltage signals
as input, and not torque. It is straightforward to nd the magnetic eld mb due to the
actuators:
mb =
Bb
(3.16)
In view of (3.13), one may nd the relation between voltages and the torque vector:
1
V = Kcoil
Bb
(3.17)
The matrix Kcoil , usually referred to as the control allocation matrix, is a constant matrix.
Note that Bb will change throughout the orbit.
According to (3.14), b always lies in the plane perpendicular to Bb . Suppose that d is
the torque that the controller produces. It is required that d lies in the plane perpendicular
34
1
(
kBb k2
Bb )
1
(
kBb k2
Bb )
(3.18)
Bb
(3.19)
is given by:
1
b
sin( ) Bb
2 k dk B
b
kB k
= k d k sin( )
k k=
3.3
(3.20)
Design of nonlinear trajectorytracking control systems for Hamiltonian systems in the form
(3.8) is quite common in the literature. One example is the nonlinear and passive adaptive attitude control system of Slotine and Di Benedetto [10]. An alternative representation is proposed by Fossen [3], which simplies the representation of the regressor matrix.
Trajectorytracking controllers require that the model parameters are known or estimated
using parameter adaptation. For setpoint regulation is possible to derive controllers that
do not require model parameters. This is presented below.
3.3.1
(3.21)
where h(~
q) is a positive denite function depending of the attitude error, for instance:
1 >
h(~
q) = q
~ Kp q
~;
2
q
~=q
(3.22)
qd
where qd = constant and Kp > 0 is a design matrix. This means that the desired attitude
must be specied as a unit quaternion, which usually is computed by specifying the desired
Euler angles and transforming these to a desired unit quaternion.
Dierentiation of V with respect to time gives:
V_
= ! T ICG !_ + q_ >
@h
@~
q
>
@h
@~
q
(3.23)
35
Since S(!) =
! > S(!)! = 0 8!
This suggests that the control input
(3.24)
Kd !
Kd !
@h
@~
q
>
Tq (q)Kp q
~
T>
q (q)
(3.25)
+ T>
q (q)
= !>
! > Kd !
@h
@~
q
(3.26)
and stability and convergence follow from standard Lyapunov techniques, for instance by
using Barbalats lemma.
3.3.2
The classical PDcontroller for satellite attitude regulation uses feedback from the imaginary
part ~
" = [~"1 ; ~"2 ; ~"3 ]> of the unit quaternion error q
~ = [~; ~"1 ; ~"2 ; ~"3 ]> where ~ denotes the
real part of the unit quaternion. The attitude error dynamics q
~ can be described by unit
quaternions according to:
1
"
~_ = ! >~
2
1
~"_ =
~!
2
(3.27)
1
!
2
(3.28)
~
"
(3.29)
kd !
where kp > 0 and kd > 0 are the controller gains. Notice that the control law does not
depends on the model of the system, and it makes ! and ~
" asymptotically converge to zero
and hence ~ converges to zero. Consider the following scalar function:
V = (kp + ckd ) (~
1
1)2 + ~
"> ~
" + ! > ICG !
2
c"> ICG !
(3.30)
One may show that there exists a su ciently small c > 0 such that V > 0 for all ~ 6= 1,
~
" 6= 0, and ! 6= 0. In fact, V is bounded from below as
V
1)2 +
1
2
~
" !
2(kp + ckd ) c
c I
I
I
~
"
!
(3.31)
36
1)~_ + ~
">~"_ + ! > ICG !_
c~
"> ICG !_
>
c~
" ICG !_ =
1
!
2
1
~!
2
~
"
>
ICG !
c~
"> (
(3.32)
~
") = 0. Also,
ICG !)
(3.33)
Thus, together with the control law ((3.29)), the time derivative will be
V_ =
kd2 k!k2
ckp k~
"k 2
~
" !
>
ckp
0
0 kd 2c
1
~!
2
1
!
2
~
"
!
~
"
>
ICG !
c~
"> ( !
>
ICG !)
(3.34)
V_
0; then, from Barbalats lemma, it follows that ~
" ! 0 and ! ! 0 as time tends to
innity.
As explained by (3.11)(3.13), the input signal is voltage V of the coil. Thus, we need
to nd the relation between and V. In practical situations, scaling is also required so as
to avoid unnecessary electricity load. Therefore, one may derive the following input signal:
1
V = Kcoil
Bb
kp
1
"
=
2 Kcoil ~
b
kB k
Bb
kd
1
2 Kcoil !
b
kB k
Bb
(3.35)
Chapter 4
Matlab Simulation Models
4.1
Boeing767
E
T
(deg)
(%)
; ulat =
Equilibrium point:
Speed
Altitude
Mass
Machnumber
4.1.1
Longitudinal model
a = [ 0.0168
0.0164
0.0417
0
0.1121
0.7771
3.6595
0
b = [ 0.0243
0.0634
3.6942
0
0.0519
0.0005
0.0243
0
];
0.0003
0.9945
0.9544
1.0000
0.5608
0.0015
0
0];
37
(deg)
(deg)
(4.1)
(4.2)
38
Eigenvalues:
lam = [
0.8678
0.8678
0.0064
0.0064
4.1.2
+
+

1.9061i
1.9061i
0.0593i
0.0593i];
Lateral model
a = [
0.1245
15.2138
0
1.6447
0.0350
2.0587
1.0000
0.0447
b = [
0.0049
4.0379
0
0.0568
0.0237
0.9613
0
1.2168];
0.0414
0.0032
0
0.0022
0.9962
0.6458
0.0357
0.1416];
Eigenvalues:
lam = [
0.1121 + 1.4996i
0.1121  1.4996i
2.0863
0.0143];
4.2
F16 Fighter
The lateral model of the F16 ghter aircraft is based on [11], pages 370371. The state
vectors are:
3
2
(ft/s)
6 (ft/s) 7
2
3
6
7
r
(deg)
w
6 p (rad/s) 7
6
7
6 p (deg=s) 7
uA (rad)
7
7
6
xlat = 6
(4.3)
6 r (rad) 7 ; ulat = uR (rad) ; ylat = 4 (deg) 5
6 A (rad) 7
6
7
(deg)
4 R (rad) 5
rw (rad)
Equilibrium point:
Speed
VT = 502 ft/s = 552 km/h
Machnumber M = 0.45
4.2.1
39
Longitudinal model
a = [
0.3220
0
30.6492
8.5396
0
0
0
0.0640
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0364
1
3.6784
0.0254
0
0
0
0.9917
0.0037
0.6646
0.4764
0
0
57.2958
0.0003
0
0.7333
0.0319
20.2
0
0
0.0008
0
0.1315
0.0620
0
20.2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1 ];
b = [
0
0
0
0
20.2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
20.2
0 ];
c= [
0
0
57.2958
0
0
0
0
57.2958
0
57.2958
0
0
57.2958
0
0
0
Eigenvalues:
lam = [
1.0000
0.4224+ 3.0633i
0.4224 3.0633i
0.0167
3.6152
20.2000
20.2000
];
Notice that the last two eigenvalues correspond to the actuator states.
1
0
0
0 ];
40
Figure 4.1: Schematic drawing of the Bristol F.2B Fighter (McRuer et al 1973).
4.3
The lateral model of the F2B Bristol ghter aircraft is given below [8]. This is a British
aircraft from World War I (see Figure 4.1). The aircraft model is for = 0 (coordinated
turn). The statespace vector is:
2
3
p (deg/s)
6 r (deg/s) 7
7
xlat = 6
(4.4)
4 (deg) 5 ; ulat = [ A (deg)]
(deg)
9:81
_ = g =
= 0: 233
U0
138 0:3048
Equilibrium point:
Speed
VT = 138 ft/s = 151.4 km/h
Altitude
h = 6 000 ft
Machnumber M = 0.126
(4.5)
4.3.1
41
Lateral model
a = [
7.1700
2.0600
0.4360
0.3410
1.0000
0
0
0
b = [
26.1000
1.6600
0
0];
0
0
0
0.2330
0
0
0
0];
Eigenvalues:
lam = [
0
0
0.4752
7.0358];
4.4
The NTNU student cubesatellite shown in Figure 3.1 has the following inertia matrix:
I_CG = diag{[0.0108,0.0113,0.0048]};
% kg m^2
42
Bibliography
[1] Blakelock, J. H. (1991). Aircraft and Missiles (John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)
[2] Etkin, B. and L. D. Reid (1996). Dynamics of Flight: Stability and Control (John
Wiley & Sons Ltd.)
[3] Fossen, T. I. (1993). Comments on Hamiltonian Adaptive Control of Spacecraft,
IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, TAC38(5):671672.
[4] Fossen, T. I. (1994). Guidance and Control of Ocean Vehicles (John Wiley & Sons
Ltd.)
[5] Fossen, T. I. (2011). Handbook of Marine Craft Hydrodynamics and Motion Control.
(John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)
[6] Hughes, P. C. (1986). Spacecraft Attitude Dynamics (John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)
[7] McLean, D. (1990). Automatic Flight Control Systems (Prentice Hall Inc.)
[8] McRuer, D., D. Ashkenas og A. I. Graham (1973). Aircraft Dynamics and
Automatic Control. (Princeton University Press, New Jersey 1973).
[9] Nelson R. C. (1998). Flight Stability and Automatic Control (McGrawHill Int.)
[10] Slotine, J. J. E. og M. D. Di Benedetto (1990). Hamiltonian Adaptive Control
of Spacecraft, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, TAC35(7):848852.
[11] Stevens, B. L. og F. L. Lewis (1992). Aircraft Control and Simulation (John Wiley
& Sons Ltd.)
[12] Roskam, J. (1999). Airplane Flight Dynamics and Automatic Flight Controls (Darcorporation)
[13] Wen, J. T.Y. and K. KreutzDelgado (1991). The Attitude Control Problem.
IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, Vol. 36, No. 10. October 1991.
43
Mult mai mult decât documente.
Descoperiți tot ce are Scribd de oferit, inclusiv cărți și cărți audio de la editori majori.
Anulați oricând.