Fault-Tolerant Control on a UH-60 Black Hawk helicopter using horizontal stabilator
- PDF / 2,963,091 Bytes
- 15 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 104 Downloads / 143 Views
ORIGINAL PAPER
Fault‑Tolerant Control on a UH‑60 Black Hawk helicopter using horizontal stabilator Praneet Vayalali1 · Michael McKay1 · Jayanth Krishnamurthi1 · Farhan Gandhi2 Received: 9 April 2020 / Revised: 24 July 2020 / Accepted: 21 September 2020 © Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt e.V. 2020
Abstract The present study proposes an augmentation to the existing control mixing on the UH-60 Black Hawk to utilize the horizontal stabilator as a control effector in the feedback control to compensate for locked-in-place failure in the main-rotor swashplate actuators. Stabilator use has previously been shown to work in an adaptive sense, where the control mixing is remapped in flight once failure is detected. Now it is shown to perform well when the defined mixing utilizes the stabilator even on the undamaged aircraft, removing the need to detect and identify specific failures on the aircraft. Post-failure, the aircraft retains level 1 handling qualities ratings in pitch bandwidth and disturbance rejection. For forward actuator failure, the aircraft departs level 1 in the vertical rate response and pitch stability margin. There is a general improvement in handling qualities ratings as stabilator authority is increased. The aircraft is simulated flying a trajectory to a recoverable state post-failure, where the descent rate and forward speed are appropriate for a rolling landing. Stabilator hardover is also considered; the aircraft is shown to compensate for a stabilator hardover at a moderate flight speed, retaining level 1 handling qualities with only minor degradation relative to the undamaged aircraft except for failure at 80 knots showing level 3 stability margins. Keywords Actuator failure · Stabilator · Fault Tolerant Control · Control redundancy · UH-60 · Helicopter List of symbols 𝐱 State vector 𝐮 Control stick input vector u, v, w Body velocities, ft/s p, q, r Body angular rates, rad/s 𝜙, 𝜃, 𝜓 Body roll, pitch and Yaw angles, rad X, Y, Z Inertial positions, ft 𝛽0 Rotor coning, rad 𝛽1s Lateral flap, rad 𝛽1c Longitudinal flap, rad 𝛽d Differential flapping, rad 𝛽̇0 Rotor coning derivative, rad/s 𝛽̇1s Lateral flapping derivative, rad/s 𝛽̇1c Longitudinal flapping derivative, rad/s 𝛽̇d Differential flapping derivative, rad/s * Praneet Vayalali [email protected] 1
Center for Mobility with Vertical Lift (MOVE), Rennselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY, USA
Director of MOVE, Redfern Chair in Aerospace Engineering, Department of Mechanical, Aerospace and Nuclear Engineering, Rennselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY, USA
2
𝜆0 Uniform inflow component 𝜆1s Lateral inflow component 𝜆1c Longitudinal inflow component 𝜆0TR Tail rotor uniform inflow 𝛺 Main rotor RPM, rad/s 𝜒f Rotor fuel flow in terms of equivalent torque, lb-ft Qe Engine torque at main rotor gearbox, lb-ft 𝛿lat Lateral stick, % 𝛿lon Longitudinal stick, % 𝛿0 Collective stick, % 𝛿ped Pedal stick, % 𝛿throttle Throttle, % 𝜃0 Root collective pitch, deg 𝜃1c Lateral cyclic pitch, deg 𝜃1s Longitudinal cyclic pi
Data Loading...
