Upload
lydang
View
227
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Università degli Studi di Napoli “Federico II”
Dipartimento di Progettazione Aeronautica
Appuntidi
Tecniche di Simulazione di Volo——
Ing. Agostino De Marco
Anno Accademico 2003–2004
Dr
af
t2
00
3–
ve
r.1
.0
Contents
3 Mathematical models
3.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . §3–1
3.1.1 Basic concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . §3–1
3.1.2 Mathematical modeling versus stability and control analysis . . §3–4
3.2 Elements of the model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . §3–6
3.2.1 Aerodynamic model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . §3–6
3.2.2 Engine model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . §3–7
3.2.3 Undercarriage model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . §3–8
3.2.4 Mass model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . §3–8
3.2.5 Atmosferic model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . §3–8
3.2.6 Control system model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . §3–9
3.3 Equations of motion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . §3–10
3.3.1 General equations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . §3–10
3.3.2 Small perturbation equations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . §3–12
3.3.3 Aircraft orientation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . §3–13
3.3.4 Kinematic relationships for Euler angles . . . . . . . . . . . . . §3–13
3.3.5 The direction cosine matrix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . §3–15
3.3.6 The quaternion approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . §3–17
3.3.7 Axes and frames of reference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . §3–20
3.3.8 Incidence angles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . §3–29
3.3.9 Direction angles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . §3–32
i
Dr
af
t2
00
3–
ve
r.1
.0
Chapter3
Mathematical models
3.1 Introduction
As stated earlier in these notes, to a simulation engineer, a faithful simulation requires
the following three elements
Model: a complete model, preferably expressed mathematically, of
the response of the aircraft to all inputs, from the pilot and from
the environment;
Solver: a means of solving these equations in “real-time”, or in other
words of animating the model;
Response feedback: a way of presenting the output of this solution
to the pilot by means of mechanical, visual and aural responses.
None of these has yet been completely solved nowadays, if judged by a strict engineering
criterium. Another question is whether or not these requirements have to be completely
met.
3.1.1 Basic concepts
The principal task, that of modelling the dynamic behaviour of the flight vehicle, is
an extension of the well known basic principles of Flight Mechanics. However, simu-
§3–1
Dr
af
t2
00
3–
ve
r.1
.0
Mathematical models — Introduction §3–2
lation must deal with more than just airframe aerodynamics and broader aspects of
mathematical modelling will be outlined here.
The nature of the problem is that the motion of a flying vehicle is governed by
equations of motion of the generic form
x = F/m , θ = M/I (3.1)
where, respectively x, F , m are the vehicle acceleration, applied force and mass, and
θ, M, I are the angular acceleration, applied moment and moment of inertia.
A more specific form of the equations of motion must be established at this point,
but one can state that the basic mathematical model of the vehicle under simulation is
embodied in the definition of the terms F and M in the eq.s (3.1). For an atmospheric
flying vehicle, this mathematical model is primarily the relationship between the air
reactions (aerodynamic forces and moments) and the motion of the airplane relative
to the air. This is currently known as the aerodynamic model of the aircraft. Other
external forces and moments arise from engine thrust and landing gear contact with the
ground. Definition of all these force and moment components is the key to a realistic
description of an aircraft’s flight characteristics. The performances of an aircraft and
its dynamic behaviour can then be calculated for a wide range of flight conditions,
according to the amount of data available for the evaluation of F (at varying airplane
attitudes). Simulation is fundamentally the generation of those forces and solution of
the equations of motion.
The term “mathematical model” is thus growing in complexity and extent, and
is also applied to other features of the aircraft such as its control system, and many
internal systems. For each feature being modelled, it is necessary to formulate the
model so that the “behaviour” of the whole system, i. e. the response of the system to
a stimulus, may be calculated.
A model is only useful if it can actually be implemented for some application. So
far, the term model has not properly separated the concept from the implementation.
This may usefully be done, with the aid of some definitions given below.
A. De Marco – Appunti di Tecniche di Simulazione di Volo
Dr
af
t2
00
3–
ve
r.1
.0
Mathematical models — Introduction §3–3
Figure 3.1: The simulation space and the definition of “models”.
The so-called simulation space is divided into three basic elements as depicted
in fig. 3.1. Starting with Reality, a conceptual model, described via equations or
other governing relationships, is obtained by analysis. Implementation via computer
programming yields a Computer Model which, through simulation, may be related
to Reality. The credibility of the conceptual model is then evaluated by procedures
which test the adequacy of the model to provide an acceptable level of agreement with
reality, while the computer model, in the form of an operational computer program,
is confirmed as an adequate representation of the conceptual model by procedures of
verification. Finally, model validation demonstrates that the computer model possesses
a satisfactory range of accuracy in comparison with reality and consistent with its
intended application.
In some aircraft simulation applications, the mathematical models may be defined
A. De Marco – Appunti di Tecniche di Simulazione di Volo
Dr
af
t2
00
3–
ve
r.1
.0
Mathematical models — Introduction §3–4
by one agency, such as the aircraft manufacturer, for implementation by another, a
simulator manifacturer. A third party, such as a regulatory authority, may require
that the original model be implemented unchanged. Verification would be performed
by the simulator manifacturer using his own internally-generated checks, and validation
by comparison with real-life data redorded from flight tests.
In creating or deriving mathematical models, it is important that the modeller (the
person or staff doing the modelling) has a clear idea of what the model is for, and that he
states this together with his definition of his model. It is important because the purpose
of the model influences its form and quality. Many systems are strictly governed by
equations which may be extremely complex but which may often be simplified in the
interests of obtaining practical solutions and yet still retain sufficient realism for the
task at hand.
A practical solution in the present context means one of adequate accuracy which
can be achieved in real-time during simulation. Real-time here refers to a solution in
which the calculation of a systen’s behaviour over a given elapsed time interval ∆t
can be achieved in the same ∆t or less of computing time. Adequate accuracy means
that the real-time solution yelds the steady-state performance of the vehicle and its
transient behaviour with accuracy which is acceptable and sufficient for the role of the
simulation.
3.1.2 Mathematical modeling versus stability and control analysis
Deriving mathematical models for simulation has some similarities with the basic tech-
niques of stability and control theory but there are also some differences. Similarities
include mathematical notation, systems of axes and basic nomenclature. Differences,
however are significant, and include the need for a wide range of speed, aircraft confi-
guration and manoeuvre real-time solution, as defined earlier.
The classical approach to stability and control analysis is to start with the complete
equations of motion and make assumptions that enable the equations to be linearised
about some local point of equilibrium (a trimmed state). Once linear equations are
A. De Marco – Appunti di Tecniche di Simulazione di Volo
Dr
af
t2
00
3–
ve
r.1
.0
Mathematical models — Introduction §3–5
available, a host of techniques can be applied to the analysis of the system to investigate
the stability of the motion following a disturbance from trim. It will provide answers to
such questions as “will the aircraft return to the original trimmed state and with what
sort of transient behaviour?” While such techniques have been, and are, invaluable in
the design process, only small disturbances from the equilibrium state are permitted
before the model is invalid. Small disturbances means, say, 10% escursions in speed or
not more than 5 degrees in angle of attack. Many simulation tasks wether for training
or for research and development, demand a wide range of flight speed or require large
changes in aircraft configuration in order to accomplish that task. A complete sortie,
from take-off to landing, is an extreme example.
Real-time solution is necessary because, in simulation, there is usually a man in
the control loop (pilot-in-the-loop simulations), who must be supplied with information
in a timely fashion so that he can use his normal control techniques and strategies.
Figure 3.2: The simulation space and the definition of “models”.
A. De Marco – Appunti di Tecniche di Simulazione di Volo
Dr
af
t2
00
3–
ve
r.1
.0
Mathematical models — Elements of the model §3–6
3.2 Elements of the model
As stated, the primary elements of a conceptual/mathematical model for flight sim-
ulation are those which directly produce the values of external forces acting on the
airframe, namely aerodynamics, engine thrust and undercarriage.
Secondary elements of a model contribute significantly to the core, and include
a control system and the model of atmospheric environment. All these features are
summarized in fig. 3.2.
3.2.1 Aerodynamic model
The aerodynamic model has to reproduce the dominant features of the forces and
moments acting on the aircraft: lift, drag – the main contributors to the aircraft
performance –, and moments about all three axes, through which pilot exercises control.
Mathematical models normally consider the physical components of the vehicle, such
as, for conventional aircrafts, wings, body (i.e. the fuselage), and tail, and build
mathematical expressions for the contributions made by these components and their
mutual interferences. A possible expression is the following
Laero = LWing + LBody + ∆LWing−Body + LTail (3.2)
for the total aerodynamic lift Laero (or simply L) of the aircraft, where the term
∆LWing−Body, usually estimated with semi-empirical formulas, takes into account the
interference effects on the wing lift due to the presence of the fuselage, the remaining
terms being calculated as the wing, fuselage and tail were isolated. Similar formulas
are implemented for the other aerodynamic force components and moments.
Additional featuresare included to represent such influences as “ground effect”,
significant during take-off and landing. In these situations, forces acting on the aircraft
differ markedly from those applicable to the same configuration in free air, due to the
presence of the ground close to the aircraft constraining the lower airflow to follow
the runway. This can resul in increased wing lift and possibly in a sharp increase in
A. De Marco – Appunti di Tecniche di Simulazione di Volo
Dr
af
t2
00
3–
ve
r.1
.0
Mathematical models — Elements of the model §3–7
nose-down pitching moment close to the ground. Both these effect are important as
they influence the pilot’s ability to perform a safe and smoth landing. Aerodynamic
models are normally “static” or “quasi-static”, based on the assumption that the airflow
can re-establish steady conditions in a time scale much shorter than the characteristic
time scale of the aircraft manoeuvre itself. Thus the time variable t does not appear
explicitly in the mathematical model, but the aircraft’s transient behaviour is, of course,
a function of time.
3.2.2 Engine model
An engine model, embedded a simulator’s conceptual model, must produce the correct
value of steadt thrust to correspond with pilot’s demand through his power lever. Usu-
ally, thrust is modelled as a net thrust: the net propulsive force is directly calculated,
having allowed for intake momentum drag. More comprehensive models will reproduce
gross thrust and momentum drag as separate entities, taking the difference explicitly
rather than implicitly. These latter models are applied in cases where the simulated
aircraft is capable of flying at high angles of attack or can vector its engine exhaust
nozzles in some way, as the thrust vector and the momentum drag vector may then
deviate by a large angle. Interference between the engine exhaust flow and the tailplane
may further affect the available applied forces.
An additional example of the need for detailed engine modelling can occur with
the simulation of a VSTOL (Vertical or Short Take-Off and Landing) aircraft, which in
the hover, must use a proportion of the airflow through the engine to generate control
forces by blowing out at the extremities. Over-active pilots, trying to keep the hovering
of these type of aircraft, end up with a descending motion as a result of their control
activities. These situation must be simulated correctly.
Pilot’s ability to control the aircraft also depend on the time needed by the engine
to produce the request level of thrust. An engine can not change its thrust instanta-
neously: burning more fuel to increase thrust must first accelerate the rotating machin-
ery of the engine and this takes time. The timescale varies in the range of few tents of
A. De Marco – Appunti di Tecniche di Simulazione di Volo
Dr
af
t2
00
3–
ve
r.1
.0
Mathematical models — Elements of the model §3–8
a second to several seconds. This implies, besides the static, performance-orientated
thrust modelling, the need for an adequate modelling of the growth or decay of thrust
with time.
Engine modelling is an area where a wide variety of techniques is used, according
to the fidelity required to the engine dynamic response. A description of some engine
models adopted in flight simulation practice will be given elsewhere in these notes.
3.2.3 Undercarriage model
The simulation of take-off or landing require some means to produce the force which
supports the aircraft in contact with the ground. This force is given by the undercar-
riage model. The real undercarriage is a complex mechanical, hydraulic and in some
cases pneumatic assembly, which can be modelled in a variety of ways. A model of a
spring coupled with a damper can provide the ground reaction in a simple way. An
extra damping can be added for the recoil phase after the impact in landing.
Detailed models are necessary in some simulation tasks, which demand the repro-
duction of tyres and brakes, anti-skid systems and nose-wheel steering.
3.2.4 Mass model
The discussion so far has been concerned with the contributions to the external forces,
broken down as
F = Faero + Fengine + Fundercarriage (3.3)
The other item which also need modelling, recalling the generic equations (3.1),
is the set of vehicle’s mass properties. These comprises the its mass, its moment of
inertia and center of gravity, usually all function of payload, fuel state, and geometry,
e. g. wing sweep, or stores configuration.
3.2.5 Atmosferic model
A full atmospheric model is needed to represent a number of properties. The starting
point is the variation of density and temperature with altitude, as defined by the
A. De Marco – Appunti di Tecniche di Simulazione di Volo
Dr
af
t2
00
3–
ve
r.1
.0
Mathematical models — Elements of the model §3–9
International Standard Atnosphere (ISA). Non-standard ambient ambient conditions
may also be needed, such as in cases when the training for “hot day” is of interest or
when design checks have to be accomplished.
These properties are usually known as atmospheric statics as opposed to wind
environments, or atmospheric dynamics, which are needed in terms of mean surface
wind for take-off and landing, and winds at altitude. Atmospheric dynamics, i. e.
turbulence associated with wind, affect performance on a route schedule, for example,
or can cause distraction and disturbance on pilot in a precise task, or sometimes gives
rise to a design case for regulation authority or crew ride comfort.
Methods of modelling atmospheric turbulence are nowadays quite advanced as a
consequence of active research in the real world environment. Extreme phenomena,
such as wind shear, responsible for several major accidents, are now modelled and are
a legitimate item to be simulated, either for research into aircraft design or for training
pilots to recognise and counter it effectively.
Many training tasks demand a full range of metereological phenomena to be sim-
ulated, including weather radar returns and runway state.
3.2.6 Control system model
The control system of an aircraft also needs modelling. It is interposed, in the real
aircraft, between the pilot’s control stick and the vehicle control surfaces, and consists
typically of a system of levers, cables and bell-cranks, terminating in a hydraulic-
actuated jack. The mechanical deficiencies of these system have to be modelled, such
as cable stretch, control jams etc.
Current military aircraft and projected future civil transport aircraft are repla-
cing mechanical connectionc by electrical ones, coupled with computer-driven systems
shaping the pilot’s demands and processing feedback signals. These developments make
the modelling needs growing dramatically as more and more functions are included in
the flight control computer. In this respect, incorporating real flight hardware in the
simulator may be the best solution.
A. De Marco – Appunti di Tecniche di Simulazione di Volo
Dr
af
t2
00
3–
ve
r.1
.0
Mathematical models — Equations of motion §3–10
3.3 Equations of motion
To the general discussion of mathematical models given above, follows here a presenta-
tion of some explicit mathematical formulations. Equation of motion will be outlined
in this section while some forms of data representation and managing will be discussed
later.
3.3.1 General equations
The following exposition assumes that the reader is familiar with the simpler concepts
of aerodynamics and the basic theory of aircraft stability and control.
The mathematical formulation used here adopts the classical notation of alpha-
betical triads to represent the three components of force, moment, linear and angular
velocity. These are illustrated in fig. 3.7 for the conventional right-handed orthogonal
axes with origin fixed in the aircraft. No particular set of vehicled carried axes is yet
assumed.
The equations of motion of a rigid aircraft flying in still air, when referred to any
system of axes fixed in the aircraft and rotatong with it, are
Wg (u+ qw − rv) = X +
Wg gx
Wg (v + ru− pw) = Y +
Wg gy
Wg (w + pv − qu) = Z +
Wg gz
(3.4)
Ixxp− Ixy(q2 − r2) − Izx (r + pq) − Ixy (q − rp) − (Iyy − Izz) qr = L
Iyyq − Izx(r2 − p2) − Ixy (p+ qr) − Iyz (r − pq) − (Izz − Ixx) rp = M
Izz r − Ixy(p2 − q2) − Iyz (q + rp) − Izx (p− qr) − (Ixx − Iyy) pq = N
(3.5)
These are sometimes known as the “total force” equations, as opposed to the small
perturbation equations of classical stability and control.
A. De Marco – Appunti di Tecniche di Simulazione di Volo
Dr
af
t2
00
3–
ve
r.1
.0
Mathematical models — Equations of motion §3–11
Precisely, the first three equations (3.4) are the force equations while the second
three (3.5) are the moment equations in their “complete” form. The full non-linear
set equations is sufficient to cope with general, large-scale motion of an aircraft and is
soluble in these form by numerical integration techniques only once the forcing term
X, Y , Z, L, M, and N on the right-hand side can be prescribed at each time step.
The moment equations (3.5) are “complete” in the sense that all the cross-inertia
terms have been retained. If, as for most cases, it can be assumed that the aircraft has
a symmetrical distribution of mass with respect to the fore-and-aft plane of synnetry,
then Iyz = Ixy = 0 and the equations become more compact
Ixxp− Izx (r + pq) − (Iyy − Izz) qr = L
Iyyq − Izx(r2 − p2) − (Izz − Ixx) rp = M
Izz r − Izx (p− qr) − (Ixx − Iyy) pq = N
(3.6)
Such an assumption is reasonable for conventional aircraft, such as a transport
or executive aircraft, but a fast-jet aircraft could well have, either intentionally or a
result of a failure, an asymmetric distribution of stores beneaths its wing, in which case
the complete equations (3.5) are necessary. It is well known the major influence that
inertia distribution can have on the flying qualities of a fast-jet aircraft and must be
included with care in a simulator’s matematical model.
Regarding the force equations (3.4), while simple in appearence, they pose some
practical difficulties in their solution. These difficulties are associated firstly with prod-
uct terms like qw, rv, etc. which, although nominally second-order, can become dom-
inant in large-scale, vigorous manoeuvres, secondly, with the “still air” assumption.
Some simulator mathematical models are implemented according to a formulation re-
ferred to a earth-based frame, to eliminate both the above difficulties. In an inertial
frame of reference, the product terms disappear, as (i) the axis system is not rotating
and (ii) the treatment of winds is simpler.
A. De Marco – Appunti di Tecniche di Simulazione di Volo
Dr
af
t2
00
3–
ve
r.1
.0
Mathematical models — Equations of motion §3–12
3.3.2 Small perturbation equations
In many simulated situations, there is no alternative to use of the total force equations
and fortunately modern computer techniques now permit this. However, in some cases
it may still be desiderable to deal with a linearized form of the equations of motion, since
they become amenable to treatment by a wide range of analytical techniques. Such
procedures are important at a design stage of a new aircraft and also in research, when
experiments are conducted to establish data on the fundamental handling qualities of
aircraft based on simplified situations and models.
If the aircraft’s motion deviates to only a small extent from a datum, trimmed
state, then the well-known small perturbation equations of motion are applicable. The
datum state is also called “equilibrium” state in which flight quantities, say f assume a
value feq, and evolve in time being perturbed by a small variation ∆f , which becomes
the unknown, viz. f = feq + ∆f .
Below are reported, as an example of formulation, the linearized equations of
longitudinal motion. Assuming level flight (θeq = 0), using aerodynamic axes (such
that weq = 0), and omitting some derivatives that are commonly neglected, one can
write the following equations in matrix form
d
dt
∆u
∆w
∆q
∆θ
=
xu xw xq xθ
zu zw zq zθ
mu mw mq mθ
·
∆u
∆w
∆q
∆θ
+
xη
zη
mη
0
η (3.7)
where η (sometimes denoted also with δe) is the elevator deflection, and the coefficients,
or aerodynamic stability derivatives are constants matrix elements for a given aircraft
configuration and datum flight condition, reported here in their “concise” form.
A corresponding set of equations can be written for the latero-directional motion,
but are not reported here.
A. De Marco – Appunti di Tecniche di Simulazione di Volo
Dr
af
t2
00
3–
ve
r.1
.0
Mathematical models — Equations of motion §3–13
The small perturbation equations are rarely used in full-blown simulations, but
can have relevance in research studies of handling qualities or to preliminary studies
of a new design, when fundamental properties of an aircraft’s dynamic behaviour may
be examined.
3.3.3 Aircraft orientation
The aircraft’s orientation in space is given by its attitude, which may be defined in a
number of ways. The most common method consists in defining a sequence of three
angles, known as the Euler attitude angles.
Starting with a set of axes, with origin C fixed in the aircraft, initially aligned
with those of a fixed inertial, or anyway datum, reference frame Ox0y0z0, and with
C ≡ O, the first set of axes is brought into alignment with the body-fixed axes Cxyz
by rotating the first set successively through each angle in turn. The usual trio of
angles consists of: À the heading or azimuth or yaw angle ψ, Á the inclination or pitch
angle θ, and  the roll angle φ.
The sequence of rotations is illustrated in fig. 3.3. In fig. 3.3(b) the intermediate
axes set between successive rotations are labeled x0y0z0, x1y1z1, x2y2z2, xyz. The se-
quence is significant, as a different order from that defined here will produce a different
final orientation.
With the definitions given here, the attitude angles can take the following range
of values:
− π < ψ ≤ +π , −π
2< θ ≤ +
π
2, −π < φ ≤ +π (3.8)
3.3.4 Kinematic relationships for Euler angles
Given these definitions of Euler attitude angles, derivation of the angles in practice
requires a relationship between the rates of change of the attitude angles and the
components of angular velocity of the aircraft’s body axes. When the latter is referred
A. De Marco – Appunti di Tecniche di Simulazione di Volo
Dr
af
t2
00
3–
ve
r.1
.0
Mathematical models — Equations of motion §3–14
(a) Euler angles as a definition of aircraft orientation with respect to a datum
frame Ox0y0z0. Frame Cxyz is body-fixed and represents the aircraft.
(b) The sequence of rotations bringing the datum frame into alignment with the
body-fixed axes. The classical color sequence Red-Green-Blue is applied accordingly.
Figure 3.3: Euler attitude angles (φ, θ, ψ) and rotation sequence.
A. De Marco – Appunti di Tecniche di Simulazione di Volo
Dr
af
t2
00
3–
ve
r.1
.0
Mathematical models — Equations of motion §3–15
to the body-fixed frame these relationships take the form
φ
θ
ψ
=
1 sinφ tan θ cosφ tan θ
0 cosφ −sinφ
0sinφ
cos θ
cosφ
cos θ
·
p
q
r
(3.9)
the inverse being
p
q
r
=
1 0 −sin θ
0 cosφ sinφ cos θ
0 −sinφ cosφ cos θ
·
φ
θ
ψ
(3.10)
Note that φ ≡ p only when θ = 0 and θ ≡ q only when φ = 0.
Equations (3.9), also known as gimbal equations are widely used, but do contain
a singularity, when the x body axis becomes vertical (θ = ±90◦), tan θ and 1/ cos θ
(= ±∞) make the explressions for φ and ψ indeterminate.
The situations in which this occur are clear. If such manoeuvres are avoided, then
the equations may be used without difficulty. For the simulation of aircraft which
perform aerobatics or similar gross manoeuvres, an alternative formulation is required
so that the derivation of the aircraft attitude angles is always trouble-free.
3.3.5 The direction cosine matrix
Transformation of variables between pairs of reference systems is often required in
order, for example, to reformulate the equations of motion in a form suitable for the
specific treatment of some terms.
The expression providing the airplane center of mass velocity components referred
to the body axes as a function of the corresponding components in earth axes is reported
A. De Marco – Appunti di Tecniche di Simulazione di Volo
Dr
af
t2
00
3–
ve
r.1
.0
Mathematical models — Equations of motion §3–16
below. It is put in a form similar to the classical
x
y
z
=
l1 l2 l3
m1 m2 m3
n1 n2 n3
·
x0
y0
z0
(3.11)
where {x} = {x, y, z}T represents a generic vector quantity, (of velocity, say, or force)
with components referred to body axes, and {x}0
= {x0, y0, z0}T, the same entity but
with components in the earth axes. finally the matrix in eq. (3.11) is denoted here as
[R] is known as direction cosine matrix.
The inverse relationship, giving earth axes components in terms of body axes
components, is
x0
y0
z0
=
l1 m1 n1
l2 m2 n2
l3 m3 n3
·
x
y
z
(3.12)
in which the transformation matrix is written as the transpose of [R], as it is also its
inverse: [R]T = [R]−1.
When direction cosines are expressed in terms of the Euler attitude angles one has
[R] =
cos θ cosψ cos θ sinψ −sin θ
sinφ sin θ cosψ − cosφ sinψ sinφ sin θ sinψ + cosφ cosψ sinφ cos θ
cosφ sin θ cosψ + sinφ sinψ cosφ sin θ cosψ − sinφ cosψ cosφ cos θ
(3.13)
The direction cosine may be defined and derived in other ways, but the transfor-
mation matrices written above are still needed and used.
A. De Marco – Appunti di Tecniche di Simulazione di Volo
Dr
af
t2
00
3–
ve
r.1
.0
Mathematical models — Equations of motion §3–17
3.3.6 The quaternion approach
A practical alternative to the use of Euler equations for defining the orientation of an
aircraft, which avoids singularities when pitch attitude reaches 90 degrees, is to use the
so-called four parameter method or quaternion approach.
It is well known that when a frame of axes Oxyz may be brought into coincidence
with a reference frame Ox0y0z0 by a single rotation D about a fixed axis in space,
making angles A, B, C with reference axes Ox0, Oy0, Oz0, respectively. These four
parameters A, B, C, D can then define the orientation of the frame Oxyz with respect
to the reference frame.
It can be shown that the transformation matrix R relating a vector (x0, y0, z0) in
the reference frame to its representation in the new frame (x, y, z) according to (3.11)
is given by
l1 l2 l3
m1 m2 m3
n1 n2 n3
=
e20+ e2
1− e2
2− e2
32 (e1e2 + e0e3) 2 (e1e3 − e0e2)
2 (e1e2 − e0e3) e2
0− e2
1+ e2
2− e2
32 (e2e3 + e0e1)
2 (e0e2 + e1e3) 2 (e2e3 − e0e1) e2
0− e2
1− e2
2+ e2
3
(3.14)
where
e0 = cosD
2
e1 = cosA sinD
2
e2 = cosB sinD
2
e3 = cosC sinD
2
(3.15)
are a new set of four parameters called quaternions. It can be shown that they are
constrained by the equation
e20+ e2
1+ e2
2+ e2
3= 1 (3.16)
Furthermore, it can be shown that the following espression are valid for quaternion
A. De Marco – Appunti di Tecniche di Simulazione di Volo
Dr
af
t2
00
3–
ve
r.1
.0
Mathematical models — Equations of motion §3–18
rates
e0 = −1
2(e1p+ e2q + e3r)
e1 =1
2(e0p+ e2r − e3q)
e2 =1
2(e0q + e3p− e1r)
e3 =1
2(e0r + e1q − e2p)
(3.17)
These equations provide the mean to generate the quadruplet (e0, . . . , e3) from the
body axis components of angular velocity p, q, r. Considering the constraint expressed
by eqs. (3.16) above, one of the values obtained from time integration of eqs. (3.17) is
effectively redundant.
Implementation in a computer code of these equations has to take into account this
constraint. One of the most widely diffused way to do this is to rewrite the quaternion
rates as
e0 = −1
2(e1p+ e2q + e3r) + k λ e0
e1 =1
2(e0p+ e2r − e3q) + k λ e1
e2 =1
2(e0q + e3p− e1r) + k λ e2
e3 =1
2(e0r + e1q − e2p) + k λ e3
(3.18)
where k is a constant chosen such that k∆t ≤ 1 for an integration time step ∆t and
λ = 1 −(
e20+ e2
1+ e2
2+ e2
3
)
(3.19)
This is known as algebraic constraint method.
A. De Marco – Appunti di Tecniche di Simulazione di Volo
Dr
af
t2
00
3–
ve
r.1
.0
Mathematical models — Equations of motion §3–19
Finally, expressed in terms of the three Euler angles, the four quaternions are
e0 = cosψ
2cos
θ2
cosφ
2+ sin
ψ
2sin
θ2
sinφ
2
e1 = cosψ
2cos
θ2
sinφ
2− sin
ψ
2sin
θ2
cosφ
2
e2 = cosψ
2sin
θ2
cosφ
2+ sin
ψ
2cos
θ2
sinφ
2
e3 = −cosψ
2sin
θ2
sinφ
2+ sin
ψ
2cos
θ2
cosφ
2
(3.20)
Espressions (3.20) are necessary to derive initial values for (e0, . . . , e3) when attitude
angles (ψ, θ, φ) are known.
In the context of aircraft simulation, the direction cosines are still required for the
transformation of variables from body axes to earth axes (and vice versa), and equation
(3.11) may be used to derive them from quaternion parameters.
The Euler angle derivatives are also required for displays on pilot’s instruments
and elsewhere. A suitable selection from eq. (3.14) gives
sin θ = − l3 =2 (e0e2 + e1e3)
=: θ = sin−1(− l3)(3.21)
Since, by definition, the elevation angle θ of the x- body axis above the horizontal plane
lies in the range ±π2,
−π
2≤ θ ≤ +
π
2(3.22)
the inverse sine process will then yeld a unique value of θ.
Next, from eq. (3.14), one has
cosψ = l1/cos θ (3.23)
and since cos θis always positive for the defined range of θ, then
cos θ sinψ = l2 (3.24)
yelds
sgn [sinψ] = sgn [l2] (3.25)
A. De Marco – Appunti di Tecniche di Simulazione di Volo
Dr
af
t2
00
3–
ve
r.1
.0
Mathematical models — Equations of motion §3–20
and hence
ψ = cos−1 (l1/cos θ) · sgn [l2] (3.26)
Similarly
cosφ = n3/cos θ (3.27)
φ = cos−1 (n3/cos θ) · sgn [m3] (3.28)
To summarize the two approaches to aircraft orientation, the Euler technique is
simple, widely known and widely used. It has the weakness consisting in the singularity
at zenith and nadir. The quaternion technique is more complex and less familiar but
is robust and will cope with all kinds of manoeuvres.
Here, for the sake of comparison, are reported the solution sequences in each case:
Euler angle approach Quaternion approach
Ê calculate body rates calculate body rates
Ë calculate Euler rates calculate quaternion rates
Ì calculate Euler angles calculate quaternions
Í calculate direction cosines calculate direction cosines
Î apply transformation matrixÀ calculate Euler angles
Á apply transformation matrix
3.3.7 Axes and frames of reference
In Flight Simulation, and generally in the study of Flight Mechanics problems, it is
necessary to define and take into account some ets of axes as frames of reference (or
coordinate frames) for many purposes and reasons. They are necessary to define the
position of a point in space or to quantify the orientation of a body relative to another
one. The general need is that of characterizing the motion of a body in terms of its
A. De Marco – Appunti di Tecniche di Simulazione di Volo
Dr
af
t2
00
3–
ve
r.1
.0
Mathematical models — Equations of motion §3–21
position and orientation versus time. Of course by saying “orientation of a body” one
means the orientation of a reference frame tied to it.
Moreover, equations of motions of a body subject to external action are written
down with respect to a specified coordinate frame, usually chosen to simplify the spec-
ification of particular groups, such as the aerodynamic forces and moments; or to take
advantage of circumstances in which some terms vanish.
The definition of reference frames is required also when there is the need to read
or measure a vectorial quantity in terms of its scalar counterparts and to transform
these entities from a frame to another one.
There are many possible axis systems, but for simulation they fall into two broad
classes: À inertial or, under certain hypoteses earth axes, and Á body axes. Of partic-
ular interest also is the class of wind axes, which will be described below. Wind axes,
as well as some earth axes, are “vehicle-carried”, i.e. they all have a moving origin
superimposed to the vehicle’s center of mass, but they are not rotating with the body,
like a body axis system rigorously does. They are defined with respect to the relative
wind, or to the trajectory in general, or to the local geographic position.
All these frames are orthogonal, right-handed coordinate frames. Generally, the
earth is supposed to be a sphere having its center of mass superimposed to its geometric
center.
Inertial frame {Oxyz}i
This is a reference frame needed in every dynamics’ prob-
lem, explicitly defined or lurking implicitly in the background of theoretical formula-
tions. An inertial frame is defined as a frame which is non-accelerated with respect to
the “fixed stars”. In Navigation, a coordinate frame that has origin at the center of the
earth and is non-rotating relative to the stars can be considered an inertial frame for
measurements made in the vicinity of the earth.
Earth frames The following earth frames are of interest in Flight Mechanics and
Flight Simulation.
A. De Marco – Appunti di Tecniche di Simulazione di Volo
Dr
af
t2
00
3–
ve
r.1
.0
Mathematical models — Equations of motion §3–22
· Earth-Center Frame {Oxyz}ec
This frame has its origin at the earth’s center. Its axes
are fixed in the earth. This frame is thus rotating with respect to the inertial frame
{Oxyz}i previously defined. The zec-axis points North and is supposed coincident with
the earth’s angular velocity vector, while the plane {Oxy}ec is equatorial. The axes
of this plane can be arranged such that this earth frame and the inertial frame are
superimposed at some initial time t = 0. The angular rate of the earth-centered frame,
i.e. the angular rate of the earth relative to the inertial frame, is denoted by ωE.
This frame is needed when the earth’s rotation has to be necessarily taken into
account, as in problems concerning, for instance, inertial navigation or space trajecoties.
· Tangent Frame {Oxyz}t
This is an earth-fixed frame with origin near the vehicle. Its
axes are aligned with the north, east, and down directions. Here “down”, or vertical,
means the normal to the earth’s surface. The north axis is in the direction of the
projection of the earth’s angular velocity vector into the local horizontal plane (this
plane being perpendicular to the down direction). The east direction completes the
right-handed orthogonal set. The definition of the tangent frame follows the so-called
North-East-Down (NED) convention.
Sometimes the origin of the tangent frame is chosen so that it is superimposed to
the vehicle mass center at the start of a particular manoeuvre under study, or at its
projection on the ground.
When the earth is supposed to be spherical, the tangent frame is also a geocentric
frame, in the geodesic jargon. The zt-axis has the same direction of the geocentric
position vector from the earth’s center to the origin Ot, and opposite versus.
The origin of a tangent frame is positioned, relative to the earth-center frame,
through its geographic coordinates, i.e. the two angles: λt, latitude of Ot, and µt
latitude of Ot.
· Vehicle-Carried Vertical Frame {Oxyz}v
A simply defined moving reference frame is
the one whose origin is fixed at the vehicle’s center of mass C (whose origin is “carried”
A. De Marco – Appunti di Tecniche di Simulazione di Volo
Dr
af
t2
00
3–
ve
r.1
.0
Mathematical models — Equations of motion §3–23
by the vehicle and follows it), but has its three axes aligned in such a way that the
zv-axis is continuously directed vertically and the plane {Oxy}v is locally tangent to
a sphere having radius RE + h, where RE is the earth’s radius and h is the vehicle’s
altitude. For atmospheric flight one has h� RE.
Note that the vehicle-carried vertical frame is a frame moving with the body but
is not a body frame (cfr. below).
This frame follows the NED convention, i.e. the xv-axis points to the north and
the yv-axis points to the east.
Since the orientations of the tangent frame and of the vehicle-carried vertical frame
are defined similarly, the latter can be transported over the former by two consecutive
rotations in the sense of latitude and longitude, respectively. This means that the the
moving origin of the vehicle carried vertical frame is positioned, at the generic time
instant, in a point in space having{
latitude: λv = λt + ∆λ
longitude: µv = µt + ∆µ
where ∆µ is a rotation around the earth-centered frame’s zec-axis and −∆λ is a rotation
around an axis which is parallel to the tangent frame’s yt-axis and passing through the
earth’s center.
The angular rate of the vehicle-carried vertical frame with respect to the inertial
frame is usually denoted by ωv. It is useful to point out that in inertial navigation
problems the earth’s surface is supposed to be an ellipsoid. This is an analytically
defined surfacewhich is an approximation to the mean sea-level gravity equipotential
surface, also known as geoid. When the earth is supposed even spherical, the reference
frame used for navigation coincides with the geocentric frame and the tangent frame
is aligned with a geographic frame at a fixed location on the earth.
The relative orientation of earth frames defined so far can be derived from fig. 3.4.
· Datum-Path Earth/Vehicle-Carried Frame {Oxyz}0
In flight dynamics applications, an-
other adopted definition for earth axes exists, useful when short term motion is of
A. De Marco – Appunti di Tecniche di Simulazione di Volo
Dr
af
t2
00
3–
ve
r.1
.0
Mathematical models — Equations of motion §3–24
interest, and perfectly adequate. It is a reference frame moving with the earth, or with
the aircraft, known as datum-path earth frame, or datum-path vehicle-carried frame.
Flight above a flat earth is still assumed, initially straight and level. Straight and
level flight implies a motion in a horizontal plane at a constant altitude, and whatever
the subsequent motion of the airplane might be, the attude is determined with respect
to the horizontal.
Referring to the tangent frame defined above, a horizontal plane {Oxy}0is defined,
being parallel to the plane {Oxy}t. The only difference is that the x0-axis points in the
arbitrary initial direction of flight rather than to the north. The z0-axis points down
as in the earth frame. It is only necessary to place the origin O0 in the atmosphere at
the most convenient point.
Sometimes this reference frame is considered as moving with the aircraft by assum-
ing its origin coincident with the vehicle mass center. But, unlike the vehicle-carried
vertical frame, the vehicle-carried datum-path frame x0-axis gives constantly a unique
reference direction, which is the initial flight direction, while keeping its {Oxy}0
plane
horizontal and its {Oxz}0
plane vertical. It provides an inertial frame for short term
airplane motion when the flight speed varies under the hypoteses of the small pertur-
bation theory.
· Practical usage of earth frames When atmospheric flight only is of interest, it is usual to
measure aeroplane motion with reference to an earth fixed framework like the tangent
frame. Clearly the plane {Oxy}t defines the local horizontal plane, thus the flight path
of an airplane flying in the atmosphere in the vicinity of the reference point Ot may be
completely described by its coordinates in the axis system, assuming a flat earth, where
the vertical is “tied” to the gravity vector. This model is quite adequate to localized
flight, where the effects of earth’s rotation on vehicle motion are negligible, and the
tangent frame becomes an inertial, or fixed, frame for the particular problem under
study or motion under simulation. The widely used notation for the tangent frame in
such cases is {Oxyz}e, which stands for earth frame, fig. 3.5. The earth frame is best
A. De Marco – Appunti di Tecniche di Simulazione di Volo
Dr
af
t2
00
3–
ve
r.1
.0
Mathematical models — Equations of motion §3–25
suited to navigation and performances applications, and to flight simulations where
flight path trajectories are of primary interest.
For investigations involving trans-global navigation. the earth frame described
above is inappropriate, the earth-centered ec frame being preferred.
Body axes Body axes consist of an axis system fixed in the aircraft, and normally
with origin C at its center of gravity. Body axes move in space and rotate with the
aircraft. For a specific set of body axes it essential to know how the orientation of the
axis system is defined with respect to the aircraft.
· Geometric-body axes {Oxyz}b
Among possible body axis systems, geometric-body
axes {Oxyz}b, or simply {Oxyz}, are usually those defined such that the x-axis is
aligned with a geometric feature, such as the fuselage reference line (FRL) or a wing
datum plane (WDP). Often such axes are known just as body axes. Both kinds of
reference may be used for one mathematical model of the aircraft, for example WDP
to define the aerodynamic forces and FRL for all other uses, including axis transforma-
tions. Tipically the inclination of the FRL with respect to the WDP is a small angle
(one or two degrees).
· Principal-body axes {Oxyz}P
An alternative set of body axes is the set of principal-
body axes, defined such that the xP-axis is aligned with the principal inertia axis, thus
making the cross-products of inertia Izx zero. This simplifies the lateral equations of
motion, as can be seen by inspecting eq. (3.6), and is useful in theoretical studies,
but is not particularly helpful in simulation, as the location of the principal axis could
change with aircraft configuration. Geometric-body axes offer sufficient advantage in
giving constant moments of inertia.
Wind axes The following definitions introduce wind axes as they are generally ac-
cepted in the aeronautical practice. The subtle differences that arise between different
A. De Marco – Appunti di Tecniche di Simulazione di Volo
Dr
af
t2
00
3–
ve
r.1
.0
Mathematical models — Equations of motion §3–26
Figure 3.4: Earth reference frames. ec: earth-centered frame; t: tangent frame;v: vehicle-carried vertical frame.
A. De Marco – Appunti di Tecniche di Simulazione di Volo
Dr
af
t2
00
3–
ve
r.1
.0
Mathematical models — Equations of motion §3–27
Figure 3.5: Earth frame in flat earth hypothesis.
types of wind frames of reference, which sometimes are referred to with the same name
in different contexts, are also pointed out in this section.
· General Wind-axis Frame {Oxyz}w
A general wind-axis system is defined such that
the origin of a rectangular Cartesian system is at the center of gravity of the aircraft,
having the xw-axis pointing into the direction of the oncoming free-stream velocity
vector.
The general wind zw-axis is more rigorously defined with unique reference to the
trajectory of the aircraft mass center. it is defined as the intersection of the plane
locally normal to the trajectory and the vertical plane containing xw. The remaining
axis yw completes the system.
According to this definition, the geometric-body axis zb is at an angle ν, known
as the bank angle, with respect to the vertical plane {Oxz}w. The relative orientation
A. De Marco – Appunti di Tecniche di Simulazione di Volo
Dr
af
t2
00
3–
ve
r.1
.0
Mathematical models — Equations of motion §3–28
of the earth, body, and wind frames defined here is illustrated in fig. 3.6.
Figure 3.6: Relative orientation of the general wind axes, earth axes, and bodyaxes.
· UK Wind-axis Frame {Oxyz}w
According to this convention, the xw-axis is defined
as in the general case. The zw-axis, instead, lies this time in the aircraft plane of
symmetry, is perpendicular to the xw-axis and is directed generally downward. The
yw-axis completes the system and is thus coincident with the body yb-axis.
In many theoretical problems airplane motion is in the geometric plane of sym-
metry (no yawing motion) so that the xw-axis also lies in the plane of symmetry. The
system then is termed the simplified wind-axis system, but is not of practical interest
in flight simulation applications.
A. De Marco – Appunti di Tecniche di Simulazione di Volo
Dr
af
t2
00
3–
ve
r.1
.0
Mathematical models — Equations of motion §3–29
· Aerodynamic-axis Frame {Oxyz}a
Aerodynamic axes, also called aerodynamic-body
axes, have their origin at the aircraft center of gravity and have the xa-axis aligned
with the projection of the velocity vector, on to the plane of symmetry.
The za-axis belongs to the aircraft plane of symmetry, the ya-axis completing the
axis system accordingly. Note that the latter axis coincides with the body axis yb.
According to this definition, aerodynamic axis xa is therefore at an angle α relative
to the geometric body axis xb. Moreover, xa is an angle β relative to the geometric
wind axis xw, i.e. to the direction of the relative wind.
In the analysis of short-term motion, aerodynamic axes are also known as stability
axes in USA, corresponding to the UK wind axes, if the xa-axis is the projection of the
velocity vector on to the plane of symmetry in a datum flight condition.
3.3.8 Incidence angles
Unlike attitude angles, which define the orientation of an aircraft with respect to a
set of earth axes, incidence angles define the direction of the airflow relative to the
vehicle’s body, and are needed in the derivation of the aerodynamic forces acting on
the airframe.
Denoted with ~Vr the opposite of the relative-wind velocity vector, the angle of
attack α is the angle between À the projection of ~Vr on to the aircraft plane symmetry
and Á the body x-axis.
Note that the definitions given above for the reference frames consider the velocity
vector of the aircraft mass center in a fixed reference frame. Nothing is said about the
local wind. One could also redefine the wind frames starting from the direction of the
total relative-wind velocity vector, including the local atmospheric wind. In that case
α is the angle between the body axis xb and the aerodynamic axis xa.
The sideslip angle formed by À velocity vector ~Vr with Á the aircraft’s symmetry
plane. It is the angle between the wind axis xw and aerodynamic axis xa.
If the velocity components are known in the body axis system, the incidence angles
A. De Marco – Appunti di Tecniche di Simulazione di Volo
Dr
af
t2
00
3–
ve
r.1
.0
Mathematical models — Equations of motion §3–30
Figure 3.7: The body- and aerodynamic- frames of references. The three com-ponents of force, moment, linear and angular velocity. Aerody-namic angles.
A. De Marco – Appunti di Tecniche di Simulazione di Volo
Dr
af
t2
00
3–
ve
r.1
.0
Mathematical models — Equations of motion §3–31
Figure 3.8: The Euler angles (ψ, θ, φ) with respect to the definition of generalwind axes, earth axes, and body axes.
A. De Marco – Appunti di Tecniche di Simulazione di Volo
Dr
af
t2
00
3–
ve
r.1
.0
Mathematical models — Equations of motion §3–32
are defined as (fig. 3.7 and 3.9)
tanα =w
u, sin β =
v
Vr
(3.29)
where V 2
r = u2 + v2 + w2. The ranges of variations of α and β are
− π < α ≤ +π , −π
2< β ≤ +
π
2(3.30)
3.3.9 Direction angles
Direction angles define the direction of the flight path velocity vector ~V with respect
to a fixed reference frame, e.g. the earth axes. The angles, shown in fig. 3.9, are the
climb angle γ and the track angle χ.
The climb angle is that formed by the wind axis xw with the horizontal plane
{Oxy}e, positive for a climbing path.
The track angle is that formed by the wind axis xw with the reference vertical plane
{Oxz}e, i.e. the angle between the local tangent to the ground track and the north-
pointing axis xe. It is positive for an east-travelling aircraft. The difference between
track angle and heading ψ is called drift and is due to the presence of winds along
the flight path. The summation of the relative wind due to the motion of the aircraft
with respect to the earth reference frame, and of the local atmospheric wind, given or
modelled in terms of wind velocity components in earth axes, gives the instantaneus
relative wind experienced by the aircraft, the same relative wind which defines the
incidence angles introduced above.
If the flight path velocity vector is ~V C, i.e. the velocity of the aircraft mass center
C, its components in earth axes ue, ve, we are
uCe = V C cos γ cosχ
vCe = V C cos γ sinχ
vCe = −V C sin γ
Incidence angle, attitude angles and direction angles can be related but the ex-
pressions are complex and omitted here. In the absence of winds, in steady, straight
A. De Marco – Appunti di Tecniche di Simulazione di Volo
Dr
af
t2
00
3–
ve
r.1
.0
Mathematical models — Equations of motion §3–33
symmetric (i.e. wings-level) flight, it can be shown that
γ = θ − α (3.31)
but it must be emphasized that this helpful relationship is only true in the restricted
but common circumstances quoted.
Figure 3.9: Direction angles. Climb γ, track χ.
A. De Marco – Appunti di Tecniche di Simulazione di Volo