The civil light helicopter domain has not fully benefited yet from the advantages system identification methods can offer. The aim of this paper is to show that system identification methods are mature enough to be successfully implemented in the civil helicopter domain. To achieve this goal, a Robinson R44 Raven II is identified in this work. The identification focuses on the hover trim condition. A lean frequency domain identification method is adopted. Furthermore, a new procedure is proposed to limit the sensitivity of the state-space minimization algorithm to initial parametric values and bounds. The resulting state-space model presents good predictive capabilities and is able to capture high frequency rotor-body dynamics. The model is also validated with the help of a helicopter pilot by performing closed-loop control task maneuvers in the MPI CyberMotion Simulator. The g gravitational acceleration, [m/s 2 ] s Laplace transform variable φ, θ, ψ fuselage angular attitude (roll, pitch, yaw) earth-fixed coordinates, [rad] β 0 , β 1c , β 1s rotor coning, longitudinal and lateral flapping angles, [rad] τ f rotor flap time constant, [s] ν rotor inflow velocity, [m/s] ν0 trim inflow ratio γ Lock number ξ, ω damping and natural frequency of a second order system η Ct integrated perturbation thrust coefficient σ rotor solidity ρ atmospheric density, [Kg/m 3 ] δ lat , δ lon , δ ped , δ col helicopter control inputs (lateral cyclic, longitudinal cyclic, pedals rudder, collective lever), [deg] Ω rotor rotation speed, [rad/s] ω frequency, [rad/s]
This paper investigated use of a haptic support system for learning purposes. A 2 Degrees of Freedom (DoF) haptic force feedback system was designed for a dual-axes compensatory tracking task. The haptic system was used in a human-in-the-loop experiment with inexperienced participants on a xed-base simulator. In the experiment, participants were divided into 3 groups. All participants performed 30 trials of the compensatory tracking task. A group of participants (NoHA group) performed the whole experiment without haptic aid. The other two groups (HA20 and HA10 groups) performed a training phase with haptic aid, followed by an evaluation phase without haptic feedback. The HA20 group performed 20 trials in the training phase, whereas the HA10 group performed only 10 trials. The results show that haptic aid was benecial for performing the tracking task in the training phase for both the axes, compared to manual control. In the pitch axis performance of the HA20 group did not worsen when the feedback was switched o, whereas a considerable deterioration in performance was visible for HA10 group. Thus, haptic force feedback was eective to learn the control task in the pitch axis, compared to manual control. In the roll axis overall performance was found to be worse than the pitch axis.\ud Moreover no benets were found from training with haptic feedback in the roll axis for both the haptic groups
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.