Voluntary Pilot Action Through Biodynamics for Helicopter Flight Dynamics Simulation

Masarati, Pierangelo; Quaranta, Giuseppe; Bernardini, Andrea; Guglieri, Giorgio

doi:10.2514/1.g000837

Cited by 9 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…they are actuated by multiple agonist/antagonist pairs: therefore, the resulting model would be underdetermined because of overactuation, and special techniques would have to be applied to be estimate the equivalent impedance at each joint. While similar experiences have been successfully carried out by the authors, regarding in particular the upper limbs' impedance at the control inceptors [11,25], it was concluded that for this particular case the more simplified approach relying on generic linear viscoelastic elements is sufficient for comfort related analysis.…”

Section: Multibody Dynamics Modelmentioning

confidence: 84%

Biodynamic Modeling Techniques for Rotorcraft Comfort Evaluation

Tamer

Zanoni

Muscarello

et al. 2019

Aerotec. Missili Spaz.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This work shows how different occupant biodynamic modeling techniques are integrated in a rotorcraft design environment and discusses the resulting differences in comfort assessment. Three modeling techniques, that are used for biodynamic characterization, are considered: lumped parameter, finite element and multibody dynamics. These models are identified for the same gender, age, weight and height and then integrated into a virtual helicopter environment with a seat-cushion interface. A generic helicopter model is used to demonstrate the approach. For each of the three techniques, the vertical acceleration levels at the human-helicopter interface, as required by vibration regulations, and at the head are evaluated up to 30 Hz. At a first glance, it is observed that the lumped parameter is the easiest to implement in terms of model set-up. However, the use of lumped parameter models is limited to the population groups that they are identified from, and thus are not as flexible as the finite element and multibody ones in developing biodynamic models for individuals of an arbitrary population percentile. Furthermore, through numerical analysis it is found that the differences are not very significant in terms of accelerations at the human-seat interface. Therefore, for comfort related issues, the use of more complex models is not justified, unless complicated comfort assessments other than human interface accelerations are required. On the other hand, it is observed that the spine dynamics can play a significant role in estimating the acceleration of head; therefore, the sophisticated finite element and multibody dynamics models redeem their higher modeling cost and computation time when the head-neck health of occupants is considered.

show abstract

Section: Multibody Dynamics Modelmentioning

confidence: 84%

Biodynamic Modeling Techniques for Rotorcraft Comfort Evaluation

Tamer

Zanoni

Muscarello

et al. 2019

Aerotec. Missili Spaz.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It would, however, also make the model underdetermined due to overactuation, and special techniques would have to be applied to estimate the equivalent impedance at each joint. While similar experiences have been successfully carried out by the authors, regarding, in particular, the upper limbs' impedance at the control inceptors [28,29], it was concluded that for this particular case the simpler approach relying on lumped viscoelastic elements is sufficient for the targeted analyses.…”

Section: Torso Modelmentioning

confidence: 87%

“…The upper limb muscles activations estimated in the inverse dynamics step, and the subsequent optimisation problem, are augmented during the direct dynamics phase with a contribution proportional the muscles' length variation and elongation velocity, with respect to the reference values estimated during the inverse kinematics step. For the single muscle this contribution, which models the reflexive part of the muscular activation behaviour [28,45], is (17) where ref is the reference muscle length in the pose estimated in the inverse kinematics step and k p ,k d are proportional and derivative gains. The total activation of each muscle bundle in the upper limb therefore is…”

Section: Direct Dynamicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multibody dynamics analysis of the human upper body for rotorcraft–pilot interaction

2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study of the biodynamic response of helicopter passengers and pilots, when excited by rotorcraft vibrations that are transmitted through the seat and, for the latter, the control inceptors, is of great importance in different areas of aircraft design. Handling qualities are affected by the proneness of the aircraft to give rise to adverse interactions, an unwanted quality that can be captured by the so-called biodynamic feedthrough. On the other hand, the transmissibility of vibrations, especially from the seat to the head, affects the comfort of pilots and passengers during flight. Detailed and parametrised multibody modelling of the human upper body can provide a strong base to support design decisions justified by a first-principles approach. In this work, a multibody model of the upper body is formed by connecting a previously developed detailed model of the arms to a similarly detailed model of the spine. The whole model can be adapted to a specific subject, identified by age, gender, weight and height. The spine model and the scaling procedure have been validated using the experimental results for seat to head transmissibility. The coupled spine-arms model is used to evaluate the biodynamic response in terms of involuntary motion induced on the control inceptors, including the related nonlinearities.

show abstract

“…This way, the effects of this kind of motion on human health, comfort, and performance can be predicted [138]. Human control actions can be divided into two general categories: voluntary and involuntary [139]. The models studied in the previous sections all belonged to the first category.…”

Section: Biodynamic Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Human Control Model Estimation in Physical Human–Machine Interaction: A Survey

Scibilia

Pedrocchi

Fortuna

2022

Sensors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study of human–machine interaction as a unique control system was one of the first research interests in the engineering field, with almost a century having passed since the first works appeared in this area. At the same time, it is a crucial aspect of the most recent technological developments made in application fields such as collaborative robotics and artificial intelligence. Learning the processes and dynamics underlying human control strategies when interacting with controlled elements or objects of a different nature has been the subject of research in neuroscience, aerospace, robotics, and artificial intelligence. The cross-domain nature of this field of study can cause difficulties in finding a guiding line that links motor control theory, modelling approaches in physiological control systems, and identifying human–machine general control models in manipulative tasks. The discussed models have varying levels of complexity, from the first quasi-linear model in the frequency domain to the successive optimal control model. These models include detailed descriptions of physiologic subsystems and biomechanics. The motivation behind this work is to provide a complete view of the linear models that could be easily handled both in the time domain and in the frequency domain by using a well-established methodology in the classical linear systems and control theory.

show abstract

Voluntary Pilot Action Through Biodynamics for Helicopter Flight Dynamics Simulation

Cited by 9 publications

References 32 publications

Biodynamic Modeling Techniques for Rotorcraft Comfort Evaluation

Biodynamic Modeling Techniques for Rotorcraft Comfort Evaluation

Multibody dynamics analysis of the human upper body for rotorcraft–pilot interaction

Human Control Model Estimation in Physical Human–Machine Interaction: A Survey

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About