MD ,RM ,VT Aircraft Yaw-rate Suppression Method Using Driving Force Control by Electrically Driven Wheel for One-wheel Landing Tosh

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "MD ,RM ,VT Aircraft Yaw-rate Suppression Method Using Driving Force Control by Electrically Driven Wheel for One-wheel Landing Tosh"

ひさともおおばま
4 years ago
Views:

MD-17-071,RM-17-054,VT-17-008 Aircraft Yaw-rate Suppression Method Using Driving Force Control by Electrically Driven Wheel for One-wheel Landing Toshiki Niinomi, Hiroshi Fujimoto, Yasumasa Watanabe

1 MD ,RM ,VT Aircraft Yaw-rate Suppression Method Using Driving Force Control by Electrically Driven Wheel for One-wheel Landing Toshiki Niinomi, Hiroshi Fujimoto, Yasumasa Watanabe (The University of Tokyo) Akira Nishizawa, Hiroshi Kobayashi (Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, JAXA) Abstract Most aircraft accidents occur at landing sequence. The goal is to suppress yaw-rate driven from driving resistance. In this paper, driving force control in the electric vehicle is applied to control yaw-rate. Furthermore, experiment method utilizing electric vehicle and slippery sheet is proposed. Numerical simulation and experimental results show the effectiveness., (Electric Aircraft, One-wheel Landing, Electrically Driven Wheel, Driving Force Control, Yaw-rate control ) (1) 787 (2) (3) (4) (3) (JAXA) Fig.1 (4) (5) % (6) (7) (5) Fig.2 (5) 5 Fig.3 Fig. 1. (4) 1 JAXA JAXA model plane with electrically driven wheel 1 2 1/6

Fig. 6. 6 Conventional method : yaw feedback controller (9) 2

Problem of sideslip J w ω w = T w rf d (1) F d = µ(λ)n sgn(v )µ 0 N (2) V w = rω w (3) Fig. 3.

V, ϵ) (4) ϵ µ λ Magic Formula (11) D S 4

2 Fig Conventional method : yaw feedback controller (9) 2 Fig. 2. Problem of sideslip J w ω w = T w rf d (1) F d = µ(λ)n sgn(v )µ 0 N (2) V w = rω w (3) Fig Proposed method : overview J w ω w T w r F d N µ(λ) -V w µ 0 N V w V (4) λ = V w V max(v w, V, ϵ) (4) ϵ µ λ Magic Formula (11) D S 4 Fig. 4. Conventional method : controller switch by DFO D s = F d λ (5) (7) M V = F d (6) = µ(λ)n sgn(v )µ 0 N (7) 5 Fig. 5. Conventional method : velocity feedforward controller 2. (5) M 2 2 F dl F dr l F d θ I yaw γ (8) I yaw γ = l sin θ(f dl F dr ) (8) 3. : 2/6

3 1 Table 1. Parameter definition Definition Symbol Torque T Wheel Inertia J w Wheel Radius r Wheel Velocity V w Landing Velocity V Friction Coefficient µ Normal Force N Driving Force F d The Rolling Friction Coefficient µ 0 Distance from tire to center of gravity l Total Mass M Yaw Inertia I yaw 8 (DFC) (8) Fig. 8. Driving force controller (DFC) (8) 9 Fig. 9. Proposed method : yaw-rate controller with DFC 7 Fig. 7. µ - λ µ - λ curve 3 1 (8) (8) Magic Formula µ - λ Fig.7 (11) µ - λ µ µ (2) (V w V ) λ = V w V V w (V w < V ) λ = V w V V (9) (10) y y = V w V 1 (11) y ˆF d Fig Fig.8 Fig.9 1 Fig.8 2 Fig km/h km/h 2 (12) (13) (14) 3/6

2 172 Table 2. Performance of Cessna 172 skyhawk Definition Value Unit Total Mass M 1000 kg Yaw Inertia I yaw 2667 kg m 2 Stall Velocity 83.00 km/h Landing Velocity V 100.0 km/h Wheel Radius r 0.

4 2 172 Table 2. Performance of Cessna 172 skyhawk Definition Value Unit Total Mass M 1000 kg Yaw Inertia I yaw 2667 kg m 2 Stall Velocity km/h Landing Velocity V km/h Wheel Radius r m Torque Limit of Wheel ±100.0 N Wheel Inertia J w kg m 2 The Rolling Friction Coefficient µ (8) Fig. 12. Slip-ratio control (8) 3 Table 3. FPEV-2 Kanon Performance of FPEV-2 Kanon Definition Value Unit Total Mass M 803 kg Yaw inertia I yaw 607 kg m 2 Wheel radius r m Wheel inertia J w 1.24 kg m 2 Maximum torque ± 200 N m 13 Fig. 13. Experiment: overview km/h Fig.10 Fig.11 Fig.10 Fig.11 Fig FPEV-2 Kanon 4 3 µ Fig.13 (5) F d µ N N µ µ µ µ µ µ µ Fig km/h µ 2 µ Fig.12 (8) λ = km/h µ 2 µ Fig.9 3 Fig Fig.14 Fig.15 Fig.16 Fig.14 4/6

(a) Torque (b) Velocity (c) Yaw rate (d) Yaw angle (e) Driving Force Fig. 10.

(d) Yaw angle (e) Driving Force 11 Fig. 11. Simulation result : proposed method : driving force control Fig.15 Fig.

8701d ( A :26249061) 1 Airbus S.A.S: Global Market Forecast 2016-2035, http://www.airbus.

Morris, More Electric Aircraft: Review, Challenges, and Opportunities for Commercial Transport Aircraft, IEEE

1, June (2015) 3 AIRBUS, FAST #51 AIRBUS TECHNICAL MAG- AZINE, January (2013) 4 Hiroshi Kobayashi and Akira Nishizawa:

5 (a) Torque (b) Velocity (c) Yaw rate (d) Yaw angle (e) Driving Force Fig Simulation result : conventional method : landing detection + yaw feedback (a) Torque (b) Velocity (c) Yaw rate (d) Yaw angle (e) Driving Force 11 Fig. 11. Simulation result : proposed method : driving force control Fig.15 Fig.16 1 µ µ Fig.14(c) µ Fig.15(c) 1.5 Fig.14(c) Fig.16(c) 5. Fig.8 (8) NEDO ID:05A48701d ( A : ) 1 Airbus S.A.S: Global Market Forecast , [retieved 1st December 2016] 2 Bulent Sarlioglu, Casey T.Morris, More Electric Aircraft: Review, Challenges, and Opportunities for Commercial Transport Aircraft, IEEE Transactions on transportation electrification, Vol.1, No.1, June (2015) 3 AIRBUS, FAST #51 AIRBUS TECHNICAL MAG- AZINE, January (2013) 4 Hiroshi Kobayashi and Akira Nishizawa: Decrease in Ground-Run Distance of Small Airplanes by applying Electrically Driven Wheels, J. Japan Soc. Aeronaut. Sp. Sci., vlo. 56, no. 656, pp , (2008) 5 Toshiki Niinomi, Hiroshi Fujimoto, Akira Nishizawa, et al: Aircraft Yaw-rate Control by Electrically Driven Wheel for Crosswind Landing, IEEJ interna- 5/6

(a) Torque (b) Velocity (c) Yaw rate (d) Driving Force Fig. 14.

Optimization, SAMCON (2017) 6 International Business Aviation Council: Business aviation safety

7 Aviation Safety: Statistical Summary of Commercial Jet Airplane Accidents, Statistical summery,

Electric Vehicle Based on Slip Ratio Control, 2011 JSAE Annual Congress (Spring), No.20115122, pp.

Pacejka and Egbert Bakker: The Magic Formula Tyre Model, In Proceedings of the 1st International

21, pp.1 18 (1991) 12 Cessna 172 Linear Model http://doc.gnu-darwin. org/cessna172/linear.

6 (a) Torque (b) Velocity (c) Yaw rate (d) Driving Force Fig Experimental result : without yaw-rate suppressing control (a) Torque (b) Velocity (c) Yaw rate (d) Driving Force Fig Experimental result : conventional method (a) Torque (b) Velocity (c) Yaw rate (d) Driving Force Fig Experimental result : proposed method tional workshop on Sensing, Actuation, Motion Control, and Optimization, SAMCON (2017) 6 International Business Aviation Council: Business aviation safety brief, International Business Aviation Council, No. 14 (2015). 7 Aviation Safety: Statistical Summary of Commercial Jet Airplane Accidents, Statistical summery, Boeing Commercial Airplanes (2015) 8 Hiroshi Fujimoto, Masataka Yoshimura: Driving Force Control for Electric Vehicle Based on Slip Ratio Control, 2011 JSAE Annual Congress (Spring), No , pp. 8-11, 2011 (in Japanese),,, 2011, No , pp.8 11, (2011) 9 :, (2003). 10, 2 (2007) 11 Hans B. Pacejka and Egbert Bakker: The Magic Formula Tyre Model, In Proceedings of the 1st International Colloquim on Tyre Models for Vehicle Dynamics Analysis, Supplement to Vehicle System Dynamics, Vol. 21, pp.1 18 (1991) 12 Cessna 172 Linear Model org/cessna172/linear.html [retrieved 15th November 2016] 13 Abraham K. Ishihara, Yoo Hsiu Yeh, Parth Kumar, et al: Adaptive Feedforward Aircraft Control, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, April (2010) 14 Leonard Bridgman: Jane s All the World s Aircraft , Jane s All the World s Aircraft Publishing Co Ltd. (1953) -Product-Sheet_v1.pdf[retrieved 18th May 2017] 6/6

Proposal of Driving Torque Control Method for Electric Vehicle with In-Wheel Motors Masataka Yoshimura (Yokohama National University) Hiroshi Fujimoto

Proposal of Driving Torque Control Method for Electric Vehicle with In-Wheel Motors Masataka Yoshimura (Yokohama National University) Hiroshi Fujimoto Propoal of Control Method for Electric ehicle with In-Wheel Motor Maataka Yohimura (Yokohama National Univerity) Hirohi Fujimoto (The Univerity of Tokyo) Abtract The anti-lip control or the lip ratio control