Taking into account a location of aircraft’s center of mass during motion cuing

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.20535/2521-1943.2023.7.1.273332

Keywords:

flight simulator, six-degrees of freedom synergistic motion system, motion cueing, cubic spline function, constructive resource, aircraft center of mass

Abstract

Compared to other information sources, motion cues provide a pilot with anticipatory information about spatial position and movement of aircraft. For motion cueing a flight simulator cockpit is installed on a motion system, movement of which motion cueing. Therefore, motion system is one of the most important components of full flight simulators. The problem of effective use of constructive resources of six-degrees of freedom synergistic motion system has been solved. But the problem of improving the motion cueing remained unsolved, due to the fact that location of motion system center of rotation is significantly different from location of aircraf’s center of gravity, and motion cues differ from real, flight one. The study subject is motion cueing on flight simulators. The problem was solved on the basis of simplified operator for transformation of motion system movements along individual degrees of freedom into jack movements, cubic spline functions to describe the dependence of the centers of rotation along pitch and yaw, and optimization theory using the deformable polyhedron method. The formulated and solved problem of taking into account of location of aircraft’s center of gravity during motion cueing along pitch and yaw increases an efficiency of using of constructive resource of a six-degrees of freedom synergistic motion system, a motion cueing fidelity and training realism on flight simulator.

References

  1. D. Stewart, “A Platform with Six Degrees of Freedom”, Proc. of the Institution of mechanical engineers, vol. 180, no. 1, pp. 371–386, 1965. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1243/PIME_PROC_1965_180_029_02.
  2. V. E. Gough, “Contribution to discussion of papers on research in automobile stability, control and tyre performance“, Proc. of Auto Div. Inst. Mech. Eng., vol. 171, pp. 392–395, 1957.
  3. V. V. Kabanyachyi, “Permissible and optimal working ranges of displaced of six-degrees-of-freedom motion system”, Cybernetics and computer technology, no. 136, p. 61–68, 2002.
  4. S. S. Ahmadi and A. Rahmanii, “Nonlinear model predictive control of a Stewart platform based on improved dynamic model”, International Journal of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics, vol. 5, pp. 18–26, 2020. Available: https://www.iaras.org/iaras/filedownloads/ijtam/2020/009-0003(2020).pdf.
  5. D. Silva, J. Garrido and E. Riveiro, “Stewart Platform Motion Control Automation with Industrial Resources to Perform Cycloidal and Oceanic Wave Trajectories”, Machines, vol. 10, no. 8, p. 711, 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/machines10080711.
  6. F. Liang, S. Tan, X. Zhao, J. Fan, Z. Lin, Z. Shi and X. Kang, “Kinematics and Dynamics Simulation of a Stewart Platform”, Journal of Physics: Conference Series, vol. 2333, no. 1, pp. 012026, 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/2333/1/012026.
  7. D. E. Galván-Pozos and F. J. Ocampo-Torres, “Dynamic Analysis of a Six-Degree of Freedom Wave Energy Converter Based on the Concept of the Stewart-Gough Platform”, Renew. Energy, vol. 146, pp. 1051–1061, 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2019.06.177.
  8. C. Gosselin and J.-P. Merlet, “Parallel robots: Architecture, modeling, and design”, in Encyclopedia of robotics. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2020, pp. 1–6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41610-1_158-1.
  9. J. Velasco, I. Calvo, O. Barambones, P. Venegas and C. Napole, “Experimental Validation of a Sliding Mode Control for a Stewart Platform Used in Aerospace Inspection Applications”, Mathematics, vol. 8, no. 11, p. 2051, 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/math8112051.
  10. J. Jiao, Y. Wu, K. Yu and R. Zhao, “Dynamic modeling and experimental analyses of Stewart platform with flexible hinges”, J. Vib. Control, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 151–171, 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1077546318772474.
  11. Y.-S. Kim, H. Shi, N. Dagalakis, J. Marvel and G. Cheok, “Design of a six–DOF motion tracking system based on a Stewart platform and ball–and–socket joints”, Mech. Mach. Theory, vol. 133, pp. 84–94, 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mechmachtheory.2018.10.021.
  12. S. Kizir and Z. Bingül, “Design and development of a Stewart platform assisted and navigated transsphenoidal surgery”, Turkish Journal of Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 961–972, 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3906/elk-1608-145.
  13. Z.-Q. Lu, D. Wu, H. Ding and L.-Q. Chen, “Vibration isolation and energy harvesting integrated in a Stewart platform with high static and low dynamic stiffness”, Appl. Math. Model, vol. 89, part 1, pp. 249–267, 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2020.07.060.
  14. S. Pedrammehr, S. Nahavandi and H. Abdi, “Closed–form dynamics of a hexarot parallel manipulator by means of the principle of virtual work”, Acta Mech. Sin, vol. 34, no. 5, pp. 883–895, 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10409-018-0761-4.
  15. S. Shastry, R. Avaneesh, K. A. Desai and S. V. Shah, “Optimal design of a Stewart–Gough platform for multidirectional 3-D printing”, in Precision Product-Process Design and Optimization. Singapore: Springer Singapore, 2018, pp. 1–29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8767-7_1.
  16. M. Shariatee and A. Akbarzadeh, “Optimum dynamic design of a Stewart platform with symmetric weight compensation system”, J. Intell. Robot. Syst., vol. 103, no. 4, p. 66, 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10846-021-01461-8.
  17. T. S. Tamir, G. Xiong, X. Dong, Q. Fang, S. Liu, E. Lodhi, Zhen Shen and F.-Y. Wang, “Design and Optimization of a Control Framework for Robot Assisted Additive Manufacturing Based on the Stewart Platform”, Int. J. Control Autom. Syst, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 968–982, 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12555-021-0058-4.
  18. Trent R. Peterson, Design and implementation of Stewart platform robot for robotics course laboratory, Ph.D. dissertation, 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15368/theses.2020.20.
  19. X. Dai, S. Song, W. Xu, Z. Huang and D. Gong, “Modal space neural network compensation control for Gough-Stewart robot with uncertain load”, Neurocomputing, vol. 449, pp. 245–257, 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neucom.2021.03.119.
  20. XiaoLong Yang, HongTao Wu, Bai Chen, ShengZheng Kang and ShiLi Cheng, “Dynamic modeling and decoupled control of a flexible Stewart platform for vibration isolation”, J. Sound Vib, vol. 439, pp. 398–412, 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsv.2018.10.007.
  21. R. V. Virgil Petrescu, R. Aversa, A. Apicella, S. Kozaitis, T. Abu-Lebdeh and F. I. T. Petrescu, “Inverse kinematics of a Stewart platform”, Journal of Mechatronics and Robotics, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 45–59, 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3844/jmrsp.2018.45.59.
  22. Y. Liang, J. Zhao, S. Yan, X. Cai, Y. Xing and A. Schmidt, “Kinematics of Stewart Platform Explains Three-Dimensional Movement of Honeybee’s Abdominal Structure”, Journal of Insect Science, vol. 19, no. 3, p. 4, 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jisesa/iez037.
  23. H. Yun, L. Liu, Q. Li, W. Li and L. Tang, “Development of an isotropic Stewart platform for telescope secondary mirror”, Mech. Syst. Signal Process, vol. 127, pp. 328–344, 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymssp.2019.03.001.

Downloads

Published

2023-04-13

How to Cite

[1]
V. Kabanyachyi, S. Hrytsan, and S. Yankovskyi, “Taking into account a location of aircraft’s center of mass during motion cuing”, Mech. Adv. Technol., vol. 7, no. 1 (97), pp. 16–23, Apr. 2023.

Issue

Section

Aviation Systems and Technologies