具有城市空中机动任务的多旋翼飞机操纵质量对电机尺寸的影响

S. Withrow-Maser, Carlos A. Malpica, K. Nagami
{"title":"具有城市空中机动任务的多旋翼飞机操纵质量对电机尺寸的影响","authors":"S. Withrow-Maser, Carlos A. Malpica, K. Nagami","doi":"10.4050/f-0077-2021-16791","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Control models of three NASA Urban Air Mobility (UAM) reference vehicles (the quadrotor, octocopter, and Lift+Cruise (LPC)) were created and compared to determine the effect of rotor number and disk loading on control margin and design. The heave and yaw axes demand more actuator usage than the roll and pitch axes. Between heave and yaw, heave was the more demanding of the two because of the dependence of heave on the engine speed controller (ESC). When the feedback gains for all three vehicles were optimized to Level 1 handling qualities (HQs) specifications using CONDUIT, the ESC for the octocopter was the most stable and had the highest rise time (time for the rotor to respond to an input), while the LPC ESC was the least stable and had the smallest rise time. Rise time corresponds to the time required for rotor response. When actuator usage was translated to current margin, torque margin, and power margin, heave was the most demanding axis, followed by yaw, roll, and then pitch for all three vehicles. The results emphasize the importance of an accurate motor model within the control system architecture.\n","PeriodicalId":273020,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Vertical Flight Society 77th Annual Forum","volume":"45 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of Handling Qualities on Motor Sizing for Multirotor Aircraft with Urban Air Mobility Missions\",\"authors\":\"S. Withrow-Maser, Carlos A. Malpica, K. Nagami\",\"doi\":\"10.4050/f-0077-2021-16791\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Control models of three NASA Urban Air Mobility (UAM) reference vehicles (the quadrotor, octocopter, and Lift+Cruise (LPC)) were created and compared to determine the effect of rotor number and disk loading on control margin and design. The heave and yaw axes demand more actuator usage than the roll and pitch axes. Between heave and yaw, heave was the more demanding of the two because of the dependence of heave on the engine speed controller (ESC). When the feedback gains for all three vehicles were optimized to Level 1 handling qualities (HQs) specifications using CONDUIT, the ESC for the octocopter was the most stable and had the highest rise time (time for the rotor to respond to an input), while the LPC ESC was the least stable and had the smallest rise time. Rise time corresponds to the time required for rotor response. When actuator usage was translated to current margin, torque margin, and power margin, heave was the most demanding axis, followed by yaw, roll, and then pitch for all three vehicles. The results emphasize the importance of an accurate motor model within the control system architecture.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":273020,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the Vertical Flight Society 77th Annual Forum\",\"volume\":\"45 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-05-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the Vertical Flight Society 77th Annual Forum\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4050/f-0077-2021-16791\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the Vertical Flight Society 77th Annual Forum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4050/f-0077-2021-16791","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

创建了三种NASA城市空中机动(UAM)参考飞行器(四旋翼、八旋翼和升力+巡航(LPC))的控制模型,并进行了比较,以确定旋翼数量和磁盘负载对控制裕度和设计的影响。升沉轴和偏航轴比横滚轴和俯仰轴需要更多的执行器使用。在升沉和偏航之间,由于升沉对发动机转速控制器(ESC)的依赖,对两者的要求更高。当使用CONDUIT将所有三种飞行器的反馈增益优化到1级操纵质量(hq)规格时,八旋翼的ESC最稳定,上升时间最长(旋翼响应输入的时间),而LPC ESC最不稳定,上升时间最短。上升时间对应于转子响应所需的时间。当执行器的使用转换为电流裕度、扭矩裕度和功率裕度时,升沉轴是对所有三种车辆要求最高的轴,其次是偏航、滚转和俯仰。结果强调了精确的电机模型在控制系统架构中的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Impact of Handling Qualities on Motor Sizing for Multirotor Aircraft with Urban Air Mobility Missions
Control models of three NASA Urban Air Mobility (UAM) reference vehicles (the quadrotor, octocopter, and Lift+Cruise (LPC)) were created and compared to determine the effect of rotor number and disk loading on control margin and design. The heave and yaw axes demand more actuator usage than the roll and pitch axes. Between heave and yaw, heave was the more demanding of the two because of the dependence of heave on the engine speed controller (ESC). When the feedback gains for all three vehicles were optimized to Level 1 handling qualities (HQs) specifications using CONDUIT, the ESC for the octocopter was the most stable and had the highest rise time (time for the rotor to respond to an input), while the LPC ESC was the least stable and had the smallest rise time. Rise time corresponds to the time required for rotor response. When actuator usage was translated to current margin, torque margin, and power margin, heave was the most demanding axis, followed by yaw, roll, and then pitch for all three vehicles. The results emphasize the importance of an accurate motor model within the control system architecture.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信