Mach Hold Controlling of Lockheed NT-33A Using Different Controlling

Techniques

Jazib Hassan & Ahmad Ali Ansari
Aeronautics and Astronautics Department
Institute of Space Technology
Islamabad Expressway, Islamabad 44000



Abstract
The paper focuses on the development of the controller
for velocity or mach hold due to the change in pitch
which occurs due to any disturbance say gust or air
pocket in the flying regime. The first step is the
development of the transfer function for the desire
purpose which includes the velocity and pitch changes
due to elevator deflection, then applying the two
different controlling techniques to make the transient
effect as stable as possible. The primary controller is
the PID controller in which gain tuning is done to set
the response and the other controller technique is
compensation of response by adding pole and zeroes
according to the desire result which is wanted. In the
end both of the controllers are compared and proper
recommendations are given.


Key Words: NT-33A, PID Controller, Lead
Compensator, Stability, MATLAB, Simulation

i. Introduction
The Lockheed T-33 Shooting Star is an American-built
jet trainer aircraft. It was produced by Lockheed and
made its first flight in 1948, piloted by Tony LeVier.
The T-33 was developed from the Lockheed P-80/F-80
starting as TP-80C/TF-80C in development, then
designated T-33A.
5


Figure 1. Lockheed NT-33A
(http://www.stevemarkmanworld.com)
A trainer is a class of aircraft designed specifically to
facilitate in-flight training of pilots and aircrews. The
use of a dedicated trainer aircraft with additional safety
featuressuch as tandem flight controls, forgiving
flight characteristics and a simplified cockpit
arrangementallows pilots-in-training to safely
advance their real-time piloting, navigation and/or war
fighting skills without the danger of overextending
their abilities alone in a fully featured aircraft.
Lockheed is a famous industry in aircraft making and
their main aim is to satisfy the customer about the
quality of the product. The velocity or Mach holding is
an important issue in the controlling of an aircraft. It is
commonly used during the cruise operation. In Mach
hold mode the aircraft is made to fly at a constant
Mach number by automatically controlling the flight
path angle through elevators. For this mode of
operation the aircraft is first trimmed to fly straight and
level and the power is adjusted to yield the desired
Mach number.
For the purpose of controlling two different controlling
techniques are applied more specifically PID controller
and a compensator is designed to get the desire results.
For this purpose MATLAB and Simulink is used and
the responses are plotted there.
ii. Use of control surface (Elevator)
Control of modern aircraft is a complicated process and
requires many considerations. Maneuverability and
stability being one of the basic aircraft requirements, is
extensively achieved through the use if control surfaces
like elevators, rudders and ailerons. For the required
purpose primary controlling surface is elevator.
As the aircraft cruises, fuel is consumed, the weight of
the aircraft decreases, and the speed tends to increase
(in case of jet aircraft).
1
The increase in speed is sensed
by the control system and corrected for by an up-
elevator signal causing the aircraft to climb. So keeping
in view the application and usage of control surface in
controlling the cruise velocity, main importance will be
given to the response of aircraft for a deflection of
control surface.


iii. Evaluation of uncontrolled response
The evaluation of uncontrolled response is necessary
for the purpose of control designing.

Initially the stability derivatives are evaluated from the
given flight data and structural dimensions, and they
are given in Table I.
Table 1. Values of Stability Derivatives
Symbol Value Symbol Value
C
x
u
-0.27 C
z
o
-5.355
C
x
o
0.273 C
z
q
-3.6
C
w
-0.813 C
m
o
-5.0
C
z
u
-1.626 C
m
o
-0.401
C
z
o
-1.05 C
m
q
-10.0
Major effects in the Mach hold are of the pitch rate due
to the elevator deflection and due to change in the pitch
rate how the velocity is settled to its initial or desired
position. Using equation of motion for longitudinal
mode which is given below:

Following transfer functions are obtained for pitch and
velocity response keeping elevator deflection as an
input
(s)
oe
=
-1u.S7 s
2
- 16.7 s - 1.649
u.u62S s
4
+ u.98S s
S
+ S.677 s
2
+ u.497S s + u.SSu1

And for velocity is given
u(s)
oe
=
-u.uuu41S s
2
+ 1.6S17 s + S.776s
u.u62S s
4
+ u.98S s
S
+ S.677 s
2
+ u.497S s + u.SSu1

To find the fact that is the system which is going to
controlled is naturally stable or not. For this reason root
locus study is done and the root locus for velocity with
respect to elevator deflection is given Figure 2
Figure 2: Root Locus for velocity
And its response to impulse elevator defelction is given
as an open loop response in Figure 3

Figure 3: Impulse response
in asimilar manner MATLAB Simulink moduleis udes
for simulating the uncontrolled response for the
Mach/velocity and is illustrated in Figure 4

Figure 4: Simulink Model for uncontrolled response
And the obtained result is demonstrated in Figure 5
below

Figure 5: Scope Results
iv. PID Controlling
After having complete results for velocity and pitch
the next step is the controller designing according to
the nature of the system i.e. how much instability it has
Velocity

Pitch

Pulse Input

inherently. So the by studying the root locus for the
velocity it comes to know that the system is
conditionally stable and the impulse response is also
getting stable after taking some time. So there proposed
the most simple controlling technique which PID
controlling.
2
By simply adjusting the gains the system
will be brought to the desire condition. Again Simulink
is used to draw the model of the system, it is shown in
Figure 6.

Figure 6: Simulink model for PID controller of
Mach hold
Table 2: Gains for PID
PID Controller Gains
K
p
2.0
K
i
0.0
K
d
0.4
Its a mean a PD controller is used and the gain value
fro integral term is zero.
The resulting response is given in Figure 7

There is a overshoot of about 10% and the settling
time is less than 20 seconds which is desired and the
undershoot value is negligible. So a PD controller is
working quite efficiently
v. Lead compensator controlling
Lead compensation is used when there is need to
control the transient of the response. So in this case the
value of damping ratio and natural frequency is some
bit out of the box so a need of lead compensator arises
to settle the response according to the desire.
The following block diagram is made in the Simulink,
to have the pictorial representation of the system the
Figure 8 is given

Figure 8: Simulink model for Lead compensation
And the resulting response from this model after
incorporating the controller is shownin Figure 9

Figure 9: Scope results for lead compensator
From the above response it is clear that the percent
overshoot is decreased by 2% but on the other hand the
settling time and the undershoot values are also
increased.
vi. Comparison of two controllers
After the completion of the step of making the
controllers for Mach hold, here comes the next step of
comparing the performance of two controllers and the
some of the facts about the results of the controller are
given in the table below
Table 3: Comparative Study
PD Controller Lead Compensator
%
Overshoot
%
under
shoot
Settling
time
%
Overshoot
%
under
shoot
Settling
time
10% -1% <20 sec 8% -2% 60 sec
From this comparative study the foremost choice
for the controlling purpose of Mach hold is the PD
controller because of its low settling time which has a
great advantage over lead compensator which one the
other side have the settling time of almost one minute.
And one minute counts a lot in aircraft flight. So
keeping in view the safety purpose as well the efficient
controller among the two is PD controller.
v||. Conc|us|on:
Different type of controllers can be used for aircraft
Mach hold control. For example transient response can
be improved by using lead compensator, steady state
response by lag compensator or both can be achieved
by simply utilizing concept of lead lag compensator.
These are classical approaches of controls. Modern
control theory can also be applied for deigning
controller. But the flaw is, system becomes more
complicate and difficult to understand. On the other
hand PID is simple to design as well as feasible to
implement on the aircraft. Because of its simplicity
PID controller is easy to design and good results can be
achieved.
Velocity

Pulse Input

Velocity

Pulse Input

In the text of Blacklock controller for the same
purpose is made but a different technique is employed
in which lead compensator and PD controller mixture
is used to get the desire response. So hereby it can be
concluded controller may be of several type it is just
the technique used by designer. In the near future more
work will be done on the altitude holding which is an
important feature in cruise flight. The advantage of
doing these researches make us more keen to learn new
things and will encourage the undergraduate students to
do it on regular basis.

Acknowledgement:
Firstly, we would like to thanks Almighty Allah for
giving us the strength of completing the research, then
our most sincere thanks to our instructor Mr. Waheed
for his continued support and guidance. Also we would
like to express my thanks to our dear friends Mr.
Ahmad Abdullah Fayyazi and Mr. Usman Manzoor for
their continued support. And most of all our deepest
love and servitude to our parents without whom
prayers and support we would have never reached this
point.


References:

[1] Jhon H. Blacklock, Automatic Control of
Aircraft and Missiles, second edition (New York:
A Wiley-Interscience Publication, 1991)
[2] Katsuhiko Ogata, Modern Control Engineering,
fourth edition (University of Minnesota)
[3] John D. Anderson,Jr., Fundamentals of
Aerodynamics, fourth edition (New Delhi:
McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Limited,
2007)
[4] James D. Lang, Aircraft Performance, Stability
and Control, Vol I (United States Air Force
Academy, Department of Aeronautics)
[5] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_T-
33_Shooting_Star


Appendix A

M File (MATLAB Coding) for evaluating different transfer Functions

WrlLlna Maln MaLrlx [A 8 C, u L l, 0 C h]
A = [0 3.42 0.27],
8 = [0 0 -.273],
C = [0 0 .813],
u = [0 0 1.626],
L = [0 3.414 3.333],
l = [0 -3.41 0],
C = [0 0.02313 .401],
P = [.003333 .0303 0],
ConLrol parL l.e. 8PS
l = [0 0 0],
! = [0 0 -.302],
k = [0 0 -.89],
llndlna characLerlsLlc equaLlon uL1 = 0
a = conv(A, conv(L,P)),
b = conv(C, conv(u,C)),
c = conv(A, conv(l,C)),
d = conv(8, conv(u,P)),
uL1 = (a+b)-(c+d),
solve('(0.0623*s^4)+(0.9836*s^3)+(3.6774*s^2)+(.4973*s)+.3301'),
LvaluLlna numeraLors
a1 = conv(!, conv(C,C)),
b1 = conv(k, conv(8,l)),
c1 = conv(!, conv(8,P)),
d1 = conv(k, conv(C,L)),
num_veloclLv = (a1+b1)-(c1+d1),
veloclLv = Lf(num_veloclLv,uL1)

a2 = conv(A, conv(!,P)),
b2 = conv(u, conv(k,C)),
c2 = conv(A, conv(k,l)),
d2 = conv(0, conv(0,0)),
num_aoa = (a2+b2)-(c2+d2),
aoa = Lf(num_aoa,uL1),

a3 = conv(A, conv(L,k)),
b3 = conv(0, conv(0,0)),
c3 = conv(A, conv(C,!)),
d3 = conv(u, conv(8,k)),
num_plLch = (a3+b3)-(c3+d3),
plLch = Lf(num_plLch,uL1)

1ransfer funcLlon of Servo
Ses = 8.8,
servo=Lf([-Ses],[1 12.3]),
dlffer = Lf([1],[0 1]),
aoa_doL = serles(aoa,dlffer),
plLch_doL=serles(plLch,dlffer),
u= 667,
acc_delLa = u*((aoa_doL)-(plLch_doL)),
servo_1= Lf([-10],[1 10]),
servo_LheLadoL = serles(servo_1,plLch_doL),
lnner_loop= feedback(servo_LheLadoL,Lf([0.93],[0 1])),
acc_LheLadoL = (acc_delLa)/(plLch_doL),
az_ea = serles(acc_LheLadoL,lnner_loop),

shorL perlod approxlmaLlon Lransfer funLlons
deLermlnanL_shorL = (conv(L,P))-(conv(l,C)),
num_shorL1_alpha= (conv(!,P))-(conv(l,k)),
num_shorL2_LheLa= (conv(L,k))-(conv(!,C)),
shorL_alpha = Lf(num_shorL1_alpha,deLermlnanL_shorL),
shorL_LheLa = Lf(num_shorL2_LheLa,deLermlnanL_shorL),
flndlna aamma bv LheLa
alpha_LheLa_allde = (shorL_alpha)/ (shorL_LheLa),
aamma_LheLa = 1 - (alpha_LheLa_allde),
h_LheLa = (667./37.3).*(serles(aamma_LheLa,Lf([1],[1 0]))),
now deslanlna coupler whlch conslsLs of l and lead compensaLor
l= Lf([1 1],[1 0]),
lead= Lf([1 1.6],[1 13]),
coupler = 18* (l*lead),
coupler_aamma = serles(coupler,aamma_LheLa1),
for flare parL
lead2 = Lf([1 1.63],[1 163]),
coupler_flare = serles(lead2,coupler),
h_doL = (230/37.3)*(aamma_LheLa1),
flare_block = serles(h_doL,coupler_flare),
for mach hold
dvnamlcs_2 = serles(servo_1,shorL_LheLa),
dvnamlcs = serles(Lf([1 0],[1]),dvnamlcs_2),
dvnamlcs_1 = feedback (dvnamlcs,Lf([2.1],[1])),
small_one = Lf(-1.19.*[1 0.2],[1 2]),
mach_hold = serles (small_one,dvnamlcs_1),
for alLlLude hold

small_one_1 = Lf(6*[1 0.8],[1 8]),
alLlLude_hold = serles (small_one_1,dvnamlcs_1),
rlocus(veloclLv)
lmpulse(veloclLv)