Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c47g7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T01:59:01.361Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Latency on a Stewart platform using washout filter

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2018

R.C. Lemes ,
M. Moreira Souza ,
E.M. Belo  and
J.H. Bidinotto
R.C. Lemes*
Affiliation:
Federal Institute of São Paulo, São Carlos, Brazil
M. Moreira Souza
Affiliation:
Federal Institute of São Paulo, São Carlos, Brazil
E.M. Belo
Affiliation:
São Carlos School of Engineering, University of São Paulo, Department of Aeronautics Engineering, São Carlos, Brazil
J.H. Bidinotto
Affiliation:
São Carlos School of Engineering, University of São Paulo, Department of Aeronautics Engineering, São Carlos, Brazil
*
professorlemes@yahoo.com.br
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The aim of this work is to investigate and quantify the latency on a Stewart Platform caused exclusively by a Classic washout filter. This washout filter is intended to recreate the sensations of motion caused by changes of translational and rotational acceleration that an aircraft can provide, due to changes in attitudes caused by external factors, and those caused by the pilot’s command. The input signal was generated by a FlightGear Simulator in order to obtain the specific forces and angular velocities of a Boeing 747 during a take-off procedure. These signals are then filtered by a washout filter and sent to the inverse kinematics of the movable platform, which will transform the aircraft motion sensations in platforms actuator position, thereby causing a certain signal delay. Experiments were performed in a Stewart Platform to obtain the latency caused by the mathematical modelling of the entire washout filter system. This latency are then compared to the latency caused by the control and dynamics of the platform’s actuators. Results indicate that the washout filter is the most responsible for the latency of the specific force signals to be reproduced by the platform in this experiment, and that the natural frequency and damping coefficient values must be properly estimated in order to optimise the total latency.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 122 , Issue 1252 , June 2018 , pp. 1003 - 1019
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Page, R.L. Brief history of flight simulation, 2000, In: SimTecT 2000 Organising and Technical Committee, Sydney Convention and Exhibition Centre, Darling Harbour, Sydney, Australia.Google Scholar
2. Jamson, A.H.J. Motion cueing in driving simulators for research applications, 2010, University of Leeds.Google Scholar
3. Rehmann, A.J. A Handbook of Flight Simulation Fidelity Requirements for Human Factors Research, 1995, Report, DOT/FAA/CT-TN95/46, Wright-Patterson, AFB, OH: Crew Systems Ergonomics Information Analysis Center.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Lemes, R.C., Breganon, R., Souza, M.M., Salvi, F.T.B., Angelico, R.A., Barbosa, C.A.Z. and Belo, E.M. Implementation of a washout filter used in Stewart platform, COBEM, December 2015, ABCM, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.Google Scholar
5. Buffett, A.R. Visual cueing requirements in flight simulation, Advances in Flight Simulation Visual and Motion Systems, April 1986, The Royal Aeronautical Society, London, UK.Google Scholar
6. Allerton, D. Principles of Flight Simulation, 2009, Aerospace Series: Wiley.Google Scholar
7. Lee, A.T. Flight Simulation: Virtual Environments in Aviation, 2005, Burlington: Ashgate Publishing Company.Google Scholar
8. Previc, F.H. and Ercoline, W.R. Spatial disorientation in aviation, Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics, 2004, AIAA.Google Scholar
9. Dasgupta, B. and Mruthyunjaya, T.S. The Stewart platform manipulator: A review, Mech and Machine Theory, 2000, 35, (1), pp 15–40.Google Scholar
10. Gough, E. Contribution to discussion of papers on research in automobile stability, control and tyre performance, Proc. Auto Div. Inst. Mech. Eng, 1956–1957, pp 392-394.Google Scholar
11. Stewart, D. A platform with six degrees of freedom, Proceedings of Institution of Mech Engineers, 1965-1966, 180, (15), pp 371–386.Google Scholar
12. Reid, L.D. and Nahon, M.A. Flight simulation motion-base drive algorithms: Part 1 - Developing and testing the equations, Report no. 296, December 1985, UTIAS.Google Scholar
13. Chen, S.H. and Fu, L.F.C. An optimal washout filter design for a motion platform with senseless and angular scaling maneuvers, American Control Conference, 2010, Baltimore, MD, US.Google Scholar
14. Ko, S.F. Investigation of Simulator Motion Drive Algorithms for Airplane Upset Simulation, 2012, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
15. Nahon, M.A. and Reid, L.D. Simulator motion-drive algorithms: A designer’s perspective, Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 1990, 13, (2), pp 356–362.Google Scholar
16. Nguyen, C.C., Antrazi, S.S., Zhou, Z.L. and Campbell, C.E. Jr Adaptive control of a Stewart platform-based manipulator, Journal of Robotic Systems, 1993, 10, (5), pp 657–687.Google Scholar
17. Souza, M.M., De Salvi, F.T.B., Carlos, S.R., Moreira, E.E.T., Schwening, G.S., Belo, E.M., Breganon, R. and Lemes, R.C., A fuzzy technique to control attitude and position of a Stewart platform, COBEM, 2013, ABCM, Ribeirão Preto, Brazil.Google Scholar
18. Advani, S.K. The Kinematic Design of Flight Simulator Motion-Bases, PhD Thesis, 1998, Delft University of Technology.Google Scholar