This post was written by http://www.avidyne.com/company/leadership.asp?name=markkrebs - , our Vice President of Engineering for Guidance and Controls. How do the servos work?
One of the first questions many people have asked was how
well the autopilot performs without digital smart servos. Plenty of smart folks have been confounded by
the idea of a modern digital autopilot being coupled to the the existing Cirrus
servo system: The question was even the topic of a COPA forum thread. "How
could that work?" they asked. The
answer is "very well indeed."
If that seems a surprising answer, well at first it was
for me too; I was daunted by the initial challenge to utilize the existing
servos. We had a few things going for us
though: good understanding of the airplane's flying qualities, our high
performance AHRS, and not least a modern digital flight control system. Over time, we overcame the challenges and
became very comfortable with the Cirrus & STEC servos.
With three planes in continuous service now, we have
accumulated hundreds of flight hours on multiple systems, including one with no
STEC pitch servo at all, and they are all flying great. We are very confident the Cirrus trim servos
and linkages provide a perfectly viable foundation on which to build a flight
control system. I will provide the details here, along with correcting some
misconceptions.
First, regarding digital servos. In all cases the servo boils down to a motor
which is an analog device that converts current and voltage into torque and
speed. Computer control makes it a "digital smart" servo, and as for
computers, we got one. The point is, the
tricky bit is about the "smarts" not about where they're located.
With a fully capable actuator & harness already in place, it makes sense to
keep the computation centralized. If there is any value in further discussion
of servos, I'm happy to engage, just send me your questions.
Next, some basics on the flight control system. As you
know, the stock Cirrus comes with pitch and roll trim servos, driven by DC motors
through planetary reduction geartrains and closely coupled to the flying
surfaces by spring cartridges. These motors are reliable and extremely strong:
no way could a human ever overpower one.
Enter the need for the spring cartridge. Whenever you move the yoke, you
are overpowering that spring (but not budging the servo). That's why discussions of "wearing
out" the spring cartridge are misplaced: it receives the greatest workout
when the plane is hand flown! There are
linkage issues we'll discuss in a moment, but basically, springs don't wear
out, and we haven't seen any sign of it. It's a pretty good system. In fact,
when I met with Cirrus aerodynamic designers to discuss the controls some time
ago, they proudly touted the fact that you could fly the plane with just the
trim hat. That might be a tricky
proposition since the trim system only gives you one speed (full speed) but it
is true, and is a unique feature of the Cirrus aircraft design.
The dynamics of the spring cartridge can be characterized
informally by one word: "detent."
What that detent is, is two springs preloaded to hold the yoke in the
middle, against a center stop so that for the first several pounds of force
applied, nothing happens. The cartridge won't budge. That's something you understand implicitly
almost as a "muscle memory," and so when you feel the detent, you
quickly and forcefully power through it. Once you've overcome the preload in
either direction, the spring responds linearly thereafter and control surface
deflection is proportional to the force applied. All this detail is relevant because as a
human you have three special advantages over the autopilot. First, your arm is
both a wonderful force sensor and a fast actuator. Second, you are attached to
the elevator almost entirely without the slop (or "deadband," in the
lingo) through which the trim servo must act.
Lastly, your hand is a force sensor: you can feel the detent and know to
push through it, but the autopilot servo can not. It doesn't know what it's pushing against, or
how hard. Also, autopilot servo has some backlash of its own, which is the
result of geometry and tension in the capstan bridle cable: that acts like
another spring in the system, stiffer than the spring cartridge but softer than
the preload.
So now, to summarize the autopilot's problem (again, from
the viewpoint of the servo) it must push back through bridle backlash against
unknown aerodynamic force from the elevator, which is itself attached through a
sloppy linkage to the trim servo that introduces the detent characteristics
just described. The aerodynamic force is called "hinge moment" and
it's highly variable. Dependent on
indicated airspeed and how much weight you want to put on the tailplane as a
result of g-loading and cg location, the hinge moment can change dramatically
during the flight and that's why there's a trim system: so you don't have to
fight it all the time. In summary, the
elevator servo is facing a backlash, a variable hinge moment, a deazdone, a
preload and another spring. Finally, since we are driving a DC motor with a
sticky, high ratio geartrain to push, it's going to take several Volts worth of
determination to move at all!
That summarizes the challenges. What do we do about them? Two things...
Handling the last problem is the easiest, since we have a
"smart" servo drive circuit. If we want to move at one volt speed, we
command four volts, because it takes three volts just to "unstick"
the motor. This is a very big part of
the solution because it means we get proportionate servo response when we ask
for it. The details are not much more
complicated than that and you can easily imagine what a big improvement it
makes: after all, control systems are all about getting what you ask for. In
fact this is about all you need in the roll axis, where the spring cartridge is
never deflected. There's been a surprising amount of confusion over the roll
channel, with STEC introducing another whole servo and Garmin eschewing the
trim system altogether. I don't know why. The Cirrus roll trim servo system is,
in a word, excellent.
The pitch problem is a lot more interesting and the
solution is both fun and elegant. First,
consider that with all those different pieces of hardware, and all their
individual dynamics, it is not clear who is flying the airplane! Is it the autopilot, the trim servo, or
you? Just to illustrate with an example,
suppose the aerodynamic hinge moment is large enough to overcome the spring
cartridge detent. Then, if the automatic
pitch trim is working, it will have been adjusting the trim servo to unload the
autopilot servo and consequently the spring in that cartridge is deflected to
"hold" the elevator force. We are in the linear range. "So
what?" you may ask, but consider, that means the autopilot servo may be
hanging "slack" in its bridle. It will have to turn a bit just to
take a strain, before it can move the elevator at all. Until that happens, trim
servo is actually flying the airplane!
When this happens to you in your STEC you experience it as wandering
uncontrolled pitch because the trim servo does not care about your glideslope
deviation.
We experienced exactly this in flight test at high speed,
during strong pull-ups, and sometimes on the glide slope, so, while
intermittent, it can really matter. Our
solution harks back to the rudder / elevator mixers on a Beech Bonanza: we
simply command both servos to move the elevator. That way it doesn't matter which one has the
solid linkage to the elevator because they're both doing the right thing all
the time. When there's a trim signal
(and this is sensed by the autopilot servo just the way it is in your STEC
right now) then we command the servos in opposite directions, to soak up
the load in that spring cartridge. That's it. In the long tradition of
ruddervators, elevons, and spoilerons, we have a "trimmervator." It's a little bit funny, but legitimate. From
the Bonanza to the B2, space shuttle, pegasus rocket and any number of other
missiles, control mixing is a commonplace solution to cross coupled surface
effectivity, which is what we've got here.
With these two simple ideas, we are able to master the
complex Cirrus pitch flight control system, and get very good response out of
the airplane. The system performs almost
as well with just a trim servo although it suffers in speed and in situations where
the hinge moment is large it just can't fly quite as precisely. We do recommend the pitch servo upgrade, but
you will find that, even without it, your airplane will fly much much better
with our autopilot.
This hardly begins to scratch the surface of the
autopilot innovations. An important characteristic to think about is that
"digital autopilot" is just a buzzword anyone can use. The devil's in the equations and not all
equations are created equal. Probably,
we won't share all the details of how Avidyne's advanced the control systems in
the DFC, but a general discussion of some of those ideas will be forthcoming in
future posts. The point, I suppose, is
that I'm very proud of the uncompromising work we've done, and confident you'll
see it expressed in robust, high performance capability of the autopilot. Some
of the COPA posts are starting to show that already.
Happy flying!
Mark
|