Review of pilot modelling techniques
Review of pilot modelling techniques
复制标题
DOI：
10.2514/6.2010-297
复制
发表时间：
2010-01
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Mohammad M. Lone;A. Cooke
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Mohammad M. Lone;A. Cooke
随着飞机尺寸的增加，不稳定的空气动力学和气动弹性带来了新的操纵质量挑战。这些需要对整个试点车辆系统有更深入的了解。随着结构模态频率进入手动控制频率范围，飞行控制系统和飞行员之间的交互水平增加。因此，飞行员准确的生理和控制理论模型至关重要。相互作用的范围从引导增益和均衡的有意识变化到结构模式的无意识生物动力馈通。到目前为止，使用理论试点模型一直是深入了解操控质量的有效方法。试点建模可以分为三个领域：人体感觉建模、生物力学建模和控制理论建模。迄今为止，尚未提出将这些方面结合在一起并提供飞行员建模的整体视图的评论。本文旨在解决这一文献空白并对最新技术进行回顾。民用飞机的设计提出了涉及重量和效率权衡的有趣问题。民用飞机运载的乘客越多，其效率就越高，但同时其尺寸和重量也会增加。这些必须通过轻质机身的设计来补偿。最终产品是一个大型轻质机身，其特点是刚性降低，从而提高了气动弹性水平。气动弹性会以通常未被充分认识或理解的方式影响飞机的稳定性和控制。当结构模式进入刚体动态频率范围时，依赖机身周围各种传感器反馈的飞行控制系统（FCS）也会受到影响。这些传感器无法再区分气动弹性动力学和刚体动力学，这可能会导致意外的 FCS 行为。这种无法区分刚体动力学和气动弹性效应的现象也是人类感觉动力学所固有的。现在，随着机身结构模式频率侵入人类感官、生物动力学和控制的频率范围，处理质量分析的传统假设不再有效。飞行员对飞机状态的感知就像机载 FCS 传感器一样被破坏。因此，在飞行员车辆系统中引入飞行员增益和均衡可能不再合适。在日常飞行中，飞行员在指挥飞机时往往会考虑到机身结构的限制。然而，现在在某些情况下，飞行员和 FCS 的组合可能会使飞机的负载超出其限制。这种情况可能是由各种触发因素引起的，并且飞行员可能知道或不知道该情况。触发事件的范围可以从飞行员策略的变化到极端的大气条件。对此类场景的调查首先需要了解飞机手动控制。目前的民用飞机实际上具有三种操作模式。飞机控制可以通过飞行员头脑中的目标的完全手动控制或飞行指挥员的目标的手动控制来实现。飞机还可以通过模式控制面板进行控制，该面板可以命令各种自动驾驶模式；飞行员在这里扮演着更多的监督角色。图 1 显示了手动控制模式中涉及的关键组件。该系统由一个目标（有意识地导出）驱动，该目标由高级大脑功能下意识地处理以导出控制动作；飞行员经验和技能的函数。这种控制作用是通过神经肌肉系统施加的，而神经肌肉系统又受到人体对环境的反应的影响。然后它通过飞行控制系统，飞机做出相应的反应。
As aircraft increase in size, unsteady aerodynamics and aeroelasticity pose new handling qualities challenges. These require a greater understanding of the pilot-vehicle system as a whole. The level of interaction between the flying control system and the pilot increases as structural mode frequencies enter into the manual control frequency range. Therefore, accurate physiological and control-theoretic models of the pilot are crucial. Interactions range from conscious changes in pilot gain and equalisation to unconscious biodynamic feedthrough of structural modes. So far, use of theoretical pilot models has been an effective way of gaining handling qualities insight. Pilot modelling can be split into three areas: human sensory modelling, biomechanical modelling and control-theoretic modelling. To date, a review that brings together these aspects and provides a holistic view of pilot modelling has not been presented. This paper aims to address this literature gap and presents a review of the state-of-the-art. he design of civil aircraft raises interesting issues involving weight and efficiency tradeoffs. The more passengers a civil aircraft carries the more efficient it becomes, but at the same time its size and weight increase. These have to be compensated for by the design of a lightweight airframe. The end product is a large lightweight airframe that is characterised by reduced rigidity and consequently increased levels of aeroelasticity. Aeroelasticity can affect aircraft stability and control in ways which are often not fully appreciated or understood. As structural modes enter into the rigid-body dynamic frequency range, the flight control systems (FCS) relying on feedback from the various sensors around the airframe are also affected. These sensors can no longer distinguish between aeroelastic and rigid body dynamics and this can lead to unexpected FCS behaviour. This inability to distinguish between rigid body dynamics and aeroelastic effects is also inherent to the human sensory dynamics. Now as airframe structural modes frequencies encroach into the frequency ranges of human senses, biodynamics and control, traditional assumptions in handling qualities analysis no longer remain valid. Pilot’s perception of aircraft states is corrupted just like the onboard FCS sensors. Therefore, pilot introduced gain and equalisation in the pilot-vehicle system may no longer be appropriate. During routine flying, pilots tend to command the aircraft with airframe structural limits in mind. However, now there are possibilities of certain scenarios where the pilot and FCS combination may load the aircraft beyond its limits. Such a scenario may be caused by various triggers and the pilot may either be aware or unaware of the scenario. Triggering events can range from changes in pilot’s strategy to extreme atmospheric conditions. Investigation of such scenarios require first an understanding of aircraft manual control. Current civil aircraft effectively have three modes of operation. Aircraft control can be achieved through complete manual control with objectives from the pilot’s mind or manual control with objectives from a flight director. The aircraft can also be controlled via the mode control panel which commands the various autopilot modes; the pilot plays a more supervisory role here. Figure 1 presents the key components involved in the manual control mode. The system is driven by an objective (derived consciously) that is subconsciously processed by higher brain functions to derive a control action; a function of pilot experience and skill. This control action is applied through the neuromuscular system that is in turn affected by the human body’s response to the environment. Then it goes through the flying control system and the aircraft responds accordingly.