曝光台 注意防骗 网曝天猫店富美金盛家居专营店坑蒙拐骗欺诈消费者
High, Medium, Low, Split 0,0,6,0
V10
Fixed base V9 V4 80
0,5,1,0 3,3,0,0
Low 60
V8 V6 V3 0,2,4,0 1,5,0,0 3,1,2,0 40
Medium
V7 V5 0,2,4,0 2,4,0,0
20
0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Gain @ 1 rad/sec
Figure 61. Pilot motion fidelity ratings for vertical task.
Phase Distortion @ 1 rad/sec (deg)
6. Vertical Experiment III: Altitude and Altitude-Rate Estimation
Background
Relative to flight, simulation has perennially produced less effective control of altitude and altitude rate. Fixed-wing landings in simulation usually have higher runway position dispersions and higher mean touchdown veloci-ties than in flight. Bray showed that with a 16-in black-and-white television monitor, simulator vertical displacements of at least ±20 ft are required in order to achieve the desired fidelity in the landing task (ref. 60).
In helicopter simulations, pilots often comment that the vertical damping (as perceived from the visual and motion cues) is less than it is in flight (refs. 59, 63–65). Since the math models have often been developed and validated
from in-flight measurements, attempts to determine the
cause have focused on the simulator visual and motion cues.
Often, the assumption is made that pilots obtain vehicle acceleration information from the motion system, and rate or position information from the visual system, as shown in figure 62. Thus, decreasing motion gain or increasing washout frequency is assumed not to affect the outer rate and position loops. In this work, an experiment was designed to test this assumption by exploring the effects of visual scene properties and vertical motion on the estimation of altitude and altitude rate.
Experimental Setup
Five factors were incorporated in Vertical Experiment III: constant rate of 3 ft/sec. The climbs started at an altitude of 7.5 ft and ended at 42.5 ft. The descents started at an altitude of 42.5 ft and ended at 7.5 ft. These unusually specific altitudes were selected to allow one-to-one motion and visual cues in the Vertical Motion Simulator.
For both tasks, all instruments were disabled so that pilots would have to estimate their altitude and altitude rate from the visual scene, motion system, or cockpit collective movement. Although pilots would ordinarily accomplish these tasks in flight by referring to an instrument that measures either altitude or altitude rate, these instruments were intentionally disabled so that the possible value of the motion and visual cueing variations could be determined.
Aircraft
Acceleration Motion cue
system
Rate-of-climb and Visual
system
altitude cues
Simulated Vehicle Math Model
The math model represented the AH-64 Apache helicopter:
(1) reposition direction, (2) initial altitude, (3) presence of
.
˙˙
h
.
直升机网 www.helicopter.cn
直升机翻译 www.aviation.cn
本文链接地址：Helicopter Flight Simulation Motion Platform Requirements(44)
|
