https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19720012071 2019-12-20T18:10:12+00:00Z NASA TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM --N- ASA TM X-2514 c 8 = ti3.C1(Lgl/Lll) @ = taf1(L23/L22) Now L=L’ = XJ-lB-lC, can be used again here. SOthat Lij = Lij and the formula previously derived for LI1. 1 ‘Figure 5 presents a sketch of ‘the angles and introduces an angle of attack cy and a sideslip angle 8. In the sketch, it is assumed that the roll operation has already been performed; hence, just yaw + and pitch 8 are shown. It can be seen that a= 8 and @=-Ic/ where a is the angle between the longitudinal body axis and the projection of the free,stream velocity V on the XZ-plane, and B is the angle between V and its projectinnnn_the.XZ-plane, Z Figure 5. - Free-stream-velocity axis and body &is system. It should be note? that the Lij equation is general and therefore can be applied to any other gyro system with any Euler angle set. All that is required is that the general platform transformation be known for use in the J and K matrices. The equations for angles of attack and sideslip will remain the same. APPLICATION OF TECHNIQUE To illustrate the technique previously discussed, gyro-platform and radar data from a previous flight test (ref. 3) were used to derive angle-of-attack and sideslip time histories. The flight test involved a parachute that was deployed from a payload at a specified Mach.number and dynamic pressure approximately 60 seconds after vehicle lift-off. The data period covered in this example extends from 3 seconds before deployment to 6 seconds after deployment. The free-stream flight-path angles in pitch and yaw (azimuth and elevation) of the payload velocity vector are presented in figure 6. Azimuth and elevation launch angles of the vehicle in the lift-off position are also given. Euler angles from gyro-platform data are presented in figure 7. These data were obtained from a gyro which measured payload attitude in a pitch, yaw, and roll sequence. The payload had littIe pitch or yaw motion prior to parachute deployment. Following deployment, however, the payload did experience some near-periodic attitude oscillations. Reference 3 states that the parachute did not achieve a steady shape during this data period, which most likely contributed to the pitch and yaw oscillations. The payload also had a high roll rate prior to deployment, but this rate decreased once the parachute was deployed and the inertia properties of the system changed. The initial gyro readings at the time of vehicle lift-off are also given in the figure. 12 Time from deployment, SK Figure 6.- Free-stream flight-path angles in pitch and yaw. r = 340.0O; re o = 85.4’. a90 , -3 -2 -I 0 I 2 3 4 5 6 Time from @kyment, set Figure 7.- Euler angles from gyro-platform data. 8g,. = -0.6~; $g,o = 0.2~; #g,o = 30.0°. 13 The results of inputting the data from figures G’and 7 into the equaxons previously discussed are presented in figures 8 and 9. Figure 8 presents a’ and p’ time histories for the nonrolling body axis system as well as a and fl for the body axis system which was rolling. As would be expected, the data all oscillate about the zero level. -The effect of the rolling motion is readily apparent. The cyclic roll appears directly on the CY and /3 data. The various roll quantities are shown in figure 9. For this figure, a l-second time period was chosen to pronounce the differences. The quantity $I was not plotted since it would have been nearly coincident with the c$’ data for this present example involving small angles. 20 - 0 I a’,@ -20 - -40L V.deg I 1 I I 1 I I 1 I 1 -3 -2 -I 0 I 2 3 4 5 6 Time from deployment, set Figure 8.- Angle-of-attack and sideslip histories. 14 5.0 5.2 5.4 5.6 5.8 6.0 Figure Time from deployment, WC 9.- Roll histories. Data from a similar parachute flight (ref. 4) were also used to determine pitch and yaw time histories. The interval chosen was one which corresponded to vertical descent of the parachute system. Pitch and yaw were also determined for this same interval by a different method (ref. 5) which made use of film data from a camera mounted near the nose of the descending payload. Pitch 8’ and yaw $J’ from both methods are presented in figure 10. In general, there is agreement between the two sets of data. The gyroplatform data appear continuous and relatively smooth, whereas the camera data are presented by data points (representing discrete film frames) and have some scatter. This result is to be expected. Errors in the gyro data would show up mainly as a shift in the zero level and would only affect the absolute values of the entire set of data. Relative values, over a half-cycle oscillation, for example, would be known to a high degree of accuracy. In contrast, each frame of the camera film is read independently; therefore, some data scatter, or noise, results. An additional observation to be made from figure 10 is that the magnitude of the camera data for both positive and negative angles appears to be greater than that of the gyro-platform data. This difference implies a calibration error in either one or both of the measuring systems. Since the camera was not originally intended to be used as a metric instrument and the gyro platform had undergone extensive calibration, it is believed that an even closer agreement between the data could have been obtained through calibration of the camera system. ACCURACY The uncertainties that arise in the determination of angles of attack and sideslip result from the uncertainties in defining the body axes and the free-stream-velocity axes. The orientation of the body axes is determined from the gyro-platform data. The errors in platform data are functions of time, accelerations applied to the vehicle, and the vehi- cle attitude. The orientation of the free-stream-velocity axes is determined from radar data and wind data. Radar errors are functions of range, elevation, and azimuth and the 15 ZU e’,deg 0 -20 - Gyro-platform data (present method) o Camera data (ref. 5) 20 S’.deg 0 -20 Figure lO.- Time histories Time from deployment, set of 8' and $' during parachute descent. time rate-of change of these parameters. Hence, an error analysis must proceed from a given flight profile, where the body motions and radar parameters are known. An unpublished detailed error analysis for an attitude-reference system like the one described in this report has been performed. For the parachute flight tests previously described, the results indicate errors in gyro pitch, yaw, and roll to be between lo and 2O for the time periods shown in figures 6 to 10. In addition to these gyro errors, there is an uncertainty of 0.25 deg/min because the earth’s rotation has not been accounted for. Radar errors have been estimated from references 3 and 4 to be approximately 0.5O in ry and rp. Hence, the calculated angles of attack and sideslip are estimated to be lmown within k.30 for the examples illustrated in this report. CONCLUDING REMARKS Equations have been derived to determine angle of attack and sideslip for both a nonrolling and rolling axis system for a flight vehicle which is radar tracked and which carries onboard a gyroscopic-attitude system. The method is limited, however, to applications where a flat, nonrotating earth may be assumed. Specifically, a pitch, yaw, roll Euler angle gyro was chosen as the example to be worked out. However, the results can easily be applied to other gyro systems if the general platform transformation is known. Sample calculations were m&de, and the results compared well with an independent method of attitude determination. Langley Research Center, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Hampton, Va., February 14, 1972. 17 I - APPENDIX CONVERSION OF RADAR DATA TO TRAJECTORY ANGLES Typically, a radar determines the position of a vehicle in flight in terms of the sla# range R, elevation angle E, and azimuth angle A from the radar site. The radar site; is located some distance (q,o,yf o) away from the launcher, where the origin of the earth? fixed axis system (Xf,Yf,Zf) is ldcated. The radar parameters and the relationship between the launcher and the radar site are shown in figure 11. ‘The components of distance (xf,yf,zf) along the earth-fixed axes between the vehicle and the origin can be obtained by transforming the radar spherical coordinates to Cartesian coordinates: xf = R cos E cos A + xfo Yf = -R cos E sin A + yf ,o f zf = R sin E West North Figure 11.- Radar parameters and relation of radar site to launcher. The components of the vehicle velocity VR in the earth-fixed axis system are found by differentiating with respect to time, Sf = -G cos E sin A + R cos E cos A - RI? sin E cos A if = -ld cos E cos A - R cos E sin A + RI? sin E sin A if = k sin E + Ri cos E 18 APPENDIX - Concluded The components of the free-stream velocity, V, in the earth-fixed ,be found by combining these last equations with the wind components, axis system can uf=%-vw,N Vf = I+ - vw,w Wf = if where Vw,~ is the wind-velocity component from the north and V,,w is the component from the west. The flight-path angles for the free-stream-velocity of these velocity components: vector are now defined in terms yY = tan-l -Vf (0 uf rp = tan -‘E/q + g,““1 The vehicle velocity, wind velocity, and resultant free-stream-velocity in figure 12 along with the flight-path angles, vector are shown - Yf West Figure 12.- Vehicle, wind, and free-stream velocities and flight-path angles. 19 1 - REFERENCES 1. McFall, John C., Jr.; and Murrow, Harold N.: Parachute Testing at Altitudes Between 30 and 90 Kilometers. J. Spacecraft Rockets (Eng. Notes), vol. 4, no. 6, June 1967, pp. 796-798. 2. Marcou, Rene J.; and Pruneau, Paul N.: Aspect of a Rocket From Gyroscopic Data. AFCRL-66-349, U.S. Air Force, 1966. (Available from DDC as AD 635 014.) 3. Preisser, John S.; and Eckstrom, Clinton V.: Flight Test of a 30-Foot-NominalDiameter Cross Parachute Deployed at a Mach Number of 1.57 and a Dynamic Pressure of 9.7 Pounds Per Square Foot. NASA TM X-1542, 1968. 4. Preisser, John S.; and Eckstrom, Clinton V.: Flight Test of a 40-Foot-NominalDiameter Disk-Gap-Band Parachute Deployed at a Mach Number of 1.91 and a Dynamic Pressure of 11.6 Pounds Per Square Foot. NASA TM X-1575, 1968. 5. Bendura, Richard J.; Henning, Allen B.; and Smith, Robert E., Jr.: Vehicle Attitude Determination With a Single Gnboard Camera. NASA TN D-4359, 1968. 20 NASA-Langley, 1972 - 27 L-7886 j NATIONAL AERONAUTICS WASHINGTON. AND SPACE ADMISTRATION D.C. 20546 OFFICIAL BUSINESS PENALTYFORPRlVATEUSEs300 FIRST CU-3-30 M=A=IIL” POSTAGE AND FEI NAT^lO_N_AL^_ _A-E.R.O.N.A.U^‘-- “The aerotzautical and space activities of the Unites States shall be conducted so as to contribute . , . to the expansion of humanknowl- edge of phenomena in the atmosphere and space. The Administration shaIl provide for the widest practicable and appropriate disreminatiofz of information concerning its activities and the results thereof.” -NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ACT OF 1958 NASA SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL PUBLICATIQN~S TECHNICAL REPORTS: Scientific and technical information considered important, complete, and a lasting contribution to existing knowledge. TECHNICAL NOTES: Information less broad in scope but nevertheless of importance as a, contribution to existing kn&&dge. TECHNICAL MEMORANDUMS: Information receiving limited distribution becauseof preliminary data, security classification, or other reasons. ? CONTRACTOR REPORTS: Siientific and technical information generated under a NASA contract or grant and considered an important contribution to existing knowledge. TECHNICAL TRANSLATIONS: Information published in a foreign language considered to merit NASA distribution in English. SPECIAL PUBLICATIONS: Information derived from or of value to NASA activities. Publications include conference proceedings, monographs, data compilations, handbooks, sourcebooks, and special bibliographies. TECHNOLOGY UTiLIZATION PUBLICATIONS: Information on t&hnology used by NASA that may be of particular interest in commercial and.other non-aerospace applications. Publications include Tech Briefs, Technology Utilization Reports and Technology Surveys. Details on the availability ot these publications may be obtained from: SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL INFORMATION OFFICE NATIONAL AERON‘AUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION Washington, D.C. ~0546