Effects of Rate Limiting Elements in Flight Control Systems -
A New PIO-Criterion
Holger Duda
Deutsche Forschungsanstalt fiir Luft- und Raumfahrt e.V
Institut fiir Flugrnechanik
Lilienthalplatz 7
D-38 108 Braunschweig
Germany
Downloaded by Indian Institute of Technology on September 22, 2012 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.1995-3204
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate and help to
understand the effects of rate saturation in flight
control systems by using the describing function
technique. The rate limiting element describing
function is calculated with the help of the Fourier
transformation. An iterative method is derived to
calculate the closed loop system describing function of
aircraft with high order flight control systems
including rate limiters. The effects of rate saturation in
closed loop systems are demonstrated by application of
the method to two characteristic aircraft systems: a
typically unstable highly augmented aircraft and the
YF-12 PIO-configuration were analysed. This leads to
a phenomenon called jump resonance, a sudden change
in aircraft system dynamics (trigger for pilot-induced
oscillations, PIO). A new PI0 criterion is proposed
considering rate limiters in flight control systems.
open loop frequency response
closed loop frequency response
closed loop frequency response from
the closed loop system input to the
rate limiter input
open loop describing function
open loop system describing function
calculated from the closed loop
system describing function
pilot gain
closed loop describing function
rate limiting element describing
function
pitch rate
commanded pitch rate
pitch rate feedback signal
maximum rate
Copyright 1995 by Holger Duda. Published by the American
Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc. with permission.
time
input amplitude
linear system 1 and 2 input signals
rate limiting element input signal
closed loop system input signal
complex Fourier coefficients
closed loop system output gignal
elevator deflection
commanded elevator deflection
pitch attitude angle
commanded pitch attitude angle
frequency
rate limiting element onset frequency
crossover frequency
closed loop rate limiting element
onset frequency
PI0 frequency
Pilot-induced oscillations (PIO) have been experienced
throughout the complete aviation's history beginning
with a mild longitudinal oscillation of the Wright Flyer
and still present in the latest aircraft with advanced
flight control systems (YF-22, JAS-39). PI0 can occur
when the pilot attempts to perform a precise control
task and can, therefore, be treated as a closed loop
instability of the pilot-aircraft system1.
For the understanding of PI0 three elements must be
considered, which can be identified from all published
PIO-cases2: the linear aircraft dynamics, the pilot
behaviour and the trigger, figure 1. In this context the
aircraft dynamics include the unaugmented aircraft, the
flight control laws, tbe sensors, actuators, notch filters,
etc.. The pilot behaviour is a factor for PI0 due to a
misadaptation to the aircraft dynamics, for example by
a too high pilot gain. The trigger can have different
forms, for example a nonlinear effect in the flight
control system or a transition in the pilot behavioural
pattern, but always causes a sudden change in the
 closed loop dynamics of the pilot-aircraft system.
Strong interactions exist between the three elements.
The central element in a PI0 is the poor aircraft
dynamics characterized mainly by a high-frequency
phase rolloff caused by time delays and filters in the
flight control system3. With the help of numerical
criteria the linear aircraft dynamics were identified as
PIO-prone for nearly all published PIO-cases, for
example YF- 164,YF-225.
The well-known theories for the analysis of PI0 only
consider linear aircraft dynamics in the frequency
domain, for example the criteria by Neal-Smith6,
Gibson7, Smith-Geddes8 and Hoh9. The consideration
of nonlinear effects in the frequency domain analysis
requires the use of the describing function technique
and is, therefore, labour-intensive. This leads to the
fact that for the numerical PI0 investigations only
linear aircraft dynamics are considered. A
representative example for this is the work on the
handling qualities assessment of the EuroFighter 2000
Downloaded by Indian Institute of Technology on September 22, 2012 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.1995-3204
prior to first flightlo.
It seems to be true that all recent PIOs have exhibited
rate saturation. Its effects are commonly described by
the words additional lag, but this does not address its
nonlinear character. Therefore, the main goal of this
paper is the investigation of the nonlinear effects of
rate saturation in flight control systems regarding pilot
induced oscillation triggering.
. .. ..
Rate J .lmitlug Element D e s c n b ~Function
A nonlinear system can be represented by a quasi-
linear system using the describing function and the
remnant". The describing function can be interpreted
as the quasi-linear frequency response for sinusoidal
inputs. The remnant is a high frequency signal, which
can be neglected if the linear part of the system has low
pass character.
The rate limiting element describing function is
derived using the onset frequency12:
In a fully developed rate limiting situation the
describing function can be calculated using the Fourier
series:
with the complex Fourier coefficients
The application of the triangle function provides the
following equation for the describing function of a rate
limiting element12
valid for
Figure 2 shows the Bode plot of the rate limiting
element describing function for an onset frequency of
1 radl sec . The transition region between no saturation
and fully developed saturation is calculated by a spline
interpolation in the frequency domain. The Bode plot
demonstrates the strong increase in phase delay and the
slight decrease in amplitude in the transition region.
. .
Closed-J . Function
Figure 3 shows two typical positions, where rate
limiters are installed in highly augmented aircraft
systems. The limiters in the aircraft stabilisation loop
have the task to protect the actuators. Otherwise the oil
supply could break down with the resuh of a system
failure. The limiters in the forward path of the flight
control system are installed to protect the system
against too high input rates by the pilot preventing a
saturation of rate limiters in the aircraft stabilisation
loop. This is particularly important for unstable highly
augmented aircraft.
A PI0 analysis requires the closed loop describing
function of the pilot-aircraft system. Hence, the forward
path limiters are also involved in a closed loop.
For the calculation of the closed loop system describing
function including rate limiters the usual equation for
the calculation of the closed loop frequency response is
not valid:
Therefore, an iterative method has been derived to
determine the closed loop system describing function
N,( j w , % ) for the generalised system in figure 412.
The two different rate limiter positions (figure 3) can
be considered in the analysis:
A. limiters in the forward path:
linear system L1 includes the pilot model and
feel system dynamics.
linear system L2 includes the complete aircraft
system dynamics.
B. limiters in the aircraft stabilisation loop:
linear system L1 includes the dynamics of the
feedback path.
 linear system L2 includes the actuator and basic
aircraft dynamics.
The method is verified by means of a comparison with
the results of nonlinear simulations in time domain12.
Graham and McRuerl' also demonstrated a
semigraphical method for the calculation of the closed
loop describing function of simple systems. For a
saturating amplifier they identified an effect called
jump resonance.
The describing function of the rate limiter is dependent
on the onset frequency won,,,, Eq. (1). This frequency
will further be called local onset frequency of the rate
limiter. The closed loop onset frequency i3,,,,, is
dependent on the input amplitude of the closed loop
system u,,, the local onset frequency won,,, and the
Downloaded by Indian Institute of Technology on September 22, 2012 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.1995-3204
frequency response of the linear closed loop system
from the input of the closed loop system to the input of
the rate limiter F,: (jh,,,,):
The calculation of 6on,,, means the determination of
the intersection of the amplitude of F.~(jhonrc,) and a
straight line with a slope of 20 dBIdecade, which
crosses the 0-dB line at the local onset frequency worn,,,
in a Bode plot.
Two characteristic aircraft systems are chosen to
demonstrate the effects of rate saturation on handling
qualities. The results are discussed using the Nichols
charts of the open loop system. For this purpose the
open loop system describing function No,,,( jw,uo) is
calculated from the closed loop system describing
function N, (jw, u,) using the following equation:
This open loop system describing function includes the
nonlinear effects due to loop closure.
Figure 5A shows the idealised structure of a typically
unstable highly augmented aircraft system. It has to be
recognised that real flight control systems can contain
additional feedback loops (AoA, load factor) and
control surfaces (canards, inboard and outboard flaps).
However, this simple model is suitable to demonstrate
the nonlinear effects due to rate saturation. In the
following investigations a maximum rate of
R = 60°/sec and a pilot input amplitude of 100% are
assumed.
The determination of the closed loop onset frequency
bi,, for this system is shown in figure 6. The system
becomes rate saturated at a frequency of approximately
5.1 radlsec for those specified conditions. It is obvious
that for a higher maximum rate or lower input
amplitude this frequency is increased. The calculation
of the describing function can be splitted into two parts:
below the closed loop onset frequency the closed loop
describing function is equal to the closed loop
frequency response; above this frequency the describing
function has to be calculated using the described
method.
Figure 7 shows the Nichols chart of the describing
function and the linear frequency response. A dramatic
phase jump can be identified at the onset of the rate
limiter. This is the same phenomenon as the jump
resonance described by Graham1'. The phase jump has
the effect thaT the describing function curve gets close
to the critical point in the Nichols chart (-180°,0 dB).
This indicates the potential for an instability, which
can be verif~ed by a nonlinear simulation in time
domain. For this purpose the system is stimulated by a
sinusoidal input signal with a frequency jumping from
4 to 6 radl sec including the closed' loop onset
frequency.
Figure 8 shows the input signal and the time responses
of the nonlinear and linear simulations: after 3.14
seconds the rate limiter is activated because of the
increased frequency. Although the demanded rate is
only minimal higher than the maximum rate of the
limiter the rate saturation leads to an instability of the
closed loop system, as it was indicated by the frequency
domain investigation. Therefore, the describing
function technique has been demonstrated as a valid
tool for stability analysis of rate saturated systems.
The YF- 12 aircraft was the prototype of the delta-wing,
high Mach number aircraft SR-71. During aerial
refuelling two types of longitudinal PIOs were
reported13. The first type is a high frequency small-
amplitude PI0 (0, 2 lHz). It is characterized by a
bobbling motion at the cockpit caused by the flexible
modes of the aircraft (pitch bobble). The second type of
-
PI0 experienced is associated with large amplitudes
and rate saturation (w,, 3 to 4 radl sec).
The handling qualities parameters evaluated from the
linear system dynamics including the bending mode in
terms of the commonly used criteria are presented in
table 1.

criterion parameter level
Smith- w, =4.8 radlsec, 2 signal with increasing frequency from 2.8 to 4 radlsec:
Geddes
Q(w,) = -137 deg
d@ / dw(o,, ) = -78 deg / Hz 1 commanded pitch attitude angle was set to zero after
Gibson
Neal- A,, = 2.5 dB, Q, = 28 deg 112
Smith
Table 1: Evaluated criteria for the YF-12 PIO-
configuration
Hence, no PI0 is predicted on basis of the linear
Downloaded by Indian Institute of Technology on September 22, 2012 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.1995-3204
aircraft dynamics. To explain the in-flight PI0
occurrence the nonlinear effects due to rate saturation
have to be considered. Figure 5B shows the simplified
flight control system for the following describing
function analysis. The system contains a rate and
position limited pitch damper. In the following analysis
a maximum rate of R = 15Olsec and an input
amplitude of 6, = 5.73 deg are assumed. The position
limiting is not considered.
The Nichols chart of the describing function and the
linear frequency response is shown in figure 9. A
strong phase jump with the consequence of a sudden
change in system dynamics can be observed. The phase
angle does not reach -180°, therefore, the stability of
the closed loop aircraft system is not endangered as in
example A. However, this does not mean that the
stability of the closed loop pilot-aircraft system is
secure. A PI0 is always characterized by a stable
aircraft system and a misadaptation of the pilot to the
aircraft dynamics.
Figure 10 shows the Nichols chart of the describing
function and the linear frequency response of the pilot-
aircraft system of figure 5B. A crossover frequency of
approximately 4.1 radl sec is used to determine the
gain of the synchronous pilot model K,. This is a
realistic value for a high gain task (aerial refuelling)
and it is consistent with the recorded PIO-frequency of
approximately 3 to 4 rad/sec13.Physically, it means that
the pilot has adapted himself to the linear aircraft
dynamics. This leads to a strong misadaptation of the
pilot after the sudden change in system dynamics due
to rate saturation as demonstrated in figure 10: the
describing function reaches the critical point in the
Nichols chart (-180°,0 dB), which means an
instability of the closed loop pilot-aircraft system.
This effect can be demonstrated by time domain
investigations using an input signal with increasing
frequency. Figure 11 shows the time histories of the
pilot aircraft system (w, = 4.1 radlsec). The time
histories on the left side demonstrate the tracking
performance without rate saturation. The destabilising
effects of rate saturation are demonstrated by means of
a stimulation of the pilot-aircraft system by an input
a severe pilot induced oscillation builds up and persists
during the rest of the simulation interval although the
six seconds of simulation time.
Hence, it follows that the applied describing function
analysis predicts the possibility of PI0 appearance in
flight.
The describing function technique has proven as a
suitable tool to show the dramatic effects of rate
saturation in flight control systems on closed loop
system dynamics. Jump resonances in a closed loop
Bode plot or phase jumps in a Nichols chart can be
observed. These effects can lead to the loss of stability
of the aircraft (example A) or the pilot-aircraft system
(example B). Further investigations have shown that
the main parameter for the stability of a rate saturated
closed loop system is the location of the onset point in
the Nichols chart12. The primary effect caused by the
activation of a rate limiter is a strong inpease in phase
delay and a slight decrease in amplitude (figure 2). If
the onset point is located above 0 db the phase delay
causes an increase in the closed loop amplitude, figure
12. This increase in amplitude provokes a stronger rate
saturation and, therefore, a further increasing phase
delay. This mechanism can lead to a closed loop
instability. For an onset point located clearly below
0 db the increasing phase delay does not cause an
increase in closed loop amplitude, so the rate limiting
effects are less dramatic.
For that reason several configurations with different
locations of the onset point in the Nichols chart were
investigated12. The results show that even unstable
highly augmented aircraft systems remain stable during
rate saturation, if the onset point is located clearly
below 0 db. But in order to achieve this condition a
very large maximum rate is required for systems with
high feedback gain. The investigations have lead to the
suggestion of a new handling qualities criterion with
respect to the consideration of rate saturation in flight
control systems12, figure 13. For its application the
following rules have to be considered:
1. Determination of the closed loop onset frequency
using Eq. (7).
2. Calculation of the open loop frequency response at
the closed loop onset frequency F,(j&,,,,) and division
into amplitude and phase (onset point).
3. Plotting of the onset point on the criterion graph in
figure 13 and comparison with the proposed limit.
 The proposed limit has been verified by evaluation of
several configurations with different onset points in the
Nichols chart for systems with rate limiters in the
aircraft stabilisation loop12. It has to be considered that
the YF-12 case, which lies in the unstable region, only
becomes unstable with the pilot in the closed loop.
The criterion can also be applied for systems with rate
limiters in the forward path (figure 3) in connection
with pilot in the loop analysis. For this case more
numeric calculations and experiments are required to
confirm the proposed limit.
The effects of rate saturation in flight control systems
have been analysed using the describing function
technique. Two characteristic examples are used to
Downloaded by Indian Institute of Technology on September 22, 2012 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.1995-3204
demonstrate sudden changes in closed loop system
dynamics (jump resonance). This phenomenon can lead
to a strong instability of the closed loop system, which
is demonstrated for a typical highly augmented aircraft
system. The well documented YF-12 PI0 can also be
explained by a sudden change in closed loop system
dynamics caused by rate saturation, which leads to a
strong misadaptation of the pilot.
Therefore, it is recommended that the rate limiters
should be included in the handling qualities assessment
of new aircraft. A new PI0 criterion is proposed
regarding the onset point of the limiter in a Nichols
chart. The use of the criterion requires no describing
function technique. Several configurations with
different onset points in the Nichols chart have been
used to verify the criterion, but in-flight or ground
based simulations are required to confirm the proposed
limit.
Rate limiting in flight control systems is not avoidable,
but its effects can be reduced by the use of low gain
flight control systems without an increase of the
maximum rate. The goal is to move the rate limiting
onset point clearly below 0 db in the Nichols chart.
Further investigations in this area are required.
References
1. Ashkenas, I.L., Jex, H.R., McRuer, D.T., "Pilot-
Induced Oscillations: Their Cause and Analysis",
NORAIR Report No. NOR-64- 143,1964
2. McRuer, D.T., "Human Dynamics and Pilot-
Induced Oscillations", The Massachusetts Institute
of Technology, 1992
3. Mitchell, D.G., Hoh, R.H., Aponso, B.L. Klyde,
D.H., "The Measurement and Prediction of Pilot-
In-The-Loop Oscillations", AIAA-Paper 94-3670,
1994
Smith, J.W., "Analysis of a Lateral Pilot-Induced
Oscillation Experienced on the First Flight of the
YF-16 Aircraft", NASA TM 72867, Edwards,
California, 1979
Dornheim, M.A., "Report Pinpoints Factors lea-
ding to YF-22 Crash", AVIATION WEEK &
SPACE TECHNOLOGY, Vol. 137, No. 19, pp.
53-54
Neal, T.P., Smith, R.E., "A Flying Qualities Cri-
terion for Design of Fighter Flight-Control Sy-
stems", AIAA Paper 70-927, 1971
Gibson, J.C., "The Development of Alternate
Criteria for FBW Handling Qualities", AGARD-
CP-508, 1990
Smith, R.H., "Notes on Lateral-Directional Pilot
Induced Oscillations", AFWAL-TR-8 1-3090, 1982
Hoh, R.E., Hodgkinson, J., "Bandwidth - A
Criterion for Highly Augmented Airplanes",
AGARD-CP-333,1982
1
Marchand, M., Koehler, R., Duda, H., Buchacker,
E., Elbel, K., "EFA Flying Qualities Specification
And Its Utilisation", AGARD-CP-54& 1993
Graham, D., McRuer, D., "Analysis of Nonlinear
Control Systems", New York, London: John Wiley
& Sons, Inc., 1961
Duda, H., "Frequency Domain Analysis of Rate
Limiting Elements in Flight Control Systems",
DLR-FB 94-16, Braunschweig, 1994 (in German)
Smith, J.W., Berry, D.T., "Analysis of
Longitudinal Pilot Induced Oscillation Tendencies
of the YF-12 Aircraft", NASA TND-7900,
Edwards, California, 1975
 linear

Fig. 1: Three elements of a P I 0

no saturation transition fully developed

0
Downloaded by Indian Institute of Technology on September 22, 2012 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.1995-3204

Amplitude
[dB1
-10-

1 10
frequency [radlsec]
Fig. 2: Rate limiting element describing function

4- sensors +
Fig. 3: Typical implementation of rate limiters in flight control systems

4
"nc
LI "* A L2 -, Ync

linear system rate limiter linear system

Fig. 4: General system for closed loop describing function analysis

 -*-
A. Typically unstable highly augmented aircraft:

5.21(-57.36)
(4.26)
(.55) qc
- 11 -10.524(1.562)(.038)(0.)
13.68
(.442,22.85)
(1.16)
(0.) (212.,088)(3.75)(-1.44)
forward gain control laws rate limiter aircraft
I I

B. YF-12, pilot in the loop (without bending mode):

- --
Downloaded by Indian Institute of Technology on September 22, 2012 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.1995-3204

@C 6, = q c I1c 1.0067.50.551 q -6.0(.8) q 1 . 0

-
7KP
+r 705.6 (.638,39.6)
(33.9)
(33.9) Y,375.2.0)
L

(0.)
w

pilot gain gain actuators aircraft

I A=
position limiter
-+ rate limiter
+-
(4.0)
,375(8.0)

pitch damper

where [& 01 = (s2+ 2 o s + m2),(s) = (S + a)

Fig. 5: System structure of the examples

Amplitude

5.1
frequency [radls] 02
Fig. 6: Determination of the closed loop onset frequency, system A
Downloaded by Indian Institute of Technology on September 22, 2012 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.1995-3204

Fig. 7: Nichols chart of aircraft stabilisation loop, system A

linear Simulation:
I I I I I I

simulation with rate limiter:

Fig. 8: Time domain analysis, system A

 I ------
Describing function
Frequency response ... .,
101-* Onset point ...-
.... .

Amplitude
Downloaded by Indian Institute of Technology on September 22, 2012 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.1995-3204

Phase [deg]
Fig. 9: Nichols chart of aircraft stabilisation loop, system B (YF-12)

Open Loop Frequency Response and Describing Function Pilot Aircraft 0/0,
151
------
I I

Describing function
Frequency response
10 - Crossover frequenc
Amplitude
[dB1
5-

0
,
I
L
I
I
I
h
,I
.
/7

-1 50 -100 -50
Phase [deg]
Fig. 10: Nichols chart of pilot-aircraft loop, system B (YF-12)
 5
- 8 [deg] - - Q, [deg]
I

-5 1 I
10 6, [deg] I

-101 I
10 - q, [deglsec] -- q,,~, [deglsec]
I

0 5 10 15
Downloaded by Indian Institute of Technology on September 22, 2012 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.1995-3204

t [secs] t [secs]

a) frequency constant at 2.8 radlsec b) increasing frequency from 2.8 to 4 radlsec

Fig. 11: Time domain investigations of the pilot-aircraft loop, system B (YF-12)

Amplitude
[dB1
15

-200 -1 80 -160 -140 -120

Phase [deg]
Fig. 12: Initial effects after rate limiting onset
 10 System stable 1 db 0.1 db
Amplitude Svstem unstabl .. .
:

[dB1
5

0
Downloaded by Indian Institute of Technology on September 22, 2012 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.1995-3204

-5

-10

-200 -180 -160 -140 -120 -100 -80

Phase [deg]

Fig. 13: Proposed P I 0 criterion12