Modelling of Flight Control Hydraulic Actuators

Considering Real System Effects

Ashok Joshi*
Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay, Powai, Mumbai, 400 076, India

The study investigates the effects of servo valve nonlinearity, actuation compliance
and friction related nonlinearity on the dynamics of a flight control surface, during its
deployment through an electro-hydraulic actuation system. Starting from the pilot
command, a realistic model of the electro-hydraulic actuation system is evolved, which
includes the command lags, servo valve nonlinearity, actuation chain compliance and
friction nonlinearity. A realistic mathematical model for the control surface motion, under
the action of the actuator forces and the aerodynamic and inertia forces is postulated, using
subsonic incompressible aerodynamics. The above mathematical model is first verified, by
carrying out subsystem level simulation wherein effects of servo valve nonlinearity,
compliance and friction nonlinearity are studied separately. Next, the combined influence of
some of these effects on the resultant control surface response is obtained. Particular
attention is paid to the control surface motion during the deployment that can influence the
close loop control of the rigid body dynamics. Simulation results show that while friction
reduces both transient as well as steady state magnitude of the actuation rate, the
compliance influences only the transient response of the actuation rate. The study also
provides a methodology for evolving an approximate analytical transfer function in terms of
the real system parameters so as to become applicable to a large class of actuation systems.

I. Introduction
It is well known that aerodynamic control surfaces are deployed in aerospace vehicles for generating
control forces and moments. In general, the commands issued for this purpose activate an actuation system, which
carries out the task of control surface deployment through a series of actions. In case of electro-hydraulic actuation
system1, hydraulic power, in conjunction with a servo valve, is used to generate the requisite forces and the motion.
The desired motion is achieved through a closed loop feedback control system that senses the actual deflection and
corrects it until the desired position is reached. In recent times, there has been a trend towards designing higher
agility aerospace vehicles resulting in larger bandwidths, as well as higher actuation rates, of actuation systems.
Such systems require an analysis that takes into account real system effects e.g. system operating pressure, apart
from compliances of the complete actuation chain, pilot command shapers and nonlinearities corresponding to servo
valve and Coulomb’s friction. In literature, the problem of modelling the dynamics of hydraulic servo systems has
been addressed adequately2,3, including the various nonlinearities that are present in such systems. However, when
dealing with flight control system analysis and design, the actuator system dynamics is usually approximated as a
linear, time invariant, first (or at the most second) order system4. It is found that while such actuator models are
sufficient for moderate actuation rate systems, there are no studies that bring out the adequacy of such models for
higher control rate actuation, which can result from using higher system pressures. In addition, when compliances
and nonlinearities are present, the performance of the real system is likely to be significantly different from the one
that is brought out from simplified simulations. The present study attempts to arrive at actuator models that need to
be used for high performance control systems. The study formulates the general flight control actuation problem,
using electro-hydraulic actuation system, which includes some of the important real system effects. A parametric
study is carried out to understand the influence of specific parameters of actuation system, including system
pressure, actuation compliances and nonlinearities, on the control surface excitation, as system actuation rate is
increased. Results are obtained for a set of non-dimensional parameters so that generic trends can be arrived at.

______________________________________________
*
Professor, Department of Aerospace Engineering, Member AIAA

1
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 II. Problem Formulation
Figure 1 below shows the schematic description of the flight control system, based on electro-hydraulic
actuation mechanism.

Control Surface
δe
U∞

Engine y(t)

S
Pump δc
E
R
V
O

Figure 1. Schematic of a generic flight control system

It is seen that there are three sub-systems namely; (1) the pilot station, (2) hydraulic servo-system and (3)
control surface that interact with each other, in order to perform the overall control task. In the following sub-
sections, the formulation details of these sub-systems are described.

A. Pilot Command through Servo Amplifier

The control action is initiated at the pilot station (human, auto or remote) by giving a suitable command, to
a servo amplifier, which represents the desired position of a specific control surface. The servo amplifier sets the
overall system gain and passes the command through a command shaper, whose output is a demand on the
movement of a spool valve. The command shaper can be represented as a standard first order lag system, which
achieves the desired command time history. Further, it is found that it takes a finite time for the commanded servo
valve current to reach its commanded value and this is represented as another first order lag, in cascade with the
command shaper. This is shown schematically below in figure 2.

+ e is yv xv
1/(τ1τ2s2 + (τ1+τ2)s + 1)
- A
δc
-
δe

Figure 2. Conversion of pilot command to servo valve opening

The command shaper, in cascade with lag of the electrical system, is shown in figure 2 as a second order
transfer function, which influences the specific time history of spool valve position xv. In general, the command
shaper lag is an order of magnitude higher than the lag of the cascaded electrical system, resulting in a
predominantly first order behaviour. In addition, the pilot command is converted into a servo valve current (see
figure 2) which results in the commanded position of the servo valve. It is found that, for small values of current, the
valve-opening curve has one slope while, for larger command currents, the curve has another, and smaller, slope3.
This is shown by the bi-linear behaviour of the current is and valve opening xv as shown graphically by the block
after the second order lag in figure 2. It can be seen that for commands that require a larger displacement of spool
valve, the bilinear behaviour is expected to introduce additional delay in the system, in comparison to a linear model
of the spool valve.

2
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
B. Hydraulic Servo Valve
Servo valve is the device that converts commanded spool valve position (xv) into a force (F) and motion (y)
at the load end. In literature4,5, 4-way zero overlap spool valve is considered as the best option for high precision
actuation, whose action, briefly, is as follows. The servo valve opening connects the high- pressure supply to one
side of valve and connects low pressure (or exhaust) to the other end. This causes flow to enter one side of Jack, and
after a pressure drop, to exit from the other end. This creates a pressure difference across the piston area, resulting in
a force in the direction of the flow. The basic flow equations for the valve, assuming valve openings to be ideal
orifices and fluid to be compressible, are as given below3.

K q x v = q v + K c Pm (1)
qv = 2 Ap (dy/dt) + (Vt/4 β) (dPm/dt) (2)

Here, Kq is the flow rate gain (m2/s), Kc is the pressure gain (m3/sec-bar), Pm is the differential pressure
(bars; 1 bar = 105 N/m2), Ap is the piston area (m2), y(t) is the displacement of the jack (m), Vt is the total cylinder
volume (m3) and β is the bulk modulus of the fluid used (bars). It should be noted that Kq & Kc are nonlinear
functions of the system pressure Ps and for a standard fluid (density ≅ 870 Kgs./m3) flow of turbulent type, are given
as,

Kq = 6.7 π d (Ps)1/2 (3)

Kc = 3.35 π xv d / (Ps)1/2 (4)

Here, d is the servo valve spool diameter (m), Ps is hydraulic system pressure (bars), qv is volume flow rate
(m3/sec) and xv is the commanded valve displacement (m). It can be seen that Kc depends on xv and hence represents
a time varying effect, which needs to be studied.

xv + Pm y(t)
Kq 1/Kc G(s)
-
qv (Vt/4β) s

+ ++
2Ap s
+

Figure 3. Schematic of servo valve operation

Figure 3 above shows the schematic of the servo valve operation, as described by equations (1-4). It should
be noted here that unknown transfer function, G(s), converts differential pressure Pm into the motion of the Jack-
control surface assembly, y(t) and is a function of actuator & control surface related forces, as described in next
section.

C. Actuator Load Model

The load on the servo actuator consists of; (1) external aerodynamic reactions from control surface, (2)
elastic forces due to actuator & joint compliances, (3) inertia forces from the jack and the control surface, (4)
viscous forces and (5) dry friction forces. In the present study two-dimensional subsonic incompressible
aerodynamic model is used to represent the aerodynamic forces that act on the control surface. The applicable
expressions for these forces are as given below.
Faerodynamic = (Cmδ Q S c / xh ) δe (5)
Finertia = (Mj xh + Ic / xh) d2δe/dt2 (6)
Ffriction = sign(d δe / dt) Fcmax (7)
Fviscous = B xh dδe / dt (8)

3
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 Here, Cmδ is the control surface hinge moment derivative, Q is the flight dynamic pressure (bars), S is the
reference surface area (m2), c is the reference chord (m), xh is offset of actuator connection point on the control
surface from its hinge line (m), Mj is the effective mass of the actuator jack (Kgs.), Ic is control surface moment of
inertia about hinge line (Kg.-m2), Fcmax is the dry friction force (N), B is the viscous force coefficient (N-sec/m)
and δe is control surface deflection (rad). The equilibrium of above reaction forces, with the force generated by the
actuator, is shown in figure 4 schematically.

To Servo Valve Jack

η
- δe
Pm
Ap 1/αs 1/s xh
+ -
-
Fc

To Pilot Station

Figure 4. Actuator force equilibrium

Here, the feedback block represents the non-linear effect of dry friction, whose magnitude remains
constant, but direction changes depending upon the direction of motion. Terms α, η & φ are given as,

α = (Mj xh + Ic / xh) (9)

η = B xh (10)
φ = (Cmδ Q S c / xh ) (11)

It may be mentioned here that application of actuator force on the control surface is assumed to have
negligible influence on the main lifting surface. In addition, Fc is magnitude of Coulomb’s friction force, whose
direction depends on the direction of the Jack velocity.

III. Numerical Simulations

The present section provides the influence of a few of the parameters, of the generic model of an electro-
hydraulic actuator system, on the load time histories of the control surface forces. Initially, the simulations are
performed at the sub-system level, in order to verify and validate the mathematical model, after which, a few
combinations are also studied.

A. Pilot Sub-system Simulation

In the present analysis, pilot is assumed to apply a step input to the actuation system, which is modulated
by the command shaper. This is further, influenced by the time constant of the electrical servo system. Figure 5
below shows the relative importance of parameter τ2/τ1 on the commanded spool valve displacement. It is seen from
figure 5 that the effect of τ2 on the overall response is to further slow down the opening of the spool valve and this
can be effectively captured by a single time constant τ1. Thus, in the further analysis, the second order system,
described in figure 2, is simplified as a first order system with τ1 treated as the effective total system time constant.
Similarly, figure 6 given below shows the influence of this effective command shaper time constant on the time
history of the servo valve input. It can be seen from the above figure that, while values of τ1 less than 0.2 seconds
open the servo valve fully within 1 second, values of τ1 more than 5 seconds open the servo valve fully, only after
15 seconds. Therefore, a shaper system with an effective time constant between 0.2-5.0 seconds can meet speed
requirements of most practical hydraulic systems.

4
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 Tim e Cons tant Ratios V ary ing from 0.2 to 1.0

1.2

Norm aliz ed V alve P os ition, (x /A )

1
v

0.8

0.6

Decreasing τ2/τ1
0.4

0.2

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6
Tim e, in s ec onds

Figure 5. Effect of different time constant ratios on normalized servo valve position

S haper Tim e Constants V arying from 0.01 to 20 seconds

1
Norm alized V alve P os ition, (x /A)
v

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2
Increasing τ1

0
0 5 10 15
Tim e, in seconds

Figure 6 Effect of command shaper time constant on normalized servo valve position

Lastly, figure 7 shows the effect of bi-linear nonlinearity of the servo valve (i.e. ratio of the slope of the
second segment with respect to the first segment) on the response of the servo valve opening and it can be seen that
for mild nonlinearity, the transient response is similar to the corresponding linear system, but the steady state value
becomes a function of the bilinear slope ratio. In case of the bi-linear factor being 0.6 or lower, the transient
response also shows the effect of the non-linearity in the servo valve opening.

5
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 1.2 B ilinear S lope Fac tor V ary ing from 1.0 to 0.6

Norm aliz ed V alve P os ition, (x /A )

1

v
0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2 Decreasing Bi-linear Slope Factor

0
0 0.5 1 1.5
Tim e, in s ec onds

Figure 7. Effect of bi-linear slope factor on normalized servo valve position

B. Servo Valve Sub-system Simulation

It can be seen from figure 3 that servo valve input translates into a force at the actuator Jack. In practice,
this force is resisted by aerodynamic, inertia and friction forces present in the system, resulting in control surface
response δe(t) of the loaded actuator. However, it is possible to derive a lot of understanding about actuator
behaviour even under the condition of no external load. In this sub-section, simulations are carried out for studying
the influence of system pressure, Ps and hydraulic fluid compressibility factor β, while considering only the jack
inertia as G(s). Thus, a simplification of the block diagram, given in figure 3, is carried out and a transfer function
between y and xv is obtained. It is found that above transfer function is of third order and type 1 so that steady state
error does not become zero for both step and ramp inputs. Instead, it is possible to investigate the transfer function
between dy/dt and xv, which is as follows.

{sy/xv}=(Kq/Ap) / [(Vt Mj/(4β Ap2)s2 + {(Mj Kc)/Ap2}s + 1] (12)

The natural frequency and damping factor from above transfer function can be derived as,

ωn2 = ( 4 Ap2 β) / (Mj Vt) (13)

ξ = (Kc / Ap) √ (β Mj / 2Vt) (14)

It is seen from above two equations that system natural frequency is independent of the system pressure and
depends only on the piston area, cylinder volume fluid bulk modulus and mass of the Jack. However, damping factor
additionally depends on the system pressure as well as on valve opening (through gain Kc) and represents a variable
coefficient of servo valve dynamics. Further, it can be shown that steady state unit step response of the above
transfer function is,

(dy/dt)ss = 6.7 π d √(Ps / β) / Ap (15)

It is found that actuation rate increases with increase in system pressure or decrease in bulk modulus.
Similarly, when the transfer function between the differential pressure and servo valve movement is considered, it is
found that there is a zero at the origin, which ensures zero steady state for a step input in xv. In this case, it is more
appropriate to consider ramp input for xv, which can be studied through the following transfer function.

6
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 {Pm/sxv}=Kq / {(Vt /4β)s2+(Kc)s+2Ap2/Mj} (16)

The steady state output for differential pressure, for a unit step in dxv/dt, can be shown to be,

(Pm)ss = 6.7 π d Mj √Ps / (2 Ap2) (17)

It is seen from the above relation that steady state differential pressure increases with increase in system
pressure and mass of the Jack. This indicates that a higher load demands a larger pressure drop and, consequently, a
higher flow rate from servo valve. A parametric study is carried out for understanding the transient response of the
valve system, using the transfer functions described by equations (12) and (16), by defining a group of parameters as
follows.

Ps = Ps / β (18)
Vt = Vt / (26.8 π d2 √β) (19)
 Mj = 6.7 Mj π d2 / (2 Ap2 √β) (20)

Results are obtained for unit step response in case of actuation rate parameter and unit ramp response in
case of differential pressure parameter, using sample data for a generic hydraulic system given in Appendix. With
regard to the treatment of time varying damping term; in the case of actuation rate simulation, valve opening is
given as a constant step of 1 mm so that a constant damping term is calculated using this value of xv. This renders
the sub-system transfer function as time-invariant (see Appendix for details) and results of simulation are compared
with the results of a time varying simulation of the same problem, to establish the adequacy of the model, using
SIMULINK. In case of simulation for Pm, only the time varying simulation for a ramp input is carried out. Figures
8-10 provide results for these cases. Figure 8 provides the Bode’ plots for the actuation rate which appears as a first
order lag for low values of system pressure and becomes an under-damped second order system for higher values.
B ode Diagram s

60

40

20
P has e (deg); M agnitude (dB )

0
Increasing Ps

-20

-50

-100
Increasing Ps
-150

-200
0 1 2
10 10 10

Frequency (rad/s ec )

Figure 8. Effect of system pressure Ps on the frequency response of actuation rate parameter

It is seen from figures 9 and 10 given below that both the servo valve actuation rate and the differential
pressure increase with increase in the system pressure. However, it is also seen that in both these cases, the system
damping, arising from flow related effects, reduces with increase in system pressure, resulting in larger peak
overshoot as well as longer settling time. However, these results are without taking into account the viscous
damping of the fluid, which would reduce both peak overshoot and settling time even at higher system pressures.

7
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 150

S y s tem P res s ure vary ing from 100 to 500 bars

A c tuation Rate, dy/dt, in m m /s ec.

100

50

Increasing Ps
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Tim e, in s ec onds

Figure 9. Unit Step response of actuator rate as a function of system pressure

60

50 S y s tem P res s ure vary ing from 100 to 500 bars

Differential P res s ure, P , in bars

40
m

30

20

10
Increasing Ps

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Tim e, in s ec onds

Figure 10. Unit ramp response of differential pressure as a function of system pressure

C. Control Surface Motion Simulation

It can be seen from figure 4 that control surface deflection dynamics depends on the both force and motion
equilibrium inasmuch as that Pm results in y(t) (or δe(t)) which in turn, effects the value of Pm itself, as brought out
in figure 3. Therefore, load simulation cannot be done in isolation, but needs to be coupled to the servo valve
subsystem. In the present case, the simulation is divided into two parts. In the first part, the effect of aerodynamic
load and the inertia load is included in the analysis and this is achieved by combining figures 3 and 4 into a single
block diagram, as shown in figure 11 below.

8
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 Pm y(t)
xv + 1/Kc Ap/(αs2+φ)
Kq
-
qy(t)
v
(Vt/4β) s

+
2Ap s
+

Figure11. Combined servo valve-control surface dynamic model

It can be seen from above figure that, similar to sub-section III.B, it is possible to obtain the effect of
system pressure on the control surface deflection rate ((dy/dt)/xh), However, in addition to Jack inertia, only the
aerodynamic reaction is included as this constitutes significant reaction force from the control surface. Figure 12
below presents these results.

16

14 A ero. Load C ons tant vary ing from 10 to 100

Increasing Aero. Load

A c tuation Rate, dy /dt, in m m /s ec .

12
Increasing Aero. Load Constant
10

Fig. 12 Effect of Aerodynamic Load on the Actuation Rate Response

8

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Tim e, in s ec onds

Figure12. Actuation rate response subject to aerodynamic loading

It is seen from above the plot that there is a drastic reduction in the actuation rate, in the presence of
aerodynamic load and that the frequency of oscillations of the servo system is now controlled by the aerodynamic
stiffness term. The above plot is obtained for the highest system pressure of 600 bars, which shows that a higher
system pressure is essential to achieve reasonable actuation rates, because the aerodynamic forces significantly
reduce the actuation rates. In the second part, the nonlinearity arising from Coulomb’s friction is also included,
which modifies the sub-system given in figure 11 and is described in figure 13 below. It can be seen from figure 13
that Coulomb’s friction term modifies the overall load time history, by adding a nonlinear damping term in the
actuator model. In practice, this term can arise at various hinges and surfaces that slide over each other and in the
present study a combined single friction parameter is included and these results are presented in figure 14 given
below.

9
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 Pm y(t)
xv + 1/Kc + Ap/(αs2+φ)
Kq
- -
q
y(t)
v s
(Vt/4β) s
Fc

+
2Ap s
+

Figure 13. Combined servo valve-Coulomb’s friction model of actuator

1.8

1.6 Coulom b Friction P aram eter V arying from 0 to 10000

1.4
Increasing Coulomb Friction Factor
A ctuation Rate, dy/dt, in m m /sec

1.2

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Tim e, in seconds

Figure 14. Effect of Coulomb’s friction on the actuation rate response

It is clearly seen that as friction factor increases, the actuation rate settles earlier, which is advantageous.
However, it is also seen that with increase in friction factor, the steady state magnitude of the actuation rate also
reduces, which indicates slowing down of the overall actuation system.

D. Actuator Compliance Simulation

In the presence of compliance of the actuation chain, actual displacement of control surface is different
from the displacement of the actuator Jack. In a simple, but adequate, manner, this compliance can be linked to the
overall force equilibrium between the pressure force Pm and the aerodynamic, inertia and damping forces generated
by control surface (equations 5-8). In such a case, the control surface motion ye can be related to Jack motion y, as,

ye(t) = y(t) – Ap Pm / Ke (21)

Here, Ke is the equivalent spring stiffness. Figure 15 shows actuation chain, with compliance. It can be seen
from this block diagram that actuator motion y(t) gets reduced by an amount which is directly proportional to both
the differential pressure and the piston area and is inversely proportional to the effective compliance.

10
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 ye(t)

Ap/Ke - +

xv + Pm 1/Kc Ap/(αs2+φ)
Kq
y(t)
-
y(t)
qv
(Vt/4β) s

+
+ 2Ap s

Figure 15. Combined servo valve-control surface dynamic model including compliance

However, while the effect of higher differential pressure (resulting from higher system pressure) and piston
area is nearly of the same type for both y(t) and ye(t), the compliance Ke effects only the elastic reduction ye(t).
Figure 16 below brings out the effect of actuator compliance on the effective actuation rate and it is seen from the
figure that with a small increase in compliance, there is significant reduction in the rate amplitude but the steady
state value remains unaltered. This is so because the elastic compression due to compliance is a result of the inertia
force, which goes to zero in the steady state, resulting in no change in the steady state actuation rate. It may be noted
here that at present, effect of viscous damping has been ignored.

1.8

1.6
Actuator Com pliance Varying from 0 to 0.00001
E ffective A ctuator Rate, dy /dt, in m m /s ec

1.4

1.2 Compliance=0.00001
e

0.8

0.6

0.4
Compliance=0
0.2

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6
Tim e, in seconds

Figure 16. Effect of compliance on rate of actuation response

E. Approximate Transfer Function Generation

The results presented in previous sub-sections have clearly brought out the fact that each of the real system
effects considered in the present paper influence a specific part of the overall actuation rate transfer function. A
simple, yet effective, way of including these in the applicable transfer function is to identify equivalent linearized
form of these real system effects.

11
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 For example, it is seen from figure 7 that steady state spool valve position can be linearly related to the
value of the ratio of the bi-linear slopes such that it appears as a gain term in the transfer function. In addition, this
slope also influences the system time constant so that command shaper time constant can be modified to take into
account the effect of the spool valve positioning nonlinearity. Similarly, it is seen from figure 14 that Coulomb’s
friction factor has direct relation with the steady state actuation rate as well as that it increases the damping factor of
the corresponding approximate second order system. Therefore, the effect of Coulomb’s friction can be captured
adequately through a gain in the numerator of the transfer function and a modified damping factor in the
denominator. Thus, it is possible to work out such simple empirical relations for other effects as well so that one can
get a second order actuator model containing the real system parameter but still remaining linear for applications in
the overall flight control design process.

IV. Conclusions
The present study has investigated the problem of actuation rate dynamics for a hydraulic actuation system.
The study formulates the complete servo system dynamics, which includes command shaper, servo valve and a
representative aerospace vehicle control surface. The mathematical models are obtained considering the real system
effects such as fluid compressibility, viscous and friction damping and servo valve nonlinearities. The study shows
that non-linearity of servo valve influences both, the steady state value of the commanded servo valve position as
well as its transient response. The studies with system pressure as a parameter bring out the fact that requirement of
high performance control system can be met by increasing the system pressure. However, it is also found that
pressure related damping reduces as the pressure is increased, resulting in greater chatter in servo system. In
addition, it is found that addition of Coulomb’s friction term, settles the system faster, but reduces the steady state
value of the actuation rate. Lastly, the actuation compliance affects only the transient behaviour of the actuation rate,
leaving the steady state value unaltered. A methodology to improve the actuator model is also outlined.

References
1
Guillon M, Hydraulic Servo Systems Analysis and Design, Butterworth & Co Ltd., 1969.
2
Viersma, T. J., Analysis, Synthesis and Design of Hydraulic Servosystems and Pipelines, Elsevier Scientific Publishing
Company, 1980.
3
Joshi, A. and Pramodh, P.G., Modelling and Simulation of Launch Vehicle Digital Autopilot, AIAA Paper No. 4696, Proc. of
Modelling and Simulation Technologies Conference, Monterey, CA, USA, 6-8 August 2002.
4
Stringer, J.D., Hydraulic Systems Analysis, The Macmillan Press Ltd., 2nd Edition, 1982.
5
Raymond, E.T. and Chenweth, C.C., Aircraft Flight Control Actuation System Design, SAE Publications Group, 1993.
6
Joshi, A. and Jayan, P.G., Modelling and Simulation of Aircraft Hydraulic System, AIAA Paper No. AIAA-2002-4611, Proc. of
Modelling and Simulation Technologies Conference, Monterey, CA, USA, 6-8 August 2002.
7
Joshi, A., ‘Modelling the Dynamics of Flight Control Surfaces Under Actuation Compliances and Losses’, Proc. Of National
Conference on Control and Dynamical Systems (NCCDS ’05), Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay, India, 27-28 January
2005.

Appendix
Representative values of the parameters, used in simulations, are as given below3.
Servo Valve Spool Diameter, d 5 mm
Fluid Bulk Modulus, β 6000 bars
Total Cylinder Volume, Vt 0.015 m3
Piston Area, Ap 0.03 m2
Jack Mass, Mj 10 Kgs
Ps [100,200,300,400,500,600] bars
Q 0.0882 bars
S 10 m2
xh 0.1 m

The dimensions of output variables are; mm for xv and bars for Pm.

The applicable transfer functions are as follows.

{(dy/dt)/xv} = 271.74 √Ps / [1 + {7.548 xv / √Ps} s + 0.0069 s2]
{Pm/dxv/dt} = 90.58 √Ps / [1 + {7.548 xv / √Ps} s + 0.0069 s2]
{y/xv} = 271.74 √Ps / [0.163 xv/√Ps + (1+0.015Lδ) s + {7.548 xv / √Ps} s2 + 0.0069 s3]

12
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics