Multibody Dynamics Modelling of a Passive Pilot for Aircraft-Pilot-Coupling Investigation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As civil and business aircraft increasingly incorporate lightweight materials and reduce airframe weights to optimize efficiency, airframes have generally become more flexible with less structurally damped vibrational modes. This has caused an increase in the occurrence of a phenomenon known as Aircraft-Pilot-Coupling (APC). APC occurs when an airframe's structural vibrational modes impinge on the bandwidth of a pilot's biodynamics, resulting in adverse interactions between passive pilot dynamics and the aircraft's control system and aeroservoelastic responses. Simulations are advantageous in the studying of APC, as they can be run during the design phase of an aircraft, allowing APC mitigation to be performed before an aircraft model takes flight. Simulating APC requires a dedicated passive pilot biodynamic model. While some models exist in literature, they typically are analytical 2-dimensional models, with many simplifications and limitations. This paper details the development of two pilot biodynamic models created within a multibody dynamics simulation software. The first model, composed of two 2D models, aims to recreate a recently developed detailed 2D analytical model to explore the capabilities of multibody dynamics simulations of 2D pilot biodynamic models. Parametric studies are outlined, allowing a direct comparison between the developed 2D model and the analytical model, alongside experimental data. The second model described in this paper builds off the first but consists of a single 3D model. For the 3D model, particle swarm optimization techniques were employed to tune the joint stiffness and damping values to the available experimental data. Identical parametric studies were performed allowing a comparison between the models and experimental data. Overall, the models both demonstrate notable results, accurately reproducing pilot response trends exhibited by the analytical model and by experimental results. Comparing error between the frequency response of the models and the available experimental data, it was found that the 3D model demonstrates significant improvements upon the multi-body dynamics 2D model and the analytical2D model, capturing characteristics of the experimental data that the 2D models were incapable of. Furthermore, the advanced abilities of the 3D model in performing simulation with multi-dimensional inputs and coupling between dimensions are demonstrated, further indicating the significance of the 3D model being presented.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".