Concepts for flight simulator motion-drive algorithms range from the most basic to the relatively complex, with little to guide a choice between these, short of implementing them all and choosing the best. To avoid this lengthy process and to put into practice the experience gained in a previous large-scale evaluation exercise, a flexible motion algorithm has been implemented. It can be run as a simple classical algorithm with few free parameters and can be quickly adjusted to yield good motion performance. The more sophisticated adaptive features of the algorithm can then be brought in gradually to improve performance. Various forms of cost functions and adaptive features were formulated and subsequently evaluated on a synergistic 6 degrees-of-freedom motion-base simulator. It was found that a fourth-order cost function coupled with adaptive gain filters yielded the most favorable results. Finally, a supervisory code to ease motion adjustment and to provide a safe interactive interface with the designer is described. This facility permits reduced turnaround time during motion tuning and allows the pilot to experience different motions back-to-back for easier comparison. The supervisory control also allows automatic motion adjustment to different flight conditions. Nomenclature§ aAA
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nahon et al. (1992) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: