RAPID INTEGRATION, DEVELOPMENT AND FLIGHT TEST

OF HELICOPTER FLIGHT CONTROL LAWS

J ack Shue Stacey L. Winger
J Shue@bellhelicopter.textron.com SWinger@bellhelicopter.textron.com
Principal Engineer, Handling Qualities Principal Engineer, FBW & Control Laws IPT Lead
Bell Helicopter Textron Inc., Fort Worth, Texas

Arthur W. Gubbels Kris Ellis
Arthur.Gubbels@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca Kristopher.Ellis@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca
Research Officer, Flight Mechanics and Avionics Research Officer, Flight Mechanics and Avionics
Flight Research Laboratory
National Research Council of Canada
Ottawa, Ontario

ABSTRACT
In 2009, Bell Helicopter developed and flight test advanced optimal/robust control laws. An innovative rapid prototyping
process was employed utilizing real-time Matlab/Simulink

executing on a rugged laptop to develop and flight test the con-

trol laws on a fly-by-wire test bed aircraft. Control law gain margin, phase margin, bandwidth calculation and compensator
selection were designed using Bells three loop optimization technology Matlab/Simulink

M-file algorithm. A desktop

simulator was used to merge the control laws with a non-linear COPTER math model S-function for simulation testing. A
COPTER math model running in Bells Simulation Lab assisted in real-time Simulink

integration, logic testing and pilots

flight control force feel system tuning. Both full and partial authority advanced control laws were evaluated in the National
Research Council of Canada (NRC) Bell Model 412 Advanced Systems Research Aircraft. Technology demonstrations were
conducted and selected handling qualities maneuvers were performed to evaluate the capabilities of the new control laws.

1
NOTATION


ACF Advanced Control Feedback
ACLAWS Advanced Control Laws
Alpha Angle of Attack
ASRA Advanced Systems Research Aircraft
A
x
Longitudinal Acceleration
A
y
Lateral Acceleration
A
z
Vertical Acceleration
Bell 412 Bell Helicopter Model 412 Aircraft
Beta Sideslip Angle
CIFER Comprehensive Identification from Fre-
quency Responses
CONDUIT Control Designers Unified Interface
COPTER Comprehensive Program for Theoretical
Evaluation of Rotorcraft
CP1-CP8 Control Potentiometers
FBW Fly By Wire
FCC Flight Control Computer
gps alt, H
gps
GPS Altitude
GPS Global Positioning System
Hind Indicated Altitude
HMU Health Monitoring Unit


Presented at the American Helicopter Society 66th Annual
Forum, Phoenix, Arizona, May 11 13, 2010. Copyright
2010 by the American Helicopter Society International, Inc.
All rights reserved.
H
p
Pressure Altitude
ID Identification
INS Inertial Navigation System
laser alt Laser Altitude
lat Latitude
long Longitude
mix alt Mixed Height Above Ground
MTE Mission-Task-Elements
NRC National Research Council of Canada
OAT Outside Air Temperature
p Roll Rate
Roll Acceleration
phi Roll Attitude
psi Heading Angle
q Pitch Rate
q Pitch Acceleration
r Yaw Rate
r Yaw Acceleration
radalt Radar Altimeter
SCAS Stability & Control Augmentation System
theta Pitch Attitude
TRC Translational Rate Command
UAV Unmanned Aerial Vehicle
V
x
X Axis Velocity
V
y
Y Axis Velocity
Vz Z Axis Velocity
Xe Longitudinal Position
Ye Lateral Position
2
INTRODUCTION

In 2009, Bell conducted company-funded research on the
next generation of advanced flight control laws at its XworX
facilities in Arlington, Texas. The focus of this activity was
to enhance safety through reduced pilot workload and auto-
mated flight. The advanced control laws, or ACLAWS,
were developed using advanced optimal/robust control the-
ory. The ACLAWS offer exceptional capabilities in the
areas of robustness, gust rejection, and control decoupling.
In addition, the control laws are designed to automatically
switch to the desired flight mode resulting in the elimination
of cockpit control mode switches. In general, the philosophy
is simple; the aircraft holds the current flight condition until
the pilot commands a change. Features of the ACLAWS
include automatic hover hold with single control input land-
ings, speed hold, heading hold, and altitude hold. The con-
trol laws have been developed for both conventional partial
authority flight control systems and future full authority fly-
by-wire (FBW) aircraft.

The ACLAWS were initially evaluated with a desktop simu-
lator, and in Bells Engineering Simulation Lab. They were
then flight tested on the National Research Council of Can-
ada (NRC) Model 412 Advanced Systems Research Aircraft
(ASRA) airborne simulator (Fig. 1). This aircraft has the
unique design of both conventional and fly-by-wire flight
control systems. The safety pilot in the right seat flies the
aircraft with the production aircraft flight controls. How-
ever, in the left seat, the evaluation pilot can fly the aircraft
through an experimental fly-by-wire flight control system.
The evaluation pilots controls are not connected mechani-
cally to the control surfaces. Instead, they are connected
electrically to the flight control computer, which, based on
the design of the flight control laws, sends commands to
actuators that move the flight controls. In the event of
evaluation pilot loss of aircraft control, the safety pilot can
take control of the aircraft at any time. This is an ideal setup
for the development and testing of new flight control laws,
since the safety of the crew and aircraft are assured by the
safety pilot.

A unique component of the development and testing of the
ACLAWS is the use of a laptop computer running the con-
trol laws using Matlab/Simulinkin quasi real-time. With
this method, code generation, compilation, linking, and de-
ployment to the host computing system are not required.
This allows the control law designer the ability to disengage
the control law computer, make changes, then reengage the
new control laws in a mater of minutes. This significantly
reduces the cycle time for control law development. In addi-
tion, the same laptop is used to run stand alone simulations,
real-time engineering simulations, and airborne simulations
in the NRC 412 ASRA. Thus, the flight control designer can
evaluate the control laws on the ground, then quickly move
to flight test evaluation.

The process that made this rapid ACLAWS prototype devel-
opment possible contains five steps, as shown in Fig. 2. The
following sections will detail the history of this program and
discuss in detail these five steps in the development.

INITIAL CONTROL LAW DESIGN
The first step in the ACLAWS development process was to
design the desired control laws in the Matlab/Simulink
environment. Then, the control laws were optimized for a
Bell Model 412 since the NRC 412 ASRA was used for
evaluating the control laws in flight. Once the control laws
are proven through test, they can be optimized for different
helicopters. The following sections detail this process.

Fig. 1. NRC 412 ASRA.
3
Mathworks Simulink Design Tool
Bells ACLAWS are modeled entirely with Mathworks
Simulink(Refs. 12) and associated toolboxes. Math-
works Simulink, a Matlab toolbox, is one of the most pow-
erful software packages for control and modeling. It can
provide multi-domain simulation and model-based design
for dynamic and embedded systems. It also contains an in-
teractive graphical environment and a customizable set of
block libraries that permit engineers to design, simulate,
implement, and test a variety of simulated nonlinear sys-
tems, such as flight controls, guidance, navigation, commu-
nication, signal processing, and data recording.

Mathworks Simulinkhas been widely adapted by the aero-
space industries. Its S-functions can be written to support
arbitrary input/output dimensions compatible with legacy
programs. An S-function is a Matlab tool to transform C and
FORTRAN codes into a Simulinkblock so that the non-
Matlab programs can be used in the Matlab Simulinkenvi-
ronment. In the ACLAWS design methodologies, this func-
tionality is used in control law optimization, integration with
aircraft math models and communication interfaces between
computer systems or devices.

Linear Math Model
To simulate a linear math model of aircraft dynamics, the
parameter identification of the aircraft must first be estab-
lished. The CIFER(Comprehensive Identification from
Frequency Responses) program (Ref. 3) was used to estab-
lish the associated linear models from flight test data. These
techniques were similar to those used on an earlier Bell con-
trol law development effort (Ref. 4). Five sets of flight test
data that were collected from the NRC 412 ASRA were used
in the CIFERanalysis. The data were collected at hover,
and at 30-, 60-, 90-, and 115-kn airspeed. As indicated in
the Fig. 3 procedure, linear models were generated using
each of the five flight test data sets. These sets were then
converted into a full set of linear Matlab/Simulinkmodels
and used in the initial tuning of the ACLAWS.

Three Loop Control Laws Design
In the control law architecture design, Bells three-loop con-
trol laws were employed (Fig. 4). Several Matlab optimiza-
tion files were established to quickly determine the control
error gains, compensators, and lead-lag transfer functions for
the control laws. Advanced Control Feedback (ACF) in the


Initial Control Law
Design
CLAWS COPTER S-Function
Desktop Simulator
Real-Time Simulator
Ethernet S-function
ACLAWS Integration
with the NRC ASRA
- Nonlinear Simulation
- Flight test I/O check
- Communications
check
- Pilot Control Feel
- Control Sensitivity
- Gain Tuning
- New Compenstaors
- Rapid ACLAWS
- New maneuvers
- Integration
ACLAWS
Flight Testing
Fig. 2. Control laws rapid prototyping methodology.

=
=
sec deg/ 25
sec deg/ 60
2
q
q

=
=
sec deg/ 60
sec deg/ 80
2
p
p

=
=
sec deg/ 20
sec deg/ 80
2
r
r

- Verify control
sensitivity for each
axis
- Add rate and / or
saturation limits if
needed
- Emergency Mode
- Each 30 knots for a
linear model.
- Insure cross
robustness check
- Verify frequency
and damping ratio
- Each 30 knots for a
linear model.
- Insure cross
robustness check
- Verify frequency
and damping ratio
- Arrange all limiter.
- Tune gains
- Verify all gain
margins, phase
margins and
bandwidths
Flight Mechanics for
maximumacceleration
per inch of control input
Linear Models for the
first loop robustness
development
SCAS mode design with
lead/lag and integrator
gain logic
Build full linear model
Gain schedule systems for
entire envelope
Fly-By-Wire
ACLAWS Design
Build Nonlinear COPTER
S-Function for flight test
Simulation Lab
Integration and flight test
Fig. 3. Control law development flow chart.
4
first (inner most) loop is employed for stabilizing the sys-
tem. Unlike the standard robust control laws design, the
decoupling of each individual axis is emphasized on this
ACF. Note that system delays in actuators and sensor meas-
urement are also considered in the ACLAWS design.

During development, switches were needed to evaluate the
different ACLAWS loops and modes. This switching was
done with software manual switches as shown in Fig. 5. The
switches were used to

- Turn on individual loops for testing through the individ-
ual axes.
- Verify the individual control sensitivity per the pilot re-
quirement.
- Switch to alternate loops without restarting Simulink.
- Activate automatic functions.
- Turn on all ACLAWS modes and features with a single
switch.
- Configure the control laws for either the engineering
simulator or the NRC 412 ASRA.


CONDUIT Design
CONDUIT(Ref. 5) design was employed to verify the
ACLAWS augmentation and integration. The CONDUIT
automatic gain search was used to determine the best error
solutions; however, it turned out to be very limited in com-
pensator and lead-lag transfer function selection. Therefore,
CONDUITwas used for verification purposes only. An
example of the CONDUITdesign is shown in Fig. 6. In
this figure, it is shown that four more blocks are generated
for assisting with the robustness of ACLAWS.

The last three blocks are control sensitivity blocks in the
longitudinal, lateral, and directional axes. For detail of con-
trol sensitivity functions, Ref. 6 can be used as a guideline.
The control sensitivity function is used to determine the pilot
control feel in maneuver mode.

The fourth block, the coefficient of uncertainty block, was
generated based on Bode plots of disturbance attenuation
from control to disturbance. The coefficient of uncertainty
block is designed using a disturbance rejection bandwidth
concept, which introduced a 3 dB trade-off region. The un-
certainty criterion is to satisfy a similar ADS-33 disturbance
rejection requirement. Instead of using 0.9 as the distur-
bance rejection average bandwidth criteria, the total band-
width is calculated. An M-file S-function was designed to
check the 3 dB crossover-frequency to determine the per-
centage of uncertainties, which the control laws can auto-
matically damp out.

All standard blocks of the CONDUITdesign were tested
for verification purposes. It was shown that the gain margin,
and phase margin are very close to Bells M-file algorithm
design. However, the CONDUITbandwidth calculation is
much higher than that of the real aircraft response, while
Bells M-file calculation was very close to aircraft perform-
ance.

In all cases, the ACLAWS design satisfied the CONDUIT
design requirements. It was also found that CONDUIT
and Bells M-file algorithm design had the potential to tune
the individual axis gain margin, phase margin, and band-
width with the least interference between the axes. It is also
possible to tune the gain margins of the vertical and pedal
axes to infinity.






Steady State
Aerodynamics Info
Outer Loop
Robust
Feedback
Inner Loop I
Feedback States
Actuator Command
Stick
Control
Inputs
SCAS
Outputs
Aircraft
Plant
E E
Guidance
Loop
E
Loop II
Autopilot
Loop III
ACLAWS

Fig. 4. Simplified ACLAWS design.
5


Fig. 5. ACLAWS software manual switch design.
6
DESKTOP SIMULATOR
After the initial control law design was developed in the
Matlab/Simulink environment and tuned with
CONDUIT, the control laws were ready for testing with a
full non-linear math model in the desktop simulation envi-
ronment. The standard Bell non-linear math model is
COPTER (Comprehensive Program for the Theoretical
Evaluation of Rotorcraft) (Ref. 7). COPTER simulates the
main and tail rotor characteristics with a blade element
model. Each rotor blade is divided into individual segments
that can be associated with unique airfoil properties. In time
domain calculations, every segment of every blade is evalu-
ated for airspeed and angle of attack. The lift, drag, and
pitching moments are summed to yield instantaneous rotor
forces and moments.

The COPTER program was packaged as a Matlab S-
function, so that the ACLAWS could be readily developed
and evaluated on engineering workstations. The COPTER
program is coupled with the appropriate airframe and rotor
definition files to produce a non-linear simulation of a Bell
412 aircraft. The combination of COPTER and an S-
function at Bell is called the COPTER S-function (Ref. 8).
An additional S-function is also used that provides an inter-
face for a joystick so that the engineer can fly the simula-
tion to evaluate the ACLAWS. Thus, the desktop flight
simulator is comprised of the following components:

1. COPTER S-function
2. J oystick S-function
3. Flight display M-file S-function
4. Real-Time Block S-function
5. Flight Control Laws (ACLAWS)
6.
The simplified desktop simulator is shown in Fig. 7.

Using the COPTER S-function assists the control law de-
signer in finding better compensators and gains from real-
time nonlinear math model simulations. The desktop simu-
lator integration helps the engineer design the ACLAWS
quickly and effectively by allowing the engineer to fly the
nonlinear math model on a desktop computer. This allows
the engineers to check the control sensitivity function per

Control Sensitivity Blocks
Pedal
Long
Lat
Coefficient of
Uncertainty Block
Control Sensitivity Blocks
Pedal
Long
Lat
Coefficient of
Uncertainty Block

Fig. 6. CONDUIT design example.
7
pilot command. It is also valuable while troubleshooting the
logic design.

REAL-TIME SIMULATOR
The next step in the ACLAWS development process was to
integrate an ethernet interface into the Simulinkmodel.
This interface enables data exchange between the control
laws and the real-time simulator in the Bell Simulation Lab.
In previous control law development efforts, C-code was
auto-generated from the Simulinkmodel using the real-
time workshop. This code was then compiled with bridge
code that interfaced the model with the real-time simulation.
By adding the Ethernet interface to the Simulinkmodel,
the need to do this was eliminated. This reduced the cycle
time for control law modifications to a few minutes, which is
approximately a 90% reduction. In addition, a laptop com-
puter was used to run the control law package. The laptop
model included

- Ethernet S-function blocks for FCC and INS communi-
cation.
- Matlab, Simulink, Control Tool Box.
- ACLAWS.
- All manual switches which are not implemented in the
aircraft.

Bell Helicopters advanced real-time flight simulation capa-
bility spans more than five decades. This simulation capa-
bility has been used in engineering development of numer-
ous helicopter and tilt-rotor aircraft. Most recently, Bells
Avionics and Simulation Development Center (ASDC) has
been exploited for fly-by-wire flight control law develop-
ment, pilot evaluation and training, flight training system
development, aircraft hardware in-the-loop testing, advanced
concept development, marketing support, and customer
demonstrations.

The ACLAWS simulator was developed quickly and inex-
pensively, using existing cockpit hardware and the ASDC
facility. In addition, existing math models and other simula-
tion components were reused or modified to build a com-
plete real-time simulator. As the program has progressed,
the real-time simulator capabilities have been enhanced as
necessary.

Initial integration of the real-time ACLAWS in the Bell
simulation lab was to insure that the communication S-
functions integration with ACLAWS was able to be run be-
fore proceeding to flight test. It also provided an avenue to
develop the desired flight control force characteristics for the
unique trim flight controls. It was also very useful for test-
ing the control law logic switching and checking for events
that would cause the fly-by-wire test bed evaluation system
to disengage. In addition, the sensor noise data was ex-
tracted from flight test data and inserted into Bells simula-
tion lab sensor package to produce simulated sensor data
quality that is similar to the aircraft sensor data. This addi-
tional noise package in the simulation sensor feedback sys-
tem has added to the fidelity of the simulation and made the
simulation testing closer to the real flight test.

Flight Control Computer
A key component of the ACLAWS rapid development proc-
ess was the use of the Matlab Simulinktool running as a
real-time process. This was one of the major innovations
developed in the program. The ACLAWS run in a slave
mode with the simulation executive (in the case of the Bell
simulation lab) providing the synchronization pulse via an
ethernet packet.

The host computer system for Bells ACLAWS is a Pana-
sonic Toughbook CF-52. This computer executes the con-
trol laws utilizing Matlab Simulinkin real-time while fly-
ing the simulator or test bed aircraft. The only connection to
the simulation host is a single ethernet cable. Several S-
functions in the Simulinkenvironment are used to com-
plete the real-time communication. The data received from
the simulation host are standard helicopter sensor signals








E
COPTER
S-Function
ACLAWS
Pilot Command
(Joystick S-Function)
Sensors
Feedback
Actuators
Nonlinear Math Model
Flight Display
S-Function

Fig. 7. Simplified desktop simulator diagram.
8
and pilot switch inputs. The data transmitted from Bells
ACLAWS laptop are the commanded position for the four
pilot controls. This simulates the commands that would be
sent to the fly-by-wire actuators on a full authority flight
control system.

NRC, developed ethernet S-functions, similar to those de-
scribed in Ref. 9, were integrated into the Matlab/Simulink
model to exchange data with the real-time math model in the
Bell Simulation Lab. This process eliminated the need for
Simulinkc-code with the bridge c-code to run real-time
simulations. Verification of the ethernet functions in the
Simulation Lab eliminated the requirement to troubleshoot
this function in-flight. This method allowed easy modifica-
tion to the control gains and compensator design. There are
three ethernet S-functions used in the rapid ACLAWS de-
velopment. Note that these same functions are used both in
the real-time simulator and in the test bed aircraft.

- FCC Data Packet Receive: The real-time math model
transmits a packet containing all required non-inertial data
including cockpit control positions, switches, engine data,
air data, radar altitude and control law tuning settings (Fig.
8). The math model serves as the master clock for the simu-

Beta
beta (deg)
Torque
Torque (%)
TAS
TAS (kts)
Status_Message
Status Message
SP_Ped_Posn
SP_Ped_Posn
SP_Lon_Cyc
SP_Lon_Cyc
SP_Lat_Cyc
SP_Lat_Cyc
SP_Col_Posn
SP_Col_Posn
sfun_fcc_r cv_tr
Receive FCC Packet
S-Function1
Radalt
Radalt (ft)
Pedal_Pos
Pedal Position (i n)
Ped_Detent
Ped_Detent
OAT
OAT (C)
NR_RPM
NR_RPM
Longitudinal _Cycl ic
Longitudi nal Cyclic Position (in)
Lon_Detent
Lon_Detent
Lateral_Cyclic
Later al Cyclic Posi tion (in)
Lat_Detent
Lat_Detent
I_YAW_FRC_IN
I_YAW_FRC_IN
I_ROLL_FRC_IN
I_ROLL_FRC_IN
I_PITCH_FRC_IN
I_PITCH_FRC_IN
I_COLL_FRC_IN
I_COLL_FRC_IN
GPS_Time
GPS Time
Functi on_Swi tches
Functi on Switches
Event_Number
Event Number
Eng_Temp2
Eng_Temp2 (C)
Eng_Temp1
Eng_Temp1 (C)
Demux
Collective_Switches
Collective Switches
Collective_Slider
Col lective Sl ider (volts)
Coll ecti ve_Pos
Collective Position (in)
Col _Detent
Col_Detent
CP8
CP8 (0-10)
CP7
CP7 (0-10)
CP6
CP6 (0-10)
CP5
CP5 (0-10)
CP4
CP4 (0-10)
CP3
CP3 (0-10)
CP2
CP2 (0-10)
CP1
CP1 (0-10)
Baro_Alt
Barometric Alti tude (ft)
Alpha
Alpha (deg)

Fig. 8. FCC data packet receive S-function.
9
lator with the packet being transmitted at regular 16 msec
cycles. The Bell ACLAWS run in a slave mode waiting for
this packet to execute each frame.

- INS Packet Receive: The real-time math model also
transmits sensor data to simulate the data packet from the
NRC INS and GPS. The data include aircraft attitudes, an-
gular rates, linear accelerations, global position, and laser
altitude (Fig. 9).

- Final Commands Transmit to FCC: The signals sent
back to the simulation math model are the commanded posi-
tion for the four FBW actuators, a synchronization counter
and four beep trim commands (Fig. 10).


ACLAWS INTEGRATION WITH THE NRC ASRA
After the ACLAWS were verified in the Bell Simulation
Lab, the next step was to integrate the real-time Mat-
lab/Simulinkcontrol law model with the NRC Bell 412
helicopter utilizing the same laptop computer that was used
in the simulator.

NRC 412 Advanced Systems Research Aircraft (ASRA)
The Flight Research Laboratory of the Institute for Aero-
space Research, NRC has been active in the development,
design, and manufacturing of Fly-By-Wire or variable
stability helicopters since the conversion of a Bell 47 to this
type of configuration in 1961.
The design for ASRA requires that the FBW system be sin-
gle string in nature. This is a requirement in order to retain
a high level of flexibility, while keeping costs low. This
single string nature allows:

- A single set of FBW actuators;
- One, non-redundant flight control computer (FCC);
- A single set of aircraft state sensors; and
- A single set of flight control software.

These features significantly reduce the maintenance and
operating costs associated with the aircraft. This simplicity
of design facilitates the incorporation of software changes
without the overhead of multiple coding sources, multiple
languages or operating systems, and in-depth code valida-
tion; all of which are necessary for production systems, but
would be overly prohibitive for flexible, time critical re-
search programs. Inherent in the single string architecture is
a reliance on the aircraft safety systems to protect the crew.
The heart of the safety system is the Health Monitoring Unit
(HMU) which, among other functions, uses a flight path
prediction scheme to prevent unsafe conditions from occur-
ring. As a final line of defense, a safety pilot is required to
mitigate the effects of a system failure and prevent excur-
sions outside of the safe flight envelope. This operating
methodology places high demands on the safety pilot, but
affords the advantages of increased flexibility by retaining
the entire certified operational envelope of the aircraft. It
allows the aircraft to be maneuvered aggressively in close
proximity to the ground, and to perform unrestricted takeoffs
and landings with the FBW system engaged.

r
r (deg/sec)
q
q (deg/sec)
p
p (deg/sec)
Vz
Ver tical Veloci ty (ft/s + up)
Time
Time
Theta
Theta (deg)
Status_Wor d
Status Wor d
sfun_honeywell_thd
Receive INS Packet
S-Function
Raw_Las_Rng
Raw Laser Range (ft)
Psi
Psi True (+/- 180 deg)
Phi
Phi (deg)
Vx_ft
North Veloci ty (ft/s)
Mi xAlt
Mixed Height abov e Gr ound (ft)
Best esti mate of AGL
Longi tude
Longitude (deg)
Lati tude
Latitude (deg)
LasAlt
Laser Alti tude (ft)
GPS_Alt
GPS Alti tude (ft)
Vy_ft
East Veloci ty (ft/s)
Demux
Az
Az (ft/s/s)
Ay
Ay (ft/s/s)
Ax
Ax (ft/s/s)

Fig. 9. INS/GPS packet receive S-function.
10
The ASRA control system structure used for this project, as
shown in Fig. 11, consists of both the safety pilot and
evaluation pilot controls. In the ASRA, the safety pilot flies
the helicopter using the standard mechanical control system,
and is responsible for assuming control in the event that a
computer drops off-line, or a potentially dangerous situation
arises. The evaluation pilot's controls, when engaged by the
safety pilot, control the ASRA through a fully programma-
ble, full authority fly-by-wire control system. To provide
this capability, four high-quality and flight-critical hydraulic
actuators, designed by HR Textron, are attached to the me-
chanical control runs in parallel. This architecture offers the
advantages of having the safety pilot's controls move in re-
sponse to the FBW actuators, allowing the safety pilot to
monitor the control system's input shape and amplitude, the
helicopter's control margins, and to some extent, the evalua-
tion pilot's workload. Consequently, by having the mechani-
cal controls back-driven, the safety pilot is able to sense the
control activity demand by any given control system. Inte-
gration of this system is simplified by the fact that the Bell
412 can be flown with the Stability and Control Augmenta-
tion System (SCAS) off, and that the SCAS off dynamics are
suitable as the FBW reversion since the aircraft can be safely
recovered from unusual attitudes without the help of the
SCAS. Thus, accounting for the effect of the SCAS on the
control system is not required.

NRC 412 aircraft is configured with five crew stations as
follows. In the front cockpit are stations for a safety pilot on
the right and an evaluation pilot on the left. In the cabin are
stations for the NRC FCC operator engineer, and two Bell
engineers for control law evaluation and laptop computer
operation. The NRC FCC provides eight tunable knobs to
be utilized for control law gain tuning. These knobs can be
adjusted without shutting down the Simulinkcontrol laws.
However, the function and range of the knobs must be pre-
determined before the flight test. When the range or granu-
larity in these knobs is exhausted and additional tuning is
required, the control laws can be modified in flight. First,
the safety pilot takes control of the aircraft and the control

Sync_Counter
Sync Counter
sfun_send412_final_dr ives_tr
Send Final commands to the FCC
[Ped_Trim]
Ped_Trim
[Lon_Trim]
Lon_Tr im
[Lat_Tr im]
Lat_Trim
Coll_Trim
Coll_Trim
Coll_FTR_ON
Coll_FTR_ON
AC_IN_DPED_CMD
A/C Input Pedal Position (%)
AC_IN_DLAT_CMD
A/C Input Later al Stick Position (%)
AC_IN_DLON_CMD
A/C Input F/A Stick Position (%)
AC_IN_DCOL_CMD
A/C Input Collective Position (%)
Ped
Lat
Lon
Ped
Col
Col
Lat
F/A
Col

Fig. 10. Final commands transmit to FCC S-function.
11
laws are disengaged. Then, the Bell engineer can change
gain values, compensator design, lead-lag transfer function,
or even generate other loops to stabilize the system. These
capabilities, plus the other design techniques discussed, en-
able rapid design and make the control laws design process
quick, accurate, and effective.

Flight Control Computer Integration with the NRC 412
ASRA
When integrated with the NRC 412 ASRA, the ACLAWS
run in a slave mode with the NRC FCC rather than the simu-
lator host computer providing the synchronization pulse via
an ethernet packet. The integration of the ACLAWS laptop
with the NRC 412 ASRA FCC is illustrated in Fig. 11. As
in the Bell Simulation Lab, several S-functions in the Simu-
linkenvironment are used to complete the real-time com-
munication. The data received from the NRC FCC are stan-
dard helicopter sensor signals. The data sent to the NRC
412 FCC from Bells ACLAWS laptop are the delta com-
manded positions for the four fly-by-wire actuators relative
to the engagement position. This capability to utilize a real-
time Simulinkmodel had been previously prototyped by
NRC on the ASRA in a simple single-axis controller, but
had never been employed in a full 4-axis control law.

With verification of the laptop ethernet interface in the
Simulation Lab, troubleshooting this function in flight test
was avoided. However, there are a few components needed
in the simulation model that are not needed when testing in
the aircraft. This includes sensor and actuator models to
emulate the hardware in the aircraft. These components are
easily disabled for flight testing with a single switch in the
ACLAWS. In addition, so that the different modes could be
isolated during initial flight testing, software manual
switches were designed into the ACLAWS to allow rapid
in-flight switching of the modes to the desired combination.
Since these switches wont be required once the design is
finalized, they are not integrated into the pilots controls.
Using the same methodologies from the desktop simulator to
the Bell Simulation Lab to flight testing, made the entire
integration easy, quick, and accurate.

The NRC FCC records all aircraft data and fly-by-wire ac-
tuator positions. However, built into the ACLAWS is the
ability to record not only this data, but any parameter inter-
nal to the control laws. This data is recorded continuously
while the ACLAWS are running for both prime and non-
prime data with the record and event numbers automatically
encoded in the data stream. Prime data is tagged using a
data on/off button on the pilot flight controls. The data file
is automatically saved with the flight and date encoded in
the file name for accurate documentation of the flight data.
After each flight, the data is processed with a Matlab script
that automatically parses each data record into a separate file
and generates time history plot files. The data is then placed
on a shared drive for analysis by the engineers and archived.

ACLAWS FLIGHT TESTING
The last step of the ACLAWS development process was
flight test on the NRC 412 ASRA helicopter. The NRC 412
controls are arranged such that the pilots position functions
as the safety pilot with the capability to manually regain
control of the aircraft, and the copilots position functions as
the evaluation pilot for the ACLAWS with FBW control, as
detailed in Ref. 10. In this configuration, the development
engineers can fly in the passenger compartment and make
in-flight ACLAWS modifications, and assist in evaluating
changes during the flight evaluation. The ACLAWS version
tested in Bells Simulation Lab is the same as is tested in the
NRC 412 aircraft. Once initial ground integration in NRC
412 aircraft was finished, the tasks of ACLAWS develop-
ment in NRC 412 becomes a matter of gain tuning.

Flight Test Development and Technology Demonstra-
tions
Through the use of the development tools and techniques
discussed in this paper, Bells ACLAWS were advanced
much more quickly than in a typical development program.
The program was begun in the forth quarter of 2008 with
only the core three-loop control law design in place from
previous work. By March 2009, the control laws had been
mated with both a desktop simulation and a newly developed
Bell 412 real-time simulator, and progressed through initial
tuning for the 412 aircraft. The first development flight test
on the NRC 412 aircraft occurred in April, 2009. After two
weeks of sensor integration and control law developmental
testing, low-speed SCAS and attitude modes were

















Project Actuator &
Override Spring
Engage
Circuit
FCC Sensors
HMU
Control
Feel Sys
Bells Laptop
Simulink ACLAWS
Swashplate
SCAS
Actuators
Mechanical Link
Evaluation Pilot
(Left seat)
Safety Pilot
(Right seat)
Ethernet
FBW Link
INS
Ethernet
Fig. 11. ACLAWS laptop and ASRA control system
architecture.
12
operational. Next, in a one week flight test opportunity in
May, the hover hold mode and low-speed operations were
implemented, and high-speed SCAS and attitude modes
flight testing was begun. In J une, the NRC 412 ASRA was
brought to Bells XworX facilities for two weeks of
continued development and technology demonstrations.
Several logic changes were added to make the ACLAWS
mode switching seamless and switchless, and additional
automated modes were added. At this point, only nine
control law development flights had been conducted, but the
low-speed ACLAWS were mature enough for technology
demonstrations to both pilot and non-pilot evaluators.
Technology demonstrations of the ACLAWS were
performed for test pilots and Bell management, to evaluate
the capabilities that are available with the ACLAWS. After
the J une flight test, the focus of the project was shifted to
development and evaluation of the ACLAWS capabilities in
a traditional partial authority flight control system. For the
evaluation, SCAS actuator authorities and trim actuator rates
were set to the same values as Bells recently certified
Model 429 aircraft. Similarly to the full authority
ACLAWS, the partial authority system adapted the three-
loop control law structure. After approximately two weeks
of development, integration and testing in Bells Simulation
Lab was begun. After one week of flight testing that
included four flight tests and approximate 6 flight test hours
on the NRC 412 ASRA, the partial authority ACLAWS
demonstrated:

- Automatic hover
- Low-speed operations
- High-speed flight
- SCAS and attitude modes
The second flight test of the partial authority ACLAWS oc-
curred at Bells XworX facilities. After one week of addi-
tional developmental flight testing on both control law ver-
sions, back-to-back evaluations were conducted on the full
and partial authority control laws. In addition, commercial
and military customers evaluated the ACLAWS in the NRC
412 ASRA, and provided valuable feedback for future de-
velopment activities.

The aircraft was flown by over 30 Bell employees and mili-
tary and commercial customers as evaluation pilots. Most of
the evaluations pilots had no prior flight training. In every
case, the evaluation pilot, with minimal instruction on how
to operate the controls, was able to fly and land the aircraft
in what were typically 2025 kn gusting wind conditions.
The summary of flight test hours is shown in Fig. 12.

Approximately 5 hours of flight test time were flown by
commercial and military pilots. The customer comments
were all very positive, such as, Significant reduction in
workload and increase in precision, especially in degraded
visuals, Very important, especially for night operations.

ADS-33 MTE Evaluation
The ACLAWS design is applicable to both commercial and
military aircraft, but is currently tuned for a non-military
aircraft. Nonetheless, selected ADS-33 Mission-Task-
Elements (MTE) (Ref. 11) flight test maneuvers were em-
ployed to demonstrate the capabilities of the ACLAWS de-
sign. This testing was performed at Bells XworX facilities
in October 2009. Note that this is not a complete ADS-33
evaluation/report. The maneuvers were flown as a spot

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Total Flight Test Hours
ACLAWS Integration
Bell Demonstration
Military Pilot Demonstrations
Commercial Pilot Demonstration
ACLAWS Flight Test Development
Flight Test Activity
Time (Hours)

Fig. 12. Flight test hours summary.
13
check of the ACLAWS capabilities after approximately 15
hours of developmental flight testing on the full authority
ACLAWS. In addition, the maneuvers were flown under
high gusty wind conditions with no prior practice runs by the
pilot. The results are shown here as an illustration of the
capability of the ACLAWS to be quickly developed and
tuned to the level of the ADS-33 requirements. The flight
test data shown here were collected from evaluations utiliz-
ing the full authority version of the ACLAWS. A unique
trim center stick cyclic, unique trim small displacement ped-
als, and traditional displacement collective controllers were
used for the evaluation pilot controls. Since the Bell 412
aircraft is a utility aircraft, the cargo/utility category is refer-
enced for all ADS-33 requirements. Maneuvers were flown
in both good visual environments (GVE) and simulated de-
graded visual environments (DVE) using foggles. The
handling qualities were all rated as level 1 by the test pilot.
Selected flight test results for the vertical maneuver, hover-
ing turn and pirouette MTEs are detailed below.

ADS-33 Vertical Maneuver MTE. For a utility aircraft,
the purpose of the ADS-33 MTE vertical maneuver (ADS-
33 Section 3.11.6), is to assess the heave axis controllability
with precision station keeping. The maneuver is to be flown
in low to moderate wind conditions. The maneuver is per-
formed as follows:

- Establish a 15 ft hover
- Initiate a 25 ft vertical ascent and stabilize
- Descend to the original hover position and stabilize
Flight test results for the vertical maneuver MTE are shown
in Figs. 13 15. The maneuver was flown with collective
input only while the cyclic and pedals remained in the detent
position throughout the test. This satisfies the requirement
of no undesirable coupling with the pitch, roll, and yaw axes.
Figure 13 shows the x and y position hold plot during the
maneuver. It can be seen that the aircraft holds the position
within 5-ft longitudinally, and 2-ft laterally throughout the
maneuver. The ADS-33 requires 3 ft for desired and 6 ft
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
Time (s)
C
o
l
l
e
c
t
i
v
e

I
n
p
u
t

(
i
n
c
h
)


Safety Pilot
Pilot
TrimAct. Pos. [Col_Detent_SW]

Fig. 14. Vertical MTE collective input.

Time (Sec)
____Ye (ft)
- - - -Xe (ft)
(X, Y) Position - feet
Fig. 13. Vertical MTE position response.
14
for adequate handling qualities in low to moderate winds.
However, this maneuver was flown with 25 kn gusty winds.
Figure 14 shows both the collective input from the test pilot
and the safety pilot. The safety pilot collective is the control
input that would be required by the pilot to fly the aircraft
without the ACLAWS. Figure 15 shows the altitude re-
sponse from both the GPS and pressure altitude. It is shown
that the altitude response is smooth and steady, and satisfies
the requirements for the vertical ascent and descent.

ADS-33 Hovering Turn MTE. The purpose of the ADS-33
MTE hovering turn maneuver (ADS-33 Section 3.11.4), is to
check the ability to perform a moderate rate turn in a hover
while maintaining reasonable precision. The maneuver is to
be flown in low to moderate wind conditions. The maneuver
is performed as follows:

- Stabilize the aircraft at a hover at less than 20 ft altitude
- Complete a 180 deg turn in under 15 seconds

In the test of the ACLAWS, the hovering turn was per-
formed using only a single pedal input by the pilot with no
pilot input on the cyclic or collective. The maneuver was
completed in less than 10 seconds. Selected flight test re-
sults are shown in Figs. 1620. In Fig. 16, it is shown that
the pedal input is higher than 1 inch in the entire maneuver.
Since the winds were very gusty, the safety pilot pedal input
is very active while the ACLAWS feedback adjusts for the
changes in wind directions. The response of pitch, roll, and
yaw rate are shown in Fig. 17. Note that during the turn, the
yaw rate reaches 25 deg per second. Figure 18 shows the
heading capture as well as pitch and roll attitudes. Figure 19
shows that the position drifts less than 5 ft during the turn,
and then corrects back to the starting location once the turn
is complete. Note that this is under high gusty winds with
no pilot corrective action by the cyclic. The altitude re-
sponse is shown in Fig. 20. Note that the GPS altitude is
held within 3 ft satisfying the requirement for desired per-
formance.

ADS-33 Pirouette MTE. The purpose of the ADS-33 pir-
ouette MTE (ADS-33 Section 3.11.5), is to check the ability
to accomplish precision control of the aircraft simultane-
ously in the pitch, roll, yaw, and heave axes. The maneuver
is to be flown in low to moderate wind conditions. The ma-
neuver is performed as follows:

0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-20
0
20
40
H
p

(
f
t
)
Pressure Altitude
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
610
620
630
640
H
g
p
s
GPS Altitude
Time (s)

Fig. 15. Vertical MTE - altitude response.
15



0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-3.5
-3
-2.5
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
Time (s)
P
e
d
a
l

I
n
p
u
t

(
i
n
c
h
)


Safety Pilot
Pilot
SCAS
TrimAct. Pos. [Ped_Detent_SW]

Fig. 16. Hovering turn MTE - pedal input.

0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-10
0
10
Filtered Pitch Rate
q
_
f

(
d
e
g
/
s
)
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-10
0
10
Filtered Roll Rate
p
_
f

(
d
e
g
/
s
)
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-50
0
50
Filtered Yaw Rate
r
_
f

(
d
e
g
/
s
)
Time (s)

Fig. 17. Hovering turn MTE body rate response.
16



0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-6
-4
-2
0
2
4
6
8
E
u
l
e
r

A
n
g
l
e

(
d
e
g
)


u
|
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-100
-50
0
50
Time (s)
H
e
a
d
i
n
g

(
d
e
g
)

Fig. 18. Hovering turn MTE attitude response.

Time (Sec)
____Ye (ft)
- - - -Xe (ft)
(X, Y) Position - feet

Fig. 19. Hovering turn MTE position response.
17
- Stabilize the aircraft in a 10-ft hover over a point on the
circumference of a 100-ft radius circle with the nose of
the aircraft pointed at the center of the circle.

- Laterally translate the aircraft around the circle keeping
the nose pointed at the center of the circle and following
the circumference of the circle.

- Maintain a groundspeed of 68 kn throughout the lateral
translation.

- Complete the maneuver in a stabilized hover at the start-
ing point.

Flight test results of ADS-33 pirouette MTE test is shown
Figs. 21 24. The tests were flown with the pilot wearing
foggles to simulate degraded visual conditions. With the
Bell CLAWS engaged, this maneuver requires the pilot to
use lateral cyclic and pedal controls, and make only minor
corrections with the longitudinal cyclic. The collective re-
mains in the detent position throughout the maneuver. Fig-
ure 21 shows the inertia longitudinal and lateral ground
speeds. It is shown that the average groundspeed is higher
than the required rate at approximately 10 kn, resulting in a
total maneuver time of approximately 52 seconds. Figure 22

shows that the GPS altitude variation is within 4 ft during
the pirouette maneuver. Figure 23 shows the pitch, roll, and
yaw attitude response. The pirouette maneuver circle data is
plotted in Fig. 24. Note that the test pilot flew this maneuver
without any practice runs. The results indicate that the ma-
neuver flown in degraded visual conditions is within ADS-
33 requirements. The test pilot rated the ACLAWS under
this environment with gusty wind as HQR 2 to 3.


CONCLUSIONS
Rapid integration, development, and flight test of advanced
flight control laws were accomplished using a variety of
control law development tools, simulations, and the NRC
412 ASRA. Both full and partial authority control law ver-
sions were developed using the three-loop control laws as
the core. The techniques used allowed a small team of engi-
neers and pilots to quickly develop, flight test, evaluate, and
demonstrate new control laws with very few hours of flight
test time. The handling qualities were evaluated by flying
selected ADS-33 MTEs with favorable results. Develop-
ment of the ACLAWS continues in 2010 with the introduc-
tion of new advanced automated features that are possible
once the core control laws are in place.

0 5 10 15 20 25 30
4
6
8
10
H
p

(
f
t
)
Pressure Altitude
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
612
614
616
618
H
g
p
s
GPS Altitude
Time (s)

Fig. 20. Hovering Turn MTE altitude response.
18






0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
-3
-2
-1
0
1
V
x
_
e
a
r
t
h

(
k
n
o
t
)
Inertial Speed - Forward
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
-10
-5
0
5
V
y
_
e
a
r
t
h

(
k
n
o
t
)
Inertial Speed - Sideward

Fig. 21. Pirouette MTE ground speed response.

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
0
5
10
15
H
p

(
f
t
)
Pressure Altitude
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
618
620
622
624
H
g
p
s
GPS Altitude
Time (s)

Fig. 22. Pirouette MTE altitude response.
19
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The control law development and demonstration effort
detailed in this paper was accomplished by a small team of
engineers, pilots, and support staff from both Bell Helicopter
and NRC. The success of this program is due to the insight,
dedication, and long hours of the development team. At
every step of the way, the teams primary focus was saving
lives through increased rotorcraft safety. While the level of
demonstrated control law capability is impressive, when the
short timeline and staffing on the program is considered, this
was truly an outstanding effort by those involved. In
addition, the collaborative effort between Bell and NRC was
absolutely essential to achieve this level of accomplishment.
The team members and a short description of their
contributions follow. At Bell Helicopter in Fort Worth,
Texas: J ack Shue, Principal Engineer, Handling Qualities
(control law development technical lead); Stacey Winger,
Principal Engineer, Fly-by-Wire and Control Laws IPT Lead
(project lead); Eric Bird, Principal Engineer, Simulation
(real-time simulation, ASRA Ethernet communications and
flight test support); Kevin Christensen, Principal Engineer,
Handling Qualities (control law development and flight
testing); Troy Caudill, Principal Test Pilot (test pilot for the
control law development); Nilesh Sahani, Sr. Engineering
Specialist, Handling Qualities (partial authority control law
development and flight testing); Ashok Agnihotri, Tech
Fellow, Technology (control law development consultation
and program oversight); Nick Lappos, Chief Technology
Officer (control law development consultation and program
direction). At the National Research Council of Canada,
Flight Research Laboratory, Ottawa, Ontario: Arthur W.
Gubbels, Research Officer, Flight Mechanics and Avionics
(ASRA FBW system development and flight test engineer);

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
2
4
6
E
u
l
e
r

A
n
g
l
e

(
d
e
g
)


u
|
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
-100
0
100
Time (s)
H
e
a
d
i
n
g

(
d
e
g
)

Fig. 23. Pirouette MTE attitude response.

Xe-position (ft)
Ye-position (ft)
Start Point
Desired Circle
Flight Path
---- 10 ft Circle
---- 15 ft Circle
Center Point
Fig. 24. Pirouette MTE position response.
20

S.J .R.P. Carignan, Group Leader, Flight Mechanics and
Avionics (safety pilot); Kris Ellis, Research Officer, Flight
Mechanics and Avionics (Ethernet communications
development and testing); Carl J ones, ASRA Crew Chief
(ASRA aircraft systems maintenance); Michael Mullins,
ASRA Instrumentation and Electrician (aircraft and FBW
electrical systems development and maintenance).

REFERENCES

1. Schillings, J ., Brown, H., Epp, J ., Kim, S. K., and
Dreier, M. E., Simulation of the Bell/USMC AH1Z
Helicopter Using COPTER/MATLAB/ SIMULINK
Analysis, American Helicopter Society 58th Annual
Forum, Montral, Canada, May 2002
2. MATLAB: The Language of Technical Computing
Using MATLAB, The Math Works Inc., Natick, MA,
1997
3. Tischler, M. B., Cauffman, M. G., "Frequency-
Response Method for Rotorcraft System Identification:
Flight Applications to BO-105 Coupled Rotor/Fuselage
Dynamics," J ournal of the American Helicopter Society,
Vol 37, No. 3, pg 3-17, July, 1992.
4. Christensen, K. T., Campbell, K. G., Griffith, C. D.,
Ivler, C. M., Tischler, M. B., Harding, J . W., Flight
Control Development for the ARH-70 Armed Recon-
naissance Helicopter Program, Presented at the Ameri-
can Helicopter Society 63rd Annual Forum, Virginia
Beach, VA, May 2007.
5. Colbourne, J. D., Frost, C. R., Tischler, M. B., Cheung,
K. K., Hiranaka, D. K., Biezad, D. J ., Control Law De-
sign and Optimization for Rotorcraft Handling Qualities

Criteria Using CONDUIT, Presented at the American
Helicopter Society 55th Annual Forum, Montreal, Que-
bec, Canada, May 25-27, 1999;
6. Shue, S. P., Corrigan, J ., Wood, T., and Ewing, A.,
Longitudinal and Lateral Control Sensitivity Damping
Analysis for Larger (J HL) Rotorcraft in Helicopter
Mode, Proceedings of AHS 2009 paper, Grapevine,
TX, May 2009.
7. Brown, H., Koelzer, H., Ruckel, P., Stepura, M., Real-
time Blade Element Math Model Delivered for USMC
Flight Training Devices, Presented at the American
Helicopter Society 64th Annual Forum, Montral, Can-
ada, April 29 May 1, 2008
8. Shue, S. P., Corrigan, J ., and H. Brown, H., Integrated
Simulation and Control Tool COPTER S-function
Matlab Control Law Desktop Simulator, Proceedings
of AHS 2009 paper, Grapevine, TX, May 2009.
9. Mosterman, P. J ., Prabhu, S., Dowd, A., Glass, J ., Erk-
kinen, T., Kluza, J ., and Shenoy, R., Embedded Real-
Time Control via MATLAB, Simulink, and xPC Tar-
get, Handbook of Networked and Embedded Control
Systems, DOI: 10.1007/0-8176-4404-0_18, November
14, 2007
10. Gubbels, A.W., Carignan, S.J .R.P. The NRC Bell 412
Advanced System Research Aircraft A New Facility
for Airborne Simulation, Canadian Aeronautics and
Space J ournal, Vol 46, No. 2, J un, 2000, p106-115
11. ADS-33E-PRF, 29 Feb. 2000, cage code 18876, Aero-
nautical Design Standard Performance Specification
Handling Qualities Requirements for Military Rotor-
craft,
http://www.redstone.army.mil/amrdec/sepd/tdmd/Docu
ments/ads33front.pdf