American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

1
TURNAROUND BUMP REDUCTION IN A LINEAR
HYDRAULIC ACTUATOR BY MECHANICAL MEANS
Steven D. Beard
*

NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA, 94035-1000
The Vertical Motion Simulator at NASA Ames Research Center utilizes custom non-
hydrostatic hydraulic actuators to drive its roll, pitch, yaw and longitudinal axis. These
actuators have operated flawlessly with one exception; they exhibit a phenomenon that is
detrimental to the motion fidelity called Turnaround Bump (TAB). TAB occurs in all
hydraulic actuators with seals at the onset of motion (extending or retracting) when the
friction on the seals changes from the higher static (no motion) to the lower dynamic
(motion) friction. The sudden change in the friction force causes an acceleration spike that
can be felt by the pilot thus giving a false motion cue. In order to reduce TAB without going
to costly hydrostatic actuators, a cost effective mechanism was designed that constantly
rotates the piston rod end of the actuator so that the piston rod never stops moving relative
to the seals even when the actuator stops moving in the linear direction.
Nomenclature
= rotational acceleration of yaw axis
1
A = pressure area of hydraulic actuator
C
D = perpendicular distance from center of rotation to the center line of hydraulic actuator
ACT
F = weight of yaw actuator
NFS
F = total normal force on hydraulic seals caused by the weight of the actuator, assumed constant
SR
F = radial force on hydraulic seals due to compression
I = rotation inertia of yaw axis
SPIKE
P = difference between
START
P and
STOP
P
START
P = differential pressure in hydraulic actuator required to start motion
STOP
P = minimum differential pressure required to keep in motion
1 2
, R R = reaction forces at end of yaw actuator
KS
= coefficient of kinetic friction in hydraulic seals
SS
= coefficient of static friction in hydraulic seals
R
= coefficient of rolling friction in yaw bearing
= rotational velocity of yaw axis
CAB
W = weight of simulator cab

I. Introduction
he Vertical Motion Simulator (VMS) at NASA Ames Research Center has been in operation since the mid
1970s. The VMS is a one-of-a-kind simulation research and development facility. It offers unparalleled
capabilities for conducting experiments involving some of the most challenging aerospace disciplines. The VMS,
shown in Fig. 1, is a very large, six-degrees-of-freedom electro-mechanical/electro-hydraulic servo system. It is
located in and partially supported by a specially constructed 73-foot-wide by 36-foot-deep by 120-foot-high tower,

*
Mechanical Systems Engineer, Aerospace Simulation Operations Branch, NASA Ames Research Center, MS 243-
5, Moffett Field, CA 94035-1000
T
AIAA Modeling and Simulation Technologies Conference and Exhibit
16 - 19 August 2004, Providence, Rhode Island
AIAA 2004-5153
This material is declared a work of the U.S. Government and is not subject to copyright protection in the United States.

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

2
whose entire interior volume is available for the operation of
the motion system. The motion platform consists of a 40-foot
long beam, which can travel up to 30 feet vertically. On top
of the beam is the lateral carriage that traverses the 40-foot
length of the beam. Then, on top of the carriage is a
longitudinal carriage and gimbal system that can
simultaneously provide 4 feet longitudinal, 18 degrees pitch,
18 degrees roll, and 24 degrees yaw (see Fig. 1).
In addition to its size, another unique feature of this facility
is that it can simulate the physical cueing environment of a
large range of vehicles. Five cabs representing the cockpits of a
variety of vehicles - each with its own instruments, controls,
visual display and audio cueing systems - can be placed on the
motion cueing system of the VMS
1
(see Fig. 2).
The roll, pitch,
yaw and
longitudinal axes
rely on custom
hydraulic actuators
to drive their
motion. These axes
exhibit a
phenomenon known as Turnaround Bump. Turnaround Bump
occurs when the hydraulic actuator comes to a stop and then tries to
move again. As the axis travels through zero velocity a disturbance
force is introduced in the opposite direction of the hydraulic actuator
motion. The disturbance force is caused by friction, also known as
stiction, in both the actuators hydraulic seals and axis bearings.
When the force caused by the differential pressure in the actuator becomes less than the force due to kinetic
friction minus the inertial force due to the simulator cab, the actuator stops. The minimum differential pressure
required to keep the actuator moving is expressed in Eq. (1), using the yaw axis of the VMS as an example (See Fig.
3 and 4).

1 1 1
( ) / ( ) / /( )
STOP KS SR NFS R CAB C
P F F A W A I A D < + + (1)

In order for the actuator to start moving again the force caused by the differential pressure in the actuator must
be greater than the static friction in the actuator and bearings as expressed in Eq. (2):

1 1
( ) / ( ) / when and
START SS SR NFS R CAB
P F F A W A > + + = 0 = 0 (2)
Figure 1: Vertical Motion Simulator Complex.

Figure 2: VMS Simulator Cab.

Figure 3: Yaw actuator layout, side view.

Figure 4: Yaw actuator layout, top view.

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

3
The differential pressure to start the actuator moving must also be greater than the minimum required pressure to
keep the actuator moving. The difference between the differential pressure to start the actuator moving and the
minimum pressure to keep the actuator moving is what causes the Turnaround Bump. This pressure spike can be
expressed by subtracting Eq. (2) from Eq. (1) with 0 and =0 = :

1 1 1 1
( ) / / ( ) / /
SPIKE SS SR NFS R CAB KS SR NFS R CAB
P F F A W A F F A W A = + + + (3)
Which can be simplified to:

1
(( ) / )( )
SPIKE SR NFS SS KS
P F F A = + (4)
The pressure spike expressed in Eq. (4) is the minimum pressure spike that would occur due to the seals
regardless of the control system driving the hydraulic actuator. The VMS yaw axis control system drives the
position, so when the control system commands a new position from a stop the pressure must build up to P
START
as
described in Eq. (2). As the pressure builds up the control system is also building up error so when the hydraulic
actuator does break loose from the stiction the control system will cause the differential pressure to overshoot and
cause a greater pressure spike.
The minimum pressure spike that can be expected from a position driven controls system is expressed by Eq. (4),
but depending on the control system, this pressure can be much higher. An example of the performance of a
position driven hydraulic actuator can be seen in Fig. 5.
II. Design Solution
In order to reduce the Turnaround Bump in the yaw axis of the VMS, a mechanism was designed to eliminate
the static friction in the yaw hydraulic actuator. The Turnaround Bump Reduction Mechanism (TABRM) constantly
rotates the piston rod end of the yaw hydraulic actuator so that the piston rod end of the actuator is always moving
relative to the housing, because of this, the seals inside the actuator never transition from kinetic to static friction
(see Fig. 6 and 7). A similar mechanism has been designed and patented
2
though the TABRM was developed
independently.




Figure 5: Turnaround Bump at zero angular velocity.

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

4

The TABRM has a 24V DC motor that rotates the rod end at approximately 10 rpm. The motor turns a shaft that
rotates a gear train (1:1 gear ratio) located in the gear housing that in turn rotates the rod end that is screwed into the
piston rod of the yaw actuator. A clutch is inserted in the TABRM to insure that the motor cannot be overloaded
(see Fig. 8).
With the TABRM installed, the pressure required to start the hydraulic actuator can be expressed by Eq. (5),
which replaces the coefficient of static friction from the seals with the coefficient of kinetic friction from Eq. (1).

1 1
( ) / / when 0 and 0
START KS SR NFS R CAB
P F F A W A > + + = = (5)
The pressure spike with the TABRM installed can be expressed by Eq. (6), which replaces the coefficient of
static friction from the seals with the coefficient of kinetic friction from Eq. (4).
0
SPIKE
P = (6)
Eq. (8) shows that with the TABRM installed there should be no additional pressure spike due to the sudden
change in friction from static to kinetic on the seals. The yaw axis position driven control system on the VMS will
still have a pressure spike because P
START
>0 due to the kinetic friction on the seals and the rolling friction of the
yaw bearing.
III. TABRM Testing
Sine sweeps were performed on the yaw axis of the VMS ranging from .125 Hz to .500 Hz while the
commanded position, position feedback, velocity, acceleration, and the differential pressure were recorded with and
without the TABRM installed. The friction in the yaw bearing was determined by using a load cell to measure the
amount of force required to move the yaw axis with the yaw actuator disengaged.

Figure 6: Yaw actuator with existing rod end.

Figure 7: Yaw actuator with TABRM installed.

Figure 8: Turnaround Bump Reduction Mechanism (TABRM) design.


American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

5
IV. TABRM Testing Results
Subtracting the friction force in the yaw bearing (see Table 2) from the force required to move the yaw axis from
a stop gives the static friction force in the hydraulic actuator (see Table 3). The TABRM reduced the static friction
in the hydraulic actuator by 47.2% when retracting and 51.7% when extending (see Table 3). The overall static
friction in the yaw axis was reduced by 42.3% when retracting and 45.8% when extending (see Table 1).
The TABRM was most effective when used during maneuvers that slowly approach and depart zero velocity,
such as a low frequency sine wave. When comparing the performance of the yaw axis with the existing system (see
Fig. 9) against the performance with the TABRM engaged (see Fig. 10), there are obvious differences.

Table 1: Force and Pressure Required by Hydraulic
Actuator to Move Yaw Axis from a Stop
Diff. Pressure Force Diff. Pressure Force
(psi) (lbs) (psi) (lbs)
Extending -44.5 -874.4 -24.1 -473.6 45.8%
Retracting 48.2 947.3 27.8 546.5 42.3%
Existing System
Direction of Motion % Change
System with TABRM

Table 2: Rolling Friction in Yaw Bearing
Force
(lbs)
Extending -98.7
Retracting 98.7
Direction of Motion

Table 3: Friction Force in Hydraulic Actuator Required to
Overcome to Start Motion
Existing System System with TABRM % Change
(lbs) (lbs)
Extending -775.71 -374.94 51.7%
Retracting 848.58 447.81 47.2%
Direction of Motion


Figure 9: Existing System (Before TABRM, .125 Hz)

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

6
With the TABRM engaged and the hydraulic actuator oscillating at .125 Hz, the acceleration spike is reduced as
much as 36.6% and the peak differential pressure is reduced by as much as 19% as compared to the existing system.
Also, with the TABRM engaged, the amount of time the hydraulic actuator is stuck at zero velocity is reduced by
approximately 50% (see Fig. 11).

The TABRM is less effective during more aggressive maneuvers such as higher frequency sine waves.
Comparing the performance of the yaw axis with the existing system (see Fig. 12) to that with the TABRM engaged
(see Fig. 13), the differences are less obvious.

Figure 10: TABRM Engaged (.125 Hz)
-2.5
-2.0
-1.5
-1.0
-0.5
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8 5.9 6.0 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5
Time, sec.
A
n
g
u
l
a
r

V
e
l
o
c
i
t
y
,

D
e
g
/
s
Existing System
TABRM Engaged

Figure 11: Angular velocity with and without the TABRM (.125 Hz)

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

7
With the TABRM engaged and the hydraulic actuator oscillating at .50 Hz, the highest acceleration spike is
only reduced by 9.3%, and the highest differential pressure spike is only reduced by 4.3% as compared to
the existing system.
The TABRM becomes less of a factor when the differential pressure in the actuator is greater than the
differential pressure required to overcome the static friction at zero velocity. The differential pressure at zero
velocity when the yaw axis is oscillating at .125 Hz (see Fig. 10) is much lower than the differential pressure when
the yaw axis is oscillating at .50 Hz (see Fig. 13) because the higher differential pressure is needed to slow the yaw
axis down from the more aggressive maneuver. When the differential pressure is greater than the pressure required
to overcome the static friction, the hydraulic actuator will start to move almost instantaneously, rather than pausing
slightly at zero velocity, as seen in Fig. 11.

Figure 12: Existing System (Before TABRM, .50 Hz)

Figure 13: TABRM Engaged (.50 Hz)

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

8
V. Future Turnaround Bump Reduction Efforts
The TABRM greatly reduces the static friction but does not affect the kinetic friction. The yaw actuator on the
VMS is mounted horizontally and the center of gravity (CG) is located between the two mounting points. The
weight of the hydraulic actuator causes a high normal force on the seals due to the racking between the piston rod
end and the housing (see Fig. 14).
Adding an external moment at the pivot point can reduce the kinetic friction (see Fig. 15). The optimum normal
force on the seals is when the external moment eliminates the racking between the piston rod end and the actuator
housing. Ideally, the moment would change such that the actuator housing is always fixed with reference to the
piston rod end.
In application it is difficult to apply a moment that exactly counters the change in the location of the piston rod
end with respect to the housing. Currently, a spring-loaded mechanism is being tested on the VMS that is
experimentally adjusted to best approximate the required moment to obtain the lowest starting pressure.
VI. Conclusion
Turnaround bump cannot be avoided with a hydraulic actuator that has seals. Turnaround bump is not just a
phenomenon of the VMS but is prevalent in many applications that use hydraulic actuators such as hexapod motion
systems and robotic applications. There will always be friction from the seals, so there will always be a disturbance
force introduced into the control system when the hydraulic actuator tries to move from a stop. There are two ways
to try and reduce the turnaround bump; one is to reduce the friction in the system, and the second is to change the
control system.
The control system has a large affect on the turnaround bump. Typically, the better response a control system
has the worse it handles disturbances. There is a balance that must be met between response and disturbance
rejection when tuning the control system. If the control system is tuned to reduce the turnaround bump then the
response will be more sluggish. If the system is tuned for maximum performance then the effect of the turnaround
bump will be more prominent.
Regardless of the control system, every effort should be made to reduce the friction from the seals so that the
control system can be as responsive as possible. The TABRM does not eliminate the turnaround bump but reduces
it enough such that it is unnoticeable by the pilot.
References
1
Giovannetti, D.P., High-Fidelity Motion Simulator Rapid Cockpit Implementation Demonstrated Using a Blackhawk
Configuration, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA), 2002-4795

2
Sheldon, P., Sheldon/Van Someren, Inc., Wauwatosa, Wi, U.S. Patent for a Actuator Cylinder with Mechanism to Reduce
Stiction Patent No. 5,727,445 Issued Mar. 17, 1998

Figure 14: Free Body Diagram of Unbalanced Yaw Actuator

Figure 15: Free Body Diagram of Actuator with External Moment