Development of Adaptive Helicopter Seat

for Aircrew Vibration Reduction

YONG CHEN,* VIRESH WICKRAMASINGHE AND DAVID G. ZIMCIK
Institute for Aerospace Research, National Research Council, Ottawa, Canada, K1A0R6

ABSTRACT: The high level vibration of helicopter flight can cause physiological harm to the
aircrew and may lead to occupational health issues. This article presents the development of
an adaptive helicopter seat mount to reduce the vibration levels transmitted to the aircrew
body. Flight test on a Bell-412 helicopter was conducted to measure the aircrew body vibra-
tion levels and vibration transmission through the seat structures. Experimental modal anal-
ysis on a Bell-412 co-pilot seat equipped with a mannequin was carried out to investigate the
seat/aircrew dynamics and identify critical vibration modes. Based on observations from the
configuration, an adaptive helicopter seat mount has been developed. Two stacked piezoelec-
tric actuators were installed on the seat frame as active struts to provide effective control
authority to the critical mannequin vibration modes. A proof-of-concept adaptive helicopter
seat has been retrofitted on a full-scale Bell-412 co-pilot seat and the performance has been
evaluated through extensive closed-loop control experiments. Test results demonstrated simul-
taneous suppression of the critical mannequin vibration modes and achieved significant global
reduction of the body vibration levels, which verified the effectiveness of the adaptive
helicopter seat mount concept for helicopter aircrew vibration reduction applications.

Key Words: stacked piezoelectric actuator, helicopter seat vibration control, adaptive real-
time controller.

INTRODUCTION aerodynamic loads from the rotor blades in order to

IGH vibration and noise levels are undesirable char-
H acteristics of helicopters during flight. The high levels
of vibration transmitted to the aircrew body can cause
discomfort and may interfere with their operating
performance in situational awareness and decision
making during missions. Recently, adverse health effects
due to extended duration of whole body vibration expo-
sure including pilot neck and spine strain injuries have
become a major concern among the rotary aircraft
aircrew communities (Castelo-Branco, 1999; Smith,
2002). These vibration induced health issues will
become more severe when additional instruments, such
as the Head-Up Display (HUD) and Night Vision
Goggle (NVG) system, are integrated onto helicopter
pilot helmets in military operations. Therefore, reduc-
tion of vibration levels experienced by helicopter aircrew
is essential to enhance the ride quality of the vehicle and
to improve the operating environment for the aircrew.
Most research efforts in the helicopter vibration
control field focus on reduction of the unsteady
*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
E-mail: Eric.Chen@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca
Figures 1—8 and 11—15 appear in color online: http://jim.sagepub.com
achieve global suppression of helicopter vibration
levels. However, successful applications on full-scale
vehicles are limited due to restrictions in high efficiency
actuators, heavy weight penalties, system complexities,
and certification issues. To reduce the whole body vibra-
tion levels experienced by the helicopter aircrew, an
alternate approach is to design adaptive seat mounts
for the aircrew to reduce vibration locally.
Currently, helicopter seats are designed primarily to
meet crashworthy criteria while vibration isolation is
achieved passively through the seat cushions. However,
the impedance properties of the conventional passive
seat cushions are difficult to optimize without
compromising aircraft handling quality and seat
comfort. Most seat cushions are designed relatively
firm to avoid excessive displacement during flight
maneuvers. Varying pilot weight and flight configura-
tions also impose compromises in the design of helicop-
ter seat cushions. In contrast, an adaptive seat mount is
able to address the variation in vibratory frequencies
due to changes in aircrew size and flight configuration
through embedded adaptive control systems. Moreover,
adaptive seat mount system does not require significant
changes to helicopter structures or modification to the
rotor and flight control systems. Therefore, the adaptive

JOURNAL OF INTELLIGENT MATERIAL SYSTEMS AND STRUCTURES, Vol. 22—March 2011 489
1045-389X/11/05 0489—14 $10.00/0 DOI: 10.1177/1045389X11400343
© The Author(s), 2011. Reprints and permissions:
http://www.sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
Downloaded from jim.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on September 15, 2016
490
seat mount approach offers a viable solution to reduce
the harmful vibration effects on helicopter aircrew
health over broad operating conditions.
Several semi-active seat vibration isolation devices
have been investigated for heavy industrial vehicles
based on emerging active material actuators, including
the magnetorheological (MR) and electrorheological
(ER) dampers (Cai and Chen, 2004; Man et al., 2005).
Hiemenz et al. (2008) developed a semi-active MR
damper-based suspension system for helicopter seat
damping control. However, the semi-active systems are
known to be ‘soft’ to high frequency excitations while
‘stiff’ to low frequency excitations. Therefore, the vibra-
tion isolation performance in the low frequency range
can be compromised, especially at the 1/rev regime
which is typically around 5 Hz.
In this article, an adaptive helicopter seat mount is
developed using stacked piezoelectric actuators to
provide effective vibration isolation to the aircrew with-
out compromising the aircrew comfort. Helicopter
vibration spectra are obtained through flight tests and
the seat dynamic are characterized using experimental
modal analysis techniques. The effectiveness of the
adaptive seat mount system is demonstrated through
extensive closed-loop tests on a mechanical shaker
using representative helicopter floor vibration profiles.
CHARACTERIZATION OF HELICOPTER
SEAT DYNAMICS
Aircrew Body Vibration
Flight test was conducted on a NRC four-bladed Bell-
412 helicopter to measure the vibration levels and
spectra experienced by the helicopter aircrew. The stan-
dard Bell-412 non-armored energy absorption seat seen
in Figure 1 was used during the flight test. It weighed
approximately 50 lbs. The seat bucket and cushions were
attached to the seat rails through the energy absorption
tube column and a shear pin. The shear pin was pre-
engineered with a notch and would break in the case of
a crash, allowing the seat bucket and pilot to slide
downwards along the rails. The springs fitted inside the
energy absorption tube was designed to miti- gate the
impact energy and provide the required crash protection
to the pilot.
A total of 16 miniature accelerometers were instru-
mented to measure the vibration levels of the pilot, co-
pilot and their seats. The measured acceleration data
were used to characterize the vibration transmissi- bility
from the floor to the aircrew body. Selected locations
included the aircrew helmet and shoulder, seat cushion,
seat base, and helicopter floor. At each location,
vibrations in the fore/aft (X) and Vertical (Z) directions
were measured simultaneously because these
represented the two major directions that caused the
Downloaded from jim.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on September 15, 2016
Y. CHEN ET AL.
Bell-412 pilot seat
Safety belt attachment
Shear pin
Side rails
Seat base
Energy absorption tube
Figure 1. Bell-412 non-armored pilot seat.
aircrew health concerns. The tested pilot size represented
a 50 percentile adult male and the co-pilot represented a
95 percentile adult male in terms of height and weight.
The aircrew seating postures and accelerometer loca-
tions are shown in Figure 2. The flight plan covered
the major flight conditions of the vehicle, which included
ground run, translational lift, hover, and several cruise
speeds. The measured vibration spectra were analyzed
between 1 and 50 Hz.
Flight test results demonstrated that the vibration
spectra at the floor, seat and aircrew body were domi-
nated by the N/rev harmonics of the blade passage
frequency despite the variation of vibration levels due
to changing flight conditions. For the floor vibration,
the dominant peak was 21.5 Hz, which corresponded
to the 4/rev of rotor passage frequency (N¼ 4); other
peaks included the 1/rev, 2/rev, 6/rev, and 8/rev.
Vibration levels measured on the aircrew body, includ-
ing helmet and shoulder locations, also varied with flight
conditions. In general, the vibration levels increased
with flight speed. The worst vibration scenario accord-
ing to the aircrew’s perception was the translational lift
condition, in which significant 1/rev and 4/rev peaks
were observed simultaneously in both the fore/aft
and vertical directions of the pilot and co-pilot helmets
and shoulders. The vibration spectra of the fore/aft and
vertical directions measured at the pilot helmet location
at typical flight conditions are shown in Figure 3.
Analysis results revealed that the vibration transmis-
sion from the floor to the pilot body was generally
 Aircrew Vibration Reduction 491

Pilot configuration Copilot configuration

Helmet location
Helmet location

Shoulder location

Shoulder location

Instrument panel

Seat cushion

Floor

Seat cushion
Seat bottom
Seat bottom

Figure 2. Accelerometer arrangement on the aircrew body and seat structures.

similar despite the differences in input vibration levels

and spectral components. The frequency spectra of the
(a) 0.10
Ground RMS: 0.07g
vibration transmission path from the floor to the helmet
at 120kt forward flight condition are shown in Figure 4.
Front-Back vibration amplitude (g)

Hover RMS: 0.05g

0.08 Translational RMS: 0.09g More details of the floor, seat and aircrew body vibra-
120kt RMS: 0.06g
tion levels and spectra can be found in a previous
0.06 publication (Wickramasinghe and Chen, 2008).
Comparing the vibration spectra at the floor and aircrew
0.04 body locations, it was found that the higher frequency
vibration peaks were reduced effectively through the
0.02 isolation effect of the passive seat cushion as well as
the aircrew body. However, the aircrew body vibration
0
at the low frequency range was amplified in both fore/aft
0 10 20 30 40 50 and vertical directions, especially at the 1/rev harmonics.
Frequnecy (Hz)
Due to the difference in aircrew weight and posture at
(b) 0.10 the time of the measurement, the aircrew body vibration
Ground RMS:0.07g
Hover RMS:0.08g
amplitude also varied.
Vertical vibration amplitude (g)

0.08 Translational RMS:0.08g The flight test results demonstrated that the helicopter
120kt RMS:0.06g aircrew were exposed to high levels of whole body vibra-
0.06 tions during flight. The vibration levels varied substan-
tially depending on flight conditions as well as the
0.04
aircrew weight and posture. Significant 1/rev and 4/rev
vibration peaks were observed on the aircrew body. The
flight test also verified that the currently in-service
0.02
passive seat cushions did not provide satisfactory vibra-
tion isolations at the low frequency regime which may be
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 particularly harmful to the aircrew health. Recognizing
Frequnecy (Hz) these challenges, it is necessary to develop innovative
Figure 3. Fore/aft and vertical vibration levels measured at the pilot technologies to reduce the vibration levels experienced
helmet location. by the aircrew.

Downloaded from jim.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on September 15, 2016

492 Y. CHEN ET AL.

Experimental Modal Analysis of Helicopter
Seat Configurations
Helicopter seat structures should be designed to
satisfy both crashworthiness criteria and vibration
isolation performance in accordance to the MIL
standard (MIL-S-85510(AS), 1981; MIL-S-58095A
(AV), 1986). However, the vibration isolation perfor-
mance of most helicopter seats is implemented through
(a) 0.15
Pilot floor
Pilot seat
Vertical vibration amplitude (g)
the seat cushions only, which may not be able to provide
satisfactory vibration isolation under varied aircrew
weight and flight configurations. Therefore, an experi-
mental modal analysis was conducted on a standard non-
armored Bell-412 co-pilot seat to identify the major
vibration modes of the seat frame that may contribute to
the significant aircrew body vibrations.
The LMS Test.Lab experimental modal analysis
system was used for this purpose. The Bell-412 co-pilot
seat was installed on a 10,000 lbs(f) Unholtz-Dicke
mechanical shaker table in the vertical direction for
RMS: 0.10g modal tests. Since the MIL-S-85510 standard stipulates
RMS: 0.09g
that no vibration amplification shall occur within the

0.12 Pilot shoulder RMS: 0.05g

Pilot helmet RMS: 0.05g frequency range of 4 to 50 Hz, a random vibration
spectrum within the range and a level of 0.05g rms was
0.09
used to drive the seat structure through the seat frame
serving as the excitation source for the experimental
0.06 modal identification.
The Bell-412 seat cushion was attached to an L-
0.03 shaped composite seat base which is attached to the seat
frame, as shown in Figure 1. Initially the modal test was
0 conducted on the Bell-412 co-pilot seat structure only,
0 10 20 30 40 50
Frequnecy (Hz) without mannequin on the seat. Two major vibra- tion
(b) 0.15 modes were identified using the modal analysis curve
Copilot floor RMS: 0.09g
Copilot seat RMS: 0.09g fitting technique known as PolyMax, and shown in
Vertical vibration amplitude (g)

Copilot shoulder RMS: 0.08g

0.12
Copilot helmet RMS: 0.09g
Figure 5. Since the seat cushion/base component was
attached to the vertical seat frame through a rectangular
0.09 sliding guide rail to allow for aircrew vertical position
adjustment, the clearance between the rails introduced a
0.06 bending mode to the seat cushion/base structure at
9.0 Hz. The second mode was as a major bending
0.03
mode at 36.4 Hz due to the cantilever type arrangement
of the seat cushion/base component.
To evaluate the impact of a seated aircrew to the
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 dynamics of helicopter seats, a mannequin equipped
Frequnecy (Hz) with a flight helmet was strapped to the seat in a
Figure 4. Vibration spectra of the transmission path for the pilot and normal seating posture using the accommodated safety
co-pilot. belt. The mannequin was provided by the Quality

Solid line: deformed shape

Dotted line: undeformed shape

Mode 1: 9.0 Hz Mode 2: 36.4 Hz

Figure 5. Bell-412 seat vibration modes.

Downloaded from jim.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on September 15, 2016

 Aircrew Vibration Reduction
Engineering Test Establishment (QETE) of the
Department of National Defence (DND) of Canada.
It was a ‘Sierra Sam’ dummy representing a 95 percentile
male occupant. Since the pilot is usually involved in
various operations and the seating posture may change
constantly, the mannequin configuration only provided
a qualitative mass distribution of a seated pilot on the
seat structure rather than a quantitative representation
of the human pilot vibration levels. However, the
mannequin configuration provided important informa-
tion about the dynamics of the seat/aircrew structures
including the major modes despite the fact that the
modal frequencies identified may be different from the
actual configuration due to differences in pilot weight
and postures.
Modal test and analysis of this configuration identi-
fied six vibration modes, as shown in Figure 6. Due to
the addition of mannequin mass, the bending seat mode
decreased to 5.6 Hz (Mode 1). The mannequin head/
helmet showed a localized bending mode in the fore/
aft direction at 9.7 Hz (Mode 2). Due to the mannequin
mass and seat cushion stiffness, a vertical mannequin
mode was identified at 10.8 Hz (Mode 3). The cushion
on the tilted seat back introduced two major vibration
modes in the fore/aft direction: a mannequin body
bending mode at 16.6 Hz (Mode 4) and a combined
Solid line: deformed shape
Dotted line: undeformed shape
Mode 1: 5.6 Hz
Mode 4: 16.6 Hz
Figure 6. Bell-412 seat/mannequin vibration modes.
Downloaded from jim.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on September 15, 2016
493
mannequin head/body movement mode at 19.8 Hz
(Mode 5). Both vibration modes incurred significant
vibration levels to the mannequin head/helmet in the
fore/aft direction. A second bending mode of the seat
cushion/bucket/frame was also identified at 43.2 Hz due
to the mass of the mannequin. Analyzing the vibration
spectra revealed that the vibration modes at 5.6, 9.7,
10.8, 16.6, and 19.8 Hz contributed dominantly to the
vibration levels at the mannequin helmet location.
Suppression of these vibration modes would lead to a
relief of the back and neck injury problem to the
helicopter aircrew.
ADAPTIVE SEAT MOUNT FOR AIRCREW
VIBRATION REDUCTION
Proof-of-Concept Adaptive Seat Mount Configuration
Measurement of aircrew body vibration levels during
Bell-412 flight test revealed an amplified vibration
phenomenon at the low frequency range. Based on the
modal test results, it was introduced by the dynamic
coupling between the seat bending mode at 5.6 Hz and
the 1/rev rotor aerodynamic input. Increase of seat
frame support stiffness at critical locations could elimi-
nate this vibration mode and avoid the amplification of
Mode 2: 9.7 Hz Mode 3: 10.8 Hz
Mode 5: 19.8 Hz Mode 6: 43.2 Hz
494 Y. CHEN ET AL.

Helmet accelerometers vibrations at the corresponding frequency regime. Based

on this observation, two stacked piezoelectric actuators
were installed as active struts to support the seat bucket
Mannequin
as shown in Figure 7. The two struts were connected to
each side of the L-shaped seat bucket through two care-
fully designed attachment mechanisms. Shear pins could
be integrated into the attachment mechanisms to allow
for free seat movement downwards in case of a crash to
Body accelerometer meet the crashworthy criteria for helicopter seats.
To evaluate the effectiveness of the active struts to
modify the dynamic properties of the Bell-412 co-pilot
seat in passive mode, an experimental modal test was
Seat frame conducted on the retrofitted seat equipped with the
mannequin. The identified major vibration modes are
shown in Figure 8. With the appended supporting
Piezo actuators
struts, the first seat bending mode at 5.6 Hz was shifted
Shaker accelerometer beyond 50 Hz. Such an increase in this bending mode
would help to avoid the low frequency vibration ampli-
Shaker table fication that was induced by the dynamic coupling
with the 1/rev rotor load. The second bending vibration
mode that was originally located at 43.2 Hz was also
not observed. However, the vibration modes at 9.7,
Figure 7. Adaptive seat mount configuration.
10.8, 16.6, and 19.7 Hz were virtually unchanged.

Solid line: deformed shape

Dotted line: undeformed shape

Mode 1: 9.7 Hz Mode 2: 10.8 Hz

Mode 3: 16.6 Hz Mode 4: 19.7 Hz

Figure 8. Bell-412 seat/mannequin vibration modes with active struts installed.

Downloaded from jim.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on September 15, 2016

 Aircrew Vibration Reduction
These vibration modes should be suppressed in order to
minimize the vibration levels on the helicopter aircrew
body after modification of the seat with the active struts.
It is known that the dominant aircrew body vibrations
are introduced by the N/rev harmonics of the rotor aero-
dynamic load. Active control force is required to coun-
teract the N/rev harmonic loads in order to provide
effective vibration suppression to the aircrew body.
Therefore, the two stacked piezoelectric actuators were
designed to provide active control authority for this
purpose. With a properly designed adaptive control
law, this adaptive seat mount concept should be able
to provide active vibration suppression to the N/rev
harmonics as well as the resonant structural modes to
significantly improve the performance of the current
helicopter seat designs.
Identification of Stack Actuator Control Authority
In the conceptual hardware design phase, two stacked
piezoelectric actuators were selected as the active struts
for the Bell-412 seat. They were developed not only to
increase the static bending stiffness of the seat frame in
order to avoid the low frequency vibration amplification
at 1/rev, but also to suppress the harmonic vibrations at
higher N/rev frequencies through adaptive control.
In the proof-of-concept hardware design, the Pst 150/
14/200 VS20 stacked piezoelectric actuators manufac-
tured by the PIEZOMECHANIK GmbH were selected.
The free stroke was rated at 0.2 mm and the maximum
Bode diagram
From: Piezo
20
Magnitude (dB g/v)
To: Helmet Accel
19.7 Hz
–20 9.7 Hz
16.6 Hz
–40
–60
540
360
To: Helmet Accel
180
Phase (deg)
0
–180
–360
–540
–720
10
Frequency (Hz)
Figure 9. Transfer functions from piezoelectric actuator and mechanical shaker.
Downloaded from jim.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on September 15, 2016
495
tensile force was 1000 lbs(f). The stacked actuators have
been preloaded in a ‘ruggedized’ stainless steel casing for
protection. However, it should be noted that further
investigation is required before the actuators can be
used in military helicopters with confidence. Despite
the fact that the piezoelectric stacked actuators were
used for this proof-of-concept study due to the compact
design features, other candidate designs such as electro-
magnetic linear actuators may qualify to provide the
required control authority.
The proof-of-concept adaptive seat mount has been
retrofitted on a full-scale Bell-412 helicopter co-pilot
seat frame, as shown in Figure 7. The legs and arms of
the 95 percentile mannequin were removed in the active
control study because of the insufficient control author-
ity of the stacked actuators. Accordingly, the tested
mannequin weight was reduced to 150lbs, and was
fastened to the co-pilot seat using the safety belt. The
Bell-412 co-pilot seat structure weighted approximately
50lbs. The two piezoelectric struts were installed
between the shaker table and the L-shaped seat bucket
at a tilt angle, which allowed the adaptive struts to
control the seat vibrations in the vertical and fore/aft
directions simultaneously.
To evaluate the actuation authority of the two active
struts, transfer functions from the mechanical shaker
and the piezoelectric struts to the mannequin helmet
location in the fore/aft direction were identified experi-
mentally, as shown in Figure 9. The transfer functions
demonstrated that the vertical vibration input from the
From: Shaker
9.7 Hz 16.6 Hz
19.7 Hz
10
496
mechanical shaker through the Bell-412 co-pilot seat
frame mainly excited the localized mannequin helmet
mode at 9.7 Hz and the vertical mannequin body mode
at 16.6 Hz. The two stacked piezoelectric struts were
configured in parallel as one control channel in present
investigation. This parallel configuration provided effec-
tive control authorities to the vibration modes at 9.7 and
19.7 Hz. However, it is important to note that the actual
modal parameters could vary depending on the manne-
quin mass and the seat cushion impedance properties.
Therefore, adaptive control laws are required to perform
on-line identification of the transfer functions for effec-
tive vibration suppression of the aircrew body vibrations
when implemented in the vehicle.
Adaptive Control Law for Aircrew Vibration Suppression
The helicopter seat and aircrew body vibrations are
directly driven by the floor vibration input of the vehicle
where the seat frame is installed. Within the frequency
range of interest, it is dominated by the N/rev harmonics
of rotor dynamic load. As shown in the flight test data,
the measured aircrew body vibration was dominated by
the 1/rev and 4/rev harmonic peaks while other higher
N/rev peaks could be ignored due to the passive damp-
ing effect from the seat cushions. Among the strategies
to eliminate harmonic disturbances, the filtered-x feed
forward algorithm has been proven effective to cancel
the harmonic components when the floor vibration is
used as the reliable reference signal.
For the retrofitted adaptive helicopter seat system, the
linear vibration response to the floor vibration input can
be expressed in the modal space as the following:
MX€ þ CX_ þ KX ¼ Ffloor þ Fcontrol
where M, C, and K is the modal mass, damping, and
stiffness matrix, respectively, and X is the modal dis-
placement matrix. The modal parameters of the major
modes have been identified previously using the LMS
Test.Lab modal analysis software. For the closed-loop
adaptive seat system, the Ffloor represents the vibration
input to the seat structures from the base, which is
dominated by the N/rev harmonic disturbance load.
The Fcontrol represents the modal control force provided
by the stacked piezoelectric actuators. Therefore, the
modal displacement of the seat system depends on the
real-time interactions between the floor input and
stacked actuator control input. Through proper control
law design, the vibration of the adaptive seat can be
effectively suppressed.
For helicopter vibrations, the major disturbance
comes from the N/rev harmonic frequencies of the
main rotor speed, and a filtered-x feed-forward adaptive
control law can be applied to minimize the seat vibration
response through active cancellation of the vibration
Downloaded from jim.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on September 15, 2016
Y. CHEN ET AL.
incurred by the N/rev harmonic loads. The filtered-x
feed forward control law is a negative gradient-based
adaptive control law to minimize the error signal, or
the seat vibration in this investigation, that is directly
correlated to a reference signal which is the N/rev
harmonic load in this case. The accelerometer mounted
at the base of the seat structure was able to provide the
required N/rev frequency information within the vibra-
tion signal, and therefore served as the reference signal.
A single-input-single-output (SISO) configured filtered-
x feed forward control law has been implemented on the
adaptive seat mount as shown in Figure 10.
As shown in Figure 10, the disturbance d(k) represents
the aircrew vibration incurred by the N/rev harmonic
excitation loads from the floor, which has been recorded
in the flight test. The error signal is the fore-aft acceler-
ation at the aircrew helmet location. The control path
H(z) represents the transfer function between the
stacked parallel actuators and the fore-aft accelerometer
located on the mannequin helmet, which has been char-
acterized as a linear state-space model. For more
detailed representation of the model, the nonlinearity
of the helicopter seat/aircrew dynamics can be treated
as a lower order time-varying linear system. On-line
system identification technique can be performed to esti-
mate the slowly varying transfer function of the control
path and to update the control law periodically in the
process of closed-loop vibration control.
The adapted control voltage on the stacked piezoelec-
tric actuators U(k) and iterative weights W(z) can be
formulated using the filtered-x LMS algorithm:
UðkÞ ¼ WðkÞx XðkÞ ð2Þ
ð1Þ Wðk þ 1Þ ¼ WðkÞ þ µH^ ðkÞ x X^ ðkÞ ð3Þ
where µ is the convergent coefficient and Xð Þz is the
reference signal. When ideally converged, the equivalent
closed-loop transfer function C(z) between the harmonic
disturbance and the error signal, or the fore-aft acceler-
ation at the mannequin helmet location, can be
expressed as:
1
CðzÞ ¼ m P. ð4Þ
2h i
1 þ nµ .H^ ð j!^i Þ.. e—j!^1i T —1 þ 1
4
i¼1 ej!^i T —1
This transfer function showed multiple equivalent
‘notches’ at the related N/rev frequencies to minimize
the vibration response on the adaptive seat. More
detailed discussion of this filtered-x feed forward algo-
rithm for helicopter vibration reduction has been
published previously (Chen et al., 2005, 2008, 2009).
General overview of the filtered-x LMS algorithms
for harmonic disturbance suppression is found in the lit-
erature (Glover, 1977; Eriksson and Allie, 1989; Morgan

x(k)
W(z)
Reference
signal
^ v(k)
H (z)
x^(k) Filtered-x
Filtered-x LMS
signal
Figure 10. Adaptive feed-forward algorithm for helicopter seat N/rev harmonics suppression.
and Sanford, 1992). Moreover, reconfiguration of
the accelerometers and actuators within the adaptive
seat mount hardware could also enable a multiple- input-
multiple-output control system for improved
performance.
Numerical Simulation of Adaptive Seat
Mount Performance
The adaptive seat mount concept depends on the
capability of the stacked piezoelectric actuators to
provide sufficient displacement and force simulta-
neously for effective reduction of aircrew body vibra-
tions. To enable a conceptual design, a numerical
simulation was conducted to estimate the actuator
authority requirements. The objective was to mitigate
the vibration level at the pilot helmet location because
the dynamic load incurred was assumed to be the
primary source that contributed to the severity of the
aircrew neck and back injuries. Helicopter floor and
aircrew body vibration information obtained from the
flight test was used for this simulation.
Dynamic simulation of the adaptive seat mount was
conducted on the MATLAB Simulink platform to eval-
uate the vibration isolation performance as well as the
required force and stroke from the actuators. The accel-
erometer in the fore/aft direction of the pilot helmet
location was used as the error signal. The adaptive feed-
forward control law was included to reduce the N/rev
harmonics of the aircrew vibrations in the fore/ aft
direction. Studied flight conditions included ground,
hover, and translational lift and several forward cruise
conditions.
Downloaded from jim.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on September 15, 2016
Aircrew Vibration Reduction 497
d(k)
Disturbance
e(k)
+
u(k) + h(k)*u(k)-b(k) Error sensor
H(z)
Control _ Control plus Noise_
v(k)
input Control path Output
^ b^(k)
H(z)
Random
LMS
noise
On-line control path identification
Simulation of the vibration control process using the
adaptive feed-forward control law required both the
dynamics information of the control path as well as
the realistic vibration levels measured at the error
sensor location. In this investigation, the control path
has been experimentally identified as discussed above.
However, the physical limitation of the stack actuators
was not considered. Based on the known information of
the seat structure and pilot weight, the required actua-
tion authority from the stack actuators was estimated.
The primary path represented the vibration distur-
bance input to the pilot, which is generally complex in
nature. In this simulation, the vibration levels measured
at the pilot helmet location during flight test was directly
used as the disturbance signal. The Simulink model is
shown in Figure 11.
It was also important to note that the numerical
simulation was conducted mainly to provide a qualita-
tive feasibility evaluation of the adaptive control
approach to mitigate the pilot vibration levels in order
to estimate the required control authority. The impact of
the proposed struts on the structural dynamics of the
seat structures was not considered. Therefore, the
‘no control’ curve represented the aircrew helmet vibra-
tion level without actuator in place, while the ‘control’
curve represented the predicted helmet vibration level
without considering the impact of the additional strut
stiffness to the seat structures.
Simulation results showed that the aircrew body
vibration levels can be reduced through adaptive control
of the stacked piezoelectric actuators in all representa-
tive flight conditions. Simulation results in translational
flight condition are shown in Figure 12. This flight
498 Y. CHEN ET AL.

FDATool Without Control

Run17_6_Helemt_X

Pilot Helmet Acceleration Filter Design Control Input

With Control

Displacement

Simulation Results

simout
y(n)=Cx(n)+Du(n) To Workspace
x(n+1)=Ax(n)+Bu(n)
Secodnary Control Path
Without Control
5
Mux
Downsample
Reference B-FFT
5 Spectrum
Error Scope
Output Downsample1
Lambda 0.003
Control Adapt Lambda
FDATool
Filtered_X LMS Algorithm 1
Filter Design
CONTROL ON Running 0.2331
Manual Switch RMS
Uncontrolled RMS
0 RMS

Running 0.0944 CONTROL OFF

RMS
Gain4 9.8 RMS Input Acceleration Running
RMS 0.187

RMS Controlled RMS

K Ts K Ts Running 0.000439
z-1 z-1 RMS
Discrete-Time Input Displacement
RMS
Integrator

Figure 11. Simulink block model for seat vibration simulation.

condition was perceived as the worst scenario by the
aircrew mainly due to the high 1/rev peak that led to
significant displacement of the aircrew body. Simulation
results demonstrated that the stacked piezoelectric actu-
ators were able to reduce the 1/rev and 4/rev peaks in
both the fore/aft and vertical directions. The suppres-
sion to 1/rev and 4/rev peaks could result in an overall
reduction of the aircrew body vibration by 33.1% in the
fore/aft direction and 28.1% in the vertical direction.
Examining the displacement output from the piezo-
electric stack actuators as shown in Figure 13, the
displacement required in this case was 0.46 mm in
terms of root mean square (rms) values. The dominant
displacement was required to counteract the 1/rev vibra-
tion harmonics, while the requirement for 4/rev
harmonics was less than 0.1 mm. Compared to the
displacement requirement, the nominal 0.2 mm provided
by the Pst 150/14/200 stack actuators would not be
sufficient to achieve full suppression of the low
frequency vibrations on the aircrew, specifically at the
1/rev range. However, effective suppression of the vibra-
tion at 4/rev harmonics could be achieved.
Simulation results also revealed that the actuation
authority requirement varied with helicopter flight
conditions and aircrew configurations. Under the
assumption that a representative helicopter seat weights
50 lbs and averaged aircrew weights 205 lbs (95 percen-
tile), the required actuation authority for effective
helicopter seat mount design was estimated as 1.33 mm
(rms) in stroke and 245.8 N (rms) in dynamic actua-
tion force. Details of the simulation results are listed
in Table 1. It was found that the operating condition
that causes higher vibration levels generally demands
higher actuation authority. High actuation stroke
is required primarily to counteract the low frequency
1/rev harmonic in ground, hover and translational lift
flight conditions. In contrast, high force is required for
the suppression of 4/rev peak during high speed cruise
flight conditions.
EXPERIMENTAL VERIFICATION
Extensive closed-loop control experiments have been
conducted on the retrofitted full-scale Bell-412 co-pilot
seat. The objective was to verify the reduction of the
primary N/rev harmonic peaks of the mannequin vibra-
tion using representative helicopter floor vibration
spectra. The test configuration was the same as

Downloaded from jim.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on September 15, 2016

 Aircrew Vibration Reduction 499

(a) 0.1 shown in Figure 7. A 10,000 lbs(f) Unholtz-Dickie

Control
mechanical shaker was used to provide simulated heli-
No control
0.08 copter floor vibration profiles to the seat frame in the
Front-back vibration (g)

vertical direction.
0.06 In these experiments, the labeled ‘no control’ curves
represented the cases that the seat was equipped with
0.04 the unpowered piezoelectric stack actuators, while the
curves labeled ‘control’ represented the cases when the
0.02
piezoelectric stacked actuators were actively controlled
by the adaptive feed-forward control law.
0
0 10 20 30 40 50
Frequnecy (Hz) Sinusoidal Vibration Spectrum Test
(b) 0.1
Control
No control Sinusoidal tones were used to simulate the N/rev
0.08
harmonic excitations of the Bell-412 helicopter. Four
Vertical vibration (g)

major harmonic peaks were generated using the mechan-

0.06
ical shaker, that is the 1/rev, 2/rev, 4/rev, and 8/rev; and
the fundamental frequency was set at 5.4 Hz to correlate
0.04 with the Bell-412 main rotor speed. The amplitude of
each harmonics was set to 0.03 g and the overall
0.02 input vibration was 0.045grms. Although the input
vibration level represented only 25% of the floor
0 vibration levels at 120kt cruise flight, the vibration
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Frequnecy (Hz) measured at the mannequin helmet location was
comparable to the level of the pilot helmet location
Figure 12. Simulation of aircrew helmet vibration in translational during the fight test. This is attributed to the signifi-
flight condition.
cant impedance differences between the very rigid
shaker table and the relatively flexible helicopter
0.5
floor/fuselage that may have provided additional vibra-
Actuator displacement tion reduction.
Piezo stack displacement (mm)

0.4 Effective reductions of the mannequin vibration levels

at all critical locations have been obtained. As shown in
0.3 Figure 14, the four plots described the helmet vibrations
measured in all three axes plus the body vibration in the
0.2 vertical direction. Through adaptive control of the
parallel stacked piezoelectric actuators, the overall
0.1
vibration levels at the mannequin helmet location and
the body location were reduced effectively and simulta-
neously. The 2/rev harmonics in the fore/aft direction of
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 the helmet location was reduced by 68%; the 4/rev
Frequnecy (Hz) harmonics was reduced by 25% and the overall vibra-
Figure 13. Displacement output from the piezoelectric stack tion level in the fore/aft direction was reduced by 52%.
actuator. Although the vertical and side vibrations at the helmet
location were not included in the control strategy design,
the overall vibration levels were also suppressed simul-
Table 1. Actuation requirement in representative flight
taneously, with 10% reduction in the vertical direction
conditions.
and 23% reduction in the lateral direction. Considering
Actuation requirement the vibration in all three directions, the equivalent over-
all vibration level was reduced by 35% at the mannequin
Flight condition Force (N, rms) Displacement (mm, rms)
helmet location. Moreover, the vibration level at the
Ground 198.0 1.33 mannequin abdomen location was also suppressed by
Hover 160.2 1.06 35%, with the 2/rev harmonic peak reduced by 49%.
Translational lift 214.7 0.46 Despite the dynamic nonlinearity of the seat cushion
Cruise at 120kt 138.2 0.12
and mannequin body, no significant control spillover
Cruise at 140kt 245.8 0.22
was observed.

Downloaded from jim.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on September 15, 2016

500 Y. CHEN ET AL.

0.1 0.1
No control RMS:0.078g No control RMS:0.079g
Helmet front-back vibration (g)

0.08 Control RMS:0.038g 0.08 Control RMS:0.052g

Body Vertical vibration (g)

0.06 0.06

0.04 0.04

0.02 0.02

0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50
Frequency (Hz) Frequency (Hz)
0.06 0.045
No control RMS:0.048g No control RMS:0.037g
Control RMS:0.042g Control RMS:0.028g
Helmet vertical vibration (g)

0.036
Helmet side vibration (g)
0.04
0.027

0.018
0.02

0.009

0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50
Frequency (Hz) Frequency (Hz)

Figure 14. Vibration control results under sinusoidal harmonic profile.

Combined Vibration Profile Test The resonant peaks of the mannequin vibration were
reduced by introducing a robust control law running
Closed-loop experiments were also conducted using in parallel with the adaptive control law. Closed-loop
combined vibration profiles which included the N/rev control results demonstrated significant vibration reduc-
harmonic tones on top of a background random tion at the mannequin helmet location: the 2/rev
spectrum. The N/rev harmonic spectrum was kept harmonics in the fore/aft direction was suppressed by
the same profile as used previously. The random 69% and the 4/rev harmonics was reduced by 50%.
vibration spectrum covered the frequency range from For the resonant peaks, the localized helmet bending
4 to 50 Hz as specified by the MIL standard, and mode at 9.7 Hz was reduced by 44%. The mode at
the level was kept at 0.02g rms. This combined vibra- 16.6 Hz was not controlled effectively. As a result, the
tion input profile provided an overall vibration input overall vibration level in the fore/aft direction was
of 0.05grms. suppressed by 39%. Similar to the previous control
The vibration response at the mannequin helmet and experiments, the helmet vertical and lateral vibrations
body locations were dominated by the 2/rev and 4/rev have also been reduced, by 7% and 16%, respectively.
peaks when not controlled, as shown in Figure 15. No significant control spillover was observed. The over-
As expected, the seat/mannequin modes at 9.7 and all vibration reduction at the helmet location was 26%
16.6 Hz were excited by the random vibration profile. when considering the vibrations in three directions.
Similarly, the dynamic coupling of the vertical mode at Notably, vibration at the mannequin abdomen location
10.8 Hz with the 2/rev harmonics resulted in the highest was reduced by 33%. The 2/rev and 4/rev harmonics at
peak, and the 4/rev harmonics was also found promi- the abdomen location was suppressed by 50% and 26%,
nent in the mannequin body vibrations. respectively. The vibration modes at 9.7 and 16.6 Hz at
The adaptive feed forward control law also achieved the abdomen location were suppressed by 53% and
simultaneous suppression of the major N/rev harmonics. 23%, respectively.

Downloaded from jim.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on September 15, 2016

 Aircrew Vibration Reduction 501

0.1 0.12
No control RMS: 0.080g No control RMS: 0.085g
Helmet front-back vibration (g)
0.08 Control RMS: 0.049g Control RMS: 0.056g

Body vertical vibration (g)

0.09

0.06
0.06
0.04

0.03
0.02

0 00
0 10 20 30 40 50 10 20 30 40 50
Frequency (Hz) Frequency (Hz)
0.06 0.035
No control RMS: 0.053g No control RMS: 0.035g
Control RMS: 0.049g Control RMS: 0.029g
Helmet vertical vibration (g)

0.028

Helmet sde vibration (g)

0.04
0.021

0.014
0.02

0.007

0 00
0 10 20 30 40 50 10 20 30 40 50
Frequency (Hz) Frequency (Hz)

Figure 15. Vibration control results under combined vibration profile.

Discussion actuator hardware. However, the proof-of-concept

adaptive seat mount has shown very promising results
It was noted that no appreciable reduction to the in reducing the mannequin body vibration levels without
1/rev harmonics was obtained so far. Several factors significant modification to the seat structures.
may have contributed to this effect. Firstly, the objective In summary, closed-loop control experiments on the
of the adaptive feed forward control law is to minimize retrofitted full-scale Bell-412 co-pilot seat have demon-
the root mean square value of the error signal, which strated promising vibration reduction performance by
was selected as the fore/aft acceleration at the helmet using active control technology. The experiments veri-
location in current investigation. This would imply fied that the adaptive seat mount concept can provide
more control weights are applied to the 2/rev and appreciable actuation authority to suppress the major
4/rev harmonics as the amplitudes were significantly N/rev harmonics as well as the resonant peaks in the
higher when compared to the 1/rev. Furthermore, the mannequin vibrations under representative helicopter
1/rev was lower in frequency, and it required the stacked vibration spectra. By incorporating more advanced
piezoelectric actuators to provide larger stroke in order controllers and stroke improved actuators, reduction
to achieve effective vibration suppression, which was not to all major peaks including the 1/rev can be expected.
available with the current stack actuators. By assigning This investigation has verified that the adaptive seat
the 1/rev harmonics with a higher control weight and mount is a viable solution to mitigate helicopter aircrew
using stroke improved stacked actuators, reduction to vibration problems.
the 1/rev peak could be expected.
In this investigation, the vibration input from the CONCLUSION
shaker was only 25% of the nominal Bell-412 helicopter
floor vibration levels. The control authority of stacked This paper investigated an adaptive seat mount
piezoelectric actuators was also intentionally limited to concept to mitigate helicopter aircrew body vibration.
50% of its full capacity in order to protect the delicate Flight test results on a Bell-412 helicopter revealed

Downloaded from jim.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on September 15, 2016

502
that the aircrew were exposed to high levels of whole
body vibration caused by the N/rev harmonics of the
rotor aerodynamic load, which may adversely affect
their performance and health. Experimental modal test
and analysis has been conducted on a Bell-412 co-pilot
seat and identified the major vibration modes that
contribute to the mannequin body vibration.
An adaptive helicopter seat mount concept has been
studied to reduce the vibration transmitted from the
floor to the aircrew body. Two stacked piezoelectric
actuators have been used as the active struts to provide
adaptive vibration attenuation to the seated aircrew.
Extensive closed-loop control experiments on a retro-
fitted full-scale Bell-412 co-pilot seat have been
conducted using a mannequin and representative heli-
copter vibration input profiles. The mannequin helmet
vibration and whole body vibration in the vertical direc-
tion have been suppressed effectively using adaptive
control techniques. This investigation verified the effec-
tiveness of the adaptive seat mount approach to reduce
vibration levels transmitted to helicopter aircrew.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This research is partly supported by the Department
of National Defence of Canada. Technical support from
Luc Hurbutise and Brent Lawrie of the Structures and
Materials Performance Laboratory (SMPL) and aircrew
of the Flight Research Laboratory (FRL) is greatly
appreciated.
REFERENCES
Cai, L. and Chen, D. 2004. ‘‘A Two-Stage Vibration Isolation System
Featuring An Electrorheological Damper via the Semi-active
Static Output Feedback Variable Structure Control Method,’’
Journal of Vibration and Control, 10:683—706.
Downloaded from jim.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on September 15, 2016
Y. CHEN ET AL.
Castelo-Branco, N.A. and Rodriguez, E. 1999. ‘‘The Vibroacoustic
Disease — An Emerging Pathology,’’ Journal of Aviation, Space,
and Environmental Medicine, 70:1—6.
Chen, Y., Wickramasinghe, V. and Zimcik, D. 2005. ‘‘Smart Spring
Impedance Control Algorithm for Helicopter Blade Harmonic
Vibration Suppression,’’ Journal of Vibration and Control,
11:543—560.
Chen, Y., Wickramasinghe, V. and Zimcik, D. 2008. ‘‘Development of
Adaptive Helicopter Seat Systems for Aircrew Vibration
Mitigation,’’ In: Proceedings of the SPIE Symposium on Smart
Structures and Materials, 8—10 March, San Diego, USA.
Chen, Y., Wickramasinghe, V. and Zimcik, D. 2009. ‘‘Development of
Adaptive Seat Mounts for Helicopter Aircrew Body Vibration
Reduction,’’ Journal of Vibration and Control, 15:1809—1825.
Eriksson, L.J. and Allie, M.A. 1989. ‘‘Use of Random Noise for
Online Transducer Estimate in an Adaptive Active Attenuation
System,’’ Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,
85:797—802.
Glover, J.R. 1977. ‘‘Adaptive Noise Canceling Applied to Sinusoidal
Interferences,’’ IEEE Transactions on Acoustics, Speech, and
Signal Processing, 25:484—491.
Hiemenz, G.J., Hu, W. and Wereley, N.M. 2008. ‘‘Semi-Active
Magnetorheological Helicopter Crew Seat Suspension for
Vibration Isolation,’’ Journal of Aircraft, 45:945—953.
Man, P.De., Lemerle, P., Mistrot, P., Verchueren, J.Ph. and
Preumont, A. 2005. ‘‘An Investigation of A Semi-Active
Suspension for A Fork Lift Truck,’’ Vehicle System Dynamics,
43:107—119.
Morgan, D.R. and Sanford, C. 1992. ‘‘A Control Theory Approach to
the Stability and Transient Analysis of the Filtered-X LMS
Adaptive Notch Filter,’’ IEEE Transactions on Signal
Processing, 40:2341—2346.
MIL-S-85510(AS). 1981. ‘‘Seats, Helicopter Cabin, Crashworthy,
General Specification.’’
MIL-S-58095A (AV). 1986. ‘‘Seat System: Crash-Resistant, Non-
Ejection, Aircrew, General Specification.’’
Smith, D. 2002. ‘‘Characterizing the Effects of Airborne Vibration on
Human Body Vibration Response,’’ Journal of Aviation, Space,
and Environmental Medicine, 73:36—45.
Wickramasinghe, V. and Chen, Y. 2008. ‘‘Analysis of Vibration on
Helicopter Aircrew Based on IAR Bell 412 Flight Tests and
Shaker Tests on the Seat Structure,’’ National Research
Council Canada, Technical Report LTR-SMPL-2008-0068,
Ottawa, Canada.