Analysis, design, optimisation and testing of a

gyroscopically stabilized platform

Doctorate of Philosophy Thesis

Mechanical Engineering

Ben Redwood

January 2014
Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

“If I had asked people what they wanted,

they would have said faster horses.”

- Henry Ford

2
Acknowledgements

Firstly, I thank Dr Shayne Gooch for his help and support throughout this research

project. The knowledge and guidance offered has been invaluable and I am truly

grateful for his continued help and assistance throughout the entirety of this

research.

I also thank John Matthews. Without support from people like John research projects

such as this would not exist and for that I am forever indebted. His passion for this

project and constant interest in progress were one of the main driving forces

motivating me to succeed. I am deeply thankful for everything he has done for me.

I thank Dr Greg Townsend whose knowledge and passion for mathematics was

invaluable. The two trips he made out to Christchurch to assist in the project were

incredibly helpful and I am glad to now call him a friend.

I thank David Read from whom I learnt a great deal. His knowledge of manufacturing

processes and eagerness to offer advice greatly increased my understanding of the

complexities of a design and build project. I also wish to thank Garry Cotton for his

patience and guidance in the workshop when manufacturing components myself.

Finally, I thank my fiancé Sjaan, whose support and understanding of the ups and

downs of post graduate life gave me the drive to keep going. And to my parents for

always giving me the opportunity to do whatever I was passionate about in life.

Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

2
Abstract

Gyroscopic stabilization can be used to maintain an otherwise unstable body in an

upright position. Devices equipped with gyroscopes can balance upon a small area

or point without falling over when the gyroscopic stabilizing force is greater than a

rotational force or moment from an out-of-balance load that causes the device to tip.

A new concept for a gyroscopically stabilized platform has been proposed in the form

of a schematic diagram. The proposed system comprises of four interconnected

gyroscopes that react to the tipping of an inherently unstable external body. The

purpose of this research is to evolve a design for, and establish the feasibility of

building the proposed stable platform using available materials and technology. If

feasible, the gyroscopically stabilized platform will be made at the most practical and

economic size.

Louis Brennan developed a 37 tonne monorail that was maintained in the upright

position with two 3 tonne counter rotating gyroscopes. The Brennan monorail is

analysed to better understand the behaviour of a similar coupled gyroscopic

stabilization system. The reactions between the components that maintain the

monorail in the stable position are studied and comparisons are made between the

proposed stable platform and the Brennan system.

A mathematical analysis of the proposed system is presented. The equations of

motion for the system are derived using the Lagrangian Formalism. The

1
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

characteristic equation of the system is then determined and from this a set of

stability conditions imposed on the design of the physical parameters of the stable

platform. The general solutions to the equations of motion are then derived.

Expressions that model the behaviour of two of the variables that describe the

motion of the stable platform are determined.

A systematic approach is adopted for establishing a new concept for the proposed

system. Testing of the initial stable platform prototype (Prototype A) showed the

system did not behave as intended. The platform was optimised further and this

resulted in a second prototype, Prototype B. Prototype B exhibiting the desired

oscillatory motion about the vertical of the platform.

Predictions made using the mathematical model are compared with empirical results.

The mathematical model was found to be an accurate method for predicting the

response of the stable platform.

2
Table of Contents

1 Introduction ................................................................................... 23

1.1 The purpose of this work ............................................................................. 23

1.2 Historical background .................................................................................. 23

1.2.1 Basic gyroscope theory ........................................................................ 24

1.2.2 Gyroscopic stabilization ........................................................................ 27

1.2.3 Gyroscopic stabilization in literature ..................................................... 28

1.3 Previous work performed on platform ......................................................... 33

1.3.1 Townsend’s feasibility analysis ............................................................. 33

1.3.2 Townsend’s purposed system layout .................................................... 34

1.3.3 System constraints ............................................................................... 37

1.3.4 Gooch’s purposed system .................................................................... 37

1.3.5 Reason for not developing project further ............................................. 39

1.4 The scope and structure of this thesis ......................................................... 40

2 The Brennan Monorail ..................................................................43

2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................. 43

2.2 Background information .............................................................................. 43

2.3 Advantages and disadvantages of the Brennan system ............................. 45

2.4 Relevance to this project ............................................................................. 47

3
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

2.5 Brennan monorail parameters ..................................................................... 47

2.6 Free body analysis ...................................................................................... 49

2.7 Main advantages of proposed system over Brennan monorail ................... 57

2.8 Concluding comments ................................................................................. 57

3 Derivation of Lagrangian of Stable Platform ............................... 59

3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................. 59

3.2 System variables ......................................................................................... 59

3.3 Initial simplifying assumptions ..................................................................... 61

3.4 Lagrangian formalism .................................................................................. 62

3.5 Approach to derivation of system Lagrangian ............................................. 62

3.6 Derivation of kinetic energy terms ............................................................... 63

3.7 Reference frame relations ........................................................................... 64

3.8 Lagrangian of external structure.................................................................. 65

3.8.1 Kinetic energy of external structure ...................................................... 66

3.8.2 Potential energy of the external structure ............................................. 68

3.8.3 Lagrangian for the external structure .................................................... 68

3.9 Lagrangian of disc ....................................................................................... 69

3.9.1 Kinetic energy of the disc...................................................................... 69

3.9.2 Euler angles.......................................................................................... 70

3.9.3 Angular velocity of disc ......................................................................... 72

3.9.4 Total kinetic energy of the disc ............................................................. 74

4
 3.9.5 Potential energy of the disc .................................................................. 76

3.9.6 Lagrangian for the disc ......................................................................... 77

3.10 Lagrangian of gyroscopes ........................................................................... 78

3.10.1 Kinetic energy of the gyroscopes ...................................................... 78

3.10.2 Inertial space linear velocity of gyroscope pivot point .............. 80

3.10.3 Angular velocity of body fixed axis ........................................... 87

3.10.4 Total kinetic energy of gyroscopes .................................................... 97

3.10.5 Potential energy of gyroscopes ......................................................... 97

3.10.6 Lagrangian for the gyroscopes .......................................................... 98

3.11 Lagrangian for the stable platform system .................................................. 98

3.12 Concluding comments ................................................................................. 99

4 Derivation of Equations of Motion and Stability Conditions .... 101

4.1 Introduction ............................................................................................... 101

4.2 Lagrangian formalism for platform system ................................................ 102

4.2.1 Lagrangian formalisation .................................................................... 102

4.2.2 Equation of motion for .................................................................. 102

4.2.3 Equation of motion for .................................................................. 103

4.2.4 Equation of motion for ................................................................... 106

4.2.5 Final equations of motion for stable platform ...................................... 107

4.3 Derivation of system stability conditions .................................................... 107

4.3.1 Position of equilibrium......................................................................... 108

5
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

4.3.2 Conditions of stability .......................................................................... 108

4.3.3 Derivation of general solution to first order equations ......................... 110

4.3.4 Stability matrix .................................................................................... 111

4.3.5 System characteristic equation ........................................................... 112

4.3.6 Behaviour of system from characteristic equation .............................. 112

4.4 Concluding comments ............................................................................... 118

5 Investigation of Stable Platform Behaviour .............................. 119

5.1 Introduction ............................................................................................... 119

5.2 Homogeneous system .............................................................................. 120

5.2.1 Characteristic equation ....................................................................... 120

5.2.2 Homogeneous system general solutions ............................................ 122

5.3 Driven System ........................................................................................... 125

5.3.1 Advantages of driven system .............................................................. 125

5.3.2 Updated equations of motion .............................................................. 126

5.3.3 Position of equilibrium......................................................................... 126

5.3.4 Conditions of stability .......................................................................... 127

5.3.5 Derivation of particular integral of driven system ................................ 130

5.4 Concluding comments ............................................................................... 135

6 Design of the gyroscopically stabilized platform ..................... 137

6.1 Introduction ............................................................................................... 137

6.2 Task clarification ....................................................................................... 138

6
 6.2.1 The design requirements specification ............................................... 138

6.2.2 Stable platform subsystems................................................................ 142

6.2.3 System schematic .............................................................................. 145

6.2.4 Dependence of each subsystem on derived inequality ....................... 146

6.3 Conceptual design of stable platform ........................................................ 148

6.3.1 Gyroscopes ........................................................................................ 149

6.3.2 Disc..................................................................................................... 152

6.3.3 External structure ............................................................................... 155

6.3.4 Disc drive mechanism......................................................................... 156

6.3.5 Gimbal frame linkage .......................................................................... 160

6.3.6 Central pivot ....................................................................................... 162

6.3.7 The final concept selected for the stable platform system .................. 163

6.4 Establishment of platform scale ................................................................ 166

6.4.1 Electric motor selection....................................................................... 167

6.4.2 Brushless DC motors .......................................................................... 168

6.4.3 Selection of motor/scale of stable platform ......................................... 169

6.5 Embodiment design of stable platform system .......................................... 170

6.5.1 Gyroscopes ........................................................................................ 170

6.5.2 Disc..................................................................................................... 173

6.5.3 External structure ............................................................................... 175

6.5.4 Disc drive mechanism and central pivot ............................................. 177

7
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

6.5.5 Gimbal frame linkage .......................................................................... 181

6.5.6 The general assembly ........................................................................ 182

6.5.7 Assessment of embodiment design stage .......................................... 183

6.6 Detailed design ......................................................................................... 184

6.7 Stability conditions inequality .................................................................... 187

6.8 Manufacture and testing of stable platform prototype ............................... 187

6.8.1 Issues with initial stable platform prototype ........................................ 188

6.9 Concluding comments ............................................................................... 190

7 Development of Prototype A ...................................................... 191

7.1 Introduction ............................................................................................... 191

7.2 Expected impact of changes ..................................................................... 192

7.3 Implemented developments ...................................................................... 193

7.3.1 Increased battery voltage and battery relocation ................................ 193

7.3.2 New external structure ........................................................................ 195

7.3.3 Optimisation of flywheel geometry ...................................................... 197

7.3.4 Driving the outer ring .......................................................................... 201

7.3.5 Implementation of universal joint as central pivot ............................... 204

7.3.6 Weight reduction ................................................................................. 206

7.3.7 Spider counter weight ......................................................................... 207

7.3.8 Increase central pivot ......................................................................... 209

7.3.9 Diametrically opposite gyroscope arrangement .................................. 211

8
 7.3.10 Main disc drive arrangement and slip ring design ........................... 214

7.3.11 Low weight external structure .......................................................... 218

7.3.12 Improved motor control ................................................................... 219

7.3.13 Increased disc drive motor size ....................................................... 221

7.3.14 New gyroscope pivot arrangement .................................................. 222

7.4 Final design ............................................................................................... 223

7.5 Discussion ................................................................................................. 224

7.6 Concluding comments ............................................................................... 227

8 Testing of Prototype B and theoretical comparison ................. 229

8.1 Introduction ............................................................................................... 229

8.1.1 Outcome of theoretical and experimental comparison ........................ 229

8.2 Theoretical results from driven system ...................................................... 230

8.3 Driven system experimental results .......................................................... 232

8.3.1 Experiment arrangement .................................................................... 232

8.3.2 Experimental testing results................................................................ 234

8.4 Discussion of results ................................................................................. 235

8.5 Concluding comments ............................................................................... 239

9 Conclusions and recommendations .......................................... 241

9.1 Summary of research activities ................................................................. 241

9.2 Conclusions of this study .......................................................................... 243

9.3 Recommendations for further work ........................................................... 246

9
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

10 References ................................................................................... 249

Appendix A Mathematical Simplification.............................................I

A1 Simplification of Equation A1.1..........,,,,,,,,,,,,,................................................II

A2 Simplification of Equation A1.2......................................................................III

Appendix B Design assessment.........................................................VI

Appendix C Manufacturing drawings..............................................XVI

C1 Prototype B Bill of Materials.......................................................................XVII

Appendix D Matlab code...............................................................XXVIII

D1 Homogeneous system..............................................................................XXIX

D2 Driven system............................................................................................XXX

Appendix E Slip ring wiring diagram...........................................XXXIII

Appendix F Townsend’s platform concept sketches................XXXV

Appendix G Operations manual for Prototype B.......................XXXIII

G1 Introduction...........................................................................................XXXVIII

G2 Assembly of overall system.........................................................................XLI

G3 Assembly of Prototype B sub- systems........................................................LV

G4 Operation Procedure for Prototype B......................................................LXVIII

G5 Safety......................................................................................................LXXVI

10
List of Figures

Figure 1.1 – Basic gyroscope arrangement.............................................................. 24

Figure 1.2 – Response of a simple gyroscope ......................................................... 25
Figure 1.3 – Angular momentum of simple gyroscope system ................................. 25
Figure 1.4 – Translation of Figure 1.3 into 3 dimensions.......................................... 26
Figure 1.5 – Gyro X gyroscopically stabilized car from Joseph (1967) ..................... 28
Figure 1.6 – Gyroscopically stabilized platform schematic sketch from Townsend
(1983) ....................................................................................................................... 35
Figure 1.7 –Three gyroscope system schematic from Gooch (1998-1999) .............. 38
Figure 2.1 – Brennan monorail layout (top) and plan view of outer shelves (bottom)
................................................................................................................................. 44
Figure 2.2 – The Brennan monorail (Photographer Unknown, 1927) ....................... 46
Figure 2.3 – Working model Brennan monorail from Moots (1911) .......................... 49
Figure 2.4 – Schematic of Brennan monorail ........................................................... 50
Figure 2.5 – Gimbal frame A of Brennan monorail ................................................... 51
Figure 2.6 – Gimbal frame B .................................................................................... 52
Figure 2.7 – Brennan monorail gimbal mounting frame............................................ 53
Figure 2.8 – Brennan monorail chassis .................................................................... 53
Figure 2.9 – Gimbal frame B .................................................................................... 54
Figure 2.10 – Gimbal frame A .................................................................................. 55
Figure 2.11 – Brennan monorail gimbal mounting frame.......................................... 56
Figure 2.12 – Brennan monorail chassis .................................................................. 56
Figure 3.1 – Relationship of system variables to physical system ............................ 60
Figure 3.2 – Relationship between inertial reference frame, inertial frame centred at
the origin of the body and the body fixed frame ....................................................... 64
Figure 3.3 – Location of external structure centre of mass relative to origin ............ 66
Figure 3.4 – Definition of Euler angles relative to inertial reference frame ............... 71
Figure 3.5 – Location of angular velocity vectors relative to reference frame ........... 72
Figure 3.6 – Rotation of Figure 3.5 such that ON, X and Y all are on a common plane
parallel to the page ................................................................................................... 73
Figure 3.7 – Rotation of disc about Od through angle ......................................... 81

11
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

Figure 3.8 – Translation axes relative to body fixed axis .......................................... 83

Figure 3.9 – Transformation axes relative to body fixed axis of gyroscope .............. 84
Figure 3.10 – Pivot point and axes locations ............................................................ 88
Figure 3.11 – Location of gyroscope body fixed axes centred at and associated
angles....................................................................................................................... 90
Figure 6.1 - Sub-systems for which design solutions have to be created for the stable
platform .................................................................................................................. 142
Figure 6.2 - Stable platform schematic layout ........................................................ 145
Figure 6.3 - Solution forms considered for the gyroscopes .................................... 151
Figure 6.4 - Solution forms considered for the disc ................................................ 154
Figure 6.5 - Solution forms considered for the external structure ........................... 156
Figure 6.6 - Solution forms considered for the disc drive mechanism .................... 159
Figure 6.7 - Solution forms considered for the gimbal frame linkage ..................... 161
Figure 6.8 - Solution forms considered for the central pivot ................................... 162
Figure 6.9 – Principal concept for stable platform system using a combination of sub-
functions from Figure 6.3 to Figure 6.8................................................................... 165
Figure 6.10 – Embodiment of gyroscope................................................................ 171
Figure 6.11 – Section of gyroscope assembly showing bearing retention design .. 172
Figure 6.12 - Embodiment of disc .......................................................................... 173
Figure 6.13 – Section of disc assembly showing battery location and central cone
cross section geometry .......................................................................................... 174
Figure 6.14 – Embodiment of external structure .................................................... 176
Figure 6.15 – Embodiment of disc drive mechanism .............................................. 178
Figure 6.16 – a) initial CV joint, b) CV joint machined to suit disc drive mechanism
bearing housing ...................................................................................................... 179
Figure 6.17 – Section of disc drive mechanism showing bearing location and CV joint
............................................................................................................................... 180
Figure 6.18 – Embodiment of gimbal frame linkage ............................................... 182
Figure 6.19 – Orthographic and isometric views showing the embodiment design for
the stable platform .................................................................................................. 183
Figure 6.20 – Cross section view of the general assembly for the final stable platform
conceptual design .................................................................................................. 185
Figure 6.21 – Determining the DC drive motor profile using the CMM ................... 186
Figure 7.1 – Proposed increased battery voltage layout ........................................ 194

12
Figure 7.2 – a) Proposed external structure, b) external structure assembled into
system for testing ................................................................................................... 196
Figure 7.3 – Optimisation of flywheel geometry key ............................................... 198
Figure 7.4 - Variation of centre cavity diameter (solid) and flywheel depth (dashed)
............................................................................................................................... 199
Figure 7.5 – a) flywheel used in the initial prototype (ø110mm), b) optimised flywheel
geometry (ø130mm) ............................................................................................... 200
Figure 7.6 – Brushless DC motor showing machined mount face for mounting of
flywheels ................................................................................................................ 201
Figure 7.7 – Proposed outer ring drive assembly ................................................... 203
Figure 7.8 – Outer ring drive arrangement assembled into stable platform system 204
Figure 7.9 – Section view of universal joint pivot assembly.................................... 205
Figure 7.10 – Universal joint, coupling and main shaft assembly ........................... 206
Figure 7.11 – Reduced weight gimbal frame .......................................................... 207
Figure 7.12 – Spider counter weight mounted upon stable platform ...................... 208
Figure 7.13 – a) initial disc assembly and bearing housing, b) raised pivot point
design..................................................................................................................... 211
Figure 7.14 – Diametrically opposite gyroscope arrangement showing front pivoting
gyroscopes ............................................................................................................. 212
Figure 7.15 – Skeleton used in SolidWorks for iterative process in optimisation of
front pivot location .................................................................................................. 213
Figure 7.16 – a) initial front pivot location, b) optimised pivot location ................... 214
Figure 7.17 – a) slip ring drive arrangement assembled into external structure, b) slip
ring plates............................................................................................................... 216
Figure 7.18 – a) modified contact arms with wire connected, b) nylon bush and brass
screw on contact arm ............................................................................................. 216
Figure 7.19 – a) relay switches used to alternate voltage to disc drive motor, b) slip
ring drive arrangement assembled together showing copper plating on outer ring 217
Figure 7.20 – a) Comparison of old external structure (top) and new light weight
external structure (bottom), b) the lightweight external structure assembled into the
test frame ............................................................................................................... 219
Figure 7.21 – Signal generator (left), flywheel speed controller (bottom middle), disc
drive motor (bottom right) and relay switch power supplies (top right), .................. 220

13
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

Figure 7.22 – Disc drive motor comparison showing Prototype A drive motor (top)
and larger Prototype B drive motor (bottom). ......................................................... 221
Figure 7.23 – a) New gyroscope pivot arrangement, b) universal joints and clamping
bracket ................................................................................................................... 223
Figure 7.24 – Final stable platform (Prototype B) ................................................... 224
Figure 8.1 - Theoretical response of stable platform showing angular displacement
over time of external structure (blue) and disc (red) ............................................... 232
Figure 8.2 – Load cell test rig assembled into Prototype B .................................... 233
Figure 8.3 – Mounting location of load cell in testing rig arrangement ................... 234
Figure 8.4 – Experimental response of stable platform Prototype B ...................... 235
Figure 8.5 – Experimental response (blue) overlaid with an optimal torque response
(red)........................................................................................................................ 236
Figure 9.9.1 – Preliminary design of “double Brennan” stabilizer ........................... 247

Figure B1 – Concept selection chart for gyroscope sub system...............................VII

Figure B2 – Concept selection chart for disc sub system........................................VIII
Figure B3 – Concept selection chart for external structure sub system.....................IX
Figure B4 – Concept selection chart for disc drive mechanism sub system...............X
Figure B5 – Concept selection chart for gimbal frame linkage sub system................XI
Figure B6 – Concept selection chart for central pivot sub system............................XII
Figure B7 – Conceptual design worksheet...............................................................XIII
Figure B8 – Embodiment design worksheet............................................................XIV
Figure B9 – Detailed design worksheet....................................................................XV
Figure C8 – Prototype B final design engineering drawing......................................XXI
Figure C9 – Prototype B gyroscopes engineering drawing.....................................XXII
Figure C10 – Prototype B disc engineering drawing..............................................XXIII
Figure C11 – Prototype B external structure engineering drawing........................XXIV
Figure C12 – Prototype B disc drive mechanism engineering drawing..................XXV
Figure C13 – Prototype B gimbal frame linkage engineering drawing..................XXVI
Figure C14 – Prototype B central pivot engineering drawing...............................XXVII
Figure E1 – Slip ring wiring diagram...................................................................XXXIV
Figure F1 – Gyroscopically stabilized platform schematic sketch from Townsend
(1983) .................................................................................................................XXXVI

14
Figure F2 – Motion of components that comprise the system from Townsend
(1983)..................................................................................................................XXXVI
Figure F3 – Reactions of system after an external torque is applied to the system
from Townsend (1983).......................................................................................XXXVII
Figure F4 – Stabilizer system mounted upon external structure from Townsend
(1983).................................................................................................................XXXVII
Figure G1 – Prototype B (SP1-01-001)....................................................................XLI
Figure G2 - External structure mount frame............................................................XLII
Figure G3 – External structure attaching to mount frame......................................XLIII
Figure G4 – Securing the disc drive mechanism to the external structure............XLIV
Figure G5 – Central pivot attaching to disc drive mechanism.................................XLV
Figure G6 – Disc and gyroscopes mount hole patterns.........................................XLVI
Figure G7 – Gyroscope assembled onto disc.......................................................XLVII
Figure G8 – M24 nut used to secure disc/gyro assembly....................................XLVIII
Figure G9 – Disc/gyro assembly secured to central pivot...................................XVLIIII
Figure G10 – Location of universal joints on gimbal frame shafts...............................L
Figure G11 - Universal joint clamping coupling..........................................................LI
Figure G12 – Linear slide assembly into overall system...........................................LII
Figure G13 – Attaching connecting arms to clamping coupling and overhead linear
slide..........................................................................................................................LIII
Figure G14 – Gyroscopes........................................................................................LVI
Figure G15 – Disc..................................................................................................LVIII
Figure G16 – External structure................................................................................LX
Figure G17 – Disc drive mechanism.......................................................................LXII
Figure G18 – Gimbal frame linkage.......................................................................LXIV
Figure G19 – Central pivot.....................................................................................LXVI
Figure G20 – 22.2V Li-Po battery..........................................................................LXIX
Figure G21 – 4.8V Ni-Mh battery...........................................................................LXIX
Figure G22 – Main power supply arrangement.....................................................LXIX
Figure G23 – Flywheel motor power arrangement................................................LXXI
Figure G24 – Disc precession motor power arrangement...................................LXXIII

15
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

List of Tables

Table 2.1– Brennan monorail parameters from Dickinson (1910) ............................ 48

Table 2.2 – Brennan gyroscope parameters from Dickinson (1910) ........................ 48
Table 3.1 - Cosine of angles between X, Y, Z and Z1, ON....................................... 73
Table 3.2 – Transformations of angular velocities into the body fixed frame centred at
......................................................................................................................... 92
Table 6.1 - Demands & wishes list ......................................................................... 139
Table 6.2 - Subsystem dependence upon Equation (4.47) .................................... 147
Table 6.6 – Sub-function selection overview .......................................................... 164
Table 6.7 - Types of Electric Motors ....................................................................... 167
Table 6.8 - Motor evaluation chart .......................................................................... 167
Table 7.1 – Development ranking system .............................................................. 192
Table 7.2 – Increase in battery voltage and relocation ........................................... 193
Table 7.3 – New external structure for testing ........................................................ 195
Table 7.4 – Optimisation of flywheel geometry ....................................................... 197
Table 7.5 - Variation in flywheel dimensions .......................................................... 198
Table 7.6 – Optimised flywheel geometry .............................................................. 200
Table 7.7 – Driving the outer ring .......................................................................... 202
Table 7.8 – Implementation of universal joint ......................................................... 204
Table 7.9 – Reduction of weight of system............................................................. 206
Table 7.10 – Spider counterweight ......................................................................... 208
Table 7.11 – Optimisation of flywheel geometry ..................................................... 209
Table 7.12 – Central pivot comparison ................................................................... 210
Table 7.13 – Diametrically opposite gyroscope arrangement ................................. 212
Table 7.14 – New disc drive arrangement .............................................................. 215
Table 7.15 – Low weight external structure ............................................................ 218
Table 7.16 – Improved motor control...................................................................... 219
Table 7.17 – Increase disc drive motor size ........................................................... 221
Table 7.18 – New gyroscope pivot arrangement .................................................... 222
Table 7.19 – Angular momentum and total mass ratio ........................................... 225
Table 7.20 – Inequality for stable platform prototype ............................................ 227

16
Table 8.1 – Theoretical vs. experimental comparison ............................................ 238

Table C1 – Prototype B final design bill of materials..............................................XVII

Table C2 – Prototype B gyroscopes bill of materials..............................................XVII
Table C3 – Prototype B disc bill of materials.........................................................XVIII
Table C4 – Prototype B external structure bill of materials....................................XVIII
Table C5 – Prototype B disc drive mechanism bill of materials...............................XIX
Table C6 – Prototype B gimbal frame linkage bill of materials.................................XX
Table C7 – Prototype B central pivot bill of materials...............................................XX
Table G1 – Bill of materials for gyroscopes relating to Figure G14.........................LVII
Table G2 – Bill of materials for disc relating to Figure G15......................................LIX
Table G3 – Bill of materials for external structure relating to Figure G16................LXI
Table G4 – Bill of materials for disc drive mechanism relating to Figure G17........LXIII
Table G5 – Bill of materials for gimbal frame linkage relating to Figure G18..........LXV
Table G6 – Bill of materials for central pivot relating to Figure G19.....................LXVII
Table G7 – Power supplies and associated components....................................LXVIII
Table G8 – Square wave generator parameters.................................................LXXIV

17
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

Nomenclature

A, B, C, D represent simplifying substitutions used in the derivation of

the systems stability conditions

a-b the pivot axis of a gyroscope parallel to x’

is the torque exerted by a gyroscope made to precess at a

rate of in the direction perpendicular to its axis of
rotation when the structure deviates from the vertical

a constant that we approximate as (based upon

being very small)

is the amplitude of the force associated with the driving of

the motor that will oscillate the disc back and forth

the non conservative generalised force associated with the

variable

the non conservative generalised force associated with the

variable

the non conservative generalised force associated with the

variable

g the acceleration due to gravity (9.81ms-2)

is the height of Od above Os

the height of the external structure centre of mass above

Os

the moment of inertia of the gyroscopes in all directions

the moments of inertia of the gyroscope systems (gimbal

frame, motor, and flywheel)

18
 The moment of inertia of the disc about the x and y axes

The moment of inertia of the disc about the z axis

the Lagrangian associated with the disc

the Lagrangian associated with the gyroscopes

the Lagrangian associated with the external structure

the Lagrangian associated with the overall system

the mass of the disc

the mass of the gyroscopes

the mass of the kth particle in the rigid body

the maximum moment produced by the stable platform

the mass of the external structure

Mstability the stability matrix of the system.

Od the origin and centre of mass of the disc

the origin and centre of mass of each of the gyroscopes

Os the origin of the external structure (also its pivot point)

r the distance from the external centre of mass above the

pivot

rad the radial distance from Od to in the direction of y’

the radial distance the pivot point of the gyroscopes are

from Od

the distance from the gyroscopes pivot axis to the end of

the contact arm

19
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

is the location of the kth particle of the disc relative to Od

T the kinetic energy of the stable platform

the kinetic energy of the disc

the kinetic energy of the gyroscopes

the kinetic energy of the external structure

point Os

The velocity relative to the origin of the gyroscopes in

the a-b,rad, axes

the potential energy of the disc

the potential energy of the gyroscopes

the inertial space velocity of the kth particle in the rigid body
relative to its body fixed axis with components

and having mass

is the velocity of the origin of the body fixed axis attached

to the disc relative to the inertial reference frame centred at
the pivot point Od written in terms of the body fixed axes
associated with the disc

the velocity of the pivot point of a gyroscope relative to

the inertial frame centred at Od written in terms of the

body fixed axis associated with the mth gyroscope

the velocity of the centre of mass of the external frame

relative to the inertial reference frame at the pivot point Os
written in terms of the body fixed axis of the external
structure

the potential energy of the external structure

20
 the components of realtive to the body fixed frame of
the gyroscopes

X, Y, Z is the body fixed frame centred at the origin

X1, Y1, Z1 the inertial reference frame

X’ Y’ Z’ the inertial frame parallel to X1, Y1, Z1 but centred at origin

O of the rigid body

is the frequency the driving force, F, oscillates at

to the angular position of each of the four gyroscopes (e.g.

when or when ) in the body
fixed axis of the disc

represents small deviations in the variable

represents small deviations in the variable

the Euler angles associated with location of the disc

around the pivot point

the gyroscopes pivot angle

the rotation of the gyroscope/frame along the a-b axis

through

the Euler angles associated with the location of the

gyroscopes relative to their pivot point,

the angle of deviation of the external structure from the

vertical

the rotation of the external structure along X axis

the roots of the characteristic equation

21
Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

relates to the coefficient of friction the motor must

overcome to initiate rotation of the disc (from bearings,
gear backlash etc)

the rotation of the disc along the Z axis

the gyroscopes rotation angle

the rotation of the gyroscope along Z

the angular velocity of the body fixed axes X, Y, Z relative

to the inertial axes X’, Y’, Z’

is the angular velocity of the body fixed axes associated

with the disc relative to the inertial reference frame

the angular velocity of the body fixed axis of the gyroscope

relative to the inertial frame entered at Od written in terms
of the body fixed axis associated with the mth gyroscope

is the angular velocity of the body fixed axes associated

with the external structure relative to the inertial reference
frame

the angular velocity components of the disc taken along X,

Y, Z relative to the inertial reference frame

the angular velocities of the gyroscopes in their body fixed

axes

the axis perpendicular to the disc in the direction of z’

22
Chapter 1 – Introduction

Introduction

1.1 The purpose of this work

A new concept for a gyroscopically stabilized platform has been proposed in the form

of a schematic diagram. The purpose of this thesis is to establish the feasibility of

implementing this schematic concept using available technology. If feasible the

gyroscopically stabilized platform will be made at the most practical and economic

size.

The stable platform uses four interconnected gyroscopes that react to the tipping

movement of an inherently unstable external body. In this system configuration, the

gyroscopes act as actuators (commonly known as moment gyro’s) and not as

sensors, meaning they produce the torque that stabilizes the system. The proposed

system has the gyroscopes arranged in such a way that it will stabilize an external

body in the horizontal pitch and roll. Research has revealed that no such

interconnected multi-gyroscopic system currently exists for stabilizing objects in both

pitch and roll directions.

1.2 Historical background

The aim of this section is to discuss briefly the historical background of the project

and give some insight into the nature of the task.

23
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

1.2.1 Basic gyroscope theory

The gyroscope was first constructed around 1810 (Bennett (1970)). A basic

gyroscope comprises of a disc (or flywheel) attached to a shaft. The shaft is mounted

in a gimbal frame which in ordinary applications allows the flywheel assembly the

ability to move in any direction. When the flywheel rotates at a high speed it will take

up a position from which a large force is required to move it from this orientation.

Because the disc is typically mounted in a gimbal frame, any external torque is

minimized resulting in the orientation of the wheel remaining fixed no matter how the

platform that the system is attached to moves (Savet (1961)). Because of this,

traditional applications for gyroscopes were devices used for measuring or

maintaining orientation in planes and ships (Arnold, Maunder, & Roberson (1963)).

More recently, gyroscopes are used in many advanced electronic devices for the

same purpose of measuring orientation.

Spin axis

Outer Frame
Shaft

Flywheel

Gimbal Frame

Figure 1.1 – Basic gyroscope arrangement

24
Chapter 1 – Introduction

Figure 1.2 illustrates an example of a rotating gyroscope and the resulting direction

of the output precession (reaction torques) as an external torque is applied to the

system.

Output Precession Output Precession

External External
Spin Spin
Torque Torque
Axis Axis

Figure 1.2 – Response of a simple gyroscope

Consider a simple gyroscope system like that shown in Figure 1.2. If the flywheel

rotates at a constant angular velocity, , and posses an inertia, I, then the angular

momentum of the system can be expressed as I (represented by the line a-a1).

a a1
dϴ

a2 a3

Figure 1.3 – Angular momentum of simple gyroscope system

If an external torque, T, is applied to the axle of the flywheel, the gyroscope will

begin to precess at right angles to the axis of rotation of the flywheel and as a

25
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

consequence it generates angular momentum that is also perpendicular to the axis

of rotation. This additional angular momentum is represented by the line a-a2 in

Figure 1.3. By completing the parallelogram, the resultant angular momentum of the

system is the line a-a3 in magnitude and direction (Davidson (1946)).

Output precession

a2
T Gyroscope spin

dϴ a1

a3

Figure 1.4 – Translation of Figure 1.3 into 3 dimensions

If the angle a1-a3 is small (such that ) and it takes for the wheel to

move through this small angle then a-a2 = a1-a3 = a-a3. . If a-a2 = , the added

angular momentum in the system, and a-a3 = , the resultant angular momentum,

then setting a-a2= a-a3. yields

(1.1)

where is the angular velocity of the precession (which is equal to ).

26
Chapter 1 – Introduction

Equation (1.1) is the fundamental equation that the motion of all gyroscopes is based

upon. Using this equation it is possible to determine the magnitude of an external

torque that is applied to a gyroscope if the inertia of the flywheel, the angular velocity

of the flywheel and the precession rate are all known.

1.2.2 Gyroscopic stabilization

Gyroscopic stabilization is a popular and common stabilization method. Devices

equipped with gyroscopes can balance upon a small area or point without falling

over when the gyroscopic stabilizing force is greater than a rotational force tending to

cause the device to tip.

Brennan (1905) was one of the first published examples of gyroscopic stabilization.

Brennan’s gyroscopic stabilization system used two coupled counter rotating

gyroscopes to stabilize a body in one plane. Brennan’s design proved very

successful and set the foundations for the development of gyroscopic stabilization.

Brennan’s system is discussed in more detail in Chapter 2.

Similar patents to Brennan’s design were then released by Schilovski (1909),

Schilovski (1914) and Sperry (1908). Schilovski (1924) designed and developed a

two-wheeled, narrow-body car with a 1,344 lb gyroscope located in the middle of the

vehicle chassis that provided the stabilizing moment.

One of the most popular examples of a gyroscopically stabilized vehicle is the Gyro

X car (Figure 1.5) developed by Alex Tremulis and Thomas O. Summers Jr. of Gyro

Transport Systems Inc. This 840kg two wheel car was designed and built in 1963.

27
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

The gyroscope, located inside the car, consisted of a 22” diameter rotor weighing

11.3kg with a spindle speed of 4000-6000rpm (Joseph (1967)). While Tremulis and

Summers proved successfully that it is possible to stabilize larger vehicles using a

single rotating flywheel there were some critical issues with the design. The issues

included the fact that the gyroscope took 3 minutes to get up to operating speed

before the car could be driven. There were also some problems with the vehicle

when it turned corners as it sometimes banked in the opposite direction.

Figure 1.5 – Gyro X gyroscopically stabilized car from Joseph (1967)

1.2.3 Gyroscopic stabilization in literature

The following section looks at literature and publications applicable to this project. It

should be noted that there is little relevant prior research on the subject of multi-

gyroscope stabilization in the available literature.

This section of the literature review presents research into the mathematical analysis

of gyroscopically stabilized systems and their research findings. An approach similar

28
Chapter 1 – Introduction

to the research presented below was adopted in the mathematical analysis of

gyroscopically stabilized system presented in this thesis.

Huseyin, Hagedorn, & Teschner (1983) studied the stability of linear conservative

gyroscopic systems. Huseyin et al. (1983) investigated the conditions required for

stability and instability of a gyroscopic system via an appropriate Lyapunov function.

Kliem & Seyranian (1997) investigated the effects of stability, flutter (the self

excitation of a gyroscope at certain speeds and orientations) and divergence (the

tendency for mechanical gyroscopes to drift over extended periods of time) on

gyroscopic systems. Kliem and Seyranian were able to produce graphs indicating

when these phenomena occurred under specific stabilizations conditions with

multiple gyroscopic stabilization systems each with varying degrees of freedom.

Using the characteristic equation , Kliem and Seyrania were able

to verify when stability, flutter and divergence occur for specific conditions based

upon the roots of the gyroscopic systems characteristic equation.

Davyskib & Samsonov (1995) investigated the possibility of gyroscopic stabilization

of spaceships in space. Due to the complex and varying geometry of the different

objects in space, Davyskib focused on establishing a range of physical parameters in

which gyroscope stabilization could be achieved. Davyskib analysis revealed that

such geometric parameters do exist when external forces (friction, spring effects etc)

are ignored and hypothesised on the effect these would have on the gyroscopic

stabilization of rigid bodies in space. Kosov (2008)Denisov & Novikov (2006)

(Kuz'mina, 1972) (Kuz'mina, 1980) (Zhu, Naing, & Al-Mamun, 2009) 46}

29
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

Both Roitenberg (1960) and Matrosov (1960) reviewed both passive and active

gyroscopic stabilizers in ships and planes. Though purely mathematical, both papers

reviewed the equations of motion of systems based upon the general solution of the

Kelvin theorem. By varying the parameters of the systems the resulting stability

conditions were investigated by means of the roots of the characteristic equations.

This section of the literature review presents the use of Control Moment Gyroscopes

(CMG’s) to achieve stabilization. CMG’s use a flywheel rotating at a constant speed,

located in a mechanical gimbal, that can be manipulated to produce reaction torques

in a desired direction (Brown & Peck (2008)). While a CMG was not considered for

use in this research, the underlying theory and behaviour of the CMG’s provided an

excellent insight into how a gyroscopically stabilized system responds.

Most modern spacecraft require some form of active control to accomplish their

mission objectives. This control may include regulating the altitude of the entire

spacecraft, pointing some articulated payload, and vibration control (Bauer (2002)).

Bauer studied the kinematics and dynamics of a novel double-gimballed CMG

design used for these applications.

Karnopp (2002) implemented a single CMG into a motorcycle to obtain stability

during loss of traction. Karnopp showed that a relatively simple control scheme can

be used to achieve stability even on a very low traction surface as long as the

vehicle is loaded symmetrically. He also investigated using the gyroscopes

momentum to act with the drive train to supply or recover energy during braking and

acceleration. Karnopp analysed the dynamics of such a system using Lagrange’s

30
Chapter 1 – Introduction

method and was able to determine the conditions that made the system stable. A

control scheme was derived that would supply feedback control to the CMG to

maintain stability of the motorcycle.

Lam (2011) further developed the work on bicycle stabilization with the use of

CMG’s. Lam’s design used a single CMG located on a motorised gimbal. When the

bicycle tipped, an integrated magnetic concentrator sensor detected the movement

and commanded the gimbal motor to rotate such that a gyroscopic precessive torque

was produced that restored the bicycle to an upright position.

This final section of the literature review presents research where a gyroscopically

stabilized system has been designed, manufactured and tested. This section has

particular relevance to this research as a similar approach to the verification of the

performance of the proposed design was adopted.

Spry & Girard (2008) presented the case where the gyroscope acts as an actuator

and not a sensor. In this regard the Spry and Girard study is similar to the dynamics

investigated by Brennan and Schilovski. Using Lagrangian mechanics, Spry & Girar

established a set the equations of motion for a pair of gyroscopes with opposite

directions of rotation (and in turn opposite precessions). These results where then

used to determine the conditions of stability for the system and analysed in Matlab. A

scale model of the single gyroscope system was constructed to verify the theoretical

results.

31
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

Beznos et al. (1998) produced a stabilisation unit that employed two coupled

gyroscopes. Benzo’s system consisted of a modified bicycle that had the steering

tube mounted vertically with the front wheel lying directly below (contrary to typical

bicycle designs). This made the bicycle inherently less stable. The stabilization

system consisted of two interlinked, counter rotating gyroscopes located between the

bicycle wheels. Benzos’ bicycle measured the systems deviation from the horizontal

through a series of sensors (measuring 3 degrees of freedom). A control system

then precessed the gyroscopes restabilzing the bicycle.

A gyroscopic method of active ride control in marine vehicles was presented by

Townsend et al. (2007). Two stabilization systems were proposed: an active system

where feedback control is used to power a motor that precesses a rotating flywheel;

and a passive system where the rotating flywheel was mounted on a set of bearings

and left to precess by itself. The active system was selected as it produced the

greater stabilizing moments. Townsend’s results showed that the motion reduction

achievable using the specified active system was in the range of 30 to 70%.

Ferreira, Tsai, Paredis, & Brown (2000) presented the findings of controlling a single

wheel gyroscopically stabilized mobile robot named Gyrover invented at Carnegie

Mellon University. A special extended Kalman Filter was used for sensor

measurement and the experimental results were used to validate the theoretical

model measuring the Gyrovers’ deviation from the vertical as it travelled up and

down a hallway. The dynamics of the Gyrover were described by a set of non-linear

coupled differential equations and analysis showed that the dynamics could be

linearized and simplified into two decoupled equations.

32
Chapter 1 – Introduction

1.3 Previous work performed on platform

The aim of this section is to discuss past work that has been completed relating to

the proposed gyroscopically stabilized system.

1.3.1 Townsend’s feasibility analysis

Townsend (1983) was commissioned to investigate the behaviour of a proposed

gyroscopic stabilization mechanism. The initial motivation for producing a

gyroscopically stabilized platform at this time was for the stabilization of a mono-

wheel vehicle.

Townsend focused on whether it was possible to achieve the desired reactions from

the gyroscopes with the proposed arrangement and also investigated the impact of

three sources of horizontal forces (wind pressure, centrifugal forces and

deceleration) on the performance of the system.

Two initial conditions were placed upon Townsend’s design:

i) The device must actively resist the applications of torques which are applied

to it about two of the three axis associated with is rotational degrees of

freedom.

ii) The device must be able to stabilize bodies which are normally unstable

under the action of such torques.

33
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

Townsend never attempted to manufacture a working stabilizer. The reasons for this

are discussed in more detail in Section 1.3.5.

Gooch (1998-1999) continued the work Townsend had begun. It was hoped that

advances in flywheel technology would make the manufacture of the platform more

feasible. Gooch’s research focused on the use of off-the-shelf flywheels and the

magnitudes of stabilizing moments that they were able to produce. Various

applications for the gyroscopically stabilized platform were also investigated. The

project was again abandoned due to technological constraints.

1.3.2 Townsend’s purposed system layout

Townsend developed a series of schematic sketches indicating how the

gyroscopically stabilized platform could potentially be arranged. A schematic sketch

of the purposed system is shown in Figure 1.6. Further sketches of the proposed

system configuration can be found in Appendix F.

34
Chapter 1 – Introduction

Solid disc Gyroscopes

interconnected
by a mechanism

Outer axle

Spherical
bearing pivot
point

Gyroscope

Gyroscope outer
axle Gimbal pivot point

Annular ring
Base plate

Solid cylindrical
axle

Figure 1.6 – Gyroscopically stabilized platform schematic sketch from Townsend (1983)

The proposed schematic system consisted of:

 A base plate attached to an annular cylinder

 A solid cylindrical axle attached to the base plate such that it was concentric

with the annular cylinder. The axle must be lower than the height of the

cylinder

35
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

 Attached to the axle by means of a spherical bearing is a solid disc whose

centre of mass is below the pivot point of the spherical bearing.

 Mounted upon the disc are four self-contained gyroscopes positioned

perpendicular to each other so that all four of their axes of rotation point

towards the centre of the solid disc. The gyroscope systems are

interconnected such that their angular displacement relative to the horizontal

is always equal (bevel gears were a suggested solution). The four gyroscopes

and the solid discs centre of mass are assumed to be below the spherical

bearings pivot point.

 Attached to the gimbal frame of each of the gyroscopes, along the axis of

rotation is an axle which extends out beyond the edge of the solid disc.

Townsend proposed that when the solid disc is rotating at a constant speed, with

each of the gyroscopes also rotating at a speed equal to each other, under these

conditions each of the gyroscopic systems will rotate downward about the gimbal

pivot point until the gyroscope outer axle’s contact with the edge of the annular

cylinder. The four outer axles contact the annular ring applying an equal force such

that no net torque is exerted upon the disc.

Assume an external torque is now applied to the system causing the base plate and

annular cylinder to pivot upwards. Because the solid disc sits upon a spherical

bearing, the solid disc/gyroscope assembly remains level. The annular cylinder

presses up on the outer axles of the gyroscopes trying to rotate them upwards about

36
Chapter 1 – Introduction

the gimbal pivot point. Due to the precession of the disc and the rotation of the

gyroscopes, the system opposes the external torque tipping the base plate and

annular cylinder maintaining the system level.

1.3.3 System constraints

Townsend imposed several conditions on the system to ensure a manufactured

prototype functioned as expected. These were:

 That all four gyroscopes rotate at an equal speed

 That all four gyroscopes have equal moments of inertia

 All four gyroscopes have the same angular displacement from the horizontal

when pivoted in their gimbal frames

1.3.4 Gooch’s purposed system

Gooch (1998-1999) purposed a different variation on Townsend’s four gyroscope

system. The assembly incorporated three flywheel assemblies mounted in a rigid

chassis as shown in the schematic diagram, Figure 1.7.

37
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

Figure 1.7 –Three gyroscope system schematic from Gooch (1998-1999)

Gooch’s purposed system was also intended for the stabilization of a mono-wheel

vehicle. The central wheel axle is fixed in the wheel hub (unstable external body).

Forces are transmitted from the level table assembly to provide drive and control for

accelerating/decelerating and cornering manoeuvres.

A support frame (not shown) provides the driving link between the level table and the

wheel. The support frame incorporates a central stub shaft providing the central

rotational axis of the stable platform. A gyroscope deflector ring then transmits the

acceleration/deceleration and cornering forces from the wheel to the level table.

38
Chapter 1 – Introduction

The deflector ring applies a force to the free wheel on the outboard end of one or

more of the gyroscopes. This results in the table precessing about the central axis. In

plan view the rotation will be in the anticlockwise direction. As the table precession

rate accelerates up to speed or decelerates from constant speed to rest there is a

slight angular displacement of the axis of rotation of the flywheel with respect to the

horizontal. A table rotation drive is included to drive the precession of the level table

and correct the level of the axis of rotation.

The three flywheel assemblies are connected using a central linkage. The central

linkage incorporates a linear slide that runs on a central table axis. This linkage

ensures that the axis of rotation of each flywheel is offset at the same angle with

respect to the horizon. The central linkage also ensures that each flywheel does the

same amount of work in transmitting the forces back to the central wheel axle.

1.3.5 Reason for not developing project further

While it was shown that theoretically the proposed gyroscopically stabilized platform

would resist external unbalance forces, neither Townsend nor Gooch attempted to

manufacture a working prototype. The main reason for this was technological

restrictions relating to the type of electric motors that were available at the time. Most

electric motors that could operate at the required speeds were of an impractical size

and required large batteries. It was decided that the project would be placed on hold

until advances in electric motor design and control allowed for a more elegant

solution to the problem of powering the gyroscope flywheels.

39
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

1.4 The scope and structure of this thesis

The gyroscopically stabilized platform is a novel design that will allow inherently

unstable bodies to remain in a stable position. The system can be adapted and

applied to a vast range of applications. Research has identified no such system

currently exists.

Hypothesis: i) To determine the feasibility of implementing Townsend’s proposed

gyroscopically stabilized platform configuration using available

materials, technology and manufacturing techniques.

ii) To develop a mathematical model that accurate predicts the

behaviour of the proposed system and use the findings of the

mathematical analysis in the design of the gyroscopically stabilized

platform to optimise the likelihood of stabilization being achieved.

The scope of this thesis is to mathematically derive a set of conditions under which

the proposed gyroscopically stabilized platform configuration is stable and to develop

a general solution that models the behaviour of the system. The mathematical

results will then be used in the physical design of the gyroscopically stabilized

platform to maximise the likelihood of the manufactured prototype remaining stable.

Testing of the gyroscopically stabilized platform prototype will then be performed to

validate the mathematical model.

Chapter 2 of this thesis investigates an early gyroscopically stabilized vehicle, the

Brennan monorail. A free body diagram of the stabilizing system is produced and a

step by step guide of the monorails operation is presented. The similarities between

40
Chapter 1 – Introduction

the proposed system and the Brennan monorail help to establish fundamental theory

regarding how gyroscopes react and behave when interconnected.

In Chapter 3 the Lagrangian equations of a general gyroscopically stabilized platform

(referred to as the stable platform), based upon Townsend’s proposed schematic,

are derived by means of the Lagrangian formalism. The systems variables are

established, a set of Euler angles defined, and from this the kinetic energy and

potential energies of the system are derived. From these the total Lagrangian

equation that describes the overall system is determined.

In Chapter 4 the equations of motion for the variables that govern the systems

behaviour are formulated and a set of the stability conditions for the stable platform

are established. From these stability conditions, an inequality is derived that

describes the condition where the restoring moment produced by the stable platform

overcomes the unbalance forces generated by the systems deviation from the

vertical axis. This inequality is then used in the physical design of the system.

Chapter 5 uses the results from Chapter 4 to determine the general solutions to a

homogeneous stable platform arrangement and a driven system.

Chapter 6 presents the design study relating to the manufacture of a working

prototype. The system is considered as a number of sub-systems and the optimal

design for each of these sub-systems is sought.

41
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

In Chapter 7 the design of the stable platform prototype is evolved further. The

overall design of the system was developed as testing was taking place.

Chapter 8 reports the observations of the testing stages for the stable platform and

looks to validate the mathematical model with the testing results.

Finally Chapter 9 presents on the key findings of the research and recommendations

for future work on the project are made.

42
Chapter 2 – The Brennan Monorail

The Brennan Monorail

2.1 Introduction

Louis Brennan was a renowned mechanical engineer who lived from 1852 -1932. He

is most notably known for his invention of the Brennan torpedo (a steerable torpedo

that is guided from the shore by a set of counter rotating propellers). In 1903 he

successfully patented the world’s first gyroscopically stabilized monorail. At the 1910

Japan-British Exhibition Brennan showcased a full scale monorail upon which 50

people were transported around a circular track at 20mph. The Brennan monorail

has significant relevance to this project due to the coupling of the gyroscopes used

to maintain the monorail upright.

The objective of this chapter is to describe the stabilization

mechanism used by Brennan to create a stable monorail.

While other multi gyroscope systems have since been manufactured, the simplicity

and success of the Brennan monorail system make it an excellent reference point

when considering gyroscopic stabilization of an unstable body.

2.2 Background information

The Brennan monorail is believed to be the first successfully patented example of

the gyroscopic stabilization of a moving vehicle. Brennan’s mechanism was novel

43
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

because if used interconnected gyroscopes that actively resisted the imbalance force

created by the monorail as it tilted from the vertical axis. A diagram outlining the

Brennan monorails components and how they are assembled together is shown in

Figure 2.1.

Gimbal frame Spur gear joint

Gyroscope frame
pivot axis

Gimbal Frame

Flywheel

Friction Frame pivot point

wheel

Friction
wheel
shelf
Free Wheel
wheel
Free
wheel shelf

Monorail

Rail

Upper friction Lower free

wheel shelf wheel shelf
(Shelf A) (Shelf C)

Lower free Upper friction

wheel shelf wheel shelf
(Shelf B) (Shelf D)

Figure 2.1 – Brennan monorail layout (top) and plan view of outer shelves (bottom)

44
Chapter 2 – The Brennan Monorail

The Brenna system incorporated two large flywheels counter rotating at a constant

speed. The flywheels were mounted in two gimbal frames in a common gyroscope

frame. When the monorail deviates from the vertical one of the friction wheels

contacts the upper friction self. The friction wheels are fixed to the same shaft as the

flywheels. This contact would cause the wheel to track along a curved upper shelf.

This in turn would cause one of the gimbal frames that house a flywheel to pivot (or

precess).

The two gimbal frames are connected together via a spur gear hence when an

external load is applied to the free wheel both flywheels precess simultaneously in

opposite directions. Due to the nature of gyroscopes this precession would cause a

downwards restorative moment to be exerted on one of the outer shelves forcing the

monorail back to level. The monorail would then tip over the equilibrium point and the

process would be repeated on the opposite side of the mechanism resulting in the

gyroscopes and monorail executing damped oscillatory motion (Franklin (1912)).

2.3 Advantages and disadvantages of the Brennan system

The main advantages of Brennan’s monorail were rail lines could be installed at a

lower cost (as only one rail was required for the monorail to run on) and production

costs for producing the monorail were also greatly reduced. The monorail was also

able to turn at much sharper angles compared to typical trains at the time. Figure 2.2

shows the monorail banking around a corner a conventional train would have

struggled to negotiate.

45
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

The main issue with the design was that each monorail carriage needed its own

rotating set of flywheels to keep stabilized rather than just the locomotive at the front.

This meant there also had to be a motor running constantly to supply energy to the

flywheels to keep them rotating to maintain the monorail in the desired upright

position. This added a significant amount of weight to the overall monorail.

Figure 2.2 – The Brennan monorail (Photographer Unknown, 1927)

Although Brennan’s system was shown to work very successfully, fears that the

gyroscopes may fail prevented adoption of the system for widespread use (Eddy

(1910)). To date no gyroscopically stabilized monorail has been developed past the

prototype stage.

46
Chapter 2 – The Brennan Monorail

2.4 Relevance to this project

The Brennan Monorail has significant relevance to this project due to the coupling of

the flywheels used in the stabilization system. Investigation of this system will give

an understanding of the reactions that gyroscopes produce when moved in their

gimbal frames and how this can be applied to stabilize an external unstable body in

the proposed schematic design.

2.5 Brennan monorail parameters

In order to establish the size of the gyroscopically stabilized platform prototype it is

useful to understand the parameters used for the design of the Brennan system. This

information helps give a greater understanding of the magnitudes of the stabilizing

moments that maintained the monorail in its upright position and potentially reveal

relevant design solutions about how the proposed system could be assembled

together.

The interactions between the components that make up the Brennan monorail are

purely mechanical; similar to the connections and linkages that are suggested in the

proposed schematic (Figure 1.6). Dickinson (1910) discussed several quantitative

values that encompassed an early full sized car that Brennan had manufactured.

The values are shown in Table 2.1 and Table 2.2.

47
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

Table 2.1– Brennan monorail parameters from Dickinson (1910)

Parameter Value Units

Monorail

Length between buffers 12.2 m

Width 3.0 m

Height from rail level 4.0 m

Weight when empty 19958.1 kg

Maximum load 13607.8 kg

Total weight 33565.9 tons

Number of drive motors 2

Total horsepower 100 hp

Maximum speed 56.3 kph

Maximum incline 1:13

Distance between wheels 6.1 m

Wheel diameter 1.6 m

Table 2.2 – Brennan gyroscope parameters from Dickinson (1910)

Gyroscopes

Number of flywheels 2

Flywheel diameter 0.914 m

Flywheel weight 680.4 kg

Flywheel rotational speed 3000 rpm

314.2 rads-1

During the course of this study no engineering drawings of the Brennan monorail

were found. The only known dimensions relating to the arrangement of a Brennan

stabilizing system were obtained from a drawing published by Moots (1911). Moots

manufactured a working model Brennan monorail (Figure 2.3) in 1911 from Norway
48
Chapter 2 – The Brennan Monorail

pine as part of a thesis and successfully showcased the stabilization principles

behind the system in a variety of tests.

Figure 2.3 – Working model Brennan monorail from Moots (1911)

2.6 Free body analysis

This section presents the free body diagrams for the Brennan monorail system.

Figure 2.4 shows a schematic representation of the Brennan system

While the proposed gyroscopically stabilized platform is more complex than the

Brennan monorail, the interactions and reactions produced by the gyroscopes are

similar. Understanding of the load paths and transmission of forces of Brennan’s

system will aid in the mechanical design of the proposed system.

49
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

Friction Wheel z
Shelf A y
Gear Joint
BB1
a
b
x

Shelf B
AA2

AA1 P1 B1
Gimbal Frame B
P2
Free Wheel

Gimbal Frame A BB2 A1

Shelf C
Φ1
Wheel
c
A2

d
Monorail Chassis B2

Φ2 Shelf D

Figure 2.4 – Schematic of Brennan monorail

Consider the sequence of events after a disturbance of the system causes the

monorail chassis to roll about the y axis. Figure 2.5 shows the reactions that occur

for gimbal frame A when this tipping motion of the chassis occurs.

50
Chapter 2 – The Brennan Monorail

z
FBB1 y

BB1

FF1 x
FG
FSA

FA FAA2 AA2

AA1 FAA1

Forces on friction
wheel A cause the
gimbal frame to FF1
precess in the FBB2
negative z direction
BB2

Φ1

FGWA

Figure 2.5 – Gimbal frame A of Brennan monorail

As the monorail tips the friction wheel ‘a’ comes in contact with shelf A. The friction

force, FSA will cause gimbal frame A to rotate about axis BB1-BB2 in the negative z

direction (Φ1).

The upward shelf reaction force, FA will also cause gimbal frame A to rotate

(precess) about BB1-BB2 in the negative z direction (Φ1).

Figure 2.6 shows the reactions that occur on gimbal frame B.

51
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

z
FG y

B1
FB1
FF2
FA1
A1
Because gimbal
frame A and B are
geared together,
gimbal frame B
precesses in the A2
positive z direction
FA2

FF2

B2
FB2

Φ2

FGWB

Figure 2.6 – Gimbal frame B

The gear force FG causes gimbal frame B to precess about the axis B1-B2 in the

positive z direction (Φ2).

The forced precession of gimbal frame B results in a righting moment (forces FF2)

due to gyroscopic effects. The gimbal frame B gyroscope assists the gimbal frame A

gyroscope in resisting the upward tipping force from shelf A (about axis P1-P2).

The forces on the frame of the Brennan monorail gimbal mounting frame (when

wheel ‘a’ contacts shelf A) are shown in Figure 2.7.

52
Chapter 2 – The Brennan Monorail

FF1

BB1 z
FBB1 y

x
B1 FB1

FP11

FGWA FP21 FF2

FP12
FF1
mg/2

FP22 mg/2
FBB2
BB2

FGWB
FB2

B2
FF2

Figure 2.7 – Brennan monorail gimbal mounting frame

The forces on the monorail chassis (when wheel ‘a’ contacts shelf A) are shown in

Figure 2.8.

FSA z
FA y

x
mg/2

mg/2 FP11
FP21

FP12

FP22

FW3
FW2

FW1
mg/2
FW4
mg/2

Figure 2.8 – Brennan monorail chassis

53
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

The applied righting moment down upon shelf A continues until the Brennan

monorail chassis is tipped over the equilibrium point (axis P1-P2). The tipping motion

continues until free wheel ‘c’ contacts shelf C (on the other side of the monorail).

Gimbal frame B of the Brennan monorail now becomes Figure 2.9.

z
FG y

x
FF2 FB1

B1

A1 Contact of free wheel C

with shelf C causes a
reaction torque that
FA1 precesses gimbal frame B
FA2 in the negative z direction
A2

FB2
B2

FF2 FC
Φ2

FGWB

Figure 2.9 – Gimbal frame B

The tipping of the monorail over the equilibrium will cause a force to be applied to

shelf ‘C’, FC, by free wheel ‘c’ resulting in the precession of gimbal frame B about B1-

B2 in the negative z direction (Φ2). This precession continues until friction wheel ‘d’

comes in contact with shelf D. This contact causes the force precession of gimbal

frame B, and due to the geared joint this also results in the forced precession of

gimbal frame A.

54
Chapter 2 – The Brennan Monorail

z
BB1 y

FF1
FBB1
FG x
FAA2

AA2

AA1
Because gimbal frame A and
FAA1 B are geared together,
gimbal frame A precesses in
FF1 the negative z direction.
Gyroscopic forces result in a
moment being applied to
BB2 shelf D
FBB2
Φ1

FGWA

Figure 2.10 – Gimbal frame A

The gear force FG causes the gimbal frame A to rotate about the axis BB1-BB2 in the

positive z direction (Φ1). The forced precession of gimbal frame A results in the

righting moment (forces FF1) due to gyroscopic effects.

This results in the application of a righting moment to shelf D (about axis P1-P2).

This righting moment continues pushing upon shelf D until the monorail again tips

over the equilibrium (about axis P1-P2) causing free wheel ‘b’ to come in contact

with shelf B. The process is then repeated resulting in the monorail executing

damped oscillatory motion about the equilibrium point.

The forces on the gimbal mounting frame of the monorail when wheel ‘c’ contacts

shelf C are shown in Figure 2.11.

55
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

FF1

BB1 z
FBB1 y

x
B1 FB1

FP11

FGWA FP21 FF2

FP12
FF1 mg/2

FP22 mg/2
FBB2
BB2

FGWB
FB2

B2
FF2
Figure 2.11 – Brennan monorail gimbal mounting frame

The forces on the monorail chassis (when wheel ‘c’ contacts shelf C) are shown in

Figure 2.12.

z
y

mg/2
FP11
mg/2
FP21
FP12
FP22

FW1
FD

FW2
FW3 FDS

FW4 mg/2
mg/2

Figure 2.12 – Brennan monorail chassis

56
Chapter 2 – The Brennan Monorail

2.7 Main advantages of proposed system over Brennan monorail

There are several advantages of the proposed stable platform over the Brennan

monorail. These are:

 While the Brennan monorail stabilized an external structure in one plane the

proposed stable platform posses the ability to stabilize in the horizontal pitch

and roll directions.

 Because the proposed gyroscopically stabilized platform precesses around a

central axis the system is able to produce an equivalent restoring force in all

directions. This feature makes the proposed system novel and adaptable to a

large range of applications.

Advances in technology have allowed a stabilization system that achieves the same

result as the Brennan monorail to be produced at a much smaller scale. High speed

electric motors and lightweight batteries will greatly increase flywheel speed while

significantly reducing the overall weight of the system. These technologies will be

utilized in the design of the stable platform.

2.8 Concluding comments

The review of the Brennan monorail has shown how gyroscopes behave when

coupled together and how this can be adapted to maintain an unstable body upright.

This understanding of the reactions produced by gyroscopes when subjected to an

external force along with the free body analysis of the Brennan monorail has

revealed the critical load paths and important system interactions. This will aid in the

design of the proposed gyroscopically stabilized platform.

57
Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

58
Chapter 3 – Derivation of Lagrangian of Stable Platform

Derivation of Lagrangian of Stable Platform

3.1 Introduction

The proposed gyroscopically stabilized platform will now be referred to as the stable

platform. It is desirable to derive a set of equations that model the oscillatory motion

of the stable platform. A Lagrangian energy approach is adopted with goal of

obtaining a set of equations of motion for each of the variables that relate to the

behaviour of the stable platform.

The objective of this chapter is to derive the Lagrangian of the stable

platform system. The kinetic and potential energy for the stable

platform subsystems (external structure, disc and gyroscopes) are

derived and combined to obtain the required Lagrangian. This result

will then be used to derive the equations of motion of the system.

3.2 System variables

The following variables are used to describe the motion of the stable platform during

the stabilization process:

59
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

The six variable are defined as

= the location of the external structure from the vertical

= the Euler angles associated with location of the disc

around the pivot point

= the Euler angles associated with the location of the

gyroscopes relative to their pivot point,

Figure 3.1 denotes how the system variables relate to the physical system.

z Disc

Od
Gyroscope

s
External Structure
θs

y
Os

Figure 3.1 – Relationship of system variables to physical system

is defined as an Euler angle that measures deviations of the system from the

horizontal, rather than the normal (like ). It is thus related to by the

equation

60
Chapter 3 – Derivation of Lagrangian of Stable Platform

(3.1)

such that

3.3 Initial simplifying assumptions

Several simplifying assumptions are established. These assumptions will all be

implemented in the physical design of the system so that it adheres to the

mathematical analysis. The four key assumptions used in this mathematical analysis

of the system are:

i)

All four of the gyroscope systems (gimbal frame,

motor, and gyroscope) have identical moments of

inertia

ii) All the gyroscope systems have equal angular

displacement ( ) from the horizontal of the disc

iii) All the gyroscopes have identical rotational

speeds, , taken to be constant

iv) The torque produced by the external structure’s deviation from the normal is

applied to the gyroscopes only (the disc does not tip).

61
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

3.4 Lagrangian formalism

We derive the equations of motion for by the

means of the Lagrangian formalism.

The Lagrangian function, associated with a system described by

independent variables, is defined as

(3.2)

where = the kinetic energy of the energy of the system

= the potential energy of the system

where the equations of motion of the system are given by

m n

where = the generalised non conservative force affecting the motion

of the co-ordinate (where applicable)

3.5 Approach to derivation of system Lagrangian

The procedure for deriving the Lagrangian of the stable platform requires the

formulation of the kinetic and potential energies and the non-conservative forces of

62
Chapter 3 – Derivation of Lagrangian of Stable Platform

the system in terms of suitable co-ordinates. This is completed for each of the three

sub systems that comprise the stable platform (the external structure, the disc and

the gyroscope) and then summed together so that

(3.3)

where = the Lagrangian associated with the external structure

= the Lagrangian associated with the disc

= the Lagrangian associated with the gyroscopes

The most convenient co-ordinates for a rigid body (such as this system) are those

associated with the body fixed axis with origin, O, attached to a specific point of the

body (often the centre of mass) so the co-ordinate system has all the body’s motion

(Wells (1967)).

3.6 Derivation of kinetic energy terms

The required expression for the kinetic energy is obtained by rewriting the

components of the inertial space velocity in terms of the variables associated with

the co-ordinate system used in the expression

(3.4)

63
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

where = the inertial space velocity of the kth particle in the rigid

body relative to its body fixed axis with components

and having mass

and then simplifying this summation.

3.7 Reference frame relations

It is important to establish a set of reference frames that will describe how the

system moves relative to a fixed point in space. The relationship between the

reference frames used to describe the motion of the system is shown in Figure 3.2.

Z’
Y

Z1
Z
Y’

X’
X

Y1

X1

Figure 3.2 – Relationship between inertial reference frame, inertial frame centred at the origin

of the body and the body fixed frame

where X1, Y1, Z1 is the inertial reference frame

X’, Y’, Z’ is the inertial frame parallel to X1, Y1, Z1

but centred at origin O of the rigid body

64
Chapter 3 – Derivation of Lagrangian of Stable Platform

X, Y, Z is the body fixed frame centred at the origin

If the origin O, has an inertial space velocity with components along X,

Y, Z, then the components of the inertial space velocity of a particle at a

location from the origin in the X, Y, Z co-ordinate system with respect to this system

are

(3.5)

where = the angular velocity of the body fixed axes X, Y, Z

relative to the inertial axes X’, Y’, Z’

So the kinetic energy of the stable platform system can be expressed as

(3.6)

3.8 Lagrangian of external structure

In this section the derivation of the Lagrangian of the external structure is presented.

The Lagrangian, depends upon the kinetic energy, , and potential energy, , of

the external structure such that, .

65
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

3.8.1 Kinetic energy of external structure

The external structure is assumed to be a point mass with a centre of mass

situated at a height above the pivot point .

Figure 3.3 illustrates the location of the centre of mass of the external structure

relative to the pivot point.

Z
COM

Os

Figure 3.3 – Location of external structure centre of mass relative to origin

The kinetic energy of the external structure can be expressed as

(3.7)

where the velocity of the centre of mass of the external

frame relative to the inertial reference frame at the

pivot point Os written in terms of the body fixed

axis of the external structure

66
Chapter 3 – Derivation of Lagrangian of Stable Platform

By inspection it can be seen that

(3.8)

where

and

(3.9)

where

Therefore, the kinetic energy of the external structure can be expressed as

67
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

(3.10)

where is the mass of the external structure

3.8.2 Potential energy of the external structure

The potential energy of the external structure is determined from the mass of the

external structure and the height of the centre of mass of the external structure

above the origin OS.

If we make the simplifying assumption that the external structure can be represented

as a point mass, , at its centre of mass above OS we obtain

(3.11)

3.8.3 Lagrangian for the external structure

The Lagrangian for the external structure is therefore a combination of equations

(3.10) and (3.11).

68
Chapter 3 – Derivation of Lagrangian of Stable Platform

(3.12)

3.9 Lagrangian of disc

This section presents the derivation of the Lagrangian of the disc. The Lagrangian,

depends upon the kinetic energy, and potential energy, of the disc.

3.9.1 Kinetic energy of the disc

As with the external structure, the kinetic energy of the disc can be expressed in the

form

(3.13)

where is the inertial space velocity of the kth particle in the disc written in terms of

the body fixed axes of the disc. These are taken to be along the principal axes of

inertia of the disc.

We also make the assumption that the disc is symmetric about the z axis of the body

fixed reference frame and Od. The origin of this frame is at its centre of mass which

is located in line with the systems pivot point.

The velocity of the kth particle for the disc can be written in the form

69
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

(3.14)

where is the velocity of the origin of the body fixed axis attached

to the disc relative to the inertial reference frame centred

at the pivot point Od written in terms of the body fixed

axes associated with the disc

is the angular velocity of the body fixed axes associated

with the disc relative to the inertial reference frame

is the location of the kth particle of the disc relative to Od

Because the external structure and disc share a common origin, can be written

as

(3.15)

where is the height of Od above Os

3.9.2 Euler angles

In order to describe the angular velocity of the disc we introduce a set of angular

variables known as Euler angles. Euler angles are commonly used to

describe the behaviour of a rotating body (Wells, 1967).

70
Chapter 3 – Derivation of Lagrangian of Stable Platform

For all applications performed in the following set of calculations X1, Y1, Z1 will be

taken as the fixed axes in space. If a rigid body (in this case the disc) is fixed at point

O and is rotated about this point, let X, Y, Z denote the reference axis attached to

this body (body fixed axis) (Kane (1983)). Each Euler angle, shown in Figure 3.4, are

defined as

 Line ‘ON’ is defined as the intersection of the plane created by moving XY

through the stationary X1Y1 plane

 is defined as the angle between X1 and ‘ON’

 is defined as the angle between Z1 and Z

 is defined as the angle between X and ‘ON’

Z1 Y
X1, Y1, Z1 = fixed in space

X, Y, Z = body fixed axis

Z
X

φ
Y1
O

ψ N
X1

Figure 3.4 – Definition of Euler angles relative to inertial reference frame

71
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

3.9.3 Angular velocity of disc

Assuming that are regarded as angular velocity vectors acting along ON, Z, Z1

respectively, the total angular velocity, ω is the vector sum of these three quantities

(Wells (1967)). This is illustrated in Figure 3.5.

For the purpose of this analysis it is useful to establish the components of this vector

relative to the body fixed axes X, Y, Z.

Z1
Y

Z
X

Y1
O

N
X1

Figure 3.5 – Location of angular velocity vectors relative to reference frame

It is possible to derive a directional cosine table to translate the vectors that act along

the body fixed axis onto the axes ‘ON’, Z, Z1 (which in turn is related to the inertial

reference frame).

The relationship between each of the angular velocity vectors is shown in Table 3.1.

72
Chapter 3 – Derivation of Lagrangian of Stable Platform

Table 3.1 - Cosine of angles between X, Y, Z and Z1, ON

X Y Z

Z1

ON 0

An example of how one of the angles is derived follows.

Assume we wish to determine the direction cosines between the line ON and the

axis X in the body fixed frame (that is, what would we need to multiply a vector along

ON by to transform it into the X axis).

Y
Z1

Y1

O X
φ
N

X1

Figure 3.6 – Rotation of Figure 3.5 such that ON, X and Y all are on a common plane parallel

to the page

Figure 3.5 is rotated so that ‘ON’, X and Y all lie on a common plane (that is parallel

to the page) such that it is possible to see as a ‘true angle’ (Figure 3.6). If ON is a

unit vector of length 1, X is equal to ; this is the resulting direction cosine

73
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

relating to a transformation of ‘ON’ onto X. Using this method it is possible to

determine the angles between each of the respective axes of rotation and complete

the elements of Table 3.1.

By taking components , and the angular velocities of the disc acting along the

body fixed with respect to ‘ON’, Z, Z1 the angular velocity components of the disc

taken along X, Y, Z relative to the inertial reference frame are:

(3.16)

(3.17)

(3.18)

Equations (3.16), (3.17) and (3.18) represent a transformation that puts the angular

velocities into a common frame where all velocities (both angular and linear) can be

summed together.

We also make the simplifying assumption that (the disc is symmetric about

the z axis of the body fixed frame).

3.9.4 Total kinetic energy of the disc

The total kinetic energy of the disc can now be determined.

74
Chapter 3 – Derivation of Lagrangian of Stable Platform

(3.19)

Since Od is located at the centre of mass, this simplifies to

(3.20)

where

This result can be obtained because (the centre of mass of the disc) and the body

fixed axes are taken along the principal axes of inertia of the disc and . From

Equation (3.15) we express as

(3.21)

75
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

Substituting Equations (3.16), (3.17), (3.18) and (3.21) into Equation (3.19) we obtain

the result

(3.22)

See Appendix A for the full simplification of the result

3.9.5 Potential energy of the disc

The potential energy of the disc is determined from the mass of the disc and the

height of the COM of the disc above the origin Os. Again we make the simplifying

assumption that the disc can be represented as a point mass at its centre of mass.

We therefore obtain

(3.23)

76
Chapter 3 – Derivation of Lagrangian of Stable Platform

3.9.6 Lagrangian for the disc

The Lagrangian for the disc can therefore be expressed as a combination of

Equations (3.22) and (3.23).

(3.24)

This equation can further be simplified based on the assumption that the disc will

always remain level as the centre of mass of the gyroscopes/disc is below the pivot

point (the disc possess high gravitational stability). This leads to the assumption that

which when substituted into the equation for yields

(3.25)

77
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

3.10 Lagrangian of gyroscopes

The following sections look at the derivation of the Lagrangian of the gyroscopes.

The Lagrangian, , depends upon the kinetic energy, , and potential energy, , of

the gyroscopes.

3.10.1 Kinetic energy of the gyroscopes

As with the external structure and the disc, the kinetic energy of the gyroscopes can

be expressed in the form

(3.26)

where is the inertial space velocity of the kth particle in the gyroscope written in

terms of the body fixed axes associated with each gyroscope (numbered 1 to 4).

This is taken to be along the principle axis of inertia of the gyroscopes where is

the mass of this particle.

We also make the assumption that the mass of each gyroscope is symmetric about

the z axis of its body fixed frame and (the origin of the reference frame is its

centre of mass). The velocity of the kth particle of the gyroscopes can be written in

the form

(3.27)

78
Chapter 3 – Derivation of Lagrangian of Stable Platform

Where the components that comprise are defined as

the velocity of the pivot point of the disc (Od)

relative to the inertial reference frame centred at

the origin Os written in terms of the body fixed axis

associated with the mth gyroscope

the velocity of the pivot point of a gyroscope

relative to the inertial frame centred at Od written

in terms of the body fixed axis associated with the

mth gyroscope

the angular velocity of the body fixed axis of the

mth gyroscope relative to the inertial frame entered

at Od written in terms of the body fixed axis

associated with the mth gyroscope

the location of the particle in the body fixed axes

While it would be useful to distinguish between the gyroscopes writing and

respectively; since it is assumed that all gyroscopes have a similar design

specification this notation does not add to the basic results.

79
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

Because is the centre of mass of each gyroscope and the body fixed axes are

taken along the principle axes of inertia of the gyroscopes, the expression for the

kinetic energy of the gyroscopes reduces to

(3.28)

It is also assumed that the gyroscopes are identical and are symmetric (that is that

) and .

3.10.2 Inertial space linear velocity of gyroscope pivot point

The linear velocity of the gyroscopes depends upon the rotation of the disc. Because

of this, we need to derive an expression for the velocity of the pivot point of the disc

(Equation (3.15)) relative to the body-fixed frame of the gyroscope. Consider a

rotation of the disc through as shown in Figure 3.7.

80
Chapter 3 – Derivation of Lagrangian of Stable Platform

y’

Od y

x’
x

Figure 3.7 – Rotation of disc about Od through angle

A transformation relative to the body-fixed axis attached to the disc but rotated an

angle , relative to the above axis results in the following velocities (shown as a

resultant of the sum of the x and y components).

(3.29)

Substitution of the values from Equation (3.15) into Equation (3.29) means that for

the components of relative to this frame we obtain

81
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

(3.30)

If we make the assumption that the origin of this axis is taken at with each axes

remaining parallel to its first position then we now introduce a transformation onto a

new set of axes relative to the origin of the gyroscopes, .

These axes are depicted in Figure 3.8 and are defined as:

 a-b - the pivot axis of a gyroscope parallel to x’

 rad - the radial distance from Od to in the direction of y’

 - the axis perpendicular to the disc in the direction of z’

82
Chapter 3 – Derivation of Lagrangian of Stable Platform

a
y’

rad b
Od y

x’
x

Figure 3.8 – Translation axes relative to body fixed axis

By direct substitution the velocity relative to the origin of the gyroscopes has

components in this set of axes defined as

(3.31)

We also know that has been defined as the velocity of the pivot

point of the gyroscopes relative to the origin of the disc. This velocity is directed

along the a-b axis of each gyroscope (which lies along the gyroscope pivot axis). It is

clear that

(written in the form , along the a-b axis) (3.32)

83
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

where = the radial distance the pivot point of the gyroscopes are

from Od

= the angular velocity of the disc

Hence has components

(3.33)

where relates to the angular position of each of the four gyroscopes (e.g. when

or when ) in the body fixed axis of the disc.

Figure 3.9 – Transformation axes relative to body fixed axis of gyroscope

The transformation

XYZ

84
Chapter 3 – Derivation of Lagrangian of Stable Platform

where (X,Y,Z) is the body fixed axes associated with the gyroscope centred at ;

is a rotation and under this type of transformation, even though the components

along each axis change we obtain

and from this we have

because any axis rotation preserves vector length.

Substituting in our previous results for (Equation (3.33)) into

reveals

85
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

which when simplified reveals

(3.34)

At each location of the gyroscopes we can determine the value for and therefore

the values for the linear velocities.

At

(3.35)

Substituting Equations (3.34) and (3.35) into the linear velocity component of

Equation (3.28) gives the linear velocity of the body fixed axis of the gyroscope as

86
Chapter 3 – Derivation of Lagrangian of Stable Platform

(3.36)

which can be simplified to

(3.37)

based on the assumption that .

3.10.3 Angular velocity of body fixed axis

The total angular velocity of the gyroscopes is

(3.38)

where the rotation of the disc along the Z axis

87
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

the rotation of the external structure along X axis

the rotation of the gyroscope/frame along the a-b axis

through

the rotation of the gyroscope along Z

To describe the angular velocity of the gyroscope, the components of in the

body fixed axis of the gyroscope centred at must be determined.

Figure 3.10 shows the location of each of the critical pivot points and axes of the

system.

Z1
Z’

Od

Y1

Os

X1

Figure 3.10 – Pivot point and axes locations

In order to determine the angular velocities of the gyroscopes we must transform all

angular velocities that the gyroscope depends upon , into the same
88
Chapter 3 – Derivation of Lagrangian of Stable Platform

reference frame. In this case, we chose the origin of the gyroscopes as our

common origin and establish a set of axes that relate to this point.

Located at we establish a set of axes such that the

 z axis is parallel to Z

 y axis is radially outward from

 x axis is along (the pivot axis of the gyroscope/frame)

To see where these axes lie in relation to the system refer to Figure 3.9 and Figure

3.10.

The set of axes are rotated at an angle (rotation of the disc) to the inertial

reference frame parallel to X1, Y1, Z1 but centred at .

The direction of each of the associated angular velocities after this transformation is

described as:

 (consisting of two components, one parallel to the x axis of the body fixed

axes of the disc along the line , and one parallel to the y axis radically

outwards from )

89
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

along

radially

 along

 along the Z

The location of the angles and are shown in Figure 3.11.

Z1
Y X
X-Y
Z
Plane

a b

Section of gyroscope body Radial direction

perpendicular to Z

axis

Figure 3.11 – Location of gyroscope body fixed axes centred at and associated angles

Figure 3.11 illustrates how this new set of axes relates to the body fixed axes of the

gyroscopes.

The relative variables that need to be transformed and the axes relating to the frame

with which we wish to transform them onto have been established. It is now possible

90
Chapter 3 – Derivation of Lagrangian of Stable Platform

to derive expressions that describe in terms of (the angular

velocities that relate to the gyroscope) in the body fixed axes centred at

(Gutschmidt (2005)).

Table 3.2 outlines all the transformations of into the frame.

As an example, the derivation of the first term of Table 3.2 will be shown.

Let us consider the component of the variable . We have defined a

transformation of this component from the frame centred at into the frame centred

at as .

We required this component to be transformed into the frame. This component

of consists of two components in the frame; one along the x axis and one

along the y axis of the body fixed axes we previously established.

The x axis component of the term in the frame can therefore be

described as .

91
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

Table 3.2 – Transformations of angular velocities into the body fixed frame centred at

Variable in frame Variable in frame Variable in frame

A transformation along
into the frame

A transformation into the frame

A transformation into the frame

A transformation radially into the

frame

A transformation into the frame

A transformation into the frame

A transformation from the x-y plane

into the x and y axes

A transformation from the x-y plane

into the x and y axes

A transformation into the frame

A transformation into the frame

A transformation from the x-y plane

into the x and y axes

A transformation from the x-y plane

into the x and y axes

Has a x component along

Has a y component along

Has a z component along

92
Chapter 3 – Derivation of Lagrangian of Stable Platform

Collecting the various contributions to we obtain the following expressions

for the angular velocities of the gyroscopes in their body fixed axes

(3.39)

(3.40)

(3.41)

where relates to the angular position of each of the four gyroscopes eg. when

or when etc

From Equation (3.28) we required and . Combining Equations

(3.39) and (3.40) results in

93
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

(3.42)

See Appendix A for the full working of this simplification.

We therefore have

(3.43)

Substitution of Equation (3.35) along with the solutions

(3.44)

from which the following simplification can be derived

(3.45)

94
Chapter 3 – Derivation of Lagrangian of Stable Platform

into Equation (3.43) produces the result

(3.46)

Note that we also assume

(all gyros pivot at an equal angle)

(all gyros have equal rotational speed)

We also require the component in Equation (3.28). Substitution of Equation

(3.35) into Equation (3.41) results in

(3.47)

The total kinetic energy of the gyroscopes is therefore

(3.48)

95
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

We make the simplifying assumption that and obtain

(3.49)

We can make one final simplifying substitution based upon and the

equation for the angular velocity of the gyroscopes reduces to

(3.50)

96
Chapter 3 – Derivation of Lagrangian of Stable Platform

3.10.4 Total kinetic energy of gyroscopes

The total kinetic energy of the gyroscopes can now be determined. Substituting

Equations (3.37) and (3.50) into Equation (3.28) results in

(3.51)

3.10.5 Potential energy of gyroscopes

The potential energy of the gyroscopes is determined from their mass and the

height of the COM of the disc above the origin Os.

Again we make the simplifying assumption that the gyroscopes can be represented

as four point masses at their centre of mass and obtain

(3.52)

97
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

3.10.6 Lagrangian for the gyroscopes

The Lagrangian for the gyroscopes is therefore a combination of Equations (3.51)

and (3.52)

(3.53)

3.11 Lagrangian for the stable platform system

The total Lagrangian for the system can now be expressed as a combination of

Equations (3.12), (3.24) and (3.53).

98
Chapter 3 – Derivation of Lagrangian of Stable Platform

(3.54)

3.12 Concluding comments

The Lagrangian for the stable platform has been derived (Equation (3.54)) and

reduced to its simplest form. This equation will be used to derive the equations of

motion of the system which in turn will be used to determine the behaviour of the

system as it stabilizes an external structure. Conditions upon the behaviour will then

be stipulated and used in the physical design of the system.

99
Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

100
Chapter 4 – Derivation of Equations of Motion and Stability Conditions

Derivation of Equations of Motion and Stability Conditions

4.1 Introduction

Having established the Lagrangian equation for the stable platform system in

Chapter 3, the equations of motion that describe the systems behaviour can be

determined. The equations of motion can then be used to derive stability conditions

that will be used in the design of the stable platform.

The objective of this chapter is to derive a set of equations of motion

from the Lagrangian that relate to the behaviour of the stable

platform. This set of equations will then be used to derive an

inequality condition that will govern the response of the stable

platform during operation. This inequality will also be used in the

physical design of the system to optimise the stabilizing moment it is

able to produce.

The process used in the derivation of the equations of motions and inequality is

adopted from Cousins (1913).

101
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

4.2 Lagrangian formalism for platform system

From Chapter 3, Equation (3.54), the Lagrangian of the system is described as

(3.54)

4.2.1 Lagrangian formalisation

The equations of motion for each variable are given by the Lagrangian equation

where is the non conservative generalised force associated with .

4.2.2 Equation of motion for

The following calculations relate to the derivation of the EOM for the rotational

motion of the gyroscopes ( ). There is no generalised force acting on this body.

Therefore

102
Chapter 4 – Derivation of Equations of Motion and Stability Conditions

(4.1)

(4.2)

(4.3)

Combining Equations (4.1), (4.2) and (4.3) results in the equation of motion for as

(4.4)

Resolving Equation (4.4) gives

(4.5)

where is a constant that we approximate as (based upon being very

small such that )

4.2.3 Equation of motion for

The following calculations relate to the derivation of the EOM for the rotational

motion of the main disc as it precesses back and forth . There is a non

conservative force present which physically acts to change the rotation of the disc

(i.e. a motor).

103
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

The force can be expressed as

(4.6)

where relates to the coefficient of friction the motor must overcome to

initiate rotation of the disc (from bearings, gear backlash etc)

is the torque exerted by a gyroscope made to precess at a rate

of in the direction perpendicular to its axis of rotation when

the structure deviates from the vertical.

Note that at high speeds we may take

(4.7)
where

where is the distance from the gyroscope gimbal frame pivot to the end

of the outer contact arm

is the distance from the disc central pivot axis to the gyroscope

gimbal frame pivot

such that is the transformation of the moment produced by the gimbal

frame at its pivot point to the disc central pivot point.

104
Chapter 4 – Derivation of Equations of Motion and Stability Conditions

We are able to make the assumption as the function has a

dependence upon the rotational speeds of the gyroscopes. Because the rotational

speed of the gyroscopes is so much higher than the rotational speed of the disc,

variations in the speed of the disc are negligible. Because of this we can

approximate the function as a constant.

(4.8)

(4.9)

Combining Equations (4.6), (4.8) and (4.9) results in the equation of motion for as

(4.10)

Differentiating Equation (4.10) yields

(4.11)

105
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

4.2.4 Equation of motion for

The following calculations relate to the derivation of the EOM for the tipping motion

of the external structure as it deviates from the vertical ( ). There is no generalised

force acting on this body.

(4.12)

(4.13)

(4.14)

Combining Equations (4.12), (4.13) and (4.14) results in the equation of motion for

as

(4.15)

which when differentiated and simplified results in

(4.16)

106
Chapter 4 – Derivation of Equations of Motion and Stability Conditions

4.2.5 Final equations of motion for stable platform

Based on our initial simplifying assumptions the motion of the system can be

described by: , the rotation of gyroscopes; , the rotation of the disc; and , the

deviation of the external structure from the vertical. Therefore, the three equations

that describe the motion of the system are:

For ,

(4.5)

For ,

(4.11)

For ,

(4.16)

4.3 Derivation of system stability conditions

Having established the equations of motion of the stable platform system it is

desirable to derive a set of stability conditions that will govern the system’s

107
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

behaviour. Manipulation of the values in these stability conditions will govern the type

of motion the system will exhibit.

4.3.1 Position of equilibrium

To be able to derive the conditions for stability, the position of equilibrium must be

determined. This is described as the position the system would take if there were no

changes to its position (that is, all accelerations and relevant velocities are equal to

zero).

We look for conditions that allow us to have

Inspection of Equations (4.11) and (4.16) reveals that for the above condition to be

satisfied we require several of the system variables to be equal to zero. The

conditions established for the position of equilibrium are therefore defined as

(4.17)

4.3.2 Conditions of stability

To determine the nature of the equilibrium position we look at the nature of small

deviations from it. We obtain a general solution for the system by writing an equation

108
Chapter 4 – Derivation of Equations of Motion and Stability Conditions

that includes the nature of small deviations from the equilibrium of each of the

variables that define the motion of the system. It is therefore assumed that

(4.18)

where represents small deviations in the variable and represents

small deviations in the variable .

Equations (4.11) and (4.16) govern the behaviour of the system about the

equilibrium point. Substituting in Equations (4.17) and (4.18) into Equations (4.11)

and (4.16) and retaining only first order terms yields a set of two equations with two

degrees of freedom

(4.19)

(4.20)

Note we use the small angle approximation to the trigonometric functions based on

Taylor’s expansion (in the form of radians rather than degrees)

109
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

4.3.3 Derivation of general solution to first order equations

Assuming that solutions to equations (4.19) and (4.20) are of the form

(4.21)

the general equations of motion of the system for small deviations from the

equilibrium position become

(4.22)

(4.23)

which can be simplified to

(4.24)

(4.25)

110
Chapter 4 – Derivation of Equations of Motion and Stability Conditions

4.3.4 Stability matrix

Substitution of the above assumptions about the form of and yields the

matrix system:

For the purpose of simplification, the following substitutions are made

(4.26)

(4.27)

(4.28)

And the matrix becomes

(4.29)

which is known as the stability matrix of the system (Luong, (1996)).

111
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

4.3.5 System characteristic equation

The characteristic equation of the system is defined as the determinant of the

stability matrix (Mstability) and must be equal to zero for a non trivial solution to exist.

The characteristic equation for this system is the 4th order polynomial shown below

(4.30)

and so we need to solve to determine the nature of the stability of

the equilibrium position (by investigation of its roots).

4.3.6 Behaviour of system from characteristic equation

For the system that is being investigated we required damped oscillations about the

equilibrium position. To satisfy this condition we require that the characteristic

equation has complex roots whose real parts are negative. It is clear the Equation

(4.30) has one root . We now investigate the remaining 3rd order cubic

polynomial

(4.31)

112
Chapter 4 – Derivation of Equations of Motion and Stability Conditions

(Cousins,1913) states that any 3rd order polynomial in the form

(4.32)

must have roots of the form

(4.33)

This satisfies the conditions we have imposed on the behaviour of the system. We

therefore continue to investigate this behaviour of our system based upon the above

results. Firstly, we write our 3rd order polynomial in the form of Equation (4.32)

(4.34)

which results in

(4.35)

(4.36)

113
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

(4.37)

As we are only concerned with the case where the roots of characteristic equation

has complex conjugate roots (oscillatory damped behaviour) let us assume that

Equation (4.43) has roots then

(4.38)

which now written in the form of Equation (4.32) results in

(4.39)

(4.40)

(4.41)

114
Chapter 4 – Derivation of Equations of Motion and Stability Conditions

Equating Equation (4.35) to Equation (4.39), Equation (4.36) to (4.40) and Equation

(4.37) to (4.41) (that is , and ) we obtain the results

(4.42)

(4.43)

(4.44)

Based upon our desired damped oscillatory behaviour we know that we require to

always be positive (the real root is positive) and to always be negative (the real

part of our complex conjugates are negative) in Equations (4.42), (4.43) and (4.44).

Investigating Equation (4.44) reveals

(4.45)

From physical values for A and B we know they must always be positive (as A and B

depend upon physical parameters like dimensions or speeds), therefore for the

above condition to hold true we require

115
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

or

(4.46)

Substituting in our values for D (Equation (4.28)), C (Equation (4.7)) and

(Equation (4.5)) results in the condition (for the system to experience the desired

damped oscillatory behaviour) being

which simplifies to

(4.47)

We also investigate Equation (4.43). From Equation (4.45) and Equation (4.40) we

obtain

116
Chapter 4 – Derivation of Equations of Motion and Stability Conditions

(4.48)

We know that b must always be positive (the real part of our complex conjugates

must always be positive for the system to exhibit damped oscillatory behaviour) and

. Therefore for to always remain negative we require

(4.49)

Substitution of our values for A (Equation (4.26)), D (Equation (4.28)) and

(Equation (4.5)) results in the condition

Which simplifies to

(4.50)

117
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

4.4 Concluding comments

The investigation into the behaviour of the system has revealed two conditions on

the physical design of the system in order for it to exhibit damped oscillations about

the equilibrium point. These are Equations (4.47) and (4.50) repeated here:

(4.47)

(4.50)

These conditions will be used in the physical design of the stable platform system.

Equation (4.47) is of particular interest as it is a combination of the imbalance torque

produced by the mass of the system moving off the vertical (left side of the equation)

and the total restoring moment that the stable platform is able to produce (right side

of the equation).

118
Chapter 5 – Investigation of Stable Platform Behaviour

Investigation of Stable Platform Behaviour

5.1 Introduction

The characteristic equation for the stable platform system has been derived in

Chapter 4 (Equation (4.34)). From this, a general solution can be determined that

describes the oscillatory motion of the stable platform. Two system conditions will be

investigated:

i) Homogeneous system behaviour: this investigation will look at the general

solutions that relates to the system when the disc and gyroscope assembly is

precessed around only when contact occurs with the tipping of the external

structure. As the external structure moves off the horizontal, a switching

mechanism will activate the precession. This effectively makes the

stabilization process “active”, that is that the precession of the disc depends

upon the tipping of the external structure

ii) Driven system behaviour: this investigation will look at the general solutions

that relate to the system when the disc and gyroscope assembly is precessed

by a drive motor that oscillates the assembly back and forth at a constant

frequency, . The oscillation frequency is calculated via the general solution

and is set to match the natural frequency of the external structure.

119
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

The objective of this chapter is to derive the general solutions of the

homogeneous and driven systems based upon their associated

characteristic equations.

5.2 Homogeneous system

This section presents the derivation of the general solutions to the homogeneous

system arrangement.

5.2.1 Characteristic equation

The characteristic equation for the homogeneous system (Equation (4.34)) has been

derived in Chapter 4.

(4.34)

For a general cubic in the form

the general formula for the roots, in terms of the coefficients are expressed in

Equations (5.1) - (5.6) (Blinn (2006)). (Ward, 1959)

(5.1)

120
Chapter 5 – Investigation of Stable Platform Behaviour

where

(5.2)

(5.3)

(5.4)

(5.5)

Note that the discriminant for a cubic in the above form is

(5.6)

and its properties determine the nature of the roots. If the characteristic

equation has positive root and a pair of complex conjugates.

For the system being considered

(5.7)

121
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

(5.8)

(5.9)

(5.10)

where Equations (4.5), (4.7), (4.26), (4.27) and (4.28) relate to

respectively.

Using this result it is possible to determine the response of the physical system

based upon the physical values selected for the constants in A, B, C, , D and .

5.2.2 Homogeneous system general solutions

Investigation into the general solution of Equation (4.24)

(4.24)

yields the result

(5.11)

122
Chapter 5 – Investigation of Stable Platform Behaviour

As we require damped oscillations we only consider the complex roots of our

characteristic equation (McCallion (1973)). Equation (5.11) will always be in the form

(5.12)

We can convert the complex number into polar form such that

(5.13)

where

such that

The two general solutions that describe the oscillatory motion of the precession of

the disc and deviation from the vertical of the external structure can therefore be

written in the form

(5.14)

(5.15)

Note we have used Euler’s formula

123
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

(5.16)

to write the complex exponential terms in terms of trigonometric functions.

where

and

The variable can be set as zero eliminating this term from the general solution.

relates to an initial excitation of the system which is does not occur in the

arrangement of the stable platform that is being investigated.

The resulting two general solutions that describe the oscillatory motion of the system

are

(5.17)

(5.18)

124
Chapter 5 – Investigation of Stable Platform Behaviour

5.3 Driven System

Having investigated the response of the system when the precession of the disc

responds to the tilt of the system (through a switching contact that initiates the drive

motor; for a detailed description as to how this system was implemented refer to

Section 7.3.10.), it is useful to know how the system will behave when the disc is

oscillated back and forth at a constant frequency by means of an external force.

It should be noted that the system that is driven at a constant oscillating frequency

shall be referred to as the driven system. The main motivation for investigating the

driven system is that it is a much simpler arrangement to design, manufacture and

control.

5.3.1 Advantages of driven system

There are several advantages associated with oscillating the disc at a constant

frequency.

 The rotation is much simpler to control (the oscillatory frequency of the motor

can easily be adjusted and set at a constant value).

 The precession of the disc through driven oscillations is much more reliable.

The precession no longer depends upon contact between the external

structure and the disc to begin rotation of the disc.

125
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

The main concern with oscillating the disc back and forth is that the stabilizing

moment may not always be applied where it is most required. This issue will be

eliminated by oscillating the disc at a high frequency.

5.3.2 Updated equations of motion

The addition of a driving force that oscillates the disc back and forth during operation

results in a change to the equations of motion. The only body that is affected by this

change is , the motion associated with the rotation of the disc. The initial equation

of motion that described this rotation of the disc was stated in Equation (4.11).

A driving force term is added to Equation (4.11) which then becomes

(5.19)

where is the amplitude of the force associated with the driving of

the motor that will oscillate the disc back and forth

is the frequency that the driving force oscillates at

5.3.3 Position of equilibrium

As with the homogeneous system, the position of equilibrium must be investigated.

126
Chapter 5 – Investigation of Stable Platform Behaviour

We look for conditions that allow us to have

Inspection of Equations (5.19) and (4.16)

(4.16)

reveals that at for the above condition to be satisfied we require

These are the same results obtained for the homogeneous system.

5.3.4 Conditions of stability

The general solution to the homogeneous system was written in the form

(5.20)

127
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

where represents small deviations in the variable and represents

small deviations in the variable .

Now that we have added another scenario (oscillating the disc back and forth by

external means), the general solution to the overall system becomes

(5.21)

where are the general solutions to the homogenous system

(determined in Section 5.2.2) and are the particular integrals of

Equations (5.19) and (4.16). Since the general solutions to the homogeneous system

decay the essential long term behaviour of the driven system is governed by the

particular integrals and .

The first order equations that govern the behaviour of the driven system about the

equilibrium point are therefore

(5.22)

where Equation (5.22) is effectively Equation (5.19) with the driving force term

added.

128
Chapter 5 – Investigation of Stable Platform Behaviour

(5.23)

Note we again use the small angle approximation to the trigonometric functions

based on Taylor’s expansion.

The driving force term in the equation of motion of can be more conveniently

written in complex form as

In this form it allows easy manipulation of the equations. As we are only interested in

the real parts of the term associated with the driving force, and since the equations

are linear, we can find the solution by considering the real parts of the resulting

solutions.

This result means that the two equations of motion that describe the behaviour of the

driven system are

(5.24)

(5.25)

129
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

5.3.5 Derivation of particular integral of driven system

If the solutions to Equations (5.24) and (5.25) take the form

(5.26)

(5.27)

Then a solution to the equations of motion for small deviations from the equilibrium

position for the driven system is

(5.28)

(5.29)

which can be factorised to

(5.30)

(5.31)

Substitution of the above assumptions about the form

yields the matrix system

130
Chapter 5 – Investigation of Stable Platform Behaviour

As we did with the homogeneous system, for the purpose of simplification, we

substitute in and from Equations (4.26), (4.27) and (4.28) and the matrix

system becomes

Cramer’s rule allows us determine the solutions to a matrix (Klein, 1990) in the form

as

(5.32)

For the driven system

131
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

(5.33)

The solutions for and can be determined by substitution of Equations (5.33)

into Equations (5.32). We therefore obtain

(5.34)

and

(5.35)

132
Chapter 5 – Investigation of Stable Platform Behaviour

It is known that all the constants in Equations (5.34) and (5.35) are real and positive;

therefore these solutions will reduce to two complex numbers.

(5.36)

(5.37)

where m, n, p and q are determined by substitution of the constants A, B and D

(Equations (4.26), (4.27) and (4.28)). These complex numbers can be converted into

polar form so that Equations (5.36) and (5.37) become

(5.38)

(5.39)

where

The oscillatory motion that describes the behaviour of the variables and is

therefore

133
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

(5.40)

(5.41)

The overall response of the total system is therefore a combination of Equations

(5.17) and (5.40) and Equations (5.18) and (5.41). From this we obtain

(5.42)

and

(5.43)

Note again that the long term behaviour of the system is governed by the particular

integrals (5.40) and (5.41).

134
Chapter 5 – Investigation of Stable Platform Behaviour

5.4 Concluding comments

The general solutions for the homogeneous system (Equations (5.17) and (5.18))

and the driven system (Equations (5.42) and (5.43)) have been derived. These

equations will be used to investigate the behaviour of the stable platform system

once a set of physical parameters have been establish through the systematic

design of the experimental prototype (Chapter 6).

A set of plots modelling the behaviour of the system will be produced in Matlab

based upon the prototype stable platforms physical parameters. The theoretical

response will then be compared to data obtained via testing of the prototype stable

platform to validate the predicted behaviour of the system. Once validated, the model

can then be used to investigate the optimal design parameters for the stable platform

for a range of applications (that is, stabilizing a range of different external structures

by varying the physical parameters of the system).

135
Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

136
Chapter 6 – Design of Stable Platform

Design of the gyroscopically stabilized platform

6.1 Introduction

The approach to the design of the gyroscopically stabilized platform was to establish

a solution that implements the concept presented in the schematic diagram (Figure

1.6) that could be manufactured at the most feasibly economic scale using existing

mechanical components. While proof of concept was the driving factor behind this

research, it needed to be established whether it was even possible to manufacture

the stable platform in the configuration proposed by Townsend (1983) and obtain the

desired interactions between the subsystems that would make the system function

as intended.

The mathematical analysis of the system revealed a set of conditions that must be

satisfied in order for the stable platform to maintain an external structure level.

The objective of this study is to establish the feasibility of

constructing Townsend’s proposed schematic, as represented in the

schematic diagram, Figure 1.6, using available engineering

components. Furthermore, the study will investigate the most

practical and economic scale at which a prototype can be built.

137
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

The design will be evolved in a systematic way applying the approach adopted by

Pahl & Beitz (1984) and Hales & Gooch (2004).B

eitz, 1984 #32}

6.2 Task clarification

This section defines the problem for which solutions for the design of the stable

platform will be established. The following problem statement was formulated to

identify the design task. {Gooch, 2004 #55}

Problem statement: To manufacture a working stable platform to be built on

campus at the University of Canterbury Mechanical

Engineering Workshop. The stable platform is to stabilize an

inherently unstable external structure.

6.2.1 The design requirements specification

Although several constraints were placed upon the performance of the stable

platform, neither the size of the system or the magnitudes of the restoring moments

were ever addressed. Townsend stated that the system must actively resist the

applications of a tipping force and thus must be able to stabilize bodies which are

normally unstable under the action of such loads.

To help establish a practical approach to the experimental prototype design and to

aid in restricting the design to an economically feasible scale, a set of requirements

were formulated as a list of demands and wishes (Table 6.1) in accordance with the

design procedure of Pahl & Beitz (1984). The main focus of these requirements can

138
Chapter 6 – Design of Stable Platform

be categorised as functional, economic, ergonomic, ecological and life cycle (Hales

& Gooch (2004)).

Table 6.1 - Demands & wishes list

Demand Stable Platform design requirement specification (requirements

Wish under each heading are in order of importance

Functional requirements for the stable platform mechanisms

D must produce a righting moment to restore assembly from 20˚offset

D the mechanical components and mechanisms are to have sufficient

strength and rigidity to withstand the loads produced by the gyroscopes

D the overall system weight will be minimised to reduce the restoring

torque the system must produce to overcome imbalances forces caused
by the system moving off the equilibrium

D be as symmetric and balanced as possible to reduce moments produced

by imbalanced mass

D gimbal frame linkage must maintain gyroscope frames at the same

angles with respect to the disc to within 2˚

D disc to rotate on central pivot joint that maintains constant velocity at tip
angles up to 20˚

D distance between disc centre of mass and pivot point to be maximised

such that gravitational stability maintains disc level during operation

W system to be easily integrated into any type of unstable external structure

W must limit energy loses due to vibrations

W must be able to adjust the angle the of the contact arms to ensure they
all rest in the horizontal position to within 2˚

139
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

Table 6.1 - Demands & wishes list cont.

W gyroscope rotational speed to exceed 5000rpm

Functional requirements for control of stable platform

D have a simple method of accurately controlling the speeds of the

gyroscopes and disc

D use readily available electric motors to power gyroscopes and disc

D safely house gyroscope motor batteries

W control the rotational speed of the gyroscope to within  10rpm of each

other

W easy method of measuring flywheel and disc speeds

Safety requirements

D testing area must contain system should catastrophic failure occur

W design must reduce potential pinch and jamming points

W include an emergency stop button to isolate power in event of an

emergency (positioned in a clearly identified location)

Quality requirements

D all manufactured components to be inspected to comply with tolerances

specified on manufacturing drawings

D all drawings to be approved by supervisor (Dr Shayne Gooch)

D all wiring to be done by certified electrical technician who is familiar with

the project

D all electrical components and connections to be checked and verified by

certified electrical technician

140
Chapter 6 – Design of Stable Platform

Table 6.1 - Demands & wishes list cont.

D each subsystem components to be tested (where applicable) to ensure

safe operation before installation into top level system assembly

W design life for system components > 5 years

Manufacturing requirements

D be predominately manufactured in University of Canterbury Mechanical

Engineering Workshop

D ensure all components can be assembled/disassembled by an individual

using readily available hand tools

Ergonomic requirements

D be of an ergonomic scale (easily operated by one person)

D overall system must be able to be manipulated by one person and safely

rest in the equilibrium position

W simple speed control of rotating components

W allow easy assembly/disassembly of individual subsystems for

alterations/modifications

W check that operation of stable platform does not cause discomfort to

viewers e.g. strobe effect, noise levels

Timing requirements

D coordinate manufacture of components with University of Canterbury

Mechanical Engineering Workshop timetable frequently corresponding
with Workshop Manager

W component checklist will be used to track manufacturing of parts to

ensure schedule is maintained (to be accessible by Workshop
Technicians)

141
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

Table 6.1 - Demands & wishes list cont.

Ecological requirements

W have an operation noise level of < 90dB

Life cycle requirements

D service stable platform after every 10 tests (check for loose components,
bearing noise etc)

D regularly check battery life and maintain battery charge

6.2.2 Stable platform subsystems

Given the design requirements specifications listed in Table 6.1, coupled with the

procedure of mechanical design outlined in (Pahl & Beitz (1984)), the stable platform

system may be considered as a set of 6 sub-systems represented in the organisation

chart, Figure 6.1.

OVERALL SYSTEM
STABLE PLATFORM

3.External 4. Disc Drive 5. Gimbal Frame

1. Gyroscopes 2. Disc 6. Central Pivot
Structure Mechanism Linkage

Figure 6.1 - Sub-systems for which design solutions have to be created for the stable platform

The functions of each of the subsystems are outlined below. The process used to

design each of the subsystems focuses primarily on their function within the overall

system rather than their form (Ullman (1992)).

142
Chapter 6 – Design of Stable Platform

1. Gyroscopes The gyroscope assembly is considered in four

sections; the motor, the flywheel, the gimbal frame

and the outer contact arm. The flywheel gives the

system its angular momentum so it is able to

produce a restoring torque. The gimbal frame

houses the motor and flywheel and pivots when an

external torque is applied. The outer contact arm

pushes down upon the outer ring returning the

external structure back to the horizontal. The

gyroscopes are interconnected via the gimbal frame

linkage.

2. Disc The majority of the sub-systems that compose the

stable platform are mounted upon or connected to

the disc. The gyroscopes sit symmetrically upon the

disc equally spaced at 90˚ angles. The disc is also

the central connection for the gimbal frame linkage

and the central pivot joint. As per the assumption in

the mathematical analysis of the system, the disc

remains level during operation due to its high

gravitational stability.

3. External Structure The external structure is defined as the unstable

mass that the stable platform is attempting to

stabilize. The structure must contain an outer

143
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

contact ring with which the contact arms attached to

the gyroscopes push down on to return the structure

to the horizontal position. The structure will be

designed to be inherently unstable.

4. Disc Drive Mechanism The disc drive mechanism is fixed to the external

structure. The drive is coupled to the disc via a

central pivot joint (torsionally rigid coupling) and

transmits drive to the disc resulting in precession of

the gyroscopes. This mechanism contributes to the

mass that the stable platform stabilizes. Ease of

assembly will be an important factor in the design of

this subsystem.

5. Gimbal Frame Linkage The gyroscopes are located upon the disc and are

all interconnected via the gimbal frame linkage. The

linkage ensures that all the gimbal frame assemblies

rest and pivot at an equal angle relative to the disc.

6. Central Pivot The disc and gyroscopes all mount upon the central

pivot joint. This pivot transmits the drive from the

disc drive mechanism to the disc and allows the disc

to remain level at all times during operation.

144
 Chapter 6 – Design of Stable Platform

6.2.3 System schematic

It is desirable to produce a schematic layout of the system to clearly show how the

various subsystems that comprise the design are connected and how they interact

(Molian (1997)). Figure 6.2 indicates where each of the subsystems that have been

defined in Figure 6.1 are located.

1. Gyroscopes 5. Gimbal Frame

Linkage
3. Outer Contact
Ring (attached to
external structure)

2. Disc

6. Central Pivot
4. Disc Drive
Mechanism
External structure
not shown

Figure 6.2 - Stable platform schematic layout

It should be noted that while the above schematic demonstrates system function it is

not a representation of the final layout design.

145
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

6.2.4 Dependence of each subsystem on derived inequality

In order optimise the design of the stable platform and to increase the likelihood of

stabilization occurring we include (Equation (4.47)) derived in Chapter 4 into the

design process. This inequality must be satisfied in order for the stable platform to

exhibit the desired oscillatory motion. Equation (4.47) has been defined as

(4.47)

This equation is made up of 12 constants that will govern the design of the stable

platform. A set of assumptions have been made based upon the variables in

Equation (4.47)

 relates to the friction in the disc drive motor and is approximated as 0.5.

 is assumed to be the maximum rotational speed of the flywheels.

 Due to the oscillatory motion of the disc, is taken as the maximum disc

precession speed.

Having categorised the stable platform as six sub-systems we now investigate each

subsystem’s dependence upon the values in Equation (4.47). The results are shown

in Table 6.2.

146
Chapter 6 – Design of Stable Platform

Table 6.2 - Subsystem dependence upon Equation (4.47)

Subsystem Dependent Variables Variable Description

1. Gyroscopes

moment of inertia of gyroscope (kgm2)

rotational speed of gyroscope (rads-1)

mass of a gyroscope (kg)

2. Disc

height of disc pivot point (m)

ratio of distance from central disc axis

to the end of the outer contact arm

mass of the disc (kg)

3. External Structure

height of external structure COM (m)

mass of external structure (kg)

4. Disc Drive Mechanism

Friction in drive motor

mass of external structure (kg)

5. Gimbal Frame Linkage

mass of the disc (kg)

6. Central Pivot

height of disc pivot point

mass of external structure (kg)

Table 6.2 and Equation (4.47) reveal conditions that will aid in the derivation of

conceptual solutions to the stable platform subsystems (Waldron & Waldron (1996)).

These are:

147
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

 the mass of the disc and the external structure must be minimised.

This does not apply to the mass of gyroscopes as these will be

maximised to obtain the largest possible moment of inertia .

 the height of the external structures centre of mass needs to be designed

to be as low as possible.

 the distance between the external structures centre of mass and the

centre of mass of the disc must be as small as possible.

 the rotational speed of the flywheels will be maximised to the greatest feasible

speed .

 the ratio must be made as large as possible. This results in the

distance from the gyroscopes pivot point to the end of the outer contact arm

needing to be much smaller than the distance from the central axis of the

disc to the gyroscopes pivot point .

 the rotational speed of the disc will be maximised to the highest possible

speed .

6.3 Conceptual design of stable platform

After breaking the overall stable platform into sub-systems represented in the

organisation chart, Figure 6.1, a conceptual design solution for each of the six sub-
148
Chapter 6 – Design of Stable Platform

systems will be sought. The first four sub-systems (the gyroscopes, disc, external

structure and disc drive mechanism) are classified as the critical sub-systems. The

remaining two sub-systems (the gimbal frame linkage and central pivot) concept

generation will depend upon the selected configurations of the four critical sub-

systems as their interaction with these systems is important.

The approach taken is to divide each of the sub-systems into sub-functions and to

build a morphological matrix using schematic diagrams of the solution principles

considered. The solution principles for each sub-function in the morphological matrix

are selected using concept selection charts adopted from (Pahl & Beitz (1984)).

Cells that are greyed represent the selected conceptual sub-functions.

6.3.1 Gyroscopes

The gyroscope assemblies are the most integral part of the stable platform. The

function of the gyroscope assemblies is to house the motor and flywheel and

produce the restorative torque through the outer contact wheel and onto the external

structure.

The working principles considered in the development of the gyroscopes are

illustrated in the morphological matrix, Figure 6.3.

Two options were considered for the placement of the gyroscopes upon the disc

(solution A1 and A2). Mounting the frame upon legs (solution A1) allowed more room

for wiring to the motor and would make assembly of the system much simpler.

Although this solution required more components to be manufactured this was

149
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

regarded as a preferable option compared to the complex machining required for the

recessed design in solution A2.

Three concepts were considered for the motor mount arrangement. Mounting the

flywheel over the top of the flywheel outer casing (solution B1), having the flywheel

mount directly off the motor axle (solution B2) or driving the flywheel by a belt and

having the motor mounted beside the arrangement (solution B3). Solution B1 was

selected as it is the simplest to manufacture. This solution keeps the centre of gravity

of the flywheel and the motor in approximately the same place. Solution B1 also

eliminates the need for complex bearing arrangements and reduces the number of

fasteners needed to hold the assembly in place.

The inertia of the flywheel coupled with its rotational speed is what governs the size

of the restoring torque that the stable platform is able to produce. Three concepts

were considered for the flywheel; a solid wheel that is fabricated from a single piece

of material (solution C1), an airfoil design to encourage the flow of air into the motor

to maintain a low operating temperature (solution C2), and an assembly where the

flywheel is made up of two components (a face mount plate and the flywheel mass)

fastened together (solution C3). Solution C2 requires complex machining and initial

testing of the motor verified that the temperature of the motor during operation is not

an issue. One of the most important features of the flywheel is that it is machined to

a high tolerance so that the assembly is dynamically balanced. This is much harder

to achieve when two components are assemble.

150
Chapter 6 – Design of Stable Platform

An accurate method of fabricating the flywheel out of a single piece of material while

keeping it balanced and concentric needs to be determined.

Morphological matrix. Subsystem 1 Gyroscopes

Solution
1 2 3
Sub-system
Sub-functions

Gimbal Frame -
A houses motor,
flywheel and
contact arm

On legs Recessed in disc

B Motor Mount
Arrangement -
drives flywheel

Flywheel mounts on motor Flywheel on motor casing Flywheel belt/chain drive

C Flywheel - inertia
produces
restoring torque

Solid Air foil Assembly

Figure 6.3 - Solution forms considered for the gyroscopes

151
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

6.3.2 Disc

The function of the disc is to provide the main mounting platform for the gyroscopes

(Figure 6.2) and batteries. The disc pivots in all directions about a central point.

Several design constraints have been placed on the conceptual design of the disc:

 The pivot of the gimbal frame arrangement and the pivot of disc must be in

line.

 The centre of mass of the disc and gimbal frame arrangement must be below

the centre of the disc pivot point.

 The disc must have high gravitational stability.

The working principles considered in the development of the disc are illustrated in

the morphological matrix, Figure 6.4.

Due to geometric constraints for the centre section of the disc a cone shape was

required. This would allow the central pivot to be located up within the cavity of the

cone, keeping the centre of mass of the disc below the pivot point. Machining the

cone and disc as a solid piece (solution D1) would help ensure concentricity of the

design but was considered too expensive. Solution D2 required machining the cone

and disc separately and then welding them together. Solution D3 considers fastening

the cone and disc sections together to allow for disassembly should the design need

to be altered. Solution D3 was selected.

Only two options were established for the mounting of the batteries that drive the

motors and flywheels; above the disc (solution E1) or below the disc (solution E2).
152
Chapter 6 – Design of Stable Platform

Solution E2 was chosen as the lower the centre of mass of the disc the more

gravitationally stable it would be. A slip ring design was also considered but was

abandoned due to complexity and the high currents involved in driving the motors (in

excess of 30A).

Solution F1 requires machining the legs that mount the gyroscopes out of solid

aluminium. These would provide sufficient strength and an ideal cavity for mounting

bearings. Solution F2 presents the mount legs bent into the desired geometry from

aluminium plate. The design would significantly reduce the weight of the disc

assembly. Welding the legs to the disc was also considered (solution F3). Solution

F1 was selected as the legs are a load path for all restoring torques that the

flywheels.

One of the critical requirements specified in Table 6.1 is that the disc and gyroscope

assembly is as symmetric as possible. Solution G1 uses dowel pins to ensure the

gimbal frame legs are assembled in the exact same location each time. Solution G2

achieves the same result but with a machined recess that locates on the edges of

the gimbal frame legs. The final solution (solution G3) considers using locating tabs

mounted on top of the disc to position the gimbal frame legs. Solution G1 was

selected.

153
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

Morphological matrix. Subsystem 2 Disc

Solution

1 2 3
Sub-system
Sub-functions

D Disc geometry –
mount for
gyroscopes

Machine from solid Fabricate Fasten

Battery mounts –
E holds batteries
that power
flywheels

Above disc Below disc

Gimbal frame
legs – used to
F mount the main
shaft of the
gimbal frame
allowing it to
pivot

Milled from solid Bent Fabricate

Locating frame
G legs – accurate
method for
locating gimbal
frame in position

Dowel pins Machine recess Location pins

Figure 6.4 - Solution forms considered for the disc

154
Chapter 6 – Design of Stable Platform

6.3.3 External structure

The function of the external structure is to act as the unstable body that the system

will be mounted upon for testing. The external structure will be of the form of an

inverted pendulum. The stable platform will work continuously to maintain it at an

upright position. One critical component of the external structure is the inclusion of

an outer ring; a circular surface that the outer contact arms can transmit a restoring

force upon.

The working principles considered in the development of the external structure are

illustrated in the morphological matrix, Figure 6.5.

Solutions H1-H3 consider what type of unstable attachment will be used at the base

of the external structure. Solution H1 (mounting the system upon a universal joint)

and solution H2 (a single shaft that can pivot in one plane) both require a significant

amount of machining and are high in cost. Using a wooden sphere turned in the

CNC lathe is a quick, cheap and lightweight solution (solution H3) and should

demonstrate the desired restoring action.

It is critical that the outer ring is set at a predetermined height to maximise the

magnitude of the restoring moment that the gyroscopes are producing. Solution I1

uses two nuts either side of a plate to accurately set the desired height of the ring.

Solution I2 incorporates holes through the frame legs coupled with a pin that retains

the ring at the desired height. Solution I3 looks at fixing the length eliminating the

adjustability but decreasing cost and complexity. Solution I1 was selected as the

preferred option.
155
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

Morphological matrix. Subsystem 3 External Structure

Solution

1 2 3
Sub-system
Sub-functions

External
H structure base –
unstable
attachment

Universal Joint 1 plane pivot Hemi-spherical body

Outer ring height

I – method for
adjusting ring
height

Adjust with thread Locating pins Fixed height

Figure 6.5 - Solution forms considered for the external structure

6.3.4 Disc drive mechanism

The function of the disc drive mechanism is to provide sufficient torque to precess

the disc around, altering the angular momentum of the gyroscopes resulting in them

pushing down on the external structure and returning it to its equilibrium position.

The working principles considered in the development of the disc drive mechanism

are illustrated in the morphological matrix, Figure 6.6

156
Chapter 6 – Design of Stable Platform

The most important issue in the conceptual design of the disc drive mechanism is

the type of motor that will be used to precess the disc. Three motor options were

considered. Solution J1 is 12V DC motor with a worm drive reduction. These motors

are commonly used as window wiper motors in automotive applications. Worm drive

gear arrangements transmit high torques and are compact. A straight drive DC motor

with a gearbox axially is shown as solution J2. Although this solution would be heavy

and expensive, the robustness of the motor-gearbox configuration would make it

ideal for any backlash that the system experiences. Solution J3 uses a stepper

motor. Stepper motors give very accurate control but the control systems required

and speed and torque limitations restrict easy adaption of the motor should the

parameters of the system alter. Solution J1 is selected as the favoured solution.

Solutions K1, K2 and K3 were considered for transmitting drive from the external

structure to the disc. An inline drive arrangement is compact and machining and

assembly time is fast. Solution K2 and K3 use a helical gear or a belt/chain drive

arrangement to rotate the disc. Extra components and alignment/tolerance

requirements make them less desirable. Solution K1 was selected as the preferred

option.

Due to the probable small motor output shaft size a machine key was not considered

as an option for securing the motor output shaft to the central drive shaft. Solution L1

uses a dowel pin pressed in through both the drive shaft and motor shaft to transmit

drive. Solution L2 uses a clamped flexible coupling whose properties will be

determined in the embodiment design section. This solution allows for misalignment

157
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

between shafts during assembly and helps reduce the backlash load on the motor

and is the preferred solution.

The final sub-section relating to the disc drive mechanism is how the drive shaft is

attached to the disc. A machine key assembly was considered (solution M1)

however the preferred option of tightening a nut down onto a spacer and clamping

the disc in place was selected. The simplicity of manufacturing and assembling this

design made it more desirable.

158
Chapter 6 – Design of Stable Platform

Morphological matrix. Subsystem 4 Disc Drive Mechanism

Solution
1 2 3
Sub-system
Sub-functions

Drive motor –
J type of motor
used to precess
disc

Window wiper DC with gearbox Stepper

Motor mounting
K – location of
drive motor
relative to shaft

Inline Geared Belt or chain drive

Shaft connection
L – how is the
motor connected
to the drive shaft

Dowel pins Flexible coupling

Disc connection
M – method for
transmitting drive
from motor shaft
to disc

Machine key Threaded clamp

Figure 6.6 - Solution forms considered for the disc drive mechanism

159
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

With all the critical conceptual subsystem functions selected the solutions for the

gimbal frame linkage and central pivot concepts were determined.

6.3.5 Gimbal frame linkage

The function of the gimbal frame linkage is to constrain the gyroscopes so they all

pivot with an equivalent angle relative to the disc. The gimbal frame linkage also acts

as the load path for the restoring torque that the gyroscopes produce, transmitting

the moment from all four gyroscopes through a single outer contact arm.

The working principles considered in the development of the gimbal frame linkage

are illustrated in the morphological matrix, Figure 6.7.

Townsend (1983) suggested that the gimbal frames be connected by bevel gears

(solution N1). The complexity and cost associated with designing and manufacturing

custom gears meant that other solutions were considered. The use of universal joints

was another option that was investigated (solution N2). Solution N3 uses linkage

arms connected to the gimbal frames and attached to a sliding connection on a

central shaft. Solution N3 was the chosen design of this sub function. This solution

will require a central shaft to be incorporated into the design of the system to suit the

linear slide linkage.

Sub-functions O and P relate to the central gimbal frame linkage and associated

linear slide. A linear bearing (solution O3) was selected as the sliding element for the

linear slide. The ability of linear bearings to deal with high radial loads while

maintaining axial alignment make them ideal for this type of application. A fixed
160
Chapter 6 – Design of Stable Platform

length rigid connection arm (solution P1) was the preferred option for sub-function P

as this component will be subjected to high loads.

Morphological matrix. Subsystem 5 Gimbal Frame Linkage

Solution
1 2 3
Sub-system
Sub-functions

Gimbal frame
N connection –
type of
connection used

Bevel gears Universal joints Linear slide

Sliding element –
O type of low
friction element
used on shaft

Single row Nylon bush Linear

Connecting arms
P – type of
connection arms
used

Fixed length Adjustable rod ends

Figure 6.7 - Solution forms considered for the gimbal frame linkage

161
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

6.3.6 Central pivot

The function of the central pivot is to support the weight of the disc and to allow the

disc to pivot in the horizontal pitch and roll directions. This condition comes from the

initial mathematical assumptions stated in Chapter 3. The disc must remain level as

it precesses around no matter what angle the external structure has tipped to.

The working principles considered in the development of the central pivot are

illustrated in the morphological matrix, Figure 6.8.

Three solutions were considered for sub-function Q. A universal joint does not

provide constant velocity. Solution Q2 (spherical bearing) would only perform as

required at small angles. Constant velocity joints are very good at dealing with radial

loads and provide a constant velocity no matter what angle the output shaft is tilted

at. Solution Q3 was selected for this sub-function.

Morphological matrix. Subsystem 6 Central Pivot

Solution
1 2 3
Sub-system
Sub-functions

Q Central pivot –
type of central
pivot

Universal joint Spherical bearing Constant velocity joint

Figure 6.8 - Solution forms considered for the central pivot

162
Chapter 6 – Design of Stable Platform

6.3.7 The final concept selected for the stable platform system

The attributes of each of the solutions considered for the sub-system sub-functions

shown schematically in Figure 6.3 - Figure 6.8 were evaluated in terms of the design

requirements specification from Table 6.1.

The concept selection process is summarised by the concept selection charts,

Figures B1 to B6, where the requirement categories (functional, safety, quality,

manufacturing, timing, economic, ergonomic, ecological, aesthetic and life cycle)

were scored in terms of meeting the design requirements specifications. Two further

categories were included in the concept selection process ‘can it be made to work’

and ‘information’ (i.e. whether the relevant expertise and experience are available).

The selected concepts for each sub-system were assembled to give a working

concept for the stable platform system. The selected sub-functions are summarized

in Table 6.3. The resulting concept for the overall system is shown in Figure 6.9.

Note that no detailed design features are included in this figure (bearing housings,

fasteners, weight reducing cut outs, radii etc). This figure is simply an assembly of

the determined sub-functions grouped together.

163
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

Table 6.3 – Sub-function selection overview

Subsystem Sub function Selected Outcome

1. Gyroscope A: Gimbal frame On legs

B: Motor mount Flywheel on motor casing

C: Flywheel Solid

2. Disc D: Disc geometry Assemble

E: Battery mounts Below disc

F: Gimbal frame legs Milled from solid

G: Locating frame legs Dowel pins

3. External Structure H: Degrees of freedom Hemi-spherical body

I: Outer ring height Adjust with thread

4. Disc Drive Mechanism J: Drive motor Window wiper motor

K: Motor mounting Inline

L: Shaft connection Flexible coupling

M: Disc connection Threaded clamp

5. Gimbal frame connection N: Gimbal frame connection Linear slide

O: Bearing arrangement Linear

P: Connecting arms Fixed length

6. Central pivot Q: Central pivot Constant velocity joint

The stable platform conceptual layout was reviewed using a conceptual design

worksheet, Figure B7 from Hales & Gooch (2004).The conceptual design work sheet

shows a good confidence level for the systems function and it was decided to

proceed to the embodiment design where further development was expected to

improve the overall arrangement in terms of meeting manufacturing, economic and

performance requirements.

164
Chapter 6 – Design of Stable Platform

Figure 6.9 – Principal concept for stable platform system using a combination of sub-functions

from Figure 6.3 to Figure 6.8

165
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

6.4 Establishment of platform scale

One of the most critical steps in the conceptual design of the stable platform is

determining the scale to which the system will be designed and built. Initially, the

goal of the project was to produce a stable platform that could stabilize a mono-

wheel vehicle. After concept generation it was decided that the manufacture of the

system was more complex than initially expected. Because of this, the motivation for

the build of the project shifted from an application specific design and build to a

broader proof of concept approach.

This shift increased the range of the sizes that the prototype stable platform could be

built at. The availability of electric motors was established as the governing factor in

determining the size of the prototype.

The flywheel electric motors were chosen to define the scale of the stable platform

because:

 the size of the motor casing and shaft will govern the size of the flywheels that

can be used. The inertia of the flywheel determines the size of the restoring

torque the platform can produce.

 for this application the torque that the motor is able to produce is not critical.

As the flywheels will not be under any load, they will be aided by momentum

once they reach their desired speed.

166
Chapter 6 – Design of Stable Platform

6.4.1 Electric motor selection

Four different types of electric motors were considered for the flywheel drive motor.

These were: induction motors; wound field “universal” motors; permanent magnet

motors and brushless permanent magnet motors. Each of these motors are

summarised in Table 6.4.

Table 6.4 - Types of Electric Motors

Motor Type DC or AC Applications

1. Induction AC Mains electric power applications

2. Wound Field “universal” AC and DC Power tools, and domestic appliances

3. Permanent Magnet DC Air pumps, golf carts, wheelchairs

4. Brushless Permanent Magnet DC Segway, model planes/helicopters, portable power tools

For the stable platform design, it is desirable that the flywheels run on a separate

power supply. This will make the system applicable to situations where mains power

is unavailable. Because of this, induction motors can be eliminated as a drive option.

The remaining motors are evaluated in Table 6.5.

Table 6.5 - Motor evaluation chart

Functional (geometry, control, load paths, motion) /5

Information (cooperation, expertise, experience) /5
Motor Manufacturing, quality (production, ease of purchase) /5
Type
Can be made to work (potential, confidence) /5
Comments Score /20

Pros – most common type of motor, cheap, constant speed under load
2 2 4 5 2 13
Cons – poor efficiency at high speeds, speed not easily controlled

Pros – solid construction, high starting torque, sealed bearings

3 3 3 5 4 15
Cons - poor ability to accelerate inertial loads, high voltage sensitivity

Pros – low maintenance, high operating speeds, easy to set up

4 4 5 4 5 18
Cons – expensive, requires ESC, high power needed to stop motor

167
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

Table 6.5 shows that of the three available electric motor options for driving the

gyroscope flywheels, brushless DC motors were found to be best suited to this

application.

6.4.2 Brushless DC motors

Brushless DC motors come in a range sizes. They are commonly used in model

aircraft applications to drive helicopter and plane propellers. The main advantages of

using these types of motors to drive the flywheels in the stable platform are:

 The external casing of the motor rotates as well as the shaft. This means that

the flywheel can be mounted over the casing aligning the motor and flywheels

centre of mass.

 The motors have a large number of mount points on them. These are usually

used for attaching aircraft propellers yet this will help aid in assembling the

motors into the gyroscope assembly.

 Due to the use of brushless DC motors in the model industry, there is a vast

amount of information available regarding setting up the motors and

controlling their speed. Because most of the consumers who use the motors

are hobbyists, the motors and their associated control systems are very

simple to use.

168
Chapter 6 – Design of Stable Platform

6.4.3 Selection of motor/scale of stable platform

The main governing factor that will determine that size of the brushless motors used

will be the load the bearings and main shaft are subjected to. To accommodate for

the largest possible load the largest available motor shaft diameter was selected

(Ø10mm).

To satisfy the conditions established in the design specification requirements (Table

6.1), the motor must have a rotational speed of at least 5000rpm and be as

lightweight as possible.

Research into brushless motors and their associated specifications revealed an

Exceed RC Brushless DC Motor (MP160) as the most appropriate motor to drive the

gyroscopes. A summary of the MP160 motors specifications is available in the CD

insert associated with this thesis under “Purchased Project Components”.

Brushless DC motors maximum speed is related to the associated Kv rating (not to

be confused with kilovolts) and the voltage that it receives from the batteries. In this

case, the motor has a 245Kv rating. This results in the motor rotating at 245 rpm per

1 volt it receives from a battery. By connecting this motor up to a 22.2V Li-Po battery,

the top speed this motor is able to achieve is approximately 5390rpm.

169
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

6.5 Embodiment design of stable platform system

The purpose of this section is to present the proposed solution developed for the

overall stable platform system. The system is designed to maintain the external

structure in an upright position with the goal of optimising the size of the restoring

torque the gyroscopes produce, minimizing the losses due to friction through the

connections and reducing the overall weight of the system.

6.5.1 Gyroscopes

Two main objectives in the development of the gyroscopes, shown in Figure 6.10,

were established. To optimise the size of the torque produced when the gyroscopes

are precessed and to develop the layout of the assembly such that the centre of

mass is in line with the gimbal pivot point (so no mass imbalance torques were

acting on the flywheel).

The gimbal frame is made from 100mm x 150mm x 5mm 350 grade RHS. This is a

low cost material that will provide sufficient strength under the system loads. The

flywheel motor is attached to the frame via eight cap screws. Clearance holes were

drilled in the frame on a PCD that matched the threaded holes in the motor. Two

aluminium brackets are attached to the back of the frame (via cap screws) for

connecting the gimbal frame linkage assembly to the frame.

170
Chapter 6 – Design of Stable Platform

Flywheel

Gimbal frame
Gimbal frame linkage
brackets

Outer contact
arm
Gimbal frame
shaft

Gimbal frame
legs

Figure 6.10 – Embodiment of gyroscope

The flywheel is manufactured from AISI 1040 round bar. This material provides

significant mass to maximise the moment of inertia of the flywheel. The final flywheel

dimensions are Ø110mm by 55mm deep. A cavity is machined in the flywheel

equivalent to the diameter of the outer casing of the motor. The flywheel is attached

to the motor via four cap screws on a 22mm PCD.

The gimbal frame shafts are manufactured from AISI 4140 alloy steel. Both ends of a

single bar are machined and threaded prior to being placed in the gimbal frame. This

will ensure concentricity post fabrication. The full length shaft is then braised in place

and the unneeded centre section cut away. Large braising fillets are used to reduce

stress at the connection (Shigley (2011)).

171
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

The gimbal frame legs are to be wire cut from 7075 aluminium plate. The overall

thickness and depth of the gimbal frame legs was increased and large radii included

to help reduce stress. Two Ø4mm dowel holes are drilled and then reamed in the

base for accurate attachment to the disc and two M6 holes are also to be tapped in

the base for securing the legs once in position. A toleranced Ø20mm hole is

machined in the legs for the gimbal frame shaft bearing.

Figure 6.11 – Section of gyroscope assembly showing bearing retention design

The gimbal frame pivots on two Ø12mm single row deep groove bearings as shown

in Figure 6.11. One bearing is fixed in place on the shaft while the other is left to float

as to not over constrain the design and to aid in assembly. The fixed bearing is held

in place with a collar that is secured to the gimbal frame legs with four cap screws.

The bearings and shaft are then secured in place with two M10 half nuts tightened

up against one another.

172
 Chapter 6 – Design of Stable Platform

The outer contact arm is machined from AISI 4140 alloy steel. A bearing surface is

machined on the shaft and a tapped hole is machined in the end face. Once the

bearing is fitted on the shaft a washer is placed on the end in conjunction with a cap

screw to secure the bearing in place. The final centre of mass of the gimbal frame

aligns with the pivot point as intended. Multiple attachment points are available on

the gimbal frame should any extra weight need to be added to aid in balancing the

assembly.

6.5.2 Disc

Objectives in the development of the disc, shown in Figure 6.12, are: to reduce the

overall weight of the assembly; to determine how to mount the batteries underneath

the assembly; and optimise the shape of the central cone section to allow for

assembly of other sub systems beneath it without interference.

Motor batteries

Disc section

Central cone section

Figure 6.12 - Embodiment of disc

173
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

The central cone section is machined from a block of solid 5052 aluminium round bar

in the CNC lathe. Aluminium is used to reduce the overall weight of the sub system.

Development of the shape within SolidWorks allowed for the optimal wall angle and

thickness to be determined. Figure 6.13 shows a section view of the disc assembly.

Li-Po Battery

Figure 6.13 – Section of disc assembly showing battery location and central cone cross

section geometry

The central cone is attached to the disc section using eight bolts. Cut outs are

included at the top of the cone to provide clearance for the linear slide linkage arms.

These also contribute to a reduction in the cone weight.

The disc is to be water jet cut from 16mm 7075 aluminium plate. The plate will then

be skimmed to ensure flatness and machined to the final dimensions (an outside

diameter of 500mm and overall thickness of 14mm). Flatness of the plate is vital as

the gyroscope assemblies are all mounted upon this surface. Alignment of their

centre of masses and symmetricity are all critical to the function of the overall system

as stipulated in Table 6.1. Two Ø4mm dowel holes and two Ø6.5mm clearance holes

are machined in the disc to mount the gyroscope mount legs in place. A recess is
174
Chapter 6 – Design of Stable Platform

added in the disc plate to ensure correct alignment when assembling with the central

cone as seen in Figure 6.13. Four large weight reducing cut outs are added to

reduce overall weight and give additional clearance should the flywheel size need to

be increased.

The batteries selected for the brushless DC motors are 22.2V, 6 cell lithium polymer

(Li-Po) batteries. Li-Po batteries are selected as they are lightweight and designed to

be used in conjunction with the chosen flywheel motors. These coupled with the

245Kv rating on the motors give a top speed of approximately 5400rpm (meeting the

requirement set in Table 6.1). To mount the batteries, 5mm recesses are milled

under the disc (see Figure 6.13). The batteries are inserted into these and held in

place with two 1mm mild steel brackets that are bent into shape. Each bracket is

secured with two cap screws. Positioning the batteries below the disc helps

contribute to its gravitational stability,

The embodiment design of the disc resulted in a much lighter assembly that met all

the requirements specified at the start of the development phase.

6.5.3 External structure

Objectives in the development of the external structure, shown in Figure 6.14 were to

reduce the overall weight of the assembly and to optimise the design such that it was

easily integrated with the other sub systems that make up the stable platform.

The outer ring is to be water jet cut from 7075 aluminium plate. The outer ring has a

maximum diameter of 620mm. Attached to the outer ring are 8 outer ring mount legs.
175
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

The use of eight legs should accommodate for any size restoring force the system

subjects the ring to and will also ensure it is held rigidly in position. The legs hold the

ring at a predetermined height and are adjustable (by moving M20 nuts located on

either side of the outer ring mount plate). The overall length of each leg is 160mm.

Each leg is secured to the outer ring by four cap screws. The legs are manufactured

from 5025 aluminium and turned in a CNC lathe.

Outer ring

Outer ring mount

plate

Outer ring mount

legs

Hemi-spherical
body

Figure 6.14 – Embodiment of external structure

The outer ring mount plate is made of 7075 aluminium plate. This plate is to be water

jet cut oversize and then machined to the final dimensions (outside diameter to

match the outer ring diameter). Weight reduction cut outs have been added along

with a set of clearance holes on a 330mm PCD and a machined recess to allow for

the mounting and alignment of the disc drive assembly.

176
Chapter 6 – Design of Stable Platform

The hemi-spherical body is to be made of model board. Several layers of the board

will be glued together and then the final shape cut in a CNC lathe. Model board has

excellent machining properties and good strength. The bottom of the body will be

coated with a thin layer of fibre glass to increase wear resistance and reduce friction

between the body and the floor. Holes are to be drilled and tapped and then coated

with super glue to give a hardened set of threads on a 330mm PCD that the disc

drive mechanism will bolt down to.

The embodiment phase of the external structure has achieved all set requirements.

The assembly is symmetric as per the requirement in Table 6.1 and weight has been

kept to a minimum. The structure is able to move in every plane and the outer ring

height is adjustable.

6.5.4 Disc drive mechanism and central pivot

Objectives in the development of the disc drive mechanism, shown in Figure 6.15

were to develop a solution for housing all rotating components and to integrate the

assembly into the overall system while providing adequate strength and minimum

weight. The disc drive mechanism must also remain clear of the disc as it tips back

and forth.

The bearing housing is developed to house the 12V DC motor, drive shaft, flexible

coupling and CV joint assembly. The housing is made from two sections of 5083

aluminium (a top bearing housing section and a bottom cone shaped section) heat

shrunk together as shown in Figure 6.17. The geometry of this bearing housing has

been optimised in SolidWorks such that the 12V DC motor is able to fit inside
177
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

avoiding contact when the disc tipped at its maximum angle. The mass has also

been minimised. The housing is designed to accommodate two bearings for the CV

joint to rotate on; one Ø70mm internal deep groove single row bearing and one

Ø20mm internal deep groove single row bearing. The bearings are then retained in

the housing with internal circlips. The bearing housing mounts down onto the

external structure and is secured in place via eight cap screws.

The motor is attached to the housing on a mount plate with a profile specific to the

12V DC motor machined onto it. This is discussed in more detail in Section 6.6. This

mount then locks into place at the base of the bearing housing slotting into three

machined grooves.

Central shaft

Constant velocity
joint
Bearing housing

12V DC motor with

worm drive

Figure 6.15 – Embodiment of disc drive mechanism

The CV joint assembly from Figure 6.17 was adapted from a Suzuki Alto drive shaft.

The CV joint is attached via six bolts to a motor coupling shaft manufactured from
178
Chapter 6 – Design of Stable Platform

AISI 4140 alloy steel. The CV joint is disassembled and the outer housing machined

to produce two bearing surfaces (Figure 6.16). This assembly slides into the top of

the bearing housing and attaches to the flexible coupling that is connected to the

12V DC motor.

a) b)

Figure 6.16 – a) initial CV joint, b) CV joint machined to suit disc drive mechanism bearing

housing

The drive shaft is attached to the CV joint via a spline. The spline is cut from an

automotive shaft that is matched to the CV joint and machined to be heat shrunk

onto the central shaft. This provides an excellent fit between the shaft and the CV

joint with no backlash.

179
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

Central shaft

M18 half nut

Aluminium Collar
Constant velocity
joint

Drive shaft

Flexible coupling M12 washer and

nut

Figure 6.17 – Section of disc drive mechanism showing bearing location and CV joint

An increase in diameter of the central shaft retains it at the top of the CV joint while a

threaded section at the bottom allows a washer and M12 bolt to be tightened

securing the central shaft in place. An aluminium collar is placed between the shaft

and the disc. The disc is assembled in place over the shaft and locked in place with

an M18 half nut. The top section of the central shaft is ground to suit the tolerance

specified for a Ø16mm linear bearing and allow for a smooth sliding fit. The length of

this shaft is greater than required in case any alterations are made to the design

during the testing phase.

The embodiment of the disc drive mechanism has resulted in a solution that is easily

integrated into the other sub systems of the stable platform.

180
Chapter 6 – Design of Stable Platform

6.5.5 Gimbal frame linkage

Objectives in the development of the gimbal frame linkage, shown in Figure 6.18

were to: develop the assembly to reduce overall weight; to ensure friction between

joints is kept at a minimum; and ensure the strength of each linkage member is

sufficient to withstand the loads they are subjected to.

Although the rigid fixed length connection arm (Figure 6.7) was selected in Section

6.3.5, the design is altered so that only one of the fixed length connections is used.

This fixed length rigid arm will act as the alignment member constraining the rotation

of the linear bearing assembly.

The other three connecting arms will be assembled from rod ends attached to a

threaded rod. The threaded sections of the rod ends on the connecting arms are

opposite hand to allow for the overall length to be adjusted without disassembly. This

adjustment will mean the angle of each of gyroscope gimbal frames can be altered

individually to ensure they are all equal and level. The spherical bearing in the rod

ends will also help when assembling the connections into place.

181
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

Linear bearing
assembly

Fixed length Adjustable length

connecting arm connecting arm

Figure 6.18 – Embodiment of gimbal frame linkage

The top and bottom of the connecting arms are attached to the gyroscopes via a cap

screw and secured with a nyloc nut. The linear bearing attachment is wire cut from

7075 aluminium. Its shape has been optimised in SolidWorks to reduce weight.

Large radii have been added to reduce stress. The attachment is placed over a

Ø16mm linear bearing and secured in place with two 26mm external circlips to form

the linear bearing assembly.

6.5.6 The general assembly

The general arrangement of the sub-systems discussed in Sections 6.5.1 to 6.5.5 is

shown in Figure 6.19. This figure includes the embodiment design features

discussed in the previous section.

182
Chapter 6 – Design of Stable Platform

Figure 6.19 – Orthographic and isometric views showing the embodiment design for the

stable platform

6.5.7 Assessment of embodiment design stage

The embodiment design stage was assessed using the embodiment design

checklist, Figure B8, from Hales & Gooch (2004).

183
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

Figure B.8 shows confidence in meeting the functional requirements for the system.

Several areas of concern are:

 the precession drive motor power supply has not been considered. This will

need to come from an external source off the stable platform system. As the

motor is DC, a variable power supply should be sufficient for testing to

determine the optimal operating speeds.

 The brushless DC motors require electronic speed controllers (ESC) and a

receiver to operate. They must be located within the vicinity of the motors and

batteries as they connect up to both of them. The mass of a single ESC is

approximately 30 grams.

 a large number of wires from the motors, batteries and ESC’s will be located

around the system. These will all be rotating with the disc. A safe method of

securing and routing these connecting wires will be implemented with the

electrical technicians at the University of Canterbury Mechanical Engineering

Department.

6.6 Detailed design

The general assembly for the overall stable platform system following the detailed

design stage is illustrated in Figure 6.20.

184
Chapter 6 – Design of Stable Platform

Figure 6.20 – Cross section view of the general assembly for the final stable platform

conceptual design

All components were to be designed so that they could be manufactured with the

equipment available to the University of Canterbury Mechanical Engineering

Department Workshop. Suggestions for machining procedures have been included

on manufacturing drawings where appropriate.

The DC drive motor is mounted in place onto a profile cut on the CNC mill. Due to

the lack of mounting points on the motor this was the most ideal method to retain it in

place. To accurately establish the dimensions of this profile ensuring a good fit the

185
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

profile was determined using a coordinate measurement machine (CMM) (Figure

6.21). This information was then transferred into SolidWorks where a profile for the

CNC mill was generated.

Figure 6.21 – Determining the DC drive motor profile using the CMM

Control of the flywheel was achieved using a 6 channel radio transmitter. A test rig

was set up to ensure the motors operated as predicted and the maximum speed was

measured using a tachometer to ensure it was equivalent to the predicted theoretical

speed. The radio controller allows the stable platform to be operated from a safe

distance.

In several locations on the assembly small cut outs and windows were added to the

designs to allow access for an Allen key so cap screws could be tightened up to the

required torque.

The detailed design stage was assessed using the detailed design checklist, Figure

B.9. This critical stage in the evaluation of the design process suggests a high level
186
Chapter 6 – Design of Stable Platform

of confidence that the final prototype design will perform as intended. Review of the

tables in Appendix B shows continued improvement of the design over the

conceptual, embodiment and detailed design phases. This is a desirable outcome

showcasing the advancement of the design to the final prototype solution

6.7 Stability conditions inequality

Having established the parameters and geometry for the prototype stable platform

we are able to check that the stability conditions of the inequality derived in Chapter

(4.47)

are satisfied.

Substitution of the known values of the prototype parameters into the inequality

derived in Chapter 4 show that is has been satisfied (72 < 261). The stable platform

prototype should exhibit oscillatory motion as it stabilizes the external structure.

6.8 Manufacture and testing of stable platform prototype

All components were manufactured in the University of Canterbury Mechanical

Engineering Workshop and assembled in a secure testing container. No issues were

encountered during the manufacture and assembly stages.

187
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

Testing of the prototype took place in a shipping container behind a clear

polycarbonate wall to ensure the safety of the operator had a failure of the system

occurred.

The testing procedure for the stable platform prototype involved turning on all the

flywheel motors and the disc drive mechanism so that the disc assembly was

precessed at a constant speed. The speeds of the two sub-systems were then varied

and the behaviour of the system observed. The size of the moment produced by the

system was only measured when the system was shown to remain stable. Due to

the nature of the system, the highest stabilizing moment was known to occur at the

highest flywheel and disc precession speeds. Subsequently most testing took place

at these values.

Testing of the stable platform prototype revealed that the system was not stabilizing

as intended.

6.8.1 Issues with initial stable platform prototype

It was desirable to identify where the main issues in the design of the prototype were

and determine solutions to rectify these.

After extensive testing the issues with the initial stable platform prototype were

established as:

 precession of disc – initial testing revealed that while the precession of the

disc resulted in the gyroscopes pushing downward, the driving arrangement

188
Chapter 6 – Design of Stable Platform

meant that all four gyroscopes could push down at the same time on the outer

ring (an occurrence that was undesirable). Other methods for precessing the

disc needed to be considered.

 disc position – the disc was not remaining level during operation. As the

external structure tipped the disc tipped with it. This is directly related to the

height of the pivot point of the disc above the centre of mass of the disc

assembly.

 angular momentum from gyroscopes – it is desirable to further increase the

angular momentum of the system to enhance the restorative torque produced

by the flywheel. Investigation into increasing flywheel speed and inertia was

required.

 system weight – the overall weight of the stable platform prototype was

considered too high reducing the responsiveness of the system. A further

reduction in all areas of the system was required.

 external structure – an external structure that allowed a means for measuring

the restoring torques produced by the system is required.

The optimisation and development phase that addresses these issues is described

in detail in Chapter 7.

189
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

6.9 Concluding comments

The systematic approach adopted for the design of the stable platform system has

resulted in the manufacture, assembly and testing of a preliminary prototype. This

chapter has shown that a working mechanical configuration of the proposed stable

platform schematic model can be manufactured at an economically feasible size.

Further testing and development of the prototype configuration is required to obtain

the desired oscillatory response.

190
Chapter 7 – Development of Prototype A

Development of Prototype A

7.1 Introduction

We will define the first prototype stable platform designed in Chapter 6 as “Prototype

A”. Having shown that the proposed schematic design for the stable platform is

manufacturable within the resources of the overall research project, several

modifications were required to improve the performance of the system. These

modifications took place over the duration of this research. The required

modifications were revealed after significant testing had been performed on

Prototype A.

A systematic approach was adopted for the development of Prototype A. The main

issues in performance have been identified (Section 6.8.1) and solutions then

generated based upon their expected impact on the overall stabilization process.

This would ensure that time was spent efficiently developing the prototype with the

aim of significant changes taking priority and being completed first. The physical

changes to Prototype A were then substituted numerically into Equation (4.47) to

gauge how effective their development had been.

The purpose of this chapter is to develop Prototype A so that it

actively stabilizes an imbalanced mass caused by the external

structure moving off the vertical. While all sub-systems currently

191
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

function as intended, development of the system would lead to the

stable platform exhibiting the desired oscillatory behaviour. Each

development will be assessed, implemented and then evaluated to

validate its impact on the overall performance of the system. Pictures

have been included where relevant.

7.2 Expected impact of changes

In order to quantify the expected impact of the changes to Prototype A, a ranking

system was established based upon three governing factors. Each of these factors is

given a score to measure the overall impact the development will have on the

performance of the system. Table 7.1 shows how the ranking points are distributed.

Table 7.1 – Development ranking system

Time to complete Ease of Integration Overall impact on performance Total

/5 /5 /10

5 = quick to complete 5 = simple to integrate into existing 10 = large impact on overall

system system performance /20

1 = long completion time 1 = integration will be complex 1 = little effect on stable platform
performance

The overall impact on the system has been multiplied by a double weighting factor

as this is the most critical outcome of the optimisation process.

We establish a set of conditions that will predict how effective the proposed change

will be and whether or not to implement it into the system. These are:

Total < 10 development will not be implemented into Prototype A

192
Chapter 7 – Development of Prototype A

Total ≥ 10 ≤ 15 development will have a positive impact on the

performance of Prototype A. Implementation of

development will depend upon time required and ease of

integration.

Total > 15 ≤ 20 development will have a significant impact on the

performance of Prototype A. Change will definitely

be implemented.

7.3 Implemented developments

The following section describes the changes that were implemented to Prototype A

to improve the systems performance.

7.3.1 Increased battery voltage and battery relocation

The initial batteries used in the prototype gave the flywheels a top speed of

approximately 5400rpm. An increase in battery voltage would increase the

magnitude of the stabilizing moment.

Table 7.2 – Increase in battery voltage and relocation

Time to complete Ease of Integration Overall impact on performance Total

4/5 3/5 7/10 14/20

The battery voltage was increased from 22.2V to 44.4V (the maximum voltage the

ESC’s were able to manage). This doubled the top speed of the flywheels to

approximately 11000rpm.

193
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

The batteries were relocated from the bottom of the disc to the top due to geometric

constraints. Had larger batteries been placed underneath the disc the tilt angle of the

disc/gyroscope assembly would have been restricted by contact with the external

structure.

Figure 7.1 shows the proposed location of the batteries up on top on the disc

adjacent to the gyroscopes. Mounting the batteries below the disc would have

contributed to lowering the centre of mass of the disc assembly however adding

extra batteries and having their COM sitting below the pivot point still had a positive

impact on the stability of the disc.

Batteries

Figure 7.1 – Proposed increased battery voltage layout

Sheet metal covers were fabricated to secure the batteries in place. A 5mm recess

was also machined in the disc for the batteries to locate in before the cover was

placed over the top.

194
Chapter 7 – Development of Prototype A

Increasing the battery size had a positive impact on Prototype A. The higher battery

voltage has increased the top speed of the flywheels resulting in a greater stabilizing

moment being produced and increased the gravitational stability of the disc.

Outcome: The increased battery voltage improved the overall stabilizing

moment produced by Prototype A.

7.3.2 New external structure

Testing of Prototype A revealed that the hemi-spherical external structure behaved

too erratically to accurately quantify the performance of the system. This

arrangement would be an excellent method of demonstrating the stabilizing ability of

system once it has been shown to perform as intended but for testing a new design

was required.

Table 7.3 – New external structure for testing

Time to complete Ease of Integration Overall impact on performance Total

3/5 4/5 4/10 11/20

Figure 7.2 a) shows the proposed SolidWorks model for the new external structure.

The outer ring and ring mount plate were mounted upon a base plate. The new

external structure is only able to pivot in one plane. Due to the symmetry of the

system, if the stable platform is able to maintain stability in one plane, it will also

maintain stability in three planes.

Figure 7.2 b) shows the new external structure assembled into the system. The

frame pivots through a single shaft mounted on two Ø35mm pillow blocks. A 415mm
195
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

lever arm is used to control the tilt angle of the external structure. By measuring the

force at the end of this lever arm the size of the restoring moment that the system

produces can be determined. A safety stop was added at the back of the test frame

so that the system was unable to tip over backwards.

a) b)

Figure 7.2 – a) Proposed external structure, b) external structure assembled into system for

testing

The design also allows for accurate measurement of the height of pivot points and

other critical features above the origin (tilt frame pivot point). Accurately measuring

these values is critical to the theoretical and experimental comparison of the system.

The new external structure improved control of the system allowing a more accurate

method of measuring the magnitude of the restoring moment. As the system is

symmetric, and therefore will behave the same in every direction, only being able to

pivot in one plane does not affect the verification of the stable platform design.

196
Chapter 7 – Development of Prototype A

Securing the structure to the floor reduced vibrations of the system when testing.

Outcome: The new external structure allows the system to be accurately

controlled for testing.

7.3.3 Optimisation of flywheel geometry

Having increased the speed of the flywheels (increased battery capacity) an increase

in the inertia of the flywheel was also investigated.

Table 7.4 – Optimisation of flywheel geometry

Time to complete Ease of Integration Overall impact on performance Total

3/5 5/5 7/10 15/20

Table 7.5 outlines a series of flywheel iterations performed on Excel and verified in

SolidWorks. Each iteration altered the dimensions of the flywheel with the aim of

obtaining the optimum geometry to produce the largest angular momentum in the

available space.

The main aim of this process was to optimise flywheel inertia while minimizing mass.

All masses and moments of inertia have been calculated using plain carbon steel

(density = 7800kgm3).

197
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

Key
A = Outer Diameter
B = Overall Length
C = Diameter of Cavity
D = Thickness of Front Wall

Figure 7.3 – Optimisation of flywheel geometry key

Based on the equation for inertia it is unnecessary to adjust dimension A. Setting this

dimension at a maximum value will ensure inertia is always at its largest possible

value. Dimension A is only restricted by the size of the gimbal frame. SolidWorks

revealed that dimension D is optimised when it at its minimum possible value i.e. the

minimum value that provides the required strength and stiffness. The only

dimensions that needed to be varied in the iterative process were the depth of the

flywheel (dimension B) and the diameter of the centre cavity (dimension C).

Table 7.5 - Variation in flywheel dimensions

Flywheel revision. A B C D Mass (kg) Moment of Inertia (kgm2)

Initial prototype flywheel 105 55 90 7 1.314 0.002706

Max. centre cavity value 130 55 64 5 4.423 0.01139

Min. centre cavity value 130 55 120 5 1.267 0.004088

Max. flywheel depth value 130 55 64 5 4.423 0.01139

Min. flywheel depth value 130 25 64 5 2.070 0.005209

198
Chapter 7 – Development of Prototype A

Table 7.5 shows the maximum and minimum dimensions (in millimetres) and the

mass and moments of inertia obtained by varying dimensions B and C.

Figure 7.4 shows a plot of mass versus the moment of inertia of the flywheel

obtained by varying dimensions B and C by 1mm per iteration.

4.5

4
Variation of centre cavity
(Dimension C)
3.5

3
Mass (kg)

2.5 Variation of flywheel depth

(Dimension B)
2

1.5

1
0.004 0.005 0.006 0.007 0.008 0.009 0.01 0.011 0.012

Moment of Inertia (kgm2)

Figure 7.4 - Variation of centre cavity diameter (solid) and flywheel depth (dashed)

Figure 7.4 shows that varying the centre cavity or the flywheel depth both had a

similar impact on the change in mass and moment of inertia. The cavity diameter

was selected as the best dimension to alter as it did not shift the centre of mass of

the flywheel relative to the motor centre of mass (a critical design requirement). A

flywheel of mass less than 2kg was desirable to limit the weight of the stable

platform. The dimensions of the optimised flywheel are summarised in Table 7.6.

199
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

Table 7.6 – Optimised flywheel geometry

Flywheel No. A B C D Mass (kg) Moment of Inertia (kgm2)

Optimised flywheel 130 55 130 5 1.836 0.006001

Figure 7.5 a) and b) shows the initial flywheel used on Prototype A and the optimised

flywheel.

a) b)

Figure 7.5 – a) flywheel used in the initial prototype (ø110mm), b) optimised flywheel

geometry (ø130mm)

To balance the flywheel so that vibrations are minimised during operation, the

mounting face of the brushless DC motors were machined to help obtain a true flat

surface for accurate flywheel location (Figure 7.6). The flywheel mounting face was

then machined to equivalent dimensions. This accurate method of machining both

surfaces to be identical resulted in a large decrease in axial deviation when the

flywheels were rotating and greatly reduced vibrations created by misalignment of

200
Chapter 7 – Development of Prototype A

the flywheels during operation. This allowed the system to be run at higher speeds

for an extended period of time.

Machined face of
brushless DC motor to
improve mounting of
flywheels

Figure 7.6 – Brushless DC motor showing machined mount face for mounting of flywheels

The resulting flywheel has been optimised through an iterative process to determine

the best mass to moment of inertia ratio. The final flywheel is easily integrated into

the existing system. An accurate method of machining both the flywheel and motor

to fit one another has greatly reduced vibrations. These changes resulted in an

overall increase in size of stabilizing moment the system is able to produce.

Outcome: The optimised flywheel geometry has significantly enhanced

the restoring moment produced by the system

7.3.4 Driving the outer ring

When the disc is precessed in one direction at a constant speed one of the

gyroscopes pushes down on the outer ring. This downward force re-orientates the

disc so that it is parallel with the outer ring resulting in all four gyroscopes pushing

201
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

down at the same time. When this occurs there is no possibility of stabilizing the

external structure.

To overcome this problem, the disc must always be accelerating or decelerating

(velocity is constantly changing). Two solutions were determined to solve this issue.

 Setting up a control system that constantly varies the speed of the disc drive

motor.

 Remove the motor allowing the disc to rotate freely and drive the outer ring. In

this case, when the structure deviates from the vertical, the outer contact

arms contact the outer ring and friction accelerates the disc assembly around.

Driving the outer ring was selected as the preferred option. The main advantage of

this design is that the disc remains stationary until contact with the outer ring occurs.

This will make the system more responsive to the tipping of the external structure.

Table 7.7 – Driving the outer ring

Time to complete Ease of Integration Overall impact on performance Total

2/5 2/5 7/10 11/20

The 12V DC motor is connected to a 1:1 pulley arrangement with drive being

transferred to the outer ring via a poly v-belt. The drive arrangement is mounted

upon the external structure frame. A fixed centre pillar is bolted to the frame and a

threaded section on top of the shaft allows the disc bearing housing to be screwed

down and fixed in place. An outer rotating shaft is fitted over the fixed centre pillar

202
 Chapter 7 – Development of Prototype A

and located on two bearings. The outer rotating shaft attaches to the outer ring

bottom mount plate. Figure 7.7 shows the proposed outer ring drive arrangement.

Disc no longer connected to

motor (free to spin on CV
joint bearings)

Outer ring
bottom plate

Pulley
Threaded section for
mounting bearing housing

Outer rotating shaft

V belt (connects to outer ring
Belt tensioner Fixed centre
12V DC motor assembly)
pillar

Figure 7.7 – Proposed outer ring drive assembly

Figure 7.8 shows the outer ring drive mechanism assembled into the system. The

system behaved as intended. The addition of friction wheels instead of bearings on

the end of the outer contact arms meant the disc was accelerated around when

contact with the outer ring occurred (similar to the Brennan monorail).

203
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

Outer ring
bottom plate

12V DC motor
Outer shaft

Belt tensioner
External
structure
Poly V belt

Figure 7.8 – Outer ring drive arrangement assembled into stable platform system

Outcome: The outer ring drive arrangement means the disc is no longer

precessed at a constant velocity

7.3.5 Implementation of universal joint as central pivot

Testing revealed that the CV joint did not move as freely as intended and as a result

the disc assembly did not pivot into the level position as the external structure moved

off the horizontal. The axial loading from the weight of the disc assembly on the

bearings inside the CV joint caused them to bind.

The CV joint arrangement was replaced by a universal joint design.

Table 7.8 – Implementation of universal joint

Time to complete Ease of Integration Overall impact on performance Total

4/5 4/5 8/10 16/20

204
Chapter 7 – Development of Prototype A

A Ø32mm steel universal joint was used. Holes were tapped in each end of the

universal joint; one end for the disc central shaft to screw into and one for a cap

screw that retained a universal joint adaptor coupling. The universal joint

arrangement rotates on two bearings assembled into the existing bearing housing.

Disc central Universal joint

shaft adaptor coupling

Universal joint
Retaining cap
screw

Figure 7.9 – Section view of universal joint pivot assembly

Figure 7.10 shows the manufactured universal joint assembled with the adaptor

coupling and disc main shaft. The new design achieved the objective of lowering the

tipping resistance of the disc assembly. The design was easily adapted into the

existing system. Although universal joints produce a non uniform angular velocity,

calculations showed that at the speed the disc precesses and angles the joint tips at

these variances are negligible. The universal joint design also increased the distance

205
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

between the centre of mass of the disc and the disc pivot point enhancing the

gravitational stability of the disc.

Universal joint
coupling Disc central
shaft

Retaining cap
screw Universal joint

Figure 7.10 – Universal joint, coupling and main shaft assembly

Outcome: The universal joint assembly has resulted in the disc

maintaining a level orientation when the external structure tips off the

horizontal

7.3.6 Weight reduction

Weight was removed from the system via weight reducing cut outs. Several large

steel components were also replaced with aluminium equivalents. Alternative

materials (carbon fibre) were not considered due to time constraints on the project.

Table 7.9 – Reduction of weight of system

Time to complete Ease of Integration Overall impact on performance Total

2/5 3/5 6/10 11/20

206
Chapter 7 – Development of Prototype A

Figure 7.11 shows the weight reduced gimbal frame. The frame height was reduced

from 50mm to 20mm and weight-reducing holes were drilled throughout the

remaining section to further lower the frames mass.

Weight reducing
holes

Figure 7.11 – Reduced weight gimbal frame

Outcome: A reduction of approximately 6% of the overall stable platform

weight was achieved resulting in a more responsive system.

7.3.7 Spider counter weight

Testing revealed that the disc was not remaining level during operation. A counter

weight frame was proposed to see if the reactions from the gyroscopes were causing

precession of the disc in the desired directions. The counterweight allowed the

centre of mass of the disc to be shifted well below its pivot point significantly

enhancing its gravitational stability. Tests could then be run to verify that when the

207
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

outer ring contacted the outer contact arms, the gimbal frames pivoted and

precession of the disc occurred.

Table 7.10 – Spider counterweight

Time to complete Ease of Integration Overall impact on performance Total

4/5 5/5 7/10 16/20

The counter weight mounted upon the stable platform is shown in Figure 7.12. A set

of four Ø100mm steel weights are hung equally spaced around the system as to not

interfere with any rotation that occurs. The weights were attached to a spider frame

via threaded rod sections. This also allowed more weight to be added to the frame if

required.

Spider frame

Weights

Threaded rod

Figure 7.12 – Spider counter weight mounted upon stable platform

208
Chapter 7 – Development of Prototype A

The design successfully proved that when the gyroscopes are run up to constant

speed and the external structure is tipped off the equilibrium, contact between the

outer ring and the contact arms cause the disc to precess around. This development

showed that system was producing the desired reactions.

Although the counter weight proved that the stable platform reacted as intended,

including it in the system was impractical. It greatly increased the rotational inertia of

the disc and overall weight of the system.

Outcome: The addition of a large counterweight proved that the system

was producing reactions in the intended directions when subject to a

tipping force.

7.3.8 Increase central pivot

Having shown the system was behaving as intended with the spider counter weight

attached, other methods for increasing the gravitational stability of the disc were

considered. The preferred solution was to increase the distance between the pivot

point of the disc and centre of mass of the disc assembly.

Table 7.11 – Optimisation of flywheel geometry

Time to complete Ease of Integration Overall impact on performance Total

2/5 5/5 8/10 15/20

A new centre cone design was produced in SolidWorks. The design looked to reduce

the rotational inertia of the disc assembly (making it more responsive to precession)

while increasing the distance between the pivot point of the disc and its centre of
209
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

mass. The mass, pivot point distance and rotational inertia of three configurations

were compared in SolidWorks to gauge the impact the new centre cone design

would have on the performance of the stable platform. The three configurations

compared were:

 the disc arrangement of Prototype A that had been used for all testing of the

system so far.

 Prototype A with the counterweight from Section 7.3.7.

 a new centre cone design fabricated out of aluminium that raised the height of

the pivot point while reducing the overall weight of the disc assembly

The results of the comparison are shown in Table 7.12.

Table 7.12 – Central pivot comparison

Weight Centre of mass to pivot distance Rotational inertia

2
(kg) (mm) (kgm )

Initial prototype 23.18 11.25 0.6723

Initial prototype with counter weight 50.03 87.09 5.249

Raised pivot point 19.42 102.6 0.4144

The new disc centre section reduced the weight of the disc assembly by 16.2%,

raised the pivot point by 91.4mm and reduced the resistance to rotation by 38.4%.

The design maintained all the mount points of the original centre cone section. A

new lightweight bearing housing arrangement was also designed and introduced in

conjunction with the new centre cone.

210
Chapter 7 – Development of Prototype A

Figure 7.13 a) and b) illustrates the comparison between the initial disc assembly

and the increased pivot point design.

a) b)

Figure 7.13 – a) initial disc assembly and bearing housing, b) raised pivot point design

Outcome: The new disc centre section increased the gravitational stability

of the disc assembly and reduced the overall weight of the system

7.3.9 Diametrically opposite gyroscope arrangement

Testing of Prototype A showed that performance of the system could further be

improved by arranging the gyroscopes in diametrically opposite pairs. This would

result in improved oscillatory motion of the disc. This arrangement required each pair

of diametrically opposite gyroscopes to be rotate in the opposite sense to one

another.

211
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

Table 7.13 – Diametrically opposite gyroscope arrangement

Time to complete Ease of Integration Overall impact on performance Total

3/5 3/5 8/10 14/20

By coupling the gyroscopes together, when one pair of gyroscopes pivot downward

the other pair would pivot up. As the disc precessed round, the upward pointing

gyroscope outer contact arms would contact the outer ring and reverse the

precession direction of the disc. This would occur at a high frequency resulting in the

disc constantly oscillating back and forth about an equilibrium point (similar to the

system Brennan developed). Two new linear slide linkage arms were needed to pivot

two of the gyroscope assemblies from the front. Figure 7.14 shows the front pivoting

gyroscope arrangement assembled into the system.

New gimbal
frame linkage
arms

Figure 7.14 – Diametrically opposite gyroscope arrangement showing front pivoting

gyroscopes

212
Chapter 7 – Development of Prototype A

Initial testing of the diametrically opposite gyroscope arrangement showed the

system performed as intended. One issue with the design was the unequal angles

the gimbal frames pivoted at due to the connecting arms attaching at different points

on the gimbal frame. This resulted in the outer contact arms contacting the outer ring

at different angular positions.

An iterative process was used in SolidWorks and Excel to optimise the location of

the front pivot to ensure the gyroscopes tipped at equal angles.

Figure 7.15 – Skeleton used in SolidWorks for iterative process in optimisation of front pivot

location

The iterative process resulted in the maximum variation between the front and rear

pivoting gyroscopes being reduced from 15 degrees to just 3 degrees. This

discrepancy was taken as acceptable due to the variations present in the

213
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

manufacture and assembly of this type of system. Figure 7.16 a) and b) shows the

comparison between the initial front pivot location and the final optimise location.

Pivot point Optimised pivot point

a) b)

Figure 7.16 – a) initial front pivot location, b) optimised pivot location

The diametrically opposite arrangement improved the oscillatory motion of the

system resulting in it exhibiting behaviour similar to the Brennan monorail stabilizer.

The design was adapted into the existing prototype without any difficulty.

Outcome: The diametrically opposite arrangement resulted in improved

oscillatory motion of the disc.

7.3.10 Main disc drive arrangement and slip ring design

Further testing revealed the outer ring drive system was not making the stabilization

process behave as intended. The option of driving the main disc was revisited.

214
Chapter 7 – Development of Prototype A

Instead of driving the disc around at a constant velocity in a single direction two

solutions were investigated to further enhance the oscillatory motion of the disc.

i) using a signal generator to switch the voltage the DC motor receives,

constantly altering the direction the disc is precessed

ii) developing a switching system that changes the direction of precession of the

disc when each of the outer contact arms contact the outer ring

Although solution ii) was much more complex to integrate into the existing prototype

and manufacture, this solution meant that the system would responded actively to

the tipping of the external structure.

Table 7.14 – New disc drive arrangement

Time to complete Ease of Integration Overall impact on performance Total

2/5 2/5 7/10 11/20

The final design used a slip ring arrangement (Figure 7.17). The initial DC motor

used to drive the disc was adapted into a new bearing assembly. The new assembly

reduced the weight of the drive arrangement by 3kg and was easily integrated into

the existing system. The universal joint, universal joint coupling, bearings and drive

shaft were all reused in the design and the external structure did not need to be

modified for mounting the new system. A schematic wiring diagram for the slip ring

arrangement can be found in Appendix E.

215
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

a) b)

Figure 7.17 – a) slip ring drive arrangement assembled into external structure, b) slip ring

plates

As the external structure tips off the vertical it comes in contact with the outer contact

arms and closes an electrical circuit.

a) b)

Figure 7.18 – a) modified contact arms with wire connected, b) nylon bush and brass screw

on contact arm

216
Chapter 7 – Development of Prototype A

The outer contact arms were redesigned to include a nylon bush with a tapped hole

in the bottom. A brass screw was fitted in the hole with a connecting wire running

back to the drive motor via the slip ring arrangement (Figure 7.18). The contact arms

were wired together to match their diametrically opposite pairing arrangement. When

the circuit was closed by the contact of the outer ring and the contact arms, a set of

relay switches (Figure 7.19 a)) turn on and drive the disc and gyroscopes around in

one direction. This causes one pair of the gyroscopes to push down on the outer ring

forcing the external structure back to the level position until it tips over the horizontal.

The contact arms of the opposite pair of gyroscopes now come in contact with the

other side of the outer ring, closing the circuit and switching the motor to drive the

disc in the opposite direction. This process continues at a high frequency and

maintains the external structure level by rocking it back and forth about the vertical.

a) b)

Figure 7.19 – a) relay switches used to alternate voltage to disc drive motor, b) slip ring drive

arrangement assembled together showing copper plating on outer ring

217
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

Figure 7.19 b) shows the slip ring drive mechanism assembled into the system. A

thin copper ring was attached to the top of the outer ring to improve conductivity

between it and the contact arms. The slip ring drive mechanism performed as

intended driving the disc and oscillating it back and forth resulting in the gyroscopes

pivoting up and down.

Outcome: The switching system further improved the oscillatory motion of

the disc rocking the external structure about the equilibrium point.

7.3.11 Low weight external structure

The external structure was redesigned to reduce the mass the system was

attempting to stabilize.

Table 7.15 – Low weight external structure

Time to complete Ease of Integration Overall impact on performance Total

4/5 5/5 8/10 17/20

The new design reduced the overall weight of the external structure from 30.6kg to

8.8kg. A comparison is illustrated in Figure 7.20. Constructed entirely of aluminium

the new structure consisted of a central shaft (equivalent in dimension to the old

shaft) with two brackets to support four outer ring mounting legs. All mounting points

and connections were kept in the same location and the height of the outer ring

remained adjustable.

218
Chapter 7 – Development of Prototype A

a) b)

Figure 7.20 – a) Comparison of old external structure (top) and new light weight external

structure (bottom), b) the lightweight external structure assembled into the test frame

Outcome: The significant weight reduction of the external structure

resulted in a more responsive system.

7.3.12 Improved motor control

The implementation of the slip ring drive arrangement showed that the system could

be made to oscillate about an equilibrium point. Testing revealed control of the

frequency and amplitude of the oscillations would allow for a better understanding of

the response produced by the system.

Table 7.16 – Improved motor control

Time to complete Ease of Integration Overall impact on performance Total

3/5 5/5 7/10 15/20

A simple switching circuit consisting of a relay switch and a square wave signal

generator were introduced to drive the 12V DC motor in place of the complex slip

219
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

ring drive arrangement. This meant that the oscillations of the motor and therefore

the precession of the disc could be set to the desired frequency. Integration of the

new oscillating motor arrangement required no major design changes to the system.

Figure 7.21 – Signal generator (left), flywheel speed controller (bottom middle), disc drive

motor (bottom right) and relay switch power supplies (top right),

The oscillating motor control system used in the stable platform is shown in Figure

7.21. One power supply is used to drive the 12V DC motor and control the motor

speed while another supplies voltage to the relay switch circuit to alternate the

voltage polarity. The signal generator allows the voltage, duty cycle and frequency of

the signal the motor receives to be adjusted.

Outcome: Control of the frequency and amplitude of the oscillatory motion

of the precession of the disc.

220
Chapter 7 – Development of Prototype A

7.3.13 Increased disc drive motor size

Torque restrictions meant the 12V DC motor had difficulty achieving the desired disc

precession at higher frequencies. To eliminate this problem a larger disc drive motor

was required that could operate at the desired frequencies and produced the

required torques.

Table 7.17 – Increase disc drive motor size

Time to complete Ease of Integration Overall impact on performance Total

3/5 5/5 7/10 15/20

A variety of different motor types were considered to replace the existing disc drive

motor. A larger DC motor with a connected worm gear was selected as the new disc

drive motor. The maximum input voltage of the disc drive motor was increased from

12V to 24V. A comparison is shown in Figure 7.22. The motor had multiple mount

points and was easily integrated into the system.

Figure 7.22 – Disc drive motor comparison showing Prototype A drive motor (top) and larger

Prototype B drive motor (bottom).

221
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

The new drive motor showed a significant improvement in precessing the disc at

high frequencies. The smaller motor overheated and stopped functioning after a

short period of testing. The larger motor proved much more robust.

Outcome: The increased disc drive motor improved both the range of

speeds the disc could be precessed at and eliminated overheating during

testing.

7.3.14 New gyroscope pivot arrangement

At higher frequencies the discrepancies between the contact angles of the gimbal

frames was still affecting the performance of the stable platform. An improved

method for ensuring the gimbal frames pivoted at equivalent angles was needed

Table 7.18 – New gyroscope pivot arrangement

Time to complete Ease of Integration Overall impact on performance Total

3/5 4/5 6/10 13/20

Solutions to pivoting the gimbal frames at equal angels were reviewed in sub-

function Q in Section 6.3.5. Bevel gears were not selected due to cost and the

complex machining and assembly required (Kamm, 1993). Universal joint

connections were selected as the preferred option to replace the linear slide design.

A universal joint was attached to the gyroscope pivot shaft and interconnected via a

clamping bracket. A linkage that attached to the front of one clamping bracket and to

the back of the other meant that the coupled gimbal frames pivoted in opposite

222
Chapter 7 – Development of Prototype A

directions. Figure 7.23 shows the new gyroscope pivoting arrangement assembled

into the stable platform.

Rear clamp Front clamp

pivot pivot

a) b)

Figure 7.23 – a) New gyroscope pivot arrangement, b) universal joints and clamping bracket

Outcome: The universal joint pivots are interconnected via an overhead

slide arm that tracked on a linear bearing. This pivoted each diametrically

opposite gyroscope pair at an equal angle.

7.4 Final design

The final design of the stable platform exhibits oscillatory motion about the vertical

with the stabilizing moment being transmitted at the desired points as the external

structure tips back and forth. The final design is shown in Figure 7.24. This design

shall be referred to as Prototype B.

223
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

Figure 7.24 – Final stable platform (Prototype B)

7.5 Discussion

This section looks at the key findings of the optimisation and development phase. It

concludes with a numerical comparison between Prototype A and the final improved

design (Prototype B) via Equation (4.47).

The optimisation stage has shown that there is a clear relationship between the

angular momentum produced by the stable platform and the mass it is required to

balance. The total mass and angular momentum of Prototype A based upon the

initial physical parameters of the system are compared in Table 7.19. Testing verified

224
Chapter 7 – Development of Prototype A

that as the mass of the system was reduced and the inertia and speed of the

gyroscopes increased the responsiveness of the system improved and the likelihood

of achieving stabilization increased.

In order to quantify this result we consider a system that has been demonstrated to

work. The physical parameters of the Brennan monorail were investigated in Table

2.1 and Table 2.2. Knowing the mass of the Brennan monorail and the dimensions

and speeds of the gyroscopes we are able to calculate a ratio of the angular

momentum versus the weight of the system. As can be seen in Table 7.19, the

Brennan monorail has a ratio 7.5 times greater than the Prototype A.

The development phase has lead to the new system (Prototype B) having a ratio

approximately 4 times better than Prototype A yet still only half as good as the

Brennan monorail ratio.

Table 7.19 – Angular momentum and total mass ratio

System Total mass (kg) Angular momentum (kgm2) Ratio

Prototype A 57.1 10.42 0.180

Brennan Monorail 33600 44680 1.33

Prototype B 37.7 28.00 0.743

This ratio, when used in conjunction with the stability inequality, gives yet another

method for helping quantify the likelihood of a gyroscopically stabilized platform

successfully achieving stabilization.

225
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

Several important design requirements were identified in the development phase of

the Prototype A. It is critical that an equal pivot angle for the diametrically opposite

gyroscopes gimbal frames is maintained. Due to the oscillatory motion of the system,

this will ensure that an equivalent restoring torque is transmitted to the external

structure in all planes as the system pivots about the equilibrium. This is essential in

achieving the desired symmetric system response. Having the gyroscope gimbal

frames rest in the equilibrium position (flywheel axes are horizontal) when the

system is not turned on also contributes to achieving the desired response as there

is no external torque from unbalanced masses present. Maintaining a symmetrically

balanced design of the disc/gyroscopes assembly will also ensure that the system is

not subjected to any mass imbalance torques.

Development of Prototype A also revealed that the distance between the pivot point

and centre of mass of the disc needs to be maximised to increase the gravitational

stability of the disc. The stability of the disc governs how effectively the gyroscopes

are able to transmit the torque they produce to the external structure. If the disc

remains level and does not tip, all of the torque produced by the precession of the

flywheels is applied to the outer ring improving the likelihood of achieving

stabilization.

Having established the parameters and geometry for the final design of the system

(Prototype B) we are able to check how the optimisation process has affected the

inequality (Equation (4.47)). Substitution of the values of the physical parameters of

Prototype B results in the inequality being expressed numerically in Table 7.20.

226
Chapter 7 – Development of Prototype A

Table 7.20 – Inequality for stable platform prototype

Left hand side of inequality 29.5

Right hand side of inequality 574.8

Table 7.20 shows that the ratio between the left and right hand sides of the equation

has further been improved when compared to Prototype A.

7.6 Concluding comments

The changes implemented in the development of Prototype A have increased the

right hand side of the inequality (Equation (4.47)) by 121% and a reduction in the left

hand side of 41%. Having satisfied and enhanced the inequality derived in Chapter

4, Prototype B has been shown to exhibit improved oscillatory motion about the

equilibrium point as it stabilizes the external structure. A bill of materials and set of

manufacturing assembly drawings for Prototype B can be found in Appendix C. A full

set of drawings for all the components and assemblies that comprise Prototype B

can be found on the CD associated with this thesis.

227
Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

228
Chapter 8 – Testing and Results

Testing of Prototype B and theoretical comparison

8.1 Introduction

Prototype B was found to exhibit the desired oscillatory motion about the equilibrium.

Substitution of the physical parameters of Prototype B allow for investigation of the

theoretical model derived in Chapter 5. The magnitude and frequency of the

restoring torque produced by the Prototype B will be measured. The frequency and

shape of this response can then be plotted and compared with the theoretical

results.

The purpose of this chapter is to compare the results obtained via

the theoretical model and experimental testing of Prototype B. The

outcome of this comparison is to validate the theoretical model such

that it can be used in the future development of the system to further

optimise its performance.

8.1.1 Outcome of theoretical and experimental comparison

It should be noted that the general solutions for the driven system (Equations (5.42)

and (5.43)) calculate the angular displacement of the disc and external structure as

they oscillate about their equilibrium positions. The load cell used in the experimental

testing measures force (and as the location of the load cell relative to the pivot point

is known, a moment can to be calculated). The main motivation behind this

229
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

comparison is to check that the theoretical and experimental results output

responses that have the same shape and frequency. The largest magnitude of the

restorative torque produced by the system obtained via experimental testing can be

compared to the value obtained by substitution of the physical parameters of

Prototype B into the inequality derived in the investigation of the stability conditions

from Chapter 4 (Equation (4.47)).

8.2 Theoretical results from driven system

As the disc and gyroscope assembly is driven by a motor we investigate the

behaviour of the general solution to the driven system (Equations (5.42) and (5.43)).

We are only interested in the long term behaviour of the system so our equations

become:

(8.1)

and

(8.2)

Substitution of the physical parameters of Prototype B into Equations (8.1) and (8.2)

yields the results shown in Equations (8.3) and (8.4).

230
Chapter 8 – Testing and Results

(8.3)

and

(8.4)

Note that to obtain the above results a coefficient of friction of 0.5 and a torque of

30N have been used as the physical conditions inside the 24V DC motor during

operation. These values are based upon the constants used in the initial design of

the system and testing of the motor to justify it was capable of producing the required

torques to precess the disc.

Plotting the responses from Equations (8.3) and (8.4) in Matlab over a period of 20

seconds we obtain the graph shown in Figure 8.1. We plot both of the responses of

the disc and the external structure on the same figure to help illustrate the variations

in angular displacement (the disc travels through an angle 2 times greater than the

external structure). Figure 8.1 also illustrates how the response of the disc and

external structure are out of phase. This type of response must also be viewed in the

experimental results.

231
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

Figure 8.1 - Theoretical response of stable platform showing angular displacement over time

of external structure (blue) and disc (red)

8.3 Driven system experimental results

The experimental testing of Prototype B comprised of a load cell attached to the

existing test frame. The load cell was used to measure the magnitude of the

restoring torque produced as well as the frequency response of the physical system.

8.3.1 Experiment arrangement

An adjustable bracket was manufactured to hold the load cell rigidly in place during

testing. This bracket was fixed in place via two bolts that tightened up against the

testing frame. Figure 8.2 shows the location of the testing rig relative to Prototype B.

232
Chapter 8 – Testing and Results

Load cell

Moment arm
(External
Pivot point
structure)

Load cell
mount frame

Figure 8.2 – Load cell test rig assembled into Prototype B

The load cell was fixed to the end of the moment arm of the external structure. The

centre of the load cell was located 412.5mm from the systems pivot point. This

distance in conjunction with the force exerted upon the load cell allows the total

restorative torque produced by the platform to be measured.

The load cell is secured to the mount frame via a Ø12mm rod end. The use of a rod

end and slotted holes allows for adjustment of the location of the load cell. An

aluminium section was manufactured to connect the load cell to the moment arm and

ensure it was accurately located in the required position. Figure 8.3 illustrates the

load cell mounted in position.

233
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

Figure 8.3 – Mounting location of load cell in testing rig arrangement

An S-type AST1000 load cell was used for all testing. The load cell was connected to

a laptop via a USB controller and all data was measured and processed in Labview

2012.

8.3.2 Experimental testing results

The oscillatory frequency of the theoretical system was determined via Figure 8.1

and Prototype B was set to precess back and forth at an equivalent frequency. The

magnitude of the largest moment produced by the experimental response is then

compared to the magnitude predicted by the theoretical model by substitution of the

systems physical parameters.

The results obtained from the testing of the Prototype B are shown in Figure 8.4.

234
Chapter 8 – Testing and Results

20

15

10

5
Restoring Moment (Nm)

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

-5

-10

-15

-20

-25
Time (seconds)

Figure 8.4 – Experimental response of stable platform Prototype B

8.4 Discussion of results

The theoretical results shown in Figure 8.1 illustrate oscillatory motion of the stable

platform. The amplitude of the angular displacement of the disc (0.4065 rads) is

approximately twice that of the external structure (0.1999 rads). This motion is

desirable as it indicates that as the disc precesses through large angles the external

structure only moves through angles half the size. This variation in the angular

displacement results in small oscillations of the structure about the equilibrium.

Figure 8.1 also shows that the theoretical response of the disc and external structure

are out of phase. This is the desired response of the system. If the disc and external

structure were oscillated in phase then no stabilization would occur. This is because

the equations of motion involve both accelerations and velocities. Looking at the

235
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

derivation of the equations of motion for the driven case, the presence of the

velocities introduces complex terms as it is only the first derivative with respect to

time, whereas the accelerations introduce real terms because it is the second

derivative. A similar phenomenon occurs in the case of the Driven Damped Simple

Harmonic Oscillator.

Prototype B was shown to exhibit the desired oscillatory motion. Figure 8.4 is

overlaid with the optimal theoretical torque output response curve. The result is

illustrated in Figure 8.5. This figure shows that the oscillatory response of the stable

platform closely follows the theoretical response shown in Figure 8.1.

20

15

10

5
Restoring Moment (Nm)

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

-5

-10

-15

-20

-25
Time (seconds)

Figure 8.5 – Experimental response (blue) overlaid with an optimal torque response (red)

236
Chapter 8 – Testing and Results

It is difficult to compare the magnitude of the theoretical and experimental

responses. Testing has shown that the force applied by the system is directly

proportional to the angle at which the disc precesses through (as the disc precess

further the magnitude of the force applied to the external structure increases). This

suggests that both the angular displacement of the disc and the restoring torque

should exhibit equal oscillatory motion. The frequency responses shown in Figure

8.1 and Figure 8.5 suggest that this is occurring.

The optimal response from the testing of the Prototype B would be a smooth

sinusoidal curve. Inconsistencies in the results when comparing the experimental

and theoretical responses can be attributed to:

 the lack of rigidity of several connections. This meant that the motion of the

connections between sub-systems was not as smooth as desired. This can be

remedied by more accurate machining methods being used when

manufacturing the systems components and more rigid load paths being

established.

 a bouncing effect occurring as the outer contact arms contact the outer ring of

the external structure. Metal on metal contact made this unavoidable. This

issue can be remedied by placing a rubber or nylon covering on the outer ring

to absorb the impact forces as the outer contact arms push down restoring the

external structure back to the equilibrium position.

 the main disc not remaining perfectly level during operation

237
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

A summary of the theoretical and experimental values compared in testing are

shown in Table 8.1. Note that the maximum theoretical moment is derived via the

equation

(8.5)

where

Table 8.1 – Theoretical vs. experimental comparison

Variable Theoretical Value Experimental Value Units % Deviation

External structure frequency 1.365 1.5 s +11

0.7326 0.666 Hz -9

Disc frequency 1.365 1.5 s +11

0.7320 0.666 Hz -9

Disc deviation per period 0.8130 N/A radians -

46.58 N/A degrees -

External structure deviation per period 0.3998 N/A radians -

22.92 N/A degrees -

Maximum moment produced 22.40 18 Nm -24

238
Chapter 8 – Testing and Results

The discrepancy in the theoretical and experimental maximum moment produced by

Prototype B can be attributed to loses through friction, vibrations and the main disc

not remaining level during the stabilization process.

From these results we have observed that the theoretical response and experimental

response of Prototype B have produced similar waveforms. This suggests that the

theoretical model can be used to predict the oscillatory motion of the stable platform.

By combining the responses of Equations (8.1) and (8.2) with the maximum

theoretical moment produced by the system (Equation (8.5)) we are able to generate

Figure 8.4. From this we are able to predict the oscillatory response that the system

will produce as the physical parameters that make up the stable platform are varied.

8.5 Concluding comments

The theoretical and experimental responses of the system have been compared by

substituting the physical conditions of the Prototype B into the relevant equations

and plotting the resulting waveform. Investigation of the results has shown that the

derived mathematical model is a suitable method for predicting the response of the

system as well as determining the maximum restorative moment produced by the

stable platform. By combining this information a figure of the theoretical response is

able to be produced that will model the oscillatory behaviour of the system.

239
Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

240
Chapter 9 – Conclusions and recommendations

Conclusions and recommendations

This study has investigated the feasibility of producing a gyroscopically stabilized

platform based upon a schematic diagram proposed by Townsend (1983). This

chapter summarises the research activities, the results of this study and makes

recommendations for future work.

9.1 Summary of research activities

A review of existing gyroscopically stabilized systems in the available literature was

undertaken. This gave a sound understanding as to where the current and available

technology relating to the project was in industry. All previous work completed on the

project by Townsend (1983) and Gooch (1998-199) was reviewed and the proposed

schematic layout of the gyroscopically stabilized platform was introduced.

The Brennan monorail was investigated due to its similarities with the proposed

system. A free body diagram of the stabilizing system was developed and a step by

step guide of the operation of the platform was presented. A review of the Brennan

stabilizer helped to establish fundamental theory regarding how gyroscopes react

and behave when interconnected.

The Lagrangian of a general gyroscopically stabilized platform (referred to as the

stable platform) based upon the proposed schematic was derived by means of the

241
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

Lagrangian formalism. The variables that defined the motion of the system were

established and from this a set of a set of Euler angles were determined. The kinetic

energy and potential energy of each of the sub-systems that comprise the stable

platform were then derived. This allowed the Lagrangian for the overall system to be

determined.

The equations of motion of the system were derived and from this a set of stability

conditions were established. From these stability conditions, an inequality was

derived that described the situation where the restoring moment produced by the

stable platform is greater than the imbalance forces generated by the unstable

body’s deviation from the vertical. This inequality was then used to impose

conditions upon the physical design of the system. The equations of motion were

used to derive general solutions to a homogeneous stable platform arrangement and

a driven system.

A set of design requirement specifications were established for the design of the

stable platform following the method of Pahl and Beitz (1984). The stable platform

system was divided into 6 sub-systems (gyroscopes, disc, external structure, disc

drive mechanism, gimbal frame linkage and central pivot) and a set of concepts

based upon each of the sub-systems functions were derived. The embodiment

design was developed and a detailed final design of the stable platform was

established. This design was referred to as Prototype A.

Prototype A was manufactured at in the University of Canterbury Mechanical

Engineering workshop. Testing of Prototype A revealed that it did not perform as

242
Chapter 9 – Conclusions and recommendations

intended. An extensive set of design developments and modifications were

undertaken to improve the performance of Prototype A. The developed system

demonstrated the desired behaviour during testing and is referred to as Prototype B.

Prototype B was shown to exhibit the desired oscillatory motion about an equilibrium

point.

Finally, Prototype B was tested and the restorative torque produced by the system

measured via a load cell. This data was then used to validate the mathematical

model. The theoretical and experimental responses were shown to be similar

confirming the mathematical model as an accurate method for predicting the

behaviour of the system.

9.2 Conclusions of this study

A schematic of a gyroscopic stabilizer was proposed by Townsend. Early research

by Townsend revealed that no multi-gyroscope interconnected stabilization system

that could balance an unstable body in all directions existed at the time.

Technological constraints on electric motors and batteries meant that the system

could not be built to the desired scale. The project was placed on hold until such time

as a proof of concept prototype could be manufactured at an economic size. Gooch

(1998-1999) continued the work that Townsend had begun. Developments in

brushless DC motors and Li-Po batteries have allowed the project to be revisited.

A theoretical mathematical analysis of the proposed system was under taken. The

key variables that define the motion of the stable platform were established as a set

of Euler angles. From these, expressions for the kinetic and potential energy of the
243
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

three critical sections that encompass the stable platform (external structure, disc

and gyroscopes) were derived. The Lagrangian for each of the sections were then

determined. Several key assumptions were established to assist in simplifying the

overall mathematical problem. These were:

 The disc will remain horizontal during the stabilization process.

 The gyroscopes have equal moments of inertia about the x, y and z axes.

 All gyroscopes will rotate with equal speed.

 The angles of deviation of all of the gyroscopes gimbal frames from the

horizontal will all be equal.

Investigation revealed that only three variables were required to describe the

behaviour of the stable platform (several of the variables were shown to be

equivalent or set as constants). These three variables were

relates to the rotation of the gyroscopes

defines the position of the main disc as it precesses round

defines the derivation of the system from the vertical

The equations of motion for the system in each of these directions were derived. A

set of stability conditions were imposed upon the system by means of the

characteristic equation. These conditions required the system to exhibit oscillations

244
Chapter 9 – Conclusions and recommendations

about an equilibrium. An inequality (Equation (4.47)) was determined and used to

govern the physical design of the stable platform.

(4.47)

A prototype design (Prototype A) was established using the systematic approach of

Pahl and Beitz (1984). The prototype did not perform as intended. A development

process was undertaken to achieve the desired system behaviour. The inclusion of a

drive motor to precess the disc meant that symmetric oscillatory motion was the

desired response of the system.

Testing of the new prototype (Prototype B) revealed several conditions that must be

satisfied in order for a similar gyroscopically stabilized system to maintain an

unstable body in the upright position.

i) The ratio of the total angular momentum produced by the system versus the

weight of overall system must be 0.8 or greater.

ii) It is important that an equal pivot angle for the diametrically opposite

gyroscopes gimbal frames is maintained. Due to the oscillatory motion of the

system, this will ensure that an equivalent restoring torque is transmitted to

the external structure in all planes as the system pivots about the equilibrium.

245
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

iii) The distance between the pivot point of the disc and the centre of mass of the

disc needs to be maximised to increase the gravitational stability of the disc.

iv) Maintaining a symmetrically balanced design of the disc/gyroscope assembly

will also ensure that the system is not subjected to any mass imbalance

torques.

v) The amplitude of the angular displacement of the disc should be

approximately twice that of the external structure. This motion is desirable as

it indicates that as the disc precesses through large angles the external

structure only moves through angles half the size. These two responses must

also be out of phase.

9.3 Recommendations for further work

It is recommended a new system is designed utilizing the findings from this research.

One suggested solution to overcome several of the issues encountered in the

existing gyroscopically stabilized platform is the reorientation of the gyroscope

gimbal frame and flywheels to rotate in the same plane as the Brennan monorail.

This arrangement will give a better force transmission path between the gyroscopes

and the external structure.

Another potential arrangement for a new gyroscopically stabilized system is the

design of a “double Brennan”. This is effectively two Brennan stabilizers positioned

at right angles to one another. The Brennan stabilizer is a proven system that has

246
Chapter 9 – Conclusions and recommendations

been shown to work. This coupled with modern technologies such as

accelerometers, control systems and small electric motors to precess the

gyroscopes gimbal frames when deviation from the horizontal occurs should produce

a system that would achieve stabilization in all planes. A preliminary design for such

a system is show in Figure 9.9.1.

Figure 9.9.1 – Preliminary design of “double Brennan” stabilizer

The major downside to a “double Brennan” arrangement is that the size of the

restoring torque produced by the system will vary in each plane. The largest torque

will occur in line with the flywheel axes while the points 45 degrees between each of

the gimbal frames will be subjected to a torque that is significantly lower. More

investigation into how this will impact the stabilization process is required.

247
 Analysis, Design, Optimisation and Testing of a Gyroscopically Stabilized Platform

It is also recommended that a small scale working Brennan stabilizer model be

constructed using modern machines, materials and control components. Testing of

such a system will provide further insight into how coupled gyroscopes can be

utilized to maintain an unstable structure upright. This recommended work could

further enable the verification of several design constraints that could be used to

further optimise the four flywheel gyroscopically stabilized platform successfully

designed, developed, manufactured and functionally verified in the work reported in

this thesis.

248
10 – References

10

References

Arnold, R. N., Maunder, L., & Roberson, R. E. (1963). Gyrodynamics (Vol. 30).

Bauer, Robert J. (2002). Kinematics and dynamics of a double-gimbaled control

moment gyroscope. Mechanism and machine theory, 37 (12), 1513-1529.

Beitz, Wolfgang, & Pahl, G. (1984). Engineering design. London: Design Council ;

Berlin : Springer.

Bennett, GG. (1970). An historical review of the development of the gyroscope.

Australian Surveyor, 23 (4), 244-252.

Beznos, AV, Formal'sky, AM, Gurfinkel, EV, Jicharev, DN, Lensky, AV,

Savitsky, KV, & Tchesalin, LS. (1998). Control of autonomous motion of

two-wheel bicycle with gyroscopic stabilisation. Paper presented at the IEEE

International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

Blinn, James F. (2006). How to solve a cubic equation, Part 1: The shape of the

discriminant. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 26 (3), 84-85

Brennan, Louis. (1905). US Patent No. 796893.

Brown, Daniel, & Peck, Mason A. (2008). Scissored-Pair Control-Moment Gyros: A

Mechanical Constraint Saves Power. Journal of guidance, control, and

dynamics, 31 (6), 1823-1826.

Cousins, H. (1913). The stability of Gyroscopic single track vehicles. Engineering,

678–681, 711–712, 781–784.

Davidson, Martin. (1946). The gyroscope and its applications: in three sections.

London: Hutchinson's scientific and technical publications.

249
 Analysis, design, optimisation and testing of gyroscopically stabilized platform

Davyskib, A, & Samsonov, VA. (1995). The possibility of gyroscopic stabilization of

the rotation of a system of rigid bodies. Journal of Applied Mathematics and

Mechanics, 59 (3), 363-367.

Denisov, G.G, & Novikov, V.V. (2006). A Problem of Gyroscopic Stabilization of

Mechanical System. Mechanics of Solids, 41 (3), 8-11.

Dickinson, A. F. (1910). The Brennan gyroscope. Cassier's Magazine.

Eddy, H.T. . (1910). Mechanical principles of Brennan's mono-rail car. Journal of the

Franklin Institute, v. 169, 467-485.

Ferreira, Enrique D, Tsai, Shu-Jen, Paredis, Christiaan JJ, & Brown, H

Benjamin. (2000). Control of the Gyrover: a single-wheel gyroscopically

stabilized robot. Advanced Robotics, 14 (6), 459-475.

Franklin, WS. (1912). An Important Practical Problem in Gyrostatic Action. Physical

Review (Series I), 34 (1), 48.

Gooch, S. (1998-1999). Project Feasability Study Documentation University of

Canterbury. Christchurch, NZ.

Gutschmidt, S. (2005). Mathematical-Mechanical Modelling of Wobbling Disc

Piezoelectric Motors. Forschen und Wissen - Mechatronik, Germany.

Hales, C. & Gooch, S. (2004). Managing engineering design. New York: Springer.

Huseyin, K, Hagedorn, P, & Teschner, W. (1983). On the stability of linear

conservative gyroscopic systems. Zeitschrift für angewandte Mathematik und

Physik ZAMP, 34 (6), 807-815.

Joseph, James. (1967, September). 2 Wheeled Road Wonder! Science &

Mechanics, 31-35.

250
10 – References

Kamm, Lawrence J. (1993). Designing cost-efficient mechanisms: minimum

constraint design, designing with commercial components, and topics in

design engineering. Warrendale, PA, U.S.A: Society of Automotive Engineers.

Kane, T. R., Likins, P. W., & Levinson, D. A. (1983). Spacecraft dynamics (Vol. 1).

New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co.

Karnopp, Dean. (2002). Tilt control for gyro-stabilized two-wheeled vehicles. Vehicle

System Dynamics, 37 (2), 145-156.

Klein, Richard E. (1990). Teaching linear systems theory using Cramer's rule.

Education, IEEE Transactions on, 33 (3), 258-267.

Kliem, Wolfhard, & Seyranian, Alexander P. (1997). Analysis of the gyroscopic

stabilization of a system of rigid bodies. Zeitschrift für angewandte

Mathematik und Physik ZAMP, 48 (5), 840-847.

Kosov, AA. (2008). Gyroscopic stabilization of nonconservative systems. Journal of

Applied and Industrial Mathematics, 2 (4), 513-521.

Kuz'mina, L.K. (1972). On the Stability of Gyroscopic Stabilization Systems. Journal

of Applied Mathematics and Mechanics, 36 (4), 732-736.

Kuz'mina, L.K. (1980). On the Stability of Systems of Gyroscopic Stabilization in the

Presence of Perturbation. Journal of Applied Mathematics and Mechanics, 44

(1), 119-122.

Lam, Pom Yuan. (2011). Gyroscopic stabilization of a kid-size bicycle. Paper

presented at the Cybernetics and Intelligent Systems (CIS), 2011 IEEE 5th

International Conference

Matrosov, V. M. (1960). On the stability of gyroscopic stabilizers. Journal of Applied

Mathematics and Mechanics, 24 (5), 1214-1224.

McCallion, H. (1973). Vibration of linear mechanical systems. London: Longman.

251
 Analysis, design, optimisation and testing of gyroscopically stabilized platform

Molian, S. (1997). Mechanism design: the kinematics and dynamics of machinery.

New York: Elsevier.

Moots, Elmer Earl. (1911). The design and testing of a monorail car model:

University of Wisconsin--Madison.

Photographer Unknown. (1927). Einschienenbahn von Brennan und Scherl from

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Einschienerp.jpg.

Roitenberg, I. N. (1960). On the theory of direct gyroscopic stabilizers. Journal of

Applied Mathematics and Mechanics, 24 (4), 1156-1163.

Savet, Paul H. (1961). Gyroscopes: theory and design : with applications to

instrumentation, guidance and control. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Schilovski, P. (1909). Patent GB 12,021.

Schilovski, P. (1914). Patent GB 12,021.

Schilovski, P. (1924). The Gyroscope: Its Practical Construction and Application,

Etc: E. & FN Spon.

Shigley, Joseph Edward. (2011). Shigley's mechanical engineering design. New

York: McGraw-Hill.

Sperry, E. A. (1908). Patent US 907,907.

Spry, Stephen C, & Girard, Anouck R. (2008). Gyroscopic stabilisation of unstable

vehicles: configurations, dynamics, and control. Vehicle System Dynamics, 46

(S1), 247-260.

Townsend, Greg. (1983). Project Feasability Study Documentation Technix Group

Ltd. New Plymouth, NZ.

Townsend, N. C., Murphy, A. J., & Shenoi, R. A. (2007). A new active

gyrostabiliser system for ride control of marine vehicles. Ocean Engineering,

34 (11-12), 1607-1617.

252
10 – References

Ullman, David G. (1992). The mechanical design process. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Waldron, Manjula B., & Waldron, Kenneth J. (1996). Mechanical design: theory

and methodology. New York: Springer.

Ward, Morgan. (1959). The vanishing of the homogeneous product sum of the roots

of a cubic. Duke Mathematical Journal, 26 (4), 553-562.

Wells, Dare A. (1967). Schaum's outline of theory and problems of Lagrangian

dynamics: with a treatment of Euler's equations of motion, Hamilton's

equations and Hamilton's principle. New York: Schaum Pub. Co.

Zhu, Zhen, Naing, Myint Phone, & Al-Mamun, Abdullah. (2009). A 3-D simulator

using ADAMS for design of an autonomous gyroscopically stabilized single

wheel robot. Paper presented at the 2009 IEEE International Conference on

Systems, Man and Cybernetics

253
Analysis, design, optimisation and testing of gyroscopically stabilized platform

254
Appendix A

Appendix A

Mathematical Simplifications

I
 Analysis, design, optimisation and testing of gyroscopically stabilized platform

The following appendix looks at the mathematical simplifications used in Chapter 4.

(A1.1)

and

(A1.2)

A1 Proof of simplification of Equation A1.1

II
Appendix A

(A1.1)

A2 Proof of simplification Equation A1.2

It is easiest to break this simplification into two parts expand them separately and

add like terms together cancelling out many of the repeated terms.

Let us first consider

III
 Analysis, design, optimisation and testing of gyroscopically stabilized platform

(A1.3)

We now consider the second part of the equation

IV
Appendix A

(A1.4)

Combining Equation A1.2 and A1.3 results in

which can be factorised to give

(A1.2)

V
 Analysis, design, optimisation and testing of gyroscopically stabilized platform

Appendix B

Design assessment

VI
Appendix B

Concept Selection Chart

Sub-system 1: Gyroscopes
Functional (geometry, motion, load paths, compatibility, control
Manufacturing, quality, life cycle (production, purchase, assembly, waste)

Develope further

Get information
Ergonomic, ecological, aesthetic & safety (user, environmental, appeal)
Concept No.

Can it be made to work (potential, confidence, enthusiasm)

Eliminate
Economics & timing (material, manufacturing, operational)

Score
Information (cooperation, expertise, experience)
Comments
P P P P P Pros - easy to assemble, simple machining, room for wiring
A1 P P P Cons - raises disc COM 8 P
Ideas - look at reducing weight
P O P P P P Pros - low COM, balanced design, easy to align with pivot point
A2 P Con - difficult to manufacture and assemble 5 P
Ideas
P P O P P P Pros - easy to mauufacutre, no balancing required
B1 P P Cons - extra components, difficult to assemble 7 P
Ideas
P P P P P P Pros - COM in line with motor COM, easy to assemble
B2 P P P Cons - flywheel must be well balanced 9 P
Ideas - look at accurate mounting solutions
P P P P O O Pros - gearing options, large flywheel mass
B3 P Cons - complex design, takes up a lot of space 3 P
Ideas
P P P P P P Pros - simple to manufacture, inexpensive
C1 P P P P Cons - fixed inertia, must be well balanced 10 P
Ideas - look at methods of manufacturing balanced wheel
P P O P P P Pros - promotes air flow, longer running times
C2 P Cons - reduced inertia, complex machining 5 P
Ideas
P P P P P P Pros - interchangable wheel,
C3 P Cons - difficult to dynamically balance, increased cost 7 P
Ideas

Key: ( P ) yes +1, ( O ) no -1, ( ) neutral, (?) not enough information

Figure B1 - Concept selection chart for gyroscope sub system

VII
 Analysis, design, optimisation and testing of gyroscopically stabilized platform

Concept Selection Chart

Sub-system 2: Disc
Functional (geometry, motion, load paths, compatibility, control
Manufacturing, quality, life cycle (production, purchase, assembly, waste)

Develope further

Get information
Ergonomic, ecological, aesthetic & safety (user, environmental, appeal)
Concept No.

Can it be made to work (potential, confidence, enthusiasm)

Eliminate
Economics & timing (material, manufacturing, operational)

Score
Information (cooperation, expertise, experience)
Comments
P P O P P P Pros - high strength, no assembly required
D1 P Cons - expensive, no room for developments/extra attachments 5 P
Ideas
P O P P P P Pros - rigid design, disc and cone and be machined individually
D2 P P P Cons - distortion from heat, welding must be done off site 7 P
Ideas
P P P P P P Pros - components can be machined seperately, adaptable design
D3 P P Cons - accurate machining required, strength could be an issue 9 P
Ideas - look at methods for reducing weight and lowering COM
P P P P P P Pros - accessible for charging, simple path for connecting cables
E1 P P Cons - negative impact on COM, limited space for securing in place 8 P
Ideas
P P P P P P Pros - lowers disc COM, aesthetics
E2 P P P Cons - diificult to assemble, reduces max disc tip angle 9 P
Ideas- investigate methods for securing in place
P P P P P P Pros - load paths, multiple mounting points,
F1 P P Cons - increased weight, high manufacturing cost, complex assembly 8 P
Ideas - consider accurate positioning method and weight reduction
P O P P P P Pros - lightweight, inexpensive, simple to manufacture
F2 P Cons - limited space for bearings, low strength, mounting options 5 P
Ideas
O P P P P P Pros - inexpensive, eliminate need for assembly
F3 P P Cons - no disassembly, must be accurately positioned 6 P
Ideas - can one leg be fabricated and one be assembled in place
P P P P P P Pros - accurate locating method, cheap to machine holes in disc
G1 P Cons - more complex assembly, difficult to align bearing surfaces 7 P
Ideas - develope for quick assembly, assemble before machining
P P P P P P Pros - quick to assemble, reduces disc weight, high accuracy
G2 Cons - expensive to machine slots, still requires fasteners 6 P
Ideas
P O O P P P Pros - allows for changes in design, simple to assemble, low cost
G3 P P Cons - machining time, does not align bearing surfaces accurately 4 P
Ideas

Key: ( P ) yes +1, ( O ) no -1, ( ) neutral, (?) not enough information

Figure B2 - Concept selection chart for disc sub system

VIII
Appendix B

Concept Selection Chart

Sub-system 3: External structure

Functional (geometry, motion, load paths, compatibility, control
Manufacturing, quality, life cycle (production, purchase, assembly, waste)

Develope further

Get information
Ergonomic, ecological, aesthetic & safety (user, environmental, appeal)
Concept No.

Can it be made to work (potential, confidence, enthusiasm)

Eliminate
Economics & timing (material, manufacturing, operational)

Score
Information (cooperation, expertise, experience)
Comments
P O P P P P Pros - pivot in all directions, easy to integrate into system
H1 P P P Cons - difficult to control and measure response, expensive 7 P
Ideas
P O P P P P Pros - cheap to manufacture, simple to measure restoring moment
H2 P P P Cons - only one plane to pivot in, heavy, will require testing frame 7 P
Ideas
P O P P P P Pros - inexpensive, excellent way to showcase design, low to ground
H3 P P P P Cons - difficult to verfiy size of torque produced by system 8 P
Ideas - consider materials and manufacturing method
P P P P P P Pros - height can be accurately set,
I1 P P P Cons - high manufacutre cost, could be difficult to adjust 9 P
Ideas - manufacture from aluminium, use coarse thread >M18
O P P P P P Pros - easy to adjust, simple to machine, low weight design
I2 P P Cons - must be machined and assembled accurately or will not work 6 P
Ideas
O P P P P P Pros - very simple to make and assemble, can be hollow
I3 Cons - no adjustability 4 P
Ideas

Key: ( P ) yes +1, ( O ) no -1, ( ) neutral, (?) not enough information

Figure B3 - Concept selection chart for external structure sub system

IX
 Analysis, design, optimisation and testing of gyroscopically stabilized platform

Concept Selection Chart

Sub-system 4: Disc drive mechanism

Functional (geometry, motion, load paths, compatibility, control
Manufacturing, quality, life cycle (production, purchase, assembly, waste)

Develope further

Get information
Ergonomic, ecological, aesthetic & safety (user, environmental, appeal)
Concept No.

Can it be made to work (potential, confidence, enthusiasm)

Eliminate
Economics & timing (material, manufacturing, operational)

Score
Information (cooperation, expertise, experience)
Comments
P P P P P O Pros - high torque, low profile, simple to control, small, inexpensive
J1 P P P P Cons - difficult to mount in place, need to test for load capacity' 8 P P
Ideas - further testing required
P P P P P P Pros - inline shaft arrangement, simple mount points, easy to control
J2 P Cons - large in size, length raises overall assembly COM 7 P
Ideas
P O P P P O Pros - very accurate control, easy to assemble,
J3 P P Con - high cost, complex control system required, large size needed 4 P
Ideas
P P P P P P Pros - simple to manufacture, low cost, compact, low weight
K1 P P Cons - only motor gear reduction, possible alignment issues 8 P
Ideas - can a coupling be used?
P O P P P P Pros - further increase in torque, high strength, reduced backlash
K2 P Cons - expensive, large increase in assembly weight, maintenance 5 P
Ideas
P O P P P P Pros - interchangeable motor pulley for varying gear ratio, high torque
K3 P Cons - cost of manufacture, complex assembly, torsioner required 5 P
Ideas
P P O P P P Pros - increased strength, reduced backlash, low cost
L1 P Cons - no disassembly, alignment, failure destroys components 5 P
Ideas
P P P P O P Pros - easy to assemble/disassemble, eliminates alignment issues
L2 P P P Cons - expensive, loosening, restricted velocity/torque 7 P
Ideas - investigate coupling options
P O P P P P Pros - acuurate alignment, easy to assemble, rigid connnection
M1 P P Cons - stress concentration, expensive to machine, difficult to modify 6 P
Ideas
P P P P P P Pros - simple disassebly/assembly, low cost, use off the shelf nut
M2 P P Cons - will loosen over time, extra components needed 8 P
Ideas - use fine thread > M20, washer to increase clamping force?

Key: ( P ) yes +1, ( O ) no -1, ( ) neutral, (?) not enough information

Figure B4 - Concept selection chart for disc drive mechanism sub system

X
Appendix B

Concept Selection Chart

Sub-system 5: Gimbal frame linkage

Functional (geometry, motion, load paths, compatibility, control
Manufacturing, quality, life cycle (production, purchase, assembly, waste)

Develope further

Get information
Ergonomic, ecological, aesthetic & safety (user, environmental, appeal)
Concept No.

Can it be made to work (potential, confidence, enthusiasm)

Eliminate
Economics & timing (material, manufacturing, operational)

Score
Information (cooperation, expertise, experience)
Comments
P O P P P P Pros - ensures equal angle pivot, aligns pivot axis,
N1 Cons - difficult to assemble, very expensive to manufacture gears 5 P
Ideas
P P P P P P Pros - maintains equal pivot angle, attach to gimbal frame shaft
N2 P Cons - must be rigid, hard to assemble, high cost for UJ's 7 P
Ideas
P P P P P Pros - lightweight, simple to assemble, low cost
N3 P P Cons - requires central shaft, side loads on bearing cause pinching 8 P
Ideas - look at making linkages adjustable, lengthen bearing
P P P P P P Pros - low cost, easily accessible components, lightweight
O1 Cons - poor under side loads, accurate shaft contact required 6 P
Ideas
P P P P P P Pros - lengthened contact area, cheap, easy to maintain
O2 Cons - lubrication needed, high friction, not ideal for sliding 6 P
Ideas - investigate more material options
P P P P P P Pros - lengthened contact area, high tolerance, smooth motion
O3 P P Cons - high cost, high tolerance shaft needed, bearing retention 8 P
Ideas - look at integrating shaft supplied with bearing as central shaft
P P O P P P Pros - rigid, simple to manufacture, lightweight, low cost
P1 P Cons - fixed length, difficult to assemble and align gimbal frames 5 P
Ideas
P P P P P P Pros - adjustable, simple to assemble, equal gimbal angles
P2 P P Cons - low rigidity could under constrain assembly 8 P
Ideas - consider including one rigid connection

Figure B5 - Concept selection chart for gimbal frame linkage sub system

XI
 Analysis, design, optimisation and testing of gyroscopically stabilized platform

Concept Selection Chart

Sub-system 6: Central pivot

Functional (geometry, motion, load paths, compatibility, control
Manufacturing, quality, life cycle (production, purchase, assembly, waste)

Develope further

Get information
Ergonomic, ecological, aesthetic & safety (user, environmental, appeal)
Concept No.

Can it be made to work (potential, confidence, enthusiasm)

Eliminate
Economics & timing (material, manufacturing, operational)

Score
Information (cooperation, expertise, experience)
Comments
P P P P O P Pros - low friction, simple to integrate into system
Q1 P Cons - not constant velocity, high cost, requires extra bearings 5 P
Ideas
O P P P O P Pros - only one bearing needed, low resistance to tipping of disc
Q2 P Cons - poor performance at angles > 5 °, expensive 3 P
Ideas
P P P P P O Pros - velocity is constant at all angles, cheap, can be machined
Q3 P P Cons - maintenance, extra components required to adapt into system 6 P
Ideas - look at machining outer housing to fit bearings

Key: ( P ) yes +1, ( O ) no -1, ( ) neutral, (?) not enough information

Figure B6 - Concept selection chart for central pivot sub system

XII
Appendix B

Conceptual Design Worksheet

Stable Platform System
Requirements Contributing factors Current status Required action

Good Marginal Poor Proceed Revise N/A

Overall geometry      
Motion of Parts      
Forces involved      
Functional Energy needed      
Material to be used      
Control system      
Information flow      

Operation      
Safety Human      
Environmental      

Qualtiy assurance      
Quality Quality control      
Reliability      

Production of components      
Purchase of components      
Manufacturing
Assembly      
Transport      

Design schedule      
Development schedule      
Timing
Production schedule      
Delivery schedule      

Marketing costs      
Design costs      
Economic Development costs      
Manufacturing costs      
Distribution costs      

User needs      
Ergonomic Ergonomic design      
Cybernetic design      

Material selection      
Ecological
Working fluid selection      

Customer appeal      
Asesthetic Fashion      
Future expectations      

Distribution      
Operation      
Life cycle
Maintenance      
Disposal      

Figure B7 - Conceptual design worksheet

XIII
 Analysis, design, optimisation and testing of gyroscopically stabilized platform

Embodiment Design Worksheet

Stable Platform System
Requirements Contributing factors Current status Required action

Good Marginal Poor Proceed Revise N/A

Overall geometry      
Motion of Parts      
Forces involved      
Functional Energy needed      
Material to be used      
Control system      
Information flow      

Operation      
Safety Human      
Environmental      

Qualtiy assurance      
Quality Quality control      
Reliability      

Production of components      
Purchase of components      
Manufacturing
Assembly      
Transport      

Design schedule      
Development schedule      
Timing
Production schedule      
Delivery schedule      

Marketing costs      
Design costs      
Economic Development costs      
Manufacturing costs      
Distribution costs      

User needs      
Ergonomic Ergonomic design      
Cybernetic design      

Material selection      
Ecological
Working fluid selection      

Customer appeal      
Asesthetic Fashion      
Future expectations      

Distribution      
Operation      
Life cycle
Maintenance      
Disposal      

Figure B8 - Embodiment design worksheet

XIV
Appendix B

Detailed Design Worksheet

Stable Platform System
Requirements Contributing factors Current status Required action

Good Marginal Poor Proceed Revise N/A

Overall geometry      
Motion of Parts      
Forces involved      
Functional Energy needed      
Material to be used      
Control system      
Information flow      

Operation      
Safety Human      
Environmental      

Qualtiy assurance      
Quality Quality control      
Reliability      

Production of components      
Purchase of components      
Manufacturing
Assembly      
Transport      

Design schedule      
Development schedule      
Timing
Production schedule      
Delivery schedule      

Marketing costs      
Design costs      
Economic Development costs      
Manufacturing costs      
Distribution costs      

User needs      
Ergonomic Ergonomic design      
Cybernetic design      

Material selection      
Ecological
Working fluid selection      

Customer appeal      
Asesthetic Fashion      
Future expectations      

Distribution      
Operation      
Life cycle
Maintenance      
Disposal      

Figure B9 - Detailed design worksheet

XV
 Analysis, design, optimisation and testing of gyroscopically stabilized platform

Appendix C

Manufacturing drawings

XVI
Appendix C

C1 Prototype B Bill of Materials

The following set of tables outline the bill of materials relating to Prototype B divided

into the sub systems that make up the overall system.

Prototype B Final Design (SP1-01-001)

Part Number Description Part/Assembly Material No. Required

SP2-01-001 Gyroscopes Assembly N/A 4

SP2-02-001 Disc Assembly N/A 1

SP2-03-001 External Structure Assembly N/A 1

SP2-04-001 Disc Drive Mechanism Assembly N/A 1

SP2-05-001 Gimbal Frame Linkage Assembly N/A 1

SP2-06-001 Central Pivot Assembly N/A 1

Table C1 - Prototype B final design bill of materials

Gyroscopes (SP2-01-001)

Part Number Description Part/Assembly Material No. Required

SP2-01-002 Gimbal frame Assembly N/A 1

SP2-01-003 Lightweight gimbal frame Part Mild Steel 1

SP2-01-004 Gimbal frame shaft Part 4140 2

SP2-01-005 Flywheel Part 4140 1

SP2-01-006 Gimbal frame contact arm Part 4140 1

SP2-01-007 Contact arm end cap Part 5083 Aluminium 1

SP2-01-008 Ø20mm ID, Ø32mm OD deep groove bearing Part N/A 1

SP2-01-009 MP160 Brushless DC Motor Part N/A 1

- M16 Nut - N/A 1

- M6 x 15 Countersunk screw - N/A 1

- M4 x 15 Cap screw - N/A 12

Table C2 - Prototype B gyroscopes bill of materials

XVII
 Analysis, design, optimisation and testing of gyroscopically stabilized platform

Disc (SP2-02-001)

Part Number Description Part/Assembly Material No. Required

SP2-02-002 Disc plate Part 7075 Aluminium 1

SP2-02-003 Centre cone section Part 7075 Aluminium 1

SP2-02-004 Gimbal frame leg Part 7075 Aluminium 1

SP2-02-005 Gimbal frame leg - Right Part 7075 Aluminium 1

SP2-02-006 Spacer washer Part 7075 Aluminium 4

SP2-02-007 22.2V 2200mAh 6 Cell Li-Po Battery Part N/A 4

SP2-02-008 70A HV ESC Part N/A 4

SP2-02-009 Ø12mm ID, Ø21mm OD deep groove bearing Part N/A 8

- M3 x 10 Cap screw - N/A 16

- M8 x 20 Cap screw - N/A 4

- M6 x 20 Cap screw - N/A 16

- Ø4mm x 20 Dowel pin - N/A 16

Table C3 - Prototype B disc bill of materials

External Structure (SP2-03-001)

Part Number Description Part/Assembly Material No. Required

SP2-03-002 Tilt frame shaft Part 5083 Aluminium 1

SP2-03-003 Main shaft end cap Part 5083 Aluminium 2

SP2-03-004 Outer ring leg spacer Part 7075 Aluminium 2

SP2-03-005 Leg mount plate Part 7075 Aluminium 2

SP2-03-006 Outer ring mount legs Part 5083 Aluminium 4

SP2-03-007 Outer contact ring Part 7075 Aluminium 1

SP2-03-008 Tilt arm Part 7075 Aluminium 1

- M6 x 12 Cap screw - N/A 2

- M4 x 12 Cap screw - N/A 16

- M12 x 75 Cap screw - N/A 2

- M20 Nut - N/A 8

Table C4 - Prototype B external structure bill of materials

XVIII
Appendix C

Disc Drive Mechanism (SP2-04-001)

Part Number Description Part/Assembly Material No. Required

SP2-04-002 Bottom threaded structure connection Part 5083 Aluminium 1

SP2-04-003 Bearing housing threaded boss Part 5083 Aluminium 1

SP2-04-004 Bottom connecting boss Part 5083 Aluminium 1

SP2-04-005 Boss mount block Part 7075 Aluminium 1

SP2-04-006 Bearing housing Assembly N/A 1

SP2-04-007 Top bearing housing section Part 5083 Aluminium 1

SP2-04-008 Centre pillar Part 5083 Aluminium 1

SP2-04-009 Centre pillar mount Part 7075 Aluminium 1

SP2-04-010 Central drive shaft Assembly N/A 1

SP2-04-011 Drive shaft Part 4140 Steel 1

SP2-04-012 Drive shaft coupling Part 4140 Steel 1

- Ø4mm x 20 Dowel pin - N/A 1

- M4 x 20 Countersunk screw - N/A 3

SP2-04-013 24V Worm drive DC motor Part N/A 1

- Ø6mm x 20 Dowel pin - N/A 1

- Ø4mm x 20 Dowel pin - N/A 1

SP2-04-014 Ø20mm ID, Ø32mm OD deep groove bearing Part N/A 1

SP2-04-015 Ø40mm ID, Ø52mm OD deep groove bearing Part N/A 1

Table C5 - Prototype B disc drive mechanism bill of materials

XIX
 Analysis, design, optimisation and testing of gyroscopically stabilized platform

Gimbal Frame Linkage (SP2-05-001)

Part Number Description Part/Assembly Material No. Required

SP2-05-002 Overhead linear slide Assembly N/A 1

SP2-05-003 Overhead connecting arm Part 7075 Aluminium 1

SP2-05-004 Linear bearing spacer Part 5083 Aluminium 1

SP2-05-005 Ø16 x 86mm Linear bearing Part N/A 1

SP2-05-006 Ø26mm circlip Part N/A 2

SP2-05-007 Connecting rod Part 7075 Aluminium 2

SP2-05-008 Universal joint clamping coupling Part N/A 1

SP2-05-009 Ø16mm Universal joint Part Mild Steel 4

- M10 Half nut - N/A 4

- M6 x 30 Cap screw - N/A 4

- M5 x 25 Cap screw - N/A 4

- M5 Nyloc nut - N/A 4

Table C6 - Prototype B gimbal frame linkage bill of materials

Central Pivot (SP2-06-001)

Part Number Description Part/Assembly Material No. Required

SP2-06-002 Universal joint coupling Part 4140 Steel 1

SP2-06-003 Main shaft Part 4140 Steel 1

SP2-06-004 Ø32mm Universal Joint Part Mild Steel 1

- M24 half nut - N/A 1

Table C7 - Prototype B central pivot bill of materials

XX
Appendix C

Figure C8 - Prototype B final design engineering drawing

XXI
 Analysis, design, optimisation and testing of gyroscopically stabilized platform

Figure C9 - Prototype B gyroscopes engineering drawing

XXII
Appendix C

Figure C10 - Prototype B disc engineering drawing

XXIII
 Analysis, design, optimisation and testing of gyroscopically stabilized platform

Figure C11 - Prototype B external structure engineering drawing

XXIV
Appendix C

Figure C12 - Prototype B disc drive mechanism engineering drawing

XXV
 Analysis, design, optimisation and testing of gyroscopically stabilized platform

Figure C13 - Prototype B gimbal frame linkage engineering drawing

XXVI
Appendix C

Figure C14 - Prototype B central pivot engineering drawing

XXVII
 Analysis, design, optimisation and testing of gyroscopically stabilized platform

Appendix D

Matlab code

XXVIII
Appendix D

D1 Homogeneous system

The following code relates to the response of the homogeneous system when the

applicable physical parameters are substituted into the relevant constants

clear all
clc

I_z_d %inertia of the disc in the z direction, kgm^2

I %rotational inertia of one gyroscope, kgm^2

M_s %mass of external structure, kg

h_s %distance from the reference pivot point to the COM
of external structure, m
h_d %distance from the reference pivot point to the
disc pivot, m
g %acceleration due to gravity, ms^-2
M_g=1.94032 %mass of one gyroscope, kg
phi_dot %angular velocity of the gyroscopes, rads^-1
w_0 %angular velocity of disc, rads^-1
r_g %distance from gyro pivot point to contact point, m
r_d %distance from disc centre axis to gyro pivot
point, m

M_d_and_4M_g %mass of disc and gyroscope assembly, kg

mu=0.5; %coefficient of friction in drive motor

C_phi_g=4*I*phi_dot;
C=4*I*(phi_dot*((r_g+r_d)/r_g));

A=(I_z_d+4*M_g*r_d^2+4*I);
B=(M_s*h_s^2+(M_d_and_4M_g)*h_d^2+8*I);
D=(M_s*h_s+((M_d_and_4M_g)*h_d))*g;

if mu*D>C*w_0*C_phi_g;
display('mu*D>C*w_0*C_phi_g')
end

if C_phi_g^2>A*D;
display('C_phi_g^2>A*D')
end

a=A*B;
b=-mu*B;
c=-(A*D-C_phi_g^2);
d=mu*D-C*w_0*C_phi_g;

discriminant=18*a*b*c*d-4*(b^3)*d+(b^2)*(c^2)-4*a*(c^3)-27*(a^2)*(d^2);

if discriminant>0;
display('discriminant>0')
end

XXIX
 Analysis, design, optimisation and testing of gyroscopically stabilized platform

delta_1=2*b^3-9*a*b*c+27*(a^2)*d;
delta_0=b^2-3*a*c;

C_eqn=((delta_1+sqrt((delta_1^2)-4*(delta_0^3)))/2)^1/3;

u_1=1;
u_2=(-1+1i*sqrt(3))/2;
u_3=(-1-1i*sqrt(3))/2;

lamda1=-(1/3*a)*(b+u_1*C_eqn+(delta_0/(u_1*C_eqn)));
lamda2=-(1/3*a)*(b+u_2*C_eqn+(delta_0/(u_2*C_eqn)));
lamda3=-(1/3*a)*(b+u_3*C_eqn+(delta_0/(u_3*C_eqn)));

beta=lamda1
alpha=real(lamda2)
delta=imag(lamda2)

root1=(C_phi_g*lamda2-C*w_0)/(A*lamda2^2-mu*lamda2)
root2=(C_phi_g*lamda3-C*w_0)/(A*lamda3^2-mu*lamda3)

%for phi_dot

a_phi=real(root1);
d_phi=imag(root1);

%for theta_dot

a_theta=real(root2);
d_theta=imag(root2);

r=sqrt((abs(a_theta))^2+(abs(d_theta))^2);
theta=atan(abs(d_theta)/abs(a_theta));

M=(root1+root2)/2;
N=(root1-root2)/2*1i;

t=-1000:0.001:-600;
delta_phi=exp(a_phi.*t).*(M*cos(d_phi.*t)+N*sin(d_phi.*t));
figure(1)
delta_theta=r*exp(a_phi.*t).*(M*cos(d_phi.*t+theta)+N*sin(d_phi.*t+theta));
subplot(2,1,1),plot(t,delta_phi,'b');
subplot(2,1,2),plot(t,delta_theta,'r');

D2 Driven system

The following code relates to the response of the driven system when the applicable

physical parameters are substituted into the relevant constants

clear all
clc

XXX
Appendix D

I_z_d %inertia of the disc in the z direction, kgm^2

I %rotational inertia of one gyroscope, kgm^2

M_s %mass of external structure, kg

h_s %distance from the reference pivot point to the COM
of external structure, m
h_d %distance from the reference pivot point to the
disc pivot, m
g %acceleration due to gravity, ms^-2
M_g=1.94032 %mass of one gyroscope, kg
phi_dot %angular velocity of the gyroscopes, rads^-1
w_0 %angular velocity of disc, rads^-1
r_g %distance from gyro pivot point to contact point, m
r_d %distance from disc centre axis to gyro pivot
point, m

M_d_and_4M_g %mass of disc and gyroscope assembly, kg

mu=0.5; %coefficient of friction in drive motor

C_phi_g=4*I*phi_dot;
C=4*I*(phi_dot*((r_g+r_d)/r_g));

A=(I_z_d+4*M_g*r_d^2+4*I);
B=(M_s*h_s^2+(M_d_and_4M_g)*h_d^2+8*I);
D=(M_s*h_s+((M_d_and_4M_g)*h_d))*g;

if mu*D>C*w_0*C_phi_g;
display('mu*D>C*w_0*C_phi_g')
end

if C_phi_g^2<A*D;
display('C_phi_g^2<A*D')
end

a=A*B;
b=-mu*B;
c=-(A*D-C_phi_g^2);
d=mu*D-C*w_0*C_phi_g;

discriminant=18*a*b*c*d-4*(b^3)*d+(b^2)*(c^2)-4*a*(c^3)-27*(a^2)*(d^2);

if discriminant>0;
display('discriminant>0')
end

delta_1=2*b^3-9*a*b*c+27*(a^2)*d;
delta_0=b^2-3*a*c;

C_eqn=((delta_1+sqrt((delta_1^2)-4*(delta_0^3)))/2)^1/3;

u_1=1;
u_2=(-1+1i*sqrt(3))/2;
u_3=(-1-1i*sqrt(3))/2;

lamda1=-(1/(3*a))*(b+u_1*C_eqn+(delta_0/(u_1*C_eqn)));
lamda2=-(1/(3*a))*(b+u_2*C_eqn+(delta_0/(u_2*C_eqn)));

XXXI
 Analysis, design, optimisation and testing of gyroscopically stabilized platform

lamda3=-(1/(3*a))*(b+u_3*C_eqn+(delta_0/(u_3*C_eqn)));

beta=lamda1
alpha=real(lamda3)
delta=imag(lamda3)

F=30; %Force within motor during oscillations, N

gamma=5;

phi_d_1=-F*(-
B*gamma^2+D)/((A*gamma^2+1i*mu*gamma)*(B*gamma^2+D)+(C_phi_g*1i*gamma-
C*w_0))
theta_s_1=-
1i*F*C_phi_g*gamma/((A*gamma^2+1i*mu*gamma)*(B*gamma^2+D)+(C_phi_g*1i*gamma
-C*w_0))

a_phi=abs(real(phi_d_1));
b_phi=abs(imag(phi_d_1));

c_theta=abs(real(theta_s_1));
d_theta=abs(imag(theta_s_1));

b_d_1=sqrt((a_phi)^2+(b_phi)^2);
delta_phi_d=atan((b_phi)/(a_phi));

b_s_1=sqrt((c_theta)^2+(d_theta)^2);
delta_theta_s=atan((d_theta)/(c_theta));

t=0:0.01:20;
delta_phi=b_d_1*cos(gamma.*t+delta_phi_d);
delta_theta=b_s_1*cos(gamma.*t+delta_theta_s);

% figure(1)
% subplot(2,1,1),plot(t,delta_phi,'b');
% subplot(2,1,2),plot(t,delta_theta,'r');
plot(t,delta_phi,'b',t,delta_theta,'r')

[peak,peak_ind]=max(delta_phi);
peak_time=t(peak_ind);

[trough,trough_ind]=min(delta_phi);
trough_time=t(trough_ind);

Period_seconds_phi=(peak_time-trough_time)*2 %period of oscillations, s

Period_Hz=1/Period_seconds_phi;

[peak2,peak_ind2]=max(delta_theta);
peak_time2=t(peak_ind2);

[trough2,trough_ind2]=min(delta_theta);
trough_time2=t(trough_ind2);

Period_seconds_theta=(peak_time2-trough_time2)*-2 %period of
oscillations, s
Period_Hz_theta=1/Period_seconds_theta;

XXXII
Appendix E

Appendix E

Slip ring wiring diagram

XXXIII
 Analysis, design, optimisation and testing of gyroscopically stabilized platform

The following figure relates to the wiring arrangement used in the development of the

slip ring design that precessed the disc when the outer contact arms and outer ring

came in contact (Section 7.3.10).

Contact Arm

Outer Ring

Slip Ring Assembly

- +
DC Motor

5 4 5 4
6 3 6 3

Relay
Switches
- +
7 2 7 2
Power Supply
8 1 8 1

Figure E1 – Slip ring wiring diagram

XXXIV
Appendix F

Appendix F

Townsend’s Platform Concept

Sketches

XXXV
 Analysis, design, optimisation and testing of gyroscopically stabilized platform

The following appendix present the conceptual sketches produced by Townsend

(1983) for the proposed configuration of the gyroscopically stabilized platform.

Solid disc Gyroscopes

interconnected
by a mechanism

Outer axle

Spherical
bearing pivot
point

Gyroscope

Gyroscope outer
axle Gimbal pivot point

Annular ring
Base plate

Solid cylindrical
axle

Figure F1 – Gyroscopically stabilized platform schematic sketch from Townsend (1983)

Figure F2 – Motion of components that comprise the system from Townsend (1983)

XXXVI
Appendix F

Figure F3 – Reactions of system after an external torque is applied to the system from

Townsend (1983)

Figure F4 – Stabilizer system mounted upon external structure from Townsend (1983)

XXXVII
 Analysis, design, optimisation and testing of gyroscopically stabilized platform

Appendix G

Operations Manual for Prototype B

XXXVIII
Appendix G

CONFIDENTIAL

Operations Manual for Prototype B

Written by Ben Redwood

For use by Technix Industries Limited

XXXIX
 Analysis, design, optimisation and testing of gyroscopically stabilized platform

G1 Introduction

Prototype B is a gyroscopically stabilized platform designed, manufactured and

tested by Ben Redwood as part of a PhD in Mechanical Engineering at the University

of Canterbury, funded by Technix Industries Limited.

The purpose of this manual is to show the assembly methods for constructing

Prototype B and the operational procedures required to achieve oscillatory stabilizing

behaviour.

This manual will cover:

 The procedure required to assemble each of the 6 sub-systems that comprise

Prototype B together to form the overall gyroscopically stabilized platform.

 A bill of materials and assembly drawings of each of the individual sub-

systems of Prototype B.

 The connections and arrangement of the power systems that drive Prototype

B and the procedures that must be followed to operate it.

 The critical safety issues that must be addressed when assembling and

operating Prototype B.

XL
Appendix G

G2 Assembly of Overall System

Figure G1 – Prototype B (SP1-01-001)

This section presents how to assemble each of the 6 subsystems that comprise

Prototype B to form the overall gyroscopically stabilized platform. The assembly of

each of the 6 sub-systems is shown in section G3 of this manual. The 6 sub-systems

and their associated part numbers that Prototype B consists of are:

i) External structure (SP2-03-001)

ii) Disc Drive Mechanism (SP2-04-001)

iii) Central Pivot (SP2-06-001)

iv) Disc (SP2-02-001)

v) Gyroscopes (SP2-01-001)

vi) Gimbal Frame Linkage (SP2-05-001)

XLI
 Analysis, design, optimisation and testing of gyroscopically stabilized platform

G2.1 Tools required

The following tools are needed for the assembly of Prototype B:

 Adjustable spanners to suit M10 – M40 bolts and nuts

 Allen keys to suit M4, M5, M6, and M8 cap screws

 10m ring spanner

 Rubber mallet

G2.2 Assembly procedure

This section will assume that Prototype B will be assembled on a flat and level

surface.

Step 1 – Securing external structure frame

Ensure the external structure mounting fame (SP2-03-009) is firmly secured to the

floor. This will aid in reducing vibrations and significantly reduce the noise of the

system during operation.

Figure G2 - External structure mount frame

XLII
 Appendix G

Step 2 – Attaching external structure to external structure frame

Attach the external structure to the mount frame via four M16 x 75mm bolts, four

M16 nuts and the two Ø35mm pillow blocks on the external structure tilt shaft (SP2-

03-002). The mount holes of the pillow blocks align with the four holes drilled in the

external structure mount frame (Figure G3).

External structure tilt

arm

M16 x 75mm bolt

M16 nut

Figure G3 – External structure attaching to mount frame

The holes in the mount frame are slotted to aid in assembly. It is important that the

external structure tilt frame shaft (SP2-03-002) is square relative to the mount frame.

This will ensure more accurate readings when measuring the magnitude of the

moment produced by Prototype B. Note that the external structure tilt arm (SP2-03-

008) is currently not connected to the external structure. The assembly of the disc

drive mechanism will ensure it is secured in place.

XLIII
 Analysis, design, optimisation and testing of gyroscopically stabilized platform

Step 3 – Attaching disc drive mechanism to external structure

Align the M20 bottom threaded structure connection (SP2-04-002) at the bottom of

the disc drive mechanism with the M20 threaded hole in the centre of the external

structure tilt shaft (SP2-03-002). It is critical that the external structures tilt arm

(Figure G4) is perpendicular to the tilt frame shaft. This should be checked with a

square before fully securing the disc dive mechanism in position.

It is safe to use the 24V DC drive motor (SP2-04-013) to gain more leverage when

tightening down the drive mechanism to the external structure.

24V DC motor

External structure tilt arm

must be perpendicular to
the tilt frame shaft

Figure G4 – Securing the disc drive mechanism to the external structure

Step 4 – Attaching central pivot to disc drive mechanism

The central pivot (SP2-06-001) can now be attached to the disc drive mechanism.

An M12 threaded section of the main drive shaft (SP2-04-010) can be seen

protruding from the top of the disc drive mechanism between two bearings. This
XLIV
Appendix G

threaded shaft section is used to secure the central pivot to the disc drive

mechanism.

M12 threaded section

Figure G5 – Central pivot attaching to disc drive mechanism

The universal joint coupling (SP2-06-002) has been machined to a high tolerance to

aid in the assembly of it with the 2 bearings. The central pivot assembly should be

wound down upon the disc drive mechanism drive shaft as far as it will go. It is safe

to tighten the thread by using the universal joint (SP2-06-004) for leverage (a force

should not be applied to the main shaft (SP2-06-003) to tighten this

connection).

Step 5 – Securing gyroscope assemblies to disc

The gyroscope assemblies (SP2-01-001) are assembled onto the disc (SP2-02-001)

(Note that this is a separate assembly that will be assembled into the overall system

later).

XLV
 Analysis, design, optimisation and testing of gyroscopically stabilized platform

The top of the disc has a large number of holes to suit sixteen Ø4mm dowel pins and

sixteen Ø6mm clearance holes for M6 cap screws. These correlate to holes found in

the bottom of the gyroscope assemblies mount legs (SP2-01-010 & SP2-01-011)

(Figure G6).

Corresponding holes

patterns

Figure G6 – Disc and gyroscopes mount hole patterns

The gyroscopes are secured to the disc by two M6 x 20mm cap screws and two

4mm dowel pins per leg. The dowel pins are first placed in the gyroscope mount

legs and aligned with the corresponding holes in the disc. The cap screws are then

inserted from the bottom of the disc up into the corresponding threaded hole of the

gyroscope mount legs and tightened, securing the gyroscopes in place (Figure G7).

XLVI
Appendix G

Ø4mm dowel pin

M6 x 25mm cap

screw

Figure G7 – Gyroscope assembled onto disc

The above step will need to be repeated for all four of the gyroscope assemblies.

Step 6 – Attaching disc/gyroscope assembly to central pivot

Once the gyroscopes are secured in place upon the disc the whole disc/gyroscopes

assembly must be assembled into the overall system.

The M24 half nut attached to the central pivot assembly (SP2-06-001) must first be

removed (Figure G8). This is used to tighten down upon the disc assembly securing

it to the top of the universal joint shoulder (Figure G9).

XLVII
 Analysis, design, optimisation and testing of gyroscopically stabilized platform

M24 half nut

Figure G8 – M24 nut used to secure disc/gyro assembly

M24 half nut

Figure G9 – Disc/gyro assembly secured to central pivot

XLVIII
Appendix G

This is one of the more complicated steps in the assembly of Prototype B and it is

recommended that one person holds the central pivot main shaft (SP2-06-003)

upright as another person lowers the disc/gyroscopes assembly over the shaft until it

rests on the universal joint shoulder. The M24 half nut is then slid over the central

pivot main shaft and tightened down as tight as possible securing the

disc/gyroscopes assembly to the rest of the system.

Step 7 – Attaching gimbal frame linkage to gyroscope gimbal frame

The next step in the assembly of Prototype B involves attaching the gimbal frame

connection (SP2-05-001) to the gimbal frame shafts (SP2-01-002). This process is

completed in several steps.

Firstly, the machined universal joints (SP2-05-008) are screwed onto the gimbal

frame shafts (SP2-01-004). The joints have been machined so that once they are

10mm from the end of the gimbal frame legs (SP2-01-010 & SP2-01-011) the slot

machined in them is vertical (Figure G10). An M10 half nut is then tightened up

against the universal joints to lock them in position. This step is repeated on the

opposite side of the assembly for the other diametrically opposite gyroscope pair.

XLIX
 Analysis, design, optimisation and testing of gyroscopically stabilized platform

M10 half
nut

Universal joint
with slot
vertical

10mm

Figure G10 – Location of universal joints on gimbal frame shafts

Once the universal joints have been correctly positioned and locked in place the

universal joint clamping coupling (SP2-05-007) is placed over the top (Figure G11)

Again, this next step is repeated on both sides of the assembly.

The clamp consist of two sections; a top section that connects to the gimbal frame

linkage connecting arm (SP2-05-006); and a bottom section that contains two tapped

M6 holes that secure the top and bottom sections together.

L
 Appendix G

M6 x 30mm
cap screw

Top clamp
section

Bottom clamp
section

Figure G11 - Universal joint clamping coupling

The bottom section is held in place under the universal joint and the top section is

placed over the top of the universal joint. Two M6 x 30mm cap screws are then used

to clamp the two sections together (while also passing through the universal joint

vertical slots, aligning them with the clamping sections). It is critical that one of the

universal joint clamping couplings points away from the centre of the system,

and one points to the centre (to match the diametrically opposite pairing of the

gyroscopes). The example shown in Figure G11 demonstrates a clamping coupling

pointing towards the centre of system. See Figure G13 for the example of an

assembled clamping coupling pointing away from the centre of the system.

LI
 Analysis, design, optimisation and testing of gyroscopically stabilized platform

The overhead liner slide assembly (SP2-05-002) is now slid over the central pivot

main shaft (SP2-06-003) as shown in Figure G12. Smooth motion of the linear slide

assembly over the main shaft with no pinching or interference should occur. It is

recommended this motion is checked before proceeding as any resistance or

interference will have a large impact on the performance of the system during the

stabilization process.

Figure G12 – Linear slide assembly into overall system

LII
 Appendix G

The final stage in the assembly of Prototype B is the attachment of the gimbal frame

linkage connecting arms (SP2-05-006). The arms connect to the linear slide

assembly and the universal joint clamping couplings via two M5 x 25mm cap screws

and two M5 nyloc nuts per arm (Figure G13).

The overhead linear slide and gyroscope assemblies will need to be manipulated

into the desired position in order to secure the connecting arms into the desired

location. This step will also need to be repeated on the opposite side of the system.

M5 Nyloc nut

M5 x 25mm
cap screw

Connecting
arm

Figure G13 – Attaching connecting arms to clamping coupling and overhead linear slide

LIII
 Analysis, design, optimisation and testing of gyroscopically stabilized platform

The nyloc nuts must not be tightened up against any surfaces. This will ensure the

joints where they are included are free to move with no resistance.

G2.3 Conclusion of Prototype B assembly

Prototype B should now be completely assembled. It is recommended that all joints,

connections, nuts, bolts and connections are secure and tight before operating the

machine and attempting to achieve stabilization.

It is also recommended that all wires and cables are either cable tied to a surface via

the available holes and cavities on the assembly or taped down to avoid any

catching or tangling from occurring during operation of the machine.

LIV
Appendix G

G3 Assembly of Prototype B Sub-systems

The following section includes the assembly diagrams and bill of materials for each

of the six sub-systems that form Prototype B. The 6 subsystems are:

 Gyroscopes (SP2-01-001)

 Disc (SP2-02-001)

 External structure (SP2-03-001)

 Disc Drive Mechanism (SP2-04-001)

 Gimbal Frame Linkage (SP2-05-001)

 Central Pivot (SP2-06-001)

The layout of this section will comprise of an assembly drawing of each sub-system

with part balloons that relate to a bill of materials of that sub-system on the following

page.

G3.1 Tools required

The following tools will be needed for the assembly of each of the Prototype B

subsystems:

i) Adjustable spanners to suit M10 – M40 bolts and nuts

ii) Allen keys to suit M3, M4, M5, M6, and M8 cap screws

iii) 10m ring spanner

iv) Can of CRC

v) Velcro tape

vi) Duct tape

LV
 Analysis, design, optimisation and testing of gyroscopically stabilized platform

G3.2 Gyroscopes

The following section presents an exploded view of the gyroscopes and the

associated bill of materials. Note it is critical when assembling the DC brushless

motor into the gimbal frame that the motor power cables point down and to the left

(when looking from the front of the assembly).

9
1
14

7 2

10
3

11

12 13 14
15
5
16

Figure G14 – Gyroscopes (SP2-01-001)

LVI
Appendix G

Table G1 – Bill of materials for gyroscopes relating to Figure G14

Part No. Description Part/Assembly Material No. Required

1 SP2-01-002 Gimbal frame Assembly N/A 1

SP2-01-003 Lightweight gimbal frame Part Mild Steel 1

SP2-01-004 Gimbal frame shaft Part 4140 2

2 SP2-01-005 Flywheel Part 4140 1

3 SP2-01-006 Gimbal frame contact arm Part 4140 1

4 SP2-01-007 Contact arm end cap Part 5083 Aluminium 1

5 SP2-01-008 Ø20mm ID, Ø32mm OD deep groove bearing Part N/A 1

6 SP2-01-009 MP160 Brushless DC Motor Part N/A 1

7 SP2-01-010 Gimbal frame leg Part 7075 Aluminium 1

8 SP2-01-011 Gimbal frame leg - Right Part 7075 Aluminium 1

9 SP2-01-013 Ø12mm ID, Ø21mm OD deep groove bearing Part N/A 8

10 SP2-01-014 Spacer washer Part 7075 Aluminium 4

11 - M3 x 10 cap screw - N/A 16

12 - M6 x 20 cap screw - N/A 16

13 - Ø4mm x 20 dowel pin - N/A 16

14 - M16 nut - N/A 1

15 - M6 x 15 countersunk screw - N/A 1

16 - M4 x 15 cap screw - N/A 12

LVII
 Analysis, design, optimisation and testing of gyroscopically stabilized platform

G3.3 Disc

The following section presents an exploded view of the disc and the associated bill of

materials. Note that the Li-Po batteries (3) are secured to the disc in the designated

cavities via Velcro tape.

Figure G15 - Disc

LVIII
Appendix G

Table G2 – Bill of materials for disc relating to Figure G15

Part No. Description Part/Assembly Material No. Required

1 SP2-02-002 Disc plate Part 7075 Aluminium 1

2 SP2-02-003 Centre cone section Part 7075 Aluminium 1

3 SP2-02-004 22.2V 2200mAh 6 cell Li-Po battery Part N/A 4

4 - M8 x 20 cap screw - N/A 4

LIX
 Analysis, design, optimisation and testing of gyroscopically stabilized platform

3.4 External structure

The following section presents an exploded view of the external structure and the

associated bill of materials. The external structure mount frame and associated

fasteners are not included in this assembly. For information regarding these

components see Step 1 and 2 of section G2.2.

5 10

12

11
4

2
3

8
9

Figure G16 – External Structure

LX
Appendix G

Table G3 – Bill of materials for external structure relating to Figure G16

Part No. Description Part/Assembly Material No. Required

1 SP2-03-002 Tilt frame shaft Part 5083 Aluminium 1

2 SP2-03-003 Main shaft end cap Part 5083 Aluminium 2

3 SP2-03-004 Outer ring leg spacer Part 7075 Aluminium 2

4 SP2-03-005 Leg mount plate Part 7075 Aluminium 2

5 SP2-03-006 Outer ring mount legs Part 5083 Aluminium 4

6 SP2-03-007 Outer contact ring Part 7075 Aluminium 1

7 SP2-03-008 Tilt arm Part 7075 Aluminium 1

8 - Ø35mm Pillow Blocks - N/A 2

9 - M6 x 12 cap screw - N/A 2

10 - M4 x 12 cap screw - N/A 16

11 - M12 x 75 bolt - N/A 2

12 - M20 nut - N/A 8

LXI
 Analysis, design, optimisation and testing of gyroscopically stabilized platform

G3.5 Disc drive mechanism

The following section presents an exploded view of the disc drive mechanism and

the associated bill of materials.

12

11

3
2

1 10

Figure G17 – Disc drive mechanism

LXII
Appendix G

Table G4 – Bill of materials for disc drive mechanism relating to Figure G17

Part No. Description Part/Assembly Material No. Required

1 SP2-04-002 Bottom threaded structure connection Part 5083 Aluminium 1

2 SP2-04-003 Bearing housing threaded boss Part 5083 Aluminium 1

3 SP2-04-004 Bottom connecting boss Part 5083 Aluminium 1

4 SP2-04-005 Boss mount block Part 7075 Aluminium 1

5 SP2-04-006 Bearing housing Assembly N/A 1

SP2-04-007 Top bearing housing section Part 5083 Aluminium 1

SP2-04-008 Centre pillar Part 5083 Aluminium 1

SP2-04-009 Centre pillar mount Part 7075 Aluminium 1

6 SP2-04-010 Central drive shaft Assembly N/A 1

SP2-04-011 Drive shaft Part 4140 Steel 1

SP2-04-012 Drive shaft coupling Part 4140 Steel 1

- Ø4mm x 20 dowel pin - N/A 1

7 SP2-04-013 24V Worm drive DC motor Part N/A 1

8 SP2-04-014 Ø20mm ID, Ø32mm OD deep groove bearing Part N/A 1

9 SP2-04-015 Ø40mm ID, Ø52mm OD deep groove bearing Part N/A 1

10 - M4 x 20 countersunk screw - N/A 3

11 - Ø6mm x 20 dowel pin - N/A 2

12 - Ø4mm x 20 dowel pin - N/A 1

LXIII
 Analysis, design, optimisation and testing of gyroscopically stabilized platform

G3.6 Gimbal frame linkage

The following section presents an exploded view of the gimbal frame linkage and the

associated bill of materials. Only the overhead linear slide assembly will be shown.

For the full assembly of all parts relating to the gimbal frame linkage see Step 7 of

Section G2.2.

Figure G18 – Gimbal frame linkage

LXIV
Appendix G

Table G5 – Bill of materials for gimbal frame linkage relating to Figure G18

Part No. Description Part/Assembly Material No. Required

SP2-05-002 Overhead linear slide Assembly N/A 1

1 SP2-05-003 Overhead connecting arm Part 7075 Aluminium 1

2 SP2-05-004 Linear bearing spacer Part 5083 Aluminium 1

3 SP2-05-005 Ø16 x 86mm Linear bearing Part N/A 1

4 - Ø26mm circlip Part N/A 2

LXV
 Analysis, design, optimisation and testing of gyroscopically stabilized platform

G3.7 Central pivot

The following section presents an exploded view of the central pivot and the

associated bill of materials.

Figure G19 – Central pivot

LXVI
Appendix G

Table G6 – Bill of materials for central pivot relating to Figure G19

Part No. Description Part/Assembly Material No. Required

1 SP2-06-002 Universal joint coupling Part 4140 Steel 1

2 SP2-06-003 Main shaft Part 4140 Steel 1

3 SP2-06-004 Ø32mm Universal Joint Part Mild Steel 1

4 - M24 half nut - N/A 1

G3.8 Conclusion of sub-systems assembly

This section has presented the assembly diagrams and bill of materials relating to

the assembly of the sub-systems that comprise Prototype B.

Before assembling the sub-systems together to form the overall system it is

recommended that all fasteners and connections are shown to be rigid and tight

(where applicable).

LXVII
 Analysis, design, optimisation and testing of gyroscopically stabilized platform

G4 Operational Procedure for Prototype B

The following section outlines the testing procedures that will result in Prototype B

exhibiting stabilizing oscillatory behaviour. It should be noted that the values stated

in this section relating to the settings on various power supplies are obtained from

extensive testing of the system. It is recommended the user varies and adjusts these

values to gain a better understanding of the performance of the system. This may

also be required to obtain the desired response from Prototype B.

G4.1 Power supplies and associated components

Prototype B uses four power supplies. Each power supply has a set of associated

components. The purpose of this section is to familiarise the user with each of the

power arrangements. Table G7 outlines each of the power supplies and the

components they relate to.

Table G7 – Power supplies and associated components

Power Supply Number Function Associated components

22.2V Li-Po battery 4 Supply power to flywheels - Electronic speed controllers

- MP160 brushless DC motors
- 4-to-1 channel wire
- Receiver
- Transmitter

4.8V Ni-MH battery 1 Supply power to ESC - Receiver

DC Variable Power Supply 1 Supply power to the relay - Relay switch

switches to alternate the
direction of precession of the - Square wave generator
disc - Relay circuit

DC Variable Power Supply 1 Supply power to the 24V drive - Relay circuit
motor to precess the disc

LXVIII
 Appendix G

The above power supplies are identified in Figures G20 – G22 shown on the next

page.

Figure G20 – 22.2V Li-Po battery

Figure G21 – 4.8V Ni-Mh battery

DC variable
Relay switch power supply
and circuit

DC variable
Square wave power supply
generator

Figure G22 – Main power supply arrangement

LXIX
 Analysis, design, optimisation and testing of gyroscopically stabilized platform

G4.2 Flywheel motor power arrangement

The procedure for connecting the flywheel motor power system together is simple

due to the use of hobby electrical components. All associated wire plugs and

connections are specific to each component (that is that the brushless DC motor can

only connect to the correct end of the electronic speed controller) making assembling

the power arrangement quick and easy.

The functions of each of the components that comprise the flywheel motor power

arrangement are shown below. Note that the number in brackets indicates the

number of components that are used in Prototype B.

 Electronic speed controller (ESC) (4) – converts the signal from the receiver

and draws power from the batteries to produce a signal to drive the brushless

DC motor.

 Li-Po battery (4) – supplies power to the brushless DC motor.

 Brushless DC motor (4) – drives the gyroscope flywheels.

 4-to-1 channel wire (1) – takes all four of the ESC’s that comprise the total

system and channels them into one wire that plugs into the receiver. This is

included to ensure all four gyroscopes receive the same signal and are

therefore rotating at equal speeds.

 Receiver (1) – receives the signal from the transmitter and supplies this signal

to the ESC.

 Transmitter (1) – controller held by operator. Movement of drive switch

controls flywheel motor speed.

LXX
Appendix G

 Ni-Mh battery (1) – due to the high spec ESC a separate power supply is

required.

The power cables for the brushless DC motor should be pointing down and to the left

(if assembled as per the instructions in section G3.2). These cables connect to the

ESC which in turn connects to the Li-Po batteries. Some sparking may occur when

connecting the ESC to the Li-Po batteries. Ensure fingers are not holding any of the

wires (only the plug) when performing this step. The ESC also has a small set of

wires coming off it that connect to the 4-to-1 channel wire which plugs into Channel

3 of the receiver. The 4.8V Ni-Mh battery is then connected to the BATT channel of

the receiver.

A schematic showing how the components are connected is shown in Figure G23.

22.2V Li-Po 70A ESC Brushless DC

battery motor

Receiver

4.8V Ni-Mh
Transmitter battery
4-to-1 Other 3 ESC
channel wire connection wires

Figure G23 – Flywheel motor power arrangement

G4.3 Disc precession motor power arrangement

The disc precession motor power arrangement is used to oscillate the disc back and

forth at a designated frequency. This is achieved by varying the input parameters of

a square wave generator and a variable power supply.

LXXI
 Analysis, design, optimisation and testing of gyroscopically stabilized platform

The functions of each of the components that comprise the disc precession motor

power arrangement are shown below. Note that the number in brackets indicates the

number of components that are used in Prototype B.

 Relay switch and circuit (1) – the central connection hub for all components

that comprise the disc precession motor power arrangement. The main

function of the relay switch and circuit is to take the signal from the square

wave generator and (coupled with the power from the two variable power

supplies) transmit an oscillating signal to the 24V DC motor.

 Variable power supply 1 (1) – the function of power supply 1 is to provide

power to the relay switch to allow it to alternate the voltage. This power supply

is set to 14V (the relay switch needs 12V to operate).

 Variable power supply 2 (1) – the power supply that drives the 24V DC motor.

The voltage of this power supply is varied to obtain the desired response from

the system in conjunction with the square wave generator parameters.

 Square wave generator (1) – a unit that produces a specified voltage shape. A

particular setting within the square wave generator is selected which has been

programmed by an electrical technician (refer to generator manual). The

square wave generator consists of 5 parameters that can all be varied to

obtain the desired response. These are identified in Table 4.2.

 24V DC motor (1) – motor with in-built worm drive used to precess the disc

back and forth.

A schematic showing how the components of the disc precession drive arrangement

are connected is shown in Figure G23.

LXXII
Appendix G

Square wave
generator

Variable power Variable power

supply 1 supply 2
Relay switch
and circuit

24V DC
motor

Figure G24 – Disc precession motor power arrangement

The relay switch and circuit should be secured in place on a non conductive surface.

The positive and negative connections of each of the power supplies are connected

to their associated connections on the circuit board. The positive and negative output

cables of the circuit board can then be attached to the 24V motor.

The square wave generator output cable is a single wire that attaches to a special

connection on the circuit board. It is recommended that the parameters of the square

wave generator are set to the values in Table G8.

LXXIII
 Analysis, design, optimisation and testing of gyroscopically stabilized platform

Table G8 – Square wave generator parameters

Parameter Value

Frequency 1.00Hz

Amplitude 0.500Vpp

Offset 4.252V

Duty Cycle 50.00%

Phase 0.00°

Testing of the system revealed that the optimal voltage of the 24V DC power supply

was approximately 16.5V.

G4.4 Operation of Prototype B

Once all power supply arrangements have been connected as per this manual the

system may be switched on so that the stabilization process may begin. The safest

order to turn on the system is:

i) Connect all flywheel motor power arrangements as per section G4.1.

ii) Turn on transmitter and wait for red LED on receiver to come on and remain

solid (confirming it is paired to the transmitter). Brushless DC motor should

sound a series of beeps and then a single beep every 2 seconds. Do not

begin to drive flywheels at this stage!

iii) Connect the disc precession motor power as per section G4.2.

iv) Turn on the square wave generator and set desired parameters

v) Turn on relay switch variable power supply and increase voltage until switch

activates and a switching noise is heard (approximately 13V).

LXXIV
Appendix G

vi) Turn on 24V DC motor variable power supply and slowly increase voltage

until desired disc precession occurs.

vii) Slowly move transmitter joystick to begin to drive flywheels until desired

speed is obtained.

viii)Vary system parameters until desired response is achieved.

G4.5 Conclusions of operational procedure

This section has outlined the connection of the power arrangements that drive

Prototype B. It has also outlined the steps that must be followed to operate the

system.

While the values outlined in this manual were shown to work after extensive testing it

is highly recommended that the user vary and alter them to gain a greater

understanding in the operation of Prototype B. It is also likely that the user will need

to vary the system parameters to obtain the desired oscillatory response from

Prototype B.

It is recommended that the current system is not operated continuously for an

extended period of time (> 5 minutes). This will help mitigate the issue of overheating

components and allow for connections that may have vibrated loose to be inspected.

LXXV
 Analysis, design, optimisation and testing of gyroscopically stabilized platform

G5 Safety

Due to the high kinetic energy and large number of spinning components that

comprise Prototype B, the user must be constantly aware of the large number of

safety issues associated with operating the system. This section will highlight the

critical safety issues that must be addressed during the assembly and operation of

Prototype B. These are:

Testing area – the current location of Prototype B (testing container) is the optimal

testing area for the system. It contains a partition that separates the operator and

any other viewers from the machine should any failure occur during operation. A

similar partition must always be used when testing the system. No person should

ever be exposed to the machine when it is turned on without protection between

themselves and Prototype B.

Safety glasses – safety glasses must be worn at all times when working on and

operating Prototype B.

Brushless DC Motors – the flywheel motors draw a significant amount of current (up

to 70A). It is highly recommended that all wiring and electrical connections on

Prototype B are fully understood and the safety issues relating to working with such

high currents are understood.

Pinching/jamming of fingers – due to the weight of some of the sub-assemblies that

make up Prototype B, care must always be taken when assembling components

together. The highest risk of injury occurs when placing the disc/gyroscopes
LXXVI
Appendix G

assembly onto the central pivot (see section G4.2, Step 6). This step must be

completed by 2 people to avoid any injury.

External structure stop – the external structure is able to tip back and forth. A safety

stop has been manufactured and must be inserted when the system is inactive.

Kill switch – it is recommended that all components that require mains power are

connected to a single outlet via a multi-board. This will allow all power to be cut from

the system at a single point. There is currently no rapid method of stopping the

flywheels and the operator should always be aware of this and operate the machine

accordingly.

LXXVII
Analysis, design, optimisation and testing of gyroscopically stabilized platform

LXXVIII