The actuators joints are spherical bearings which allow compliance for this sort of thing. So actuating just actuator 1 would cause actuator 2 to be “off axis” a bit, but by a small degree. The compliance from the spherical bearings means that this misalignment doesn’t cause any large structural loads at the actuator joints to the thrust structure or at the joints to the engine itself.
Derivation of Thrust Vector Control (TVC) Actuator-Force / Gimbal-Torque Transformation MatrixThrust vector control (TVC) systems for rocket engine propulsion traditionally use a simple linear relationship to convert between actuator forces and torques about the engine gimbal’s center-of-rotation (COR). As shown in Equation (1), the torque about the gimbal COR is proportional to the applied actuator force and the TVC moment arm (MA)—the perpendicular distance between the TVC actuator’s line-of-action (LOA) and the engine gimbal’s COR.
While this fundamental relationship remains valid and accurate in a two-dimensional (2D), one-degree-of-freedom (1-DOF) context—particularly in its non-linear formulation as described in the ER63 Technical Bulletin TB-02 (Derivation of Thrust Vector Control (TVC) Engine-Gimbal / Actuator Moment-Arm Geometry)—it becomes limited when extended to three-dimensional (3D), two-degree-of-freedom (2-DOF) analyses. In 3D, out-of-plane angular displacements can arise, causing the gimbaled engine plane-of-motion to become non-coplanar with the respective actuator plane-of-motion. Such misalignments occur due to the rod-end (RE) and/or tail-stock (TE) mounting geometry of individual TVC actuators.
These geometric complexities lead to inaccuracies in calculating engine torques and corresponding actuator forces if only the traditional TVC MA relationship is employed. For higher gimbal angular displacements (e.g., greater than 5 degrees), these inaccuracies become more pronounced, necessitating a more robust mathematical framework.
This document presents a comprehensive 3D (2-DOF) derivation of a transformation matrix that accurately converts between gimbaled engine torques and TVC actuator forces. By incorporating the necessary geometric and rotational considerations, this new approach corrects the limitations of the traditional TVC MA method. Subsequent sections compare the newly formulated approach to the traditional method, demonstrating its enhanced accuracy and reliability for a broad range of gimbaled engine conditions.
