CN112562421A - Flight conflict evaluation method based on index system - Google Patents
Flight conflict evaluation method based on index system Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- CN112562421A CN112562421A CN202011355532.9A CN202011355532A CN112562421A CN 112562421 A CN112562421 A CN 112562421A CN 202011355532 A CN202011355532 A CN 202011355532A CN 112562421 A CN112562421 A CN 112562421A
- Authority
- CN
- China
- Prior art keywords
- conflict
- aircraft
- calculating
- index
- flight
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Granted
Links
Images
Classifications
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G08—SIGNALLING
- G08G—TRAFFIC CONTROL SYSTEMS
- G08G5/00—Traffic control systems for aircraft, e.g. air-traffic control [ATC]
- G08G5/0043—Traffic management of multiple aircrafts from the ground
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- G06Q10/00—Administration; Management
- G06Q10/06—Resources, workflows, human or project management; Enterprise or organisation planning; Enterprise or organisation modelling
- G06Q10/063—Operations research, analysis or management
- G06Q10/0639—Performance analysis of employees; Performance analysis of enterprise or organisation operations
- G06Q10/06393—Score-carding, benchmarking or key performance indicator [KPI] analysis
Landscapes
- Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
- Human Resources & Organizations (AREA)
- Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
- Economics (AREA)
- General Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- Development Economics (AREA)
- Educational Administration (AREA)
- Strategic Management (AREA)
- Entrepreneurship & Innovation (AREA)
- Game Theory and Decision Science (AREA)
- Aviation & Aerospace Engineering (AREA)
- Marketing (AREA)
- Operations Research (AREA)
- Quality & Reliability (AREA)
- Tourism & Hospitality (AREA)
- General Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
- Theoretical Computer Science (AREA)
- Traffic Control Systems (AREA)
Abstract
The invention provides a flight conflict evaluation method based on an index system, which comprises the following steps: a 1: determining influence factors of flight conflict assessment, wherein each factor corresponds to a plurality of indexes; a 2: calculating the conflict aircraft relative position and motion trend index of each time slice in the flight conflict occurrence period based on the aircraft navigation data; a 3: calculating a conflict controllability index based on the process information of the conflict occurrence; a 4: calculating an airspace operation environment index based on the airspace operation data when the conflict occurs; a 5: processing the index result under each factor according to a formula, and calculating the weight of each influence factor by an entropy weight method; a 6: and averaging the flight conflict scores of the time slices to obtain a final evaluation score of the event. The method comprehensively considers various factors influencing flight conflict, determines the influence degree of each factor, reduces the deviation of qualitative judgment, provides more sufficient objective data based on the aviation big data evaluation method, is simple and convenient in evaluation method, and has visual display result; the method can quantitatively compare different conflict events by utilizing the distribution of the scores, find out the commonalities of similar events and provide improvement measures.
Description
Technical Field
The invention relates to the technical field of air transportation, in particular to a flight conflict evaluation method based on an index system.
Background
Safety is one of the most important concerns in the field of air transport. A flight conflict generally means that two civilian aircraft are actually operating less than a specified separation criterion. Although the flight conflict can be qualitatively identified according to relevant regulations of civil aviation bureau, an intuitive and quantitative evaluation method for the severity of the flight conflict is lacked. At present, a Reich model, an Event model and the like are mainly applied in domestic and foreign researches, aircrafts are assumed to be collision boxes, and collision probabilities of two aircrafts are evaluated by combining theoretical methods such as probability theory and the like.
An effective solution to the problems in the related art has not been proposed yet.
Disclosure of Invention
The invention aims to provide a flight conflict evaluation method based on an index system, so as to solve the problems in the background technology.
In order to achieve the purpose, the invention provides the following technical scheme:
a flight conflict evaluation method based on an index system comprises the following steps:
a 1: determining influence factors of flight conflict assessment, wherein each factor corresponds to a plurality of indexes;
a 2: calculating the conflict aircraft relative position and motion trend index of each time slice in the flight conflict occurrence period based on the aircraft navigation data;
a 3: calculating a conflict controllability index based on the process information of the conflict occurrence;
a 4: calculating an airspace operation environment index based on the airspace operation data when the conflict occurs;
a 5: processing the index result under each factor according to a formula, and calculating the weight of each influence factor by an entropy weight method;
a 6: and averaging the flight conflict scores of the time slices to obtain a final evaluation score of the event.
Further, in the flight conflict assessment method, the influencing factors in the step (a1) are conflicting aircraft relative position and motion trend factors, conflicting controllability factors and airspace operation environment factors, and a plurality of factor assessment indexes are set under each factor;
the factors of the conflict aircraft relative position and the motion trend comprise three indexes: s1 vertical interval and vertical approach speed of aircraft, S2 horizontal interval and horizontal approach speed of aircraft, and S3 track included angle, corresponding factor score R1The calculation method comprises the following steps:
the conflict controllability factor comprises an index of conflict resolution time S4 and a corresponding factor score R2The calculation method comprises the following steps:
R2＝S4
the spatial domain operation environment factors comprise two indexes of S5 spatial domain busy degree and S6 spatial domain complexity, and corresponding scores R3The calculation method comprises the following steps:
based on the three factors, the method for calculating the risk score of the aircraft flight conflict is shown as the following formula:
S＝100*(w1*R1+R2*w2+w3*R3)
wherein, w1-w3The weights corresponding to the three factors are calculated by an entropy weight method, Si，i∈[1,6]I.e. the index set under the above-mentioned corresponding factors, each SiThe data will also correspond to a plurality of sub-indices, SiThe value is obtained by averaging the values of the next sub-index.
Further, in the above flight conflict assessment method, the index in the step (a1) includes: the method comprises the following steps of S1 aircraft vertical interval and vertical approaching speed, S2 aircraft horizontal interval and horizontal approaching speed, S3 track included angle, S4 conflict resolution time, S5 airspace busy degree and S6 airspace complexity, wherein each index belongs to a plurality of sub-indexes.
Further, in the flight conflict evaluation method, the method for calculating the conflict aircraft relative position and movement trend index result per minute is as follows:
b 1: starting time T of flight conflictstartAnd end time TendSelecting [ T ]start,Tend]Setting the time granularity of conflict analysis as 1 second as the time range of flight conflict evaluation, and dividing the time range of the flight conflict evaluation into m time slices;
b 2: calculating the conflict aircraft relative position and motion trend index results of m time slices;
b 3: calculating conflict controllability results of the m time slices;
b 4: and calculating the airspace operation environment index results of the m time slices.
Further, in the above flight conflict assessment method, in the step (b2), based on the longitude, latitude and altitude of two aircraft at that time, the included angles between the vertical interval and the approach speed of the two aircraft S1, between the horizontal interval and the approach speed of the two aircraft S2 and between the horizontal interval and the approach speed of the two aircraft S3 are calculated, the three indexes are multiplied by the calculation result, and the cubic square root is taken to obtain the score of the factor, and the specific score comparison table is as follows:
c 1: calculating S1 aircraft vertical interval and approaching speed results of m time slices, calculating and accumulating according to the aircraft vertical interval and vertical approaching speed to obtain an average value:
TABLE 1 conflicting aircraft score vertical separation
The vertical interval is calculated by acquiring the height information of the conflict flights through secondary radar/ADSB data, and VS in the table represents the vertical interval (unit: meter) between the conflict aircraft pairs. The minimum vertical separation of the VSM aircraft will vary from altitude layer to altitude layer. The VSM of an aircraft is 300 meters when flying at an altitude layer below 8400 meters (inclusive) and 600 meters when flying above 12500 meters (exclusive). It is noted that the VSM is 300 meters when the aircraft is flying in RVSM airspace of (6000 meters, 8400 meters ] and (8400 meters, 12500 meters), but the scoring rules are applied according to the FL >12500m table if the VSM is still 600 meters when the aircraft is not RVSM capable.
TABLE 2 conflicting aircraft vs. vertical proximity
The vertical approach rate, i.e., the approach velocity of the impacting aircraft pair over the vertical range, VS in the table above represents the vertical approach rate of the aircraft pair in meters per minute.
c 2: calculating S2 aircraft horizontal interval and approaching speed results of m time slices, calculating and accumulating according to the horizontal interval and the horizontal approaching speed of the aircraft to obtain an average value:
TABLE 3 conflicting aircraft score for horizontal separation
The horizontal interval is that longitude and latitude information of the conflict flights is obtained through secondary radar/ADSB data to be calculated, HS in the table represents the horizontal interval (unit: meter) between the conflict aircraft pairs, the content of the radar control HSM 6000 meters is 6 kilometers below, and the content of the radar control HSM 6000 meters is 10 kilometers above.
Table 4 conflicting aircraft to horizontal proximity rates
The horizontal approach rate, i.e., the approach speed of the conflict aircraft pair in the horizontal range, and CR in the above table represents the horizontal approach rate of the aircraft pair in km/h. The horizontal approach rate is calculated by adopting a cosine theorem, namely, the displayed ground speed vector difference value of the conflicting aircraft is calculated.
c3, judging the score of the index of the S3 track included angle according to the interval of the track included angle theta:
when theta is more than or equal to 135 degrees, the score is 100; when theta is more than or equal to 45 degrees and less than 135 degrees, the score is 50; when theta is less than 45 degrees, the score is 25;
likewise, a higher score indicates a greater risk;
further, in the flight conflict assessment method, the conflict controllability is calculated by the conflict resolution time of S4, and the corresponding score is as follows:
TABLE 5 Conflict resolution time
Further, in the flight conflict evaluation method, the airspace operating environment in the airspace at the aircraft flight conflict occurrence period includes two levels of S5 airspace busy degree and S6 airspace complexity, the calculation results of the two indexes are accumulated and multiplied, and then the calculation results are derived to obtain the scores of the corresponding factors, and the specific corresponding scores are as follows:
d1, calculating S5 space domain busy degree results of m time slices, calculating and accumulating according to the flow capacity ratio and the call saturation to obtain a score average, wherein the corresponding scores are as follows:
TABLE 6 collision occurrence airspace flow capacity ratio
The flow capacity ratio is the ratio of the flow of the airspace unit to the published capacity when the conflict occurs, the busy degree of the airspace unit is reflected from the angle of the flight number required to be commanded, and the FCR in the upper table is the flow capacity ratio of the airspace unit.
TABLE 7 Conflict occurrence channel Call saturation
The saturation of the call, i.e., the congestion of the vhf channel used when a conflict occurs, reflects, on the other hand, how busy the controller is handling the conflict, and how untimely the conflict is released due to a possible set call (e.g., a flight around the sky). When the airspace condition is severe, sometimes, although the airspace flow capacity ratio is not high, the aircraft does not fly according to the route due to a large number of aircraft flying around applications, and the controlled airspace is busy and increases steeply. Thus, the call saturation introduced by the present system will complement the shorthand in the flow capacity ratio that is characterized for the busy level of the airspace. R in the above table is the animation saturation of the channel.
d2, calculating S6 space domain complexity results of m time slices, calculating scores according to the number of potential conflict aircrafts, and correspondingly calculating the scores as follows:
TABLE 8 number of potentially conflicting aircraft
The flight control system has the advantages that altitude layer resources and horizontal range occupation beyond a plan are generated when the aircraft with conflicts performs maneuvering flight, new conflicts can be generated when the airspace resources are occupied by other flights, so that the original configuration of the airspace resources is forced to be changed by controllers to avoid additional risks, and the system defines the flights which need to be concerned by the controllers as the number of potential conflict aircrafts. The statistical method of the potential conflict shelf is to screen flights in the empty domain from the aspects of space range and approach trend. Firstly, taking the collision flying aircraft as a center, respectively taking the upper and lower parts of the aircraft as 300 meters, and dividing a potential collision attention area of a cylinder by taking a minimum head crossing interval (for example, 6000 meters including 30 kilometers below and 6000 meters above 50 kilometers) as a radius. Then, the aircraft with the vertical or horizontal approaching trend between the aircraft in the potential conflict concern area and the conflict resolution aircraft is taken into the index statistics of the number of potential conflict aircraft. N in the table represents the number of potentially conflicting aircraft.
Further, in the flight conflict evaluation method, the information entropy of the conflict aircraft relative position and motion trend factor, the conflict controllability factor and the airspace operation environment factor is calculated based on the information entropy, and the weight calculation method includes:
e 1: constructing an initial judgment matrix according to the m time slices and the n indexes
A＝(aij)m×n
aijA metric value representing a jth index in the ith scheme;
e 2: standardizing the initial evaluation matrix to obtain a matrix:
B＝(bij)m×n
e 3: calculating the information entropy of the jth index
e 4: calculating the coefficient of difference
dj＝1-ej
e 5: calculating the weight of each index
Obtained wjI.e. the weight of the jth evaluation index, the weight set of all indexes is W ═ W1,w2,…wn}。
According to the invention, through multidimensional indexes, subjective and objective influence factors of flight conflicts are considered: the method comprises the following steps that the relative position and the motion trend of a conflict aircraft (S1 aircraft vertical interval and vertical approaching speed, S2 aircraft horizontal interval and horizontal approaching speed, and S3 track included angle), conflict controllability (S4 conflict resolution time), an airspace operation environment (S5 airspace busy degree and airspace S6 domain complexity) and the like are adopted, so that the method has the two-aircraft approaching trend directly related to flight conflict and the operation environment where the flight conflict is located, more comprehensive influence factors are considered, and the key characteristic of the flight conflict is reflected; when the index calculation model is redesigned, the indexes are disassembled according to the correlation degree between the indexes, and the indexes with larger correlation, such as the vertical approach trend, the horizontal approach trend and the track included angle, are combined in a group, so that the cumulative influence effect of the similar indexes is ensured; confirming the weight of each factor through the objective rule of the data by an entropy weight method, and determining the influence degree of different factors; the score of each flight conflict is evaluated based on historical data, the air traffic management personnel are helped to realize the comparison of the severity of different events, the repeated analysis is better carried out, the key factors influencing the flight conflicts are found, and effective improvement measures are provided.
Compared with the prior art, the invention has the following beneficial effects: 1. compared with the traditional collision risk assessment method, the flight conflict assessment method can more comprehensively consider various factors influencing flight conflicts, wherein the factors of conflict aircrafts comprise intervals, approach trends and the like, the factors of airspace situation environment concern the busy degree and the complexity of an airspace when an event occurs, the aspects of flow capacity ratio, call saturation, potential conflict flight number and the like are covered, and the factors considered for conflict assessment are more comprehensive; 2. the evaluation method determines the weight of each factor through an entropy weight method, determines the influence degree of each factor, and reduces the deviation of qualitative judgment; 3. the invention is an objective evaluation method based on civil aviation big data, the rule of mining historical data by a mathematical model is established, and the calculation method is more scientific and efficient; 4. the invention utilizes the distribution of the scores, is convenient for carrying out quantitative comparison on different conflict events, finds the commonness of similar events and is convenient for proposing improvement measures.
Drawings
In order to more clearly illustrate the embodiments of the present invention or the technical solutions in the prior art, the drawings needed in the embodiments will be briefly described below, and it is obvious that the drawings in the following description are only some embodiments of the present invention, and it is obvious for those skilled in the art to obtain other drawings without creative efforts.
FIG. 1 is a schematic flow chart of a flight conflict evaluation method based on an index system.
Detailed Description
The invention will be further described based on the case of flight conflict actually occurring in a certain high-altitude area control area in China, with reference to the accompanying drawings and specific implementation manners:
as shown in fig. 1, a flight conflict evaluation method based on an index system includes:
a 1: determining influence factors of flight conflict assessment, wherein each factor corresponds to a plurality of indexes;
a 2: calculating the conflict aircraft relative position and motion trend index of each time slice in the flight conflict occurrence period based on the aircraft navigation data;
a 3: calculating a conflict controllability index based on the process information of the conflict occurrence;
a 4: calculating an airspace operation environment index based on the airspace operation data when the conflict occurs;
a 5: processing the index result under each factor according to a formula, and calculating the weight of each influence factor by an entropy weight method;
a 6: and averaging the flight conflict scores of the time slices to obtain a final evaluation score of the event.
According to the above, the influencing factors in the step a1 are conflicting relative position and movement tendency of the aircraft, conflicting controllability and airspace operation environment factors, respectively.
According to the above, the step a1 of indexing includes: s1 aircraft vertical spacing and approach speed, S2 aircraft horizontal spacing and approach speed, S3 track included angle, S4 conflict controllability, S5 airspace busy degree, S6 airspace complexity and the like are 6 indexes, and the embodiment totally uses six indexes to describe dangerous conditions when the aircraft conflicts.
The factors of the relative position and the motion trend of the conflict aircraft comprise S1 aircraft vertical interval and approach speed (vertical interval and vertical approach rate), S2 aircraft horizontal interval and approach speed (horizontal interval and horizontal approach rate) and S3 flight path angle.
The conflict controllability factor refers to the conflict resolution time of S4.
The spatial domain operation environment factors are characterized by S5 spatial domain busy degree (spatial flow capacity ratio, saturation degree of a communication wave channel) and S6 spatial domain complexity (potential conflict flight number) in the conflict occurrence process.
The flight conflict assessment method introduced in the embodiment can consider various factors influencing flight conflicts more comprehensively, the factors of conflict aircrafts comprise intervals, approach trends (relative speed, included angle) and the like, the factors of airspace situation environment concern the busy degree of an airspace when an event occurs, the aspects of flow capacity ratio, call saturation, potentially conflicting flight number and the like are covered, and compared with the traditional collision risk assessment method, the factors considered for conflict assessment are more comprehensive. The evaluation method determines the weight of each factor by an entropy weight method, determines the influence degree of each factor and reduces the deviation of subjective qualitative judgment. Based on civil aviation big data, the data mode is objectively identified, the calculation method is scientific and simple, and the displayed result is more visual; meanwhile, different conflict events can be quantitatively compared by utilizing the distribution of the scores, the commonness of similar events can be found, and improvement measures can be provided conveniently.
According to the above, the method for calculating the flight conflict indicator result per minute is as follows (since the event is not yet determined, in order to avoid the possible influence on the actual flight conflict evaluation, the date of the event occurrence is hidden here):
b 1: the starting time of the flight conflict is 8 hours, 45 minutes and 36 seconds on a certain day of a certain month in a certain year, and the ending time of the flight conflict is 8 hours, 46 minutes and 10 seconds on the same day, so that a certain day of a certain month in a certain year [8 hours, 45 minutes and 36 seconds, 8 hours, 46 minutes and 10 seconds ] is selected as the time range of flight conflict assessment, the time granularity of conflict analysis is set to be 1 second, and the conflict event has 35 time slices in total;
b 2: calculating the conflict aircraft relative position and motion trend index results of 35 time slices;
b 3: calculating conflict controllability index results of 35 time slices;
b 4: and calculating the airspace operation environment index result of 35 time slices.
Further, a flight conflict evaluation method based on an index system is characterized in that in the step (b2), according to the longitude, the latitude and the altitude of two aircrafts at the moment, included angles between the vertical interval and the approaching speed of the S1 aircraft, between the horizontal interval and the approaching speed of the S2 aircraft and the flight path of the S3 are calculated, the three indexes are multiplied after calculation results, and the cubic square root is taken to obtain the score of the factor, and the specific process is as follows:
c 1: and S1 calculating vertical interval and approaching speed results of the aircraft in 35 time slices, calculating and accumulating according to the vertical interval and the vertical approaching speed of the aircraft to obtain an average value:
TABLE 9 vertical spacing and closing velocity results and scores
In table 9, the vertical interval column and the vertical proximity rate column are numerical values calculated by the index, and the corresponding vertical interval score column and the vertical proximity rate score column are risk influence scores obtained by the above calculation method. For example, since the vertical interval between the 10 th time slot aircraft is 300, the vertical interval score is 63 minutes according to table 1, the vertical approach rate of the time slot during flight is 0, the vertical approach rate is 27 minutes according to table 2, and the vertical interval and the approach speed index score of the time slot S1 are (63+ 27)/2-45 minutes.
c 2: calculating S2 aircraft horizontal interval and approaching speed results of 35 time slices, calculating and accumulating according to the horizontal interval and the horizontal approaching speed of the aircraft to obtain an average value:
TABLE 10 horizontal Interval and closing Rate results and scores
In table 10, the horizontal interval column and the horizontal proximity ratio column are numerical values calculated by the index, and the corresponding horizontal interval score column and horizontal proximity ratio score column are risk influence scores obtained by the above calculation method. For example, since the horizontal interval between the 10 th time slot aircraft is 6.52, the vertical interval score is 54 minutes and the horizontal approach rate during the flight of the time slot is 1021 from table 3, the vertical approach rate is 80 minutes and the score between the horizontal interval and the approach speed index of the aircraft for the time slot S2 is (54+ 80)/2-67 minutes from table 4.
c3, judging the score of the index of the S3 track included angle according to the interval of the track included angle theta:
TABLE 11 track Angle result and score
The track included angle column and the track included angle score column in table 11 respectively list the actual track included angle change condition during the collision of the aircraft and the score obtained according to the above corresponding rule. For example, the track angle of the 10 th time slice colliding aircraft pair is 179.93 °, so the vector velocity difference score is 100.
c4 multiplying the scores of three indexes by the third power
TABLE 12 conflict aircraft relative position and movement trend scores
In table 12, the scores of the three indexes in the collision process of the aircraft are listed in the columns of the scores of the vertical interval and the approaching speed of the aircraft, the scores of the horizontal interval and the approaching speed of the aircraft, and the scores of the three indexes in the track included angle are calculated by three evolution after multiplication. For example, the 10 th time slice conflicts the aircraft vertical interval and approaching speed score 45, the aircraft horizontal interval and approaching speed score 67 and the track angle score 100 of the aircraft pair, so the conflict aircraft relative position and motion trend factor is always divided into (45 x 67 x 100) 1/3-67.05.
Further, the flight conflict evaluation method based on the index system is characterized in that the conflict controllability is calculated through S4 conflict resolution time, the conflict resolution time obtained according to the flight conflict report is 35S, and therefore the corresponding conflict controllability is divided into 80.
Further, the flight conflict evaluation method based on the index system is characterized in that the airspace operating environment in the airspace of the aircraft at the time of occurrence of flight conflict comprises two levels of S5 airspace busy degree and S6 airspace complexity, the calculation results of the two indexes are accumulated and then are multiplied to obtain scores of corresponding factors, and the scores are specifically as follows:
d1, calculating S5 space domain busy degree results of 35 time slices, calculating and accumulating according to the flow capacity ratio and the call saturation to obtain a score average, wherein the corresponding scores are as follows:
TABLE 13 airspace busyness score
In table 13, the flow capacity ratio score and the call saturation score list respectively lists the scores of the two indexes in the process of collision of the aircraft, and finally, the scores are added and averaged to obtain the airspace busy degree score. For example, since the 10 th slot has a flow capacity ratio score of 35 and a call saturation score of 65, the spatial domain is busy (35+65)/2, which is 50 points.
d2 calculating S6 airspace complexity results of 35 time slices, calculating scores according to the number of potential conflict aircrafts, and correspondingly calculating the scores as follows:
TABLE 14 spatial complexity score
d3, multiplying the two index scores by the following evolution:
TABLE 15 airspace operating environment scores
In table 15, the score of the busy level of the airspace and the score of the complexity of the airspace of S5 and S6 respectively list the scores of the two indexes in the process of collision of the aircraft, and finally the influence score of the factor is obtained by calculation through multiplication and evolution. For example, the 10 th time slice space domain busy degree score is 50, and the space domain complexity score is 55, so that the space domain operation environment factors are always (50 × 55) ^ 1/2-52.44.
According to the above, the method for calculating the weight is as follows:
c 1: constructing an initial judgment matrix according to the 35 time slices and the 3 indexes
A＝(aij)35×7
aijA metric value representing a jth index in the ith scheme;
the initial evaluation matrix a of 35 × 3 is as follows:
c 2: standardizing the initial evaluation matrix to obtain a matrix:
B＝(bij)m×n
the normalized matrix B of 35 x 3 is shown below:
c3: calculating the information entropy of the jth index
The entropy matrix E of information 35 × 3 after transmission processing is as follows:
c4: calculating the coefficient of difference
dj＝1-ej
D＝{d1,d2,d3}＝{0.410346164，0.294826918，0.294826918}
c 5: calculating the weight of each index
Obtained wjI.e. the weight of the jth evaluation index, the weight set of all indexes is W ═ 0.41, 0.295, 0.295}
According to the evaluation results of the flight conflict events in each time slice in the relative position of the conflict aircraft and 3 factors such as the motion trend, the conflict controllability and the airspace operation environment, a 35 x 3 evaluation matrix is established, and index weight is obtained by using an entropy weight method, so that the calculation result of the flight conflict events in each time slice is calculated:
TABLE 16 conflict Risk weighted score
And averaging all the calculation results of 35 time slices of the flight conflict event to obtain the final score S of the flight conflict event, which is 60.28 points.
Finally, it should be noted that: although the present invention has been described in detail with reference to the foregoing embodiments, those skilled in the art will understand that various changes, modifications and substitutions can be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention as defined by the appended claims. Any modification, equivalent replacement, or improvement made within the spirit and principle of the present invention should be included in the protection scope of the present invention.
Claims (8)
1. A flight conflict evaluation method based on an index system is characterized by comprising the following steps:
a 1: determining influence factors of flight conflict assessment, wherein each factor corresponds to a plurality of indexes;
a 2: calculating the conflict aircraft relative position and motion trend index of each time slice in the flight conflict occurrence period based on the aircraft navigation data;
a 3: calculating a conflict controllability index based on the process information of the conflict occurrence;
a 4: calculating an airspace operation environment index based on the airspace operation data when the conflict occurs;
a 5: processing the index result under each factor according to a formula, and calculating the weight of each influence factor by an entropy weight method;
a 6: and averaging the flight conflict scores of the time slices to obtain a final evaluation score of the event.
2. The method according to claim 1, wherein the influencing factors in the step (a1) are conflicting aircraft relative position and movement tendency factors, conflicting controllability factors and airspace operation environment factors, and a plurality of factor evaluation indexes are set under each factor;
the factors of the conflict aircraft relative position and the motion trend comprise three indexes: s1 vertical interval and vertical approach speed of aircraft, S2 horizontal interval and horizontal approach speed of aircraft, and S3 track included angle, corresponding factor score R1The calculation method comprises the following steps:
the conflict controllability factor comprises an index of conflict resolution time S4 and a corresponding factor score R2The calculation method comprises the following steps:
R2＝S4
the spatial domain operation environment factors comprise two indexes of S5 spatial domain busy degree and S6 spatial domain complexity, and corresponding scores R3The calculation method comprises the following steps:
based on the three factors, the method for calculating the risk score of the aircraft flight conflict is shown as the following formula:
S＝100*(w1*R1+R2*w2+w3*R3)
wherein, w1-w3The weights corresponding to the three factors are calculated by an entropy weight method, Si，i∈[1，6]I.e. the index set under the above-mentioned corresponding factors, each SiThe data will also correspond to a plurality of sub-indices, SiThe value is obtained by averaging the values of the next sub-index.
3. The method for evaluating flight conflict based on index system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the index in the step (a1) comprises: the method comprises the following steps of S1 aircraft vertical interval and vertical approaching speed, S2 aircraft horizontal interval and horizontal approaching speed, S3 track included angle, S4 conflict resolution time, S5 airspace busy degree and S6 airspace complexity, wherein each index belongs to a plurality of sub-indexes.
4. The method for evaluating flight conflict based on the index system according to claim 1, characterized in that the method for calculating the conflict aircraft relative position and movement trend index result per minute is as follows:
b 1: starting time T of flight conflictstartAnd end time TendSelecting [ T ]start,Tend]Setting the time granularity of conflict analysis as 1 second as the time range of flight conflict evaluation, and dividing the time range of the flight conflict evaluation into m time slices;
b 2: calculating the conflict aircraft relative position and motion trend index results of m time slices;
b 3: calculating conflict controllability results of the m time slices;
b 4: and calculating the airspace operation environment index results of the m time slices.
5. The method as claimed in claim 4, wherein the step (b2) is performed by calculating the included angles between the vertical interval and the approaching speed of the S1 aircraft, the horizontal interval and the approaching speed of the S2 aircraft and the track of the S3 aircraft according to the longitude, the latitude and the altitude of the two aircraft at the moment, and multiplying the three indexes by taking the square root of three times to obtain the score of the factor, wherein the specific score is as follows:
c 1: calculating S1 aircraft vertical interval and approaching speed results of m time slices, and calculating and accumulating according to the vertical interval and the vertical approaching speed of the aircraft to obtain a mean value;
the scoring standard corresponding to the vertical interval of the aircraft is as follows:
the vertical interval is calculated by acquiring the height information of conflict flights through secondary radar/ADSB data, wherein VS in the table represents the vertical interval (unit: meter) between the conflict aircraft pairs, VSm is the minimum vertical interval of the aircraft and changes according to the difference of the height layers, the VSm is 300 meters when the aircraft flies at the height layers below 8400 meters (inclusive), 600 meters when the aircraft flies above 12500 meters (exclusive), the VSm is 300 meters when the aircraft flies in RVSM airspace of (6000 meters, 8400 meters) and (8400 meters, 12500 meters), but the VSm is still 600 meters when the aircraft does not have RVSM capacity, and the scoring rule is applied according to a table of FL >12500 m;
the aircraft vertical approach speed corresponds to the score criteria as follows:
in the above table VS represents the vertical approach velocity of the aircraft pair in meters per minute;
c 2: calculating S2 aircraft horizontal interval and approaching speed results of m time slices, and calculating and accumulating according to the horizontal interval and the horizontal approaching speed of the aircraft to obtain a mean value;
the aircraft horizontal interval corresponding score standard is as follows:
the horizontal interval is calculated by acquiring longitude and latitude information of conflict flights through secondary radar/ADSB data, HS in the upper table represents the horizontal interval between conflict aircraft pairs, the unit is meter, the content of radar control HSM 6000 meters is 6 kilometers below, and the content of the radar control HSM 6000 meters is 10 kilometers above;
the aircraft horizontal approach velocity correspondence score criteria are as follows:
in the above table, CR represents the horizontal approaching speed of the aircraft pair, the unit is kilometer per hour, and the horizontal approaching speed is calculated by using the cosine theorem, that is, the display ground speed vector difference of the conflicting aircraft is calculated;
c3, judging the score of the index of the S3 flight path included angle according to the interval of the flight path included angle theta;
specific scoring criteria are as follows;
when theta is larger than or equal to 135 degrees, counting for 100 minutes;
when theta is more than or equal to 45 degrees and less than 135 degrees, the value is counted for 50 minutes;
when theta is less than 45 degrees, 25 minutes are counted;
a higher score indicates a higher risk.
6. The method as claimed in claim 4, wherein the collision controllability is calculated by S4 collision resolution time, and the corresponding scoring criteria are as follows:
7. the method of claim 4, wherein the airspace operating environment in the airspace at the time of occurrence of the aircraft flight conflict includes two levels of S5 airspace busy degree and S6 airspace complexity, the calculation results of the two indicators are multiplied and then the sum is derived to obtain the score of the corresponding factor, and the specific scoring criteria are as follows:
d1, calculating S5 space domain busy degree results of m time slices, calculating and accumulating according to the flow capacity ratio and the call saturation to obtain a score average, wherein the corresponding score standard is as follows:
FCR in the table is airspace unit flow capacity ratio;
the scoring standards corresponding to the communication saturation of the conflict channel are as follows:
r in the above table is the call saturation of the channel;
d2: calculating S6 airspace complexity results of m time slices, and calculating scores according to the number of potential conflict aircrafts, wherein the corresponding scoring standards are as follows:
the scoring standard corresponding to the number of potential conflict aircrafts is as follows:
n in the table represents the number of potentially conflicting aircraft.
8. The flight conflict assessment method based on the index system according to claim 1, wherein the weights of the conflicting aircraft relative position and motion tendency factors, the conflicting controllability factors and the airspace operation environment factors are calculated based on the information entropy, and the calculation method of the weights is as follows:
e 1: constructing an initial judgment matrix according to the m time slices and the n indexes
A＝(aij)m×n
aijA metric value representing a jth index in the ith scheme;
e 2: standardizing the initial evaluation matrix to obtain a matrix:
B＝(bij)m×n
e 3: calculating the information entropy of the jth index
e 4: calculating the coefficient of difference
dj＝1-ej
e 5: calculating the weight of each index
Obtained wjI.e. the weight of the jth evaluation index, the weight set of all indexes is W ═ W1，w2，…wn}。
Priority Applications (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202011355532.9A CN112562421B (en) | 2020-11-27 | 2020-11-27 | Flight conflict evaluation method based on index system |
Applications Claiming Priority (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202011355532.9A CN112562421B (en) | 2020-11-27 | 2020-11-27 | Flight conflict evaluation method based on index system |
Publications (2)
| Publication Number | Publication Date |
|---|---|
| CN112562421A true CN112562421A (en) | 2021-03-26 |
| CN112562421B CN112562421B (en) | 2022-04-12 |
Family
ID=75046176
Family Applications (1)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202011355532.9A Active CN112562421B (en) | 2020-11-27 | 2020-11-27 | Flight conflict evaluation method based on index system |
Country Status (1)
| Country | Link |
|---|---|
| CN (1) | CN112562421B (en) |
Cited By (3)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN113284369A (en) * | 2021-05-14 | 2021-08-20 | 中国民航大学 | Prediction method for actual measurement airway data based on ADS-B |
| CN118587941A (en) * | 2024-08-05 | 2024-09-03 | 飞友科技有限公司 | Flight conflict resolution method and system |
| CN118587941B (en) * | 2024-08-05 | 2024-10-25 | 飞友科技有限公司 | Flight conflict resolution method and system |
Citations (16)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| US20110270473A1 (en) * | 2010-04-29 | 2011-11-03 | Reynolds Zachary R | Systems and methods for providing a vertical profile for an in-trail procedure |
| CN102509476A (en) * | 2011-11-01 | 2012-06-20 | 四川川大智胜软件股份有限公司 | Short-period flight conflict relieving method |
| US20120215433A1 (en) * | 2011-02-22 | 2012-08-23 | Lockheed Martin Corporation | Methods and systems for managing air traffic |
| CN102903263A (en) * | 2012-09-28 | 2013-01-30 | 北京航空航天大学 | Method and device used for removing flight conflicts and based on packet mode |
| CN105489069A (en) * | 2016-01-15 | 2016-04-13 | 中国民航管理干部学院 | SVM-based low-altitude airspace navigation airplane conflict detection method |
| CN106097233A (en) * | 2016-05-31 | 2016-11-09 | 中国民航大学 | A kind of Route reform conflict Resolution method of case-based reasioning |
| CN106373435A (en) * | 2016-10-14 | 2017-02-01 | 中国民用航空飞行学院 | Non-centralized safety interval autonomous keeping system for pilot |
| CN106875755A (en) * | 2017-02-28 | 2017-06-20 | 中国人民解放军空军装备研究院雷达与电子对抗研究所 | A kind of air traffic conflict management method and device based on complexity |
| US9990854B1 (en) * | 2016-03-15 | 2018-06-05 | Rockwell Collins, Inc. | Unmanned aerial system mission flight representation conversion techniques and traffic management scheme |
| CN109191923A (en) * | 2018-09-25 | 2019-01-11 | 中国人民解放军国防科技大学 | Unmanned aerial vehicle flight conflict resolution method and system |
| CN109830127A (en) * | 2018-12-26 | 2019-05-31 | 南京航空航天大学 | It is marched into the arena 4D path planning method based on an aircraft for fusion program |
| CN109887341A (en) * | 2019-03-01 | 2019-06-14 | 中国民航大学 | Flight collision rapid detection method based on adjacent mesh |
| CN110659797A (en) * | 2019-08-09 | 2020-01-07 | 中国船舶重工集团公司第七0九研究所 | Method and system for evaluating flight conflict resolution control instruction |
| EP3716248A1 (en) * | 2019-03-29 | 2020-09-30 | Honeywell International Inc. | Systems and methods for dynamically detecting moving object trajectory conflict using estimated times of arrival |
| CN111739347A (en) * | 2020-06-05 | 2020-10-02 | 南京航空航天大学 | Autonomous flight path planning and conflict resolution method and device applied to free route airspace |
| CN111862685A (en) * | 2020-06-18 | 2020-10-30 | 大蓝洞(南京)科技有限公司 | Flight conflict evaluation method based on multi-dimensional indexes |
-
2020
- 2020-11-27 CN CN202011355532.9A patent/CN112562421B/en active Active
Patent Citations (16)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| US20110270473A1 (en) * | 2010-04-29 | 2011-11-03 | Reynolds Zachary R | Systems and methods for providing a vertical profile for an in-trail procedure |
| US20120215433A1 (en) * | 2011-02-22 | 2012-08-23 | Lockheed Martin Corporation | Methods and systems for managing air traffic |
| CN102509476A (en) * | 2011-11-01 | 2012-06-20 | 四川川大智胜软件股份有限公司 | Short-period flight conflict relieving method |
| CN102903263A (en) * | 2012-09-28 | 2013-01-30 | 北京航空航天大学 | Method and device used for removing flight conflicts and based on packet mode |
| CN105489069A (en) * | 2016-01-15 | 2016-04-13 | 中国民航管理干部学院 | SVM-based low-altitude airspace navigation airplane conflict detection method |
| US9990854B1 (en) * | 2016-03-15 | 2018-06-05 | Rockwell Collins, Inc. | Unmanned aerial system mission flight representation conversion techniques and traffic management scheme |
| CN106097233A (en) * | 2016-05-31 | 2016-11-09 | 中国民航大学 | A kind of Route reform conflict Resolution method of case-based reasioning |
| CN106373435A (en) * | 2016-10-14 | 2017-02-01 | 中国民用航空飞行学院 | Non-centralized safety interval autonomous keeping system for pilot |
| CN106875755A (en) * | 2017-02-28 | 2017-06-20 | 中国人民解放军空军装备研究院雷达与电子对抗研究所 | A kind of air traffic conflict management method and device based on complexity |
| CN109191923A (en) * | 2018-09-25 | 2019-01-11 | 中国人民解放军国防科技大学 | Unmanned aerial vehicle flight conflict resolution method and system |
| CN109830127A (en) * | 2018-12-26 | 2019-05-31 | 南京航空航天大学 | It is marched into the arena 4D path planning method based on an aircraft for fusion program |
| CN109887341A (en) * | 2019-03-01 | 2019-06-14 | 中国民航大学 | Flight collision rapid detection method based on adjacent mesh |
| EP3716248A1 (en) * | 2019-03-29 | 2020-09-30 | Honeywell International Inc. | Systems and methods for dynamically detecting moving object trajectory conflict using estimated times of arrival |
| CN110659797A (en) * | 2019-08-09 | 2020-01-07 | 中国船舶重工集团公司第七0九研究所 | Method and system for evaluating flight conflict resolution control instruction |
| CN111739347A (en) * | 2020-06-05 | 2020-10-02 | 南京航空航天大学 | Autonomous flight path planning and conflict resolution method and device applied to free route airspace |
| CN111862685A (en) * | 2020-06-18 | 2020-10-30 | 大蓝洞(南京)科技有限公司 | Flight conflict evaluation method based on multi-dimensional indexes |
Non-Patent Citations (3)
| Title |
|---|
| 丛玮: "空中交通多尺度行为模式识别方法研究", 《中国博士学位论文全文数据库（电子期刊）》 * |
| 焦卫东等: "基于ADS-B的通用航空飞行冲突解脱算法", 《信号处理》 * |
| 王涛波等: "基于扩展摩尔邻域的自由飞行冲突风险研究", 《交通运输系统工程与信息》 * |
Cited By (4)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN113284369A (en) * | 2021-05-14 | 2021-08-20 | 中国民航大学 | Prediction method for actual measurement airway data based on ADS-B |
| CN113284369B (en) * | 2021-05-14 | 2022-07-01 | 中国民航大学 | Prediction method for actually measured airway data based on ADS-B |
| CN118587941A (en) * | 2024-08-05 | 2024-09-03 | 飞友科技有限公司 | Flight conflict resolution method and system |
| CN118587941B (en) * | 2024-08-05 | 2024-10-25 | 飞友科技有限公司 | Flight conflict resolution method and system |
Also Published As
| Publication number | Publication date |
|---|---|
| CN112562421B (en) | 2022-04-12 |
Similar Documents
| Publication | Publication Date | Title |
|---|---|---|
| US8554457B2 (en) | System and method for airport surface management | |
| CN110728857B (en) | Low-altitude isolation airspace traffic management method based on vertically-taking-off and landing unmanned aerial vehicle | |
| CN111508279B (en) | Method for marking weather avoidance field | |
| CN111862685B (en) | Flight conflict evaluation method based on multi-dimensional indexes | |
| CN106651088B (en) | Flight quality monitoring method based on temporal GIS | |
| CN108152866B (en) | Aviation weather forecast quality evaluation method based on weather influence flight quantity | |
| US10607496B2 (en) | System and method to assist pilots in determining aircraft phase transition time based on monitored clearance information | |
| US20220335837A1 (en) | Flight management method and system using same | |
| Pejovic et al. | Relationship between air traffic demand, safety and complexity in high-density airspace in Europe | |
| CN112562421B (en) | Flight conflict evaluation method based on index system | |
| Sherry et al. | Big data analysis of irregular operations: Aborted approaches and their underlying factors | |
| Wang et al. | The effect of psychological risk elements on pilot flight operational performance | |
| Standfuss et al. | Applicability of Current Complexity Metrics in ATM Performance Benchmarking and Potential Benefits of Considering Weather Conditions | |
| Haynie | An investigation of capacity and safety in near-terminal airspace for guiding information technology adoption | |
| CN113627798B (en) | Quantitative evaluation method for control efficiency of high-altitude airway flight | |
| CN115564188A (en) | Flight plan robustness evaluation system and method | |
| Liu et al. | Airborne flight time: A comparative analysis between the US and China | |
| Yang et al. | Quantifying convective weather impacts to airspace capacity: framework and preliminary results | |
| Oh et al. | An analysis of runway accident precursors based on latent class model | |
| Majumdar et al. | A trend analysis of air traffic occurrences in the UK airspace | |
| Pritchett et al. | 'Party line'information use studies and implications for ATC datalink communications | |
| Li | Evaluating the benefits of accepting cruising flight levels that are not in compliance with the hemispherical rules in the pacific airspace | |
| Zhang et al. | Integrated capacity evaluation method on terminal area capacity based on the controller workload statistics | |
| Hansman et al. | " Party Line" Information Use Studies and Implications for ATC Datalink Communications | |
| Diana | Measuring taxi-out time improvements: A Six-Sigma approach in the case of Charlotte Douglas International Airport |
Legal Events
| Date | Code | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| PB01 | Publication | ||
| PB01 | Publication | ||
| SE01 | Entry into force of request for substantive examination | ||
| SE01 | Entry into force of request for substantive examination | ||
| GR01 | Patent grant | ||
| GR01 | Patent grant |