DE102022121418A1 - Device for determining and displaying the consequences of a fault condition in aircraft systems - Google Patents

Abstract

The invention relates to a device and a method for determining and displaying the consequences of a fault state of systems of an aircraft (100), the aircraft (100) having a number N of systems SYSn(101), the time-dependent system state SZn(t) of which is determined by a number Mn of system parameters PARMn,mn(t) is defined, with n = 1, 2, ..., N and N ≧ 1 and mn = 1, 2,..., Mn and Mn ≧ 1 and t: = time, whereby for the entirety of the system parameters PARMn,mn(t) a Πn=1NMn−dimensional system parameter space Perallow is predetermined, which defines normal operation of the systems SYSn(101). The device comprises a first unit (102), which is designed and set up for a current operating phase BP(t0) of the aircraft (100) to be determined, with t0: current time; a second unit (120), which is designed and set up to determine current system parameters PARMn,mn(t0) of the systems SYSn(101); an evaluation unit (103) which is designed and set up for this purpose; based on the current system parameters PARMn,mn(t0) and the system parameter space Permissive to determine a current error state FZ(t0) of one or more of the systems SYSn that deviates from normal operation, and on the basis of the determined error state FZ(t0) and the determined current operating phase BP(t0) of the aircraft for a number S of predetermined impact categories AWKs for each impact category AWKs for the error condition FZ(t0) to determine error consequences FKAWKs(t), with s = 1, 2, ..., S and S ≧ 1; and an output unit (104) which is designed and set up to output the determined assigned error consequences FKAWKs(t) for one or more of the impact categories AWKs.

Description

The invention relates to a device for determining and displaying the consequences of an error condition in systems of an aircraft. The invention further relates to an aircraft with a similar device and a method for operating a similar device.

The term “system(s) of an aircraft” is understood broadly here. It includes at least all technical systems that are arranged on and/or in an aircraft and whose control is required for safe operation of the aircraft.

Examples of such systems can be found in the following non-exhaustive list: air conditioning, heating systems, cooling systems, pressure control systems, power supply systems, fire protection systems, fire/smoke detector systems, fire extinguishing systems, flight control systems, flight guidance systems, actuators, control surface systems, fuel systems, hydraulic systems, tank systems, energy storage systems, ice and rain protection systems etc.

Today's systems for warning aircraft crews about error states in aircraft systems (crew alerting systems, CAS) focus on displaying identified system errors. The pilot's task is then to draw attention to the displayed system errors based on their aircraft system knowledge and knowledge of the system to draw conclusions about the relevant effects/consequences of the operational operation of the current flight mission and to take appropriate measures.

As research into the causes of accidents shows, the pilots quickly become overwhelmed and, in the sometimes very short decision-making periods, make wrong decisions.

The object of the invention is to provide a device which, on the one hand, determines error states in aircraft systems and, in addition, enables improved determination and display of the consequences of one or more simultaneously determined error states.

The invention results from the features of the independent claims. Advantageous further developments and refinements are the subject of the dependent claims. Further features, possible applications and advantages of the invention result from the following description and the explanation of exemplary embodiments of the invention, which are shown in the figures.

Systemparameterraum $P_{erlaubt}$

vorgegeben ist, der einen Normalbetrieb der Systeme SYS_n definiert. Die Vorrichtung umfasst eine erste Einheit, die dazu ausgeführt und eingerichtet ist, eine aktuelle Betriebsphase BP(t₀) des Luftfahrzeugs zu ermitteln, mit t₀: aktuelle Zeit; eine zweite Einheit, die dazu ausgeführt und eingerichtet ist, aktuelle Systemparameter PARM_n,mn (t₀) der Systeme SYS_n zu ermitteln, eine Auswerteeinheit, die dazu ausgeführt und eingerichtet ist, auf Basis der aktuellen Systemparameter PARM_n,mn (t₀) und des Systemparameterraums $P_{erlaubt}$

einen vom Normalbetrieb abweichenden aktuellen Fehlerzustand FZ(t₀) eines oder mehrerer der Systeme SYS_n zu ermitteln, und auf Basis des ermittelten Fehlerzustands FZ(t₀) und der ermittelten aktuellen Betriebsphase BP(t₀) des Luftfahrzeugs für eine Anzahl S vorgegebener Auswirkungskategorien AWK_s je Auswirkungskategorie AWK_s für den Fehlerzustand FZ(t₀) Fehlerkonsequenzen FK_AWKs (t) zu ermitteln, mit s = 1, 2, ..., S und S ≧ 1; und eine Ausgabeeinheit, die dazu ausgeführt und eingerichtet ist, für eine oder mehrere der Auswirkungskategorien AWK_s die ermittelten zugeordneten Fehlerkonsequenzen FK_AWKs (t) auszugeben.A first aspect of the invention relates to a device for determining and displaying the consequences of an error state of systems of an aircraft, the aircraft having a number N of systems SYS _n , the time-dependent system state SZ _n (t) each being determined by a number M _n of system parameters PARM _{n, m n} (t) is defined, with n = 1, 2, ..., N and N ≧1 and m _n = 1, 2,..., M _n and M _n ≧ 1 and t:= time, where for the Totality of system parameters PARM _{n,m n} (t) a ${\mathrm{\Pi }}_{n=1}^N{M}_n-\text{more dimensional}$

System parameter space $P_{erlaubt}$

is specified, which defines normal operation of the SYS _n systems. The device comprises a first unit which is designed and set up to determine a current operating phase BP(t ₀ ) of the aircraft, with t ₀ : current time; a second unit that is designed and set up to receive current system parameters PARM _{n,m n} (t ₀ ) of the systems SYS _n to determine an evaluation unit that is designed and set up for this purpose, based on the current system parameters PARM _{n,m n} (t ₀ ) and the system parameter space $P_{erlaubt}$

to determine a current error state FZ(t ₀ ) of one or more of the systems SYS _n that deviates from normal operation, and on the basis of the determined error state FZ(t ₀ ) and the determined current operating phase BP(t ₀ ) of the aircraft for a number S of predetermined impact categories AWK _s per impact category AWK _s for the error state FZ(t ₀ ) Error consequences FK _{AWK s} (t) to be determined, with s = 1, 2, ..., S and S ≧ 1; and an output unit that is designed and set up to generate the determined assigned error consequences FK _AWK for one or more of the impact categories AWK _{s s} (t) to spend.

For example, an aircraft includes N = 100 systems. Each of these systems has a time-dependent system state SZ _n (t), which is determined by a number M _n of time-dependent system parameters PARM _{n,m n} (t) is defined. For example, the system state for the first system (n=1): SZ ₁ (t) through M ₁ = 15 system parameters PARM _{n=1,m n} (t), with m _n = 1, 2, ..., 15 = M _n , etc..

The first unit serves to determine a current operating phase BP(t ₀ ) of the aircraft, where t ₀ is the current time. Over the course of a flight, the aircraft is in different operating phases BP(t), as will be explained in more detail below. For this purpose, the first unit advantageously comprises one Processor, which is connected, for example, to corresponding sensors or to corresponding aircraft systems, whose data/signals enable a respective current operating phase to be determined. For this purpose, the first unit is, for example, with a flight guidance system and/or a navigation system and/or an autopilot system and/or a FADEC system (“Full Authority Digital Engine Control”), and/or a “flight mode switch” and/ or a “Ground Mode Switch” and/or a “Flap Control System”, etc. connected.

Advantageously, the first unit is also designed to determine the operating phases BP(t 0 + Δt) of the aircraft that follow the current operating phase BP(t ₀ ) up to the end of the current flight, ie, the operating phases BP(t ₀ + Δt) ahead of it, where t ₀ is the current time and Δt is a variable time period covering a period from the current time t ₀ until the scheduled termination of the flight at a time t _landing : Δt ∈ {0, t _landing - t ₀ }.

• • Betrieb des Luftfahrzeugs am Boden an einer Parkposition, Halteposition, (ParkPosition, „Taxi-Holding Position“)
• • Betrieb des Luftfahrzeugs am Boden beim Rollen („Taxi“)
• • Betrieb des Luftfahrzeugs am Boden während des Startvorgangs („T/O-Run“)
• • Betrieb des Luftfahrzeugs im Steigflug („Climb“)
• • Betrieb des Luftfahrzeugs im Horizontalflug („Cruise“)
• • Betrieb des Luftfahrzeugs im Sinkflug („Descent“)
• • Betrieb des Luftfahrzeugs im Horizontalflug („Holding Pattern“)
• • Betrieb des Luftfahrzeugs im Anflug („Approach“)
• • Betrieb des Luftfahrzeugs während der Landung („Landing“)
• • Betrieb des Luftfahrzeugs während des Durchstartens („Go-Around“)

An operating phase BP(t) of the aircraft can be defined, for example, by one or more of the following:

• • Operation of the aircraft on the ground at a parking position, holding position (ParkPosition, “Taxi-Holding Position”)
• • Operation of the aircraft on the ground while taxiing (“taxi”)
• • Operation of the aircraft on the ground during the take-off process (“T/O-Run”)
• • Operation of the aircraft in climb
• • Operation of the aircraft in horizontal flight (“cruise”)
• • Operation of the aircraft in descent (“descent”)
• • Operation of the aircraft in horizontal flight (“Holding Pattern”)
• • Operation of the aircraft in the approach (“approach”)
• • Operation of the aircraft during landing (“landing”)
• • Operation of the aircraft during go-around

This list is not exhaustive and can be supplemented in particular by operational and/or air traffic control-related or defined operating phases BP(t).

• • Betrieb des Luftfahrzeugs am Boden während des Startvorgangs („T/O-Run“)
• • Betrieb des Luftfahrzeugs im Steigflug („Climb“)
• • Betrieb des Luftfahrzeugs im Horizontalflug („Cruise“)
• • Betrieb des Luftfahrzeugs im Sinkflug („Descent“)
• • Betrieb des Luftfahrzeugs im Anflug („Approach“)

The unit advantageously takes into account at least the following operating phases BP(t) of the aircraft for a flight:

• • Operation of the aircraft on the ground during the take-off process (“T/O-Run”)
• • Operation of the aircraft in climb
• • Operation of the aircraft in horizontal flight (“cruise”)
• • Operation of the aircraft in descent (“descent”)
• • Operation of the aircraft on the approach (“approach”)

Systemparameterraum $P_{erlaubt}$

vorgegeben, der einen Normalbetrieb der jeweiligen Systeme SYS_n angibt/definiert. Die zweite Einheit ermittelt die aktuellen Systemparameter PARM_n,mn (t₀) der Systeme SYS_n und ist hierzu vorteilhaft über Daten-/Signalleitungen mit den Systeme SYS_n verbunden. Die zweite Einheit weist vorteilhaft einen Prozessor auf, auf dem ein entsprechendes Programm läuft. Die zweite Einheit ist weiterhin mit der Auswerteeinheit verbunden, an die die ermittelten aktuellen Systemparameter PARM_n,mn (t₀) bereitgestellt werden.For the entire system parameters PARM _{n,m n} (t) is a ${\mathrm{\Pi }}_{n=1}^N{M}_n-\text{more dimensional}$

System parameter space $P_{erlaubt}$

specified, which indicates/defines normal operation of the respective systems SYS _n . The second unit determines the current system parameters PARM _{n,m n} (t ₀ ) of the systems SYS _n and is advantageously connected to the systems SYS _n via data/signal lines. The second unit advantageously has a processor on which a corresponding program runs. The second unit is further connected to the evaluation unit to which the determined current system parameters PARM _{n,m n} (t ₀ ) are provided.

dann ermittelt die Auswerteeinheit einen aktuellen Fehlerzustand FZ(t₀) in einem jeweiligen oder in mehreren ggf. miteinander vernetzen Systemen SYS_n.If one or more system parameters are PARM _{n,m n} (t ₀ ) outside the permitted system parameter space $P_{erlaubt},$

The evaluation unit then determines a current error state FZ(t ₀ ) in a respective system or in several systems SYS _n that may be networked with one another.

können insbesondere auch Auswirkungen für vorausliegenden zukünftige Zeiten t haben, so dass hier als Variable t und nicht t₀ aufgeführt ist.The evaluation unit further determines one or more error consequences FK AWK for each impact category AWK _s based on the current error state FZ(t ₀ ) and the determined current operating phase BP(t ₀ ) of the aircraft for a number S of predetermined impact categories _{AWK s s} (t), with s = 1, 2, ..., S and S ≧ 1; i.e. FK _{AWK s} (t) = FK _{AWK s} (FZ(t ₀ ), BP(t ₀ )). The consequences of errors $F{K}_{AW{K}_s}\left(t\right)$

can in particular also have effects for future times t ahead, so that t and not t ₀ is listed here as a variable.

• • Steuerbarkeit des Luftfahrzeugs
• • Flugleistung des Luftfahrzeugs
• • Reichweite des Luftfahrzeugs
• • Treibstoffverbrauch des Luftfahrzeugs
• • Maximale nutzbare Flughöhe des Luftfahrzeugs
• • Nutzbarkeit einer automatischen Systemsteuerung für einzelne Systeme SYS_n
• • Nutzbarkeit einer manuellen Systemsteuerung für einzelne Systeme SYS_n

The evaluation unit advantageously takes into account one or more of the following non-exhaustive listed impact categories AWK _s :

• • Controllability of the aircraft
• • Flight performance of the aircraft
• • Range of the aircraft
• • Fuel consumption of the aircraft
• • Maximum usable flight altitude of the aircraft
• • Usability of an automatic system control for individual systems SYS _n
• • Usability of a manual system control for individual systems SYS _n

The error consequences FK _AWK are advantageous _s (t) additionally determined for operational phases BP(t ₀ + Δt) of the aircraft ahead in time up to the completion of the respective flight, ie for each operational phase BP(t ₀ +Δt) ahead in time up to the completion of the respective flight at time t _landing the consequences of errors FK _{AWK s} (t) = FK _{AWK s} (t ₀ + Δt)) = FK _{AWK s} (FZ(t ₀ ), BP(t ₀ + Δt)) is determined separately, where t ₀ is the current time and Δt is a variable time period that covers a period from the current time t ₀ to the planned termination of the flight at a time t _landing covers: Δt ∈ {0, t _landing -t ₀ }.

In this case, it is particularly advantageous to use the preceding operating phases of the aircraft when determining the consequences of the error FK _{AWK s} (t) taken into account.

If, for example, a current error condition FZ(t ₀ ) occurs during a current operating phase BP(t ₀ ): = horizontal cruise flight in FL 410, then, in order to remain in the above example, FK _AWK is used when determining the error consequences _s (t) the operational phases BP(t ₀ + Δt): descent, approach and landing that necessarily follow the horizontal cruise flight are taken into account.

For example, if engine damage occurs on an engine of a twin-engine commercial aircraft during horizontal flight at cruising altitude (e.g. FL 410), this will have an impact, for example, on the controllability of the aircraft, the flight performance of the aircraft, the range of the aircraft, and the fuel consumption of the aircraft , the maximum usable flight altitude of the aircraft, if necessary the usability of an automatic system control for individual systems SYS _n and the like. The impact category AWK _s therefore indicates the “dimensions” for which error consequences FK _{AWK s} (t) can be determined.

The evaluation unit is advantageously designed and set up in such a way that the determination of the error consequences FK _{AWK s} (t) based on a specified look-up table. This look-up table is advantageously created in such a way that the table is based on the determined error state FZ(t ₀ ), the determined current operating phase BP(t ₀ ), if necessary the previous operating phase(s) BP(t ₀ + Δt) of the aircraft and, depending on the specified impact categories AWK _s, one or more error consequences FK _AWK for each impact category AWK _s (as input information). _s (t) can be removed.

Alternatively, the evaluation unit is advantageously designed and set up in such a way that determining the error consequences FK _{AWK s} (t) depending on the determined error state FZ(t ₀ ), the determined current operating phase BP(t ₀ ), possibly the previous operating phase(s) BP(t ₀ + Δt) of the aircraft and depending on the specified impact categories AWK _s per impact category AWK _s is based on a specified technical system model TSM of the aircraft. This technical system model TSM is preferably available as a mathematical model, the technical system behavior of which is defined or depicted in the model using appropriate mathematical relationships, for example in the form of differential equations. In other words, the system model depicts the aircraft as a whole system with its technical system behavior, that is, it depicts the technical interaction of the individual systems that make up the aircraft and, in particular, allows the aforementioned determination of the FK _AWK error consequences _{s ,TSM} (t).

$$F{K}_{AW{K}_s,OSM}\left(\text{t}\right)=F{K}_{AW{K}_s,OSM}\left(FZ\left(t_0\right),BP\left(t_0+\Delta t\right),EUF\left(t\right)\right)$$

The technical system model TSM of the aircraft is advantageously supplemented by a mathematical operational (simulation) model OSM, which is designed to provide flight operational states FBZ(t) of the aircraft [such as current and/or dynamic states predicted for the planned flight route aircraft] and/or provided current and/or external environmental factors predicted for the planned flight route EUF(t) [such as current and/or predicted weather conditions along a flight route of the aircraft, current and/or predicted air traffic information (closed airways, closed airports, etc .)] and the resulting error consequences FK _{AWK s ,OSM} (t) to determine. The determined error consequences FK _{AWK s ,OSM} (t) in this embodiment variant are therefore advantageously based on the determined current error state FZ(t ₀ ), the determined current operating phase BP(t ₀ ), as well as on provided information on flight operational states FBZ(t) of the aircraft and/or on provided Information about external environmental factors EUF(t) along the flight route: $$F{K}_{AW{K}_s,OSM}\left(\text{t}\right)=F{K}_{AW{K}_s,OSM}\left(FZ\left(t_0\right),bP\left(t_0\right),EUF\left(t\right)\right)\text{or}$$

$$F{K}_{AW{K}_s,OSM}\left(\text{t}\right)=F{K}_{AW{K}_s,OSM}\left(FZ\left(t_0\right),bP\left(t_0+\Delta t\right),EUF\left(t\right)\right)$$

The operational simulation model OSM is advantageously provided with corresponding current data FBZ(t) and EUF(t)), such as the current and/or predicted dynamic state of the aircraft, current and/or predicted weather data along the planned flight route, as well as air traffic information the flight route is provided. This is preferably done via wireless transmission of the data/information from ground stations and/or satellites to the evaluation unit and thus to the operational simulation model OSM. The evaluation unit advantageously has the corresponding data receiving interfaces.

d.h. das technischen System-Modell TSM erzeugt zunächst die darauf basierenden Fehlerkonsequenzen FK_AWKs,TSM(t). Darauf basierend erzeugt das operationelle Simulations-Modell OSM, die unter Berücksichtigung von FBZ(t) und/oder EUF(t) erzeugten Fehlerkonsequenzen FK_AWKs,OSM(t). Hierzu kann das operationelle Simulations-Modell OSM auch auf Eingangsdaten und/oder Teilergebnisse des technischen System-Modells TSM zurückgreifen.The operational simulation model OSM is advantageously connected/networked with the technical system model TSM of the aircraft and advantageously uses its input data and/or its determined partial results and/or its determined results on error consequences FK _{AWK s ,TSM} (t), so that the following serial chain advantageously results: $$F{K}_{AW{K}_{s}TSM}\left(\text{t}\right)\to F{K}_{AW{K}_{s}OSM}\left(\text{t}\right)=F{K}_{AW{K}_s}\left(\text{t}\right),$$

i.e. the technical system model TSM first generates the error consequences FK _AWK based on it _{s ,TSM} (t). Based on this, the operational simulation model OSM generates the error consequences FK _AWK generated taking FBZ(t) and/or EUF(t) into account _{s ,OSM} (t). For this purpose, the operational simulation model OSM can also use input data and/or partial results of the technical system model TSM.

The error consequences FK _AWK are therefore advantageous _s (t) determined using a specified technical system model TSM of the aircraft and using a specified operational simulation module.

Simulations with the technical system model TSM of the aircraft and, if necessary, with the additional operational simulation module OSM are advantageously used to generate the aforementioned look-up table.

According to the invention, the output unit is designed and set up to generate the determined assigned current error consequences FK _AWK for one or more of the impact categories AWK _{s s} (t) to spend. The output unit is advantageously an optical output unit, in particular a display unit such as a screen, a monitor, a display, etc.

For example, the determined error consequences FK _AWK are sent from the output unit _s (t) advantageously output as a table in which each line specifies the error consequence(s) for a uniquely assigned impact category AWK _s . For example, if the error consequences are FK _{AWK s} (t) not only the current operating phase is determined, but also broken down for previous operating phases of the aircraft, then the columns of the table give the error consequences FK _{AWK s} (t) for various operational phases ahead.

The evaluation unit is advantageously designed and set up to detect the determined error consequences FK _{AWK s} (t) to evaluate their criticality and, depending on this evaluation, each of the identified error consequences FK _{AWK s} (t) into one of a number of predetermined criticality categories KK _g , with g = 1, 2, ..., G and G ≧2. Furthermore, the output unit is advantageously designed and set up to prevent error consequences FK _{AWK s} (t) to output each criticality category KK _g in a quality Q(KK _g ) assigned to the criticality category KK _g . In this case, “criticality” is intended to be a measure of the “dangerousness” of an error consequence FK _{AWK s} (t) be understood for further flight/flight operations. The criticality is preferably assessed using a specified look-up table, the error consequences FK _{AWK s} (t) assigns respective criticality categories.

The evaluation unit is particularly advantageously designed and set up to evaluate the criticality in relation to a safe further flight with its operational phases ahead. In this further development, not only error consequences FK _AWK are considered for error states that occur _s (t) is determined, but also their effects are assessed for operational phases of the aircraft ahead up to the completion of the respective flight.

The quality O(KK _g ) is advantageously a color, a background color and/or a font and/or symbol color and/or a symbol type or a font.

In an advantageous development, the evaluation unit is designed and set up to develop the error state FZ(t ₀ ) for all systems SYS _n for times ahead t = t ₀ + Δt as error states FZ(t) on the basis of the error state FZ(t 0 ) determined for a current time t ₀ . = FZ(t ₀ + Δt) and based on the predicted error states FZ(t) = FZ(t ₀ + Δt) predicted error consequences FK _{AWK s} (t) = FK _{AWK s} (t ₀ + Δt) to be determined, with Δt: time difference. Furthermore, the output unit in this development is designed and set up to detect the determined predicted error consequences. FK _{AWK s} (t) = FK _{AWK s} (t ₀ + Δt) for one or more of the impact categories AWK _S over time t, and/or for previous operating phases BP(t) = BP(t ₀ + Δt) of the aircraft and/or for positions POS(t ) = POS(t ₀ + Δt) along a provided forward flight route of the aircraft.

This allows, for example, error states FZ(t) to be taken into account, which are known to have a time course and may give rise to further errors.

The predicted error consequences FK _AWK are advantageously determined _s (t) = FK _{AWK s} (t ₀ + Δt) based on a specified look-up table and/or on a specified system model of the aircraft. The predicted error consequences FK _AWK are advantageous _s (t) = FK _{AWK s} (t ₀ + Δt) can be determined based on the specified system model of the aircraft using a neural network.

A further aspect of the invention relates to an aircraft with a device as described above.

$P_{erlaubt}$

Systemparameterraum $P_{erlaubt}$

vorgegeben ist, der einen Normalbetrieb der Systeme SYS_n definiert, mit folgenden Schritten:

• • Ermitteln einer aktuelle Betriebsphase BP(t₀) des Luftfahrzeugs;
• • Ermitteln der aktuellen Systemparameter PARM_n,mn (t₀) der Systeme SYS_n;
• • auf Basis der aktuellen Systemparameter PARM_n,mn (t₀) und des Systemparameterraums $P_{erlaubt}$
  
  Ermitteln eines vom Normalbetrieb abweichenden aktuellen Fehlerzustandes FZ(t₀) eines oder mehrerer der Systeme SYS_n;
• • auf Basis des ermittelten aktuellen Fehlerzustands FZ(t₀) und der ermittelten aktuellen Betriebsphase BP(t₀) des Luftfahrzeugs für eine Anzahl S vorgegebener Auswirkungskategorien AWK_S je Auswirkungskategorie AWK_S für den aktuellen Fehlerzustand FZ(t₀) Ermitteln von Fehlerkonsequenzen FK_AWKs (t), mit s = 1, 2, ..., S und S ≧1; und
• • für eine oder mehrere der Auswirkungskategorien AWK_S Ausgeben der ermittelten zugeordneten Fehlerkonsequenzen FK_AWKs (t).

A further aspect of the invention relates to a method for operating a device for determining and displaying the consequences of a fault state of systems of an aircraft, the aircraft having a number N of systems SYS _n , the time-dependent system state SZ _n (t) each being represented by a number M _n of system parameters PARM _{n,m n} (t) is defined, with n = 1, 2, ..., N and N ≧ 1 and m _n = 1, 2,..., M _n and M _n ≧ 1 and t := time, where for the Totality of system parameters PARM _{n,m n} (t) a ${\mathrm{\Pi }}_{n=1}^N{M}_n-\text{more dimensional}$

$P_{erlaubt}$

System parameter space $P_{erlaubt}$

is specified, which defines normal operation of the SYS _n systems, with the following steps:

• • Determine a current operating phase BP(t ₀ ) of the aircraft;
• • Determine the current system parameters PARM _{n,m n} (t ₀ ) of the systems SYS _n ;
• • based on the current system parameters PARM _{n,m n} (t ₀ ) and the system parameter space $P_{erlaubt}$
  
  Determining a current error state FZ(t ₀ ) of one or more of the systems SYS _n that deviates from normal operation;
• • based on the determined current error state FZ(t ₀ ) and the determined current operating phase BP(t ₀ ) of the aircraft for a number S of predetermined impact categories AWK _S per impact category AWK _S for the current error state FZ(t ₀ ) Determination of error consequences FK _{AWK s} (t), with s = 1, 2, ..., S and S ≧1; and
• • for one or more of the impact categories AWK _S outputting the determined assigned error consequences FK _{AWK s} (t).

The error consequences are advantageously determined FK _{AWK s} (t) based on a given look-up table. The error consequences are advantageously determined FK _{AWK s} (t) based on a given system model of the aircraft. The error consequences FK _AWK are also advantageous _s (t) determined based on the specified system model of the aircraft using a neural network.

An advantageous development of the method is characterized by the fact that the determined error consequences are FK _{AWK s} (t) are assessed with regard to their criticality with regard to safe, uninterrupted further operation of the aircraft in advance, in particular with regard to safe further flight execution until the end of the current flight and, depending on this assessment, each of the identified error consequences FK _{AWK s} (t) is divided into one of a number of predetermined criticality categories KK _g , with g = 1, 2, ..., G and G ≧ 2; and error consequences FK _{AWK s} (t) each criticality category KK _g is output in a quality Q(KK _g ) assigned to the criticality category KK _g .

A further advantageous development of the method is characterized by the fact that, based on the error state FZ(t ₀ ) of one or more of the systems SYS _n determined for a current time t ₀ , its development for all systems SYS _n for times t = t ₀ ahead + Δt predicted as error states FZ(t) = FZ(t ₀ + Δt) and predicted error consequences FK _AWK based on the predicted error states FZ(t) = FZ(t ₀ + Δt). _s (t) FK _{AWK s} (t ₀ + Δt) can be determined, where Δt is a variable time period that covers a period from the current time t ₀ to the planned termination of the flight at a time t _landing : Δt ∈ {0, t _landing -t ₀ }. The error states FZ(t) = FZ(t ₀ + Δt) are advantageously predicted based on a predetermined system model of the aircraft. The predicted error states FZ(t) = FZ(t ₀ + Δt) are advantageously determined based on the specified system model of the aircraft using a neural network.

The determined predicted error consequences become advantageous. FK _{AWK s} (t) = FK _{AWK s} (t ₀ + Δt) for one or more of the impact categories AWK _s issued over time t, and/or for previous operating phases BP(t) = BP(t ₀ + Δt) of the aircraft until the completion of the current flight and/ or for positions POS(t) = POS(t ₀ + Δt) along a provided forward flight route of the aircraft until landing at the destination airport and/or an alternative airport.

The predicted error consequences FK _AWK are advantageously determined _s (t) = FK _{AWK s} (t ₀ + Δt) based on a given look-up table. The predicted error consequences FK _AWK are advantageously determined _s (t) = FK _{AWK s} (t ₀ + Δt) based on a given technical system model of the aircraft.

The predicted error consequences FK _AWK are advantageous _s (t) = FK _{AWK s} (t ₀ + Δt) is determined based on the specified system model of the aircraft using a neural network.

Further advantageous embodiments and advantages of the proposed method result from a corresponding and analogous transfer of the above statements to the proposed device.

Further advantages, features and details emerge from the following description, in which at least one exemplary embodiment is described in detail - if necessary with reference to the drawing. Identical, similar and/or functionally identical parts are provided with the same reference numerals.

• 1 ein von der Ausgabeeinheit ausgegebene Tabelle, in der Fehlerkonsequenzen für verschiedene Auswirkungskategorien AWK_s und Flugphasen (= Betriebsphasen BP(t) = BP(t₀ + Δt)) des Luftfahrzeugs angegeben sind,
• 2 ein von der Ausgabeeinheit ausgegebene Tabelle, in der Fehlerkonsequenzen für verschiedene Auswirkungskategorien AWK_s und Flugphasen (= Betriebsphasen BP(t) = BP(t₀ + Δt)) des Luftfahrzeugs angegeben sind,
• 3 einen schematisierten Aufbau einer vorgeschlagenen Vorrichtung, und
• 4 einen stark schematisierten Ablaufplan eines vorgeschlagenen Verfahrens.

Show it:

• 1 a table issued by the output unit in which error consequences are specified for various impact categories AWK _s and flight phases (= operating phases BP(t) = BP(t ₀ + Δt)) of the aircraft,
• 2 a table issued by the output unit in which error consequences are specified for various impact categories AWK _s and flight phases (= operating phases BP(t) = BP(t ₀ + Δt)) of the aircraft,
• 3 a schematic structure of a proposed device, and
• 4 a highly schematized flowchart of a proposed procedure.

The proposed device determines the consequences of current FZ(t ₀ ) and possibly predicted FZ(t + Δt) system errors (= error states) of aircraft systems SYS _n during a flight for the current and, if applicable, for the preceding operating phase(s) of the aircraft 100 and visually displays the consequences of the system errors so that the pilots of the aircraft are provided with already assessed information about the consequences of the error and thus the challenges that lie ahead.

In addition, the error consequences can be FK _{AWK s} (t) can be represented, for example, as a bar in a table that has the two axes “flight phases” (= operating phases BP(t) = BP(t ₀ + Δt) of the aircraft 100) and “impact categories” AWK _s (cf. 1 ). Any number of error consequences FK _AWK can be used in this table _s (t) are shown. In the exemplary embodiment, these are displayed as horizontal bars which extend over the various preceding operating phases BP(t) = BP(t ₀ + Δt) of the aircraft 100 to which they have a consequence. The consequences of errors FK _{AWK s} (t) (bars) can be colored according to their criticality, for example following the common color scheme from yellow to red (low or high criticality). Through the graphical assignment to the operating phases BP(t) and the respective impact category, it is immediately apparent from the grayscale that in 1 In the example shown, landing is most likely the greatest challenge, as two consequences of medium criticality (error consequence 2 and error consequence 4) and one consequence of high criticality (error consequence 3) occur in this flight phase. It can be seen that restrictions in controllability, automation and range are to be expected in this operating phase.

• Ein zweimotoriges Verkehrsluftfahrzeug (bspw. ein Airbus A350) befindet sich im Steigflug eines normalen Mittelstreckenflugs. Dabei ergeben sich folgende Fehler.

Fehler 1: Während des Steigflugs zeigt das rechte Triebwerk eine überhöhte Öltemperatur. Dies erfordert, den Standardprozeduren folgend, ein Abschalten des Triebwerks. Fehler 2: Aufgrund eines Fehlers des linken Schubhebels lässt sich das linke Triebwerk nicht mehr manuell steuern, sondern kann nur noch über den elektronischen Schubregler gesteuert werden. Ist dieser ausgeschaltet, liefert das Triebwerk in einem Notfallmodus (Failsafe) entweder maximalen Dauerschub bei eingefahrenen Landeklappen oder Leerlauf bei ausgefahrenen Klappen (um die Landung zu ermöglichen). Bei aktivem Schubregler bestehen keine Einschränkungen, da dieser die Schubhebelstellung nicht benötigt. Fehler 3: ein sporadischer Fehler im Schubregler lässt diesen nur in einem Submodus, abhängig von der vertikalen Bahnführung, funktionieren. The exemplary representation shown above will be explained below using a concrete example. The proposed device offers particular advantages in gradual error scenarios or in contradictory situations. The example error situation is as follows:

• A twin-engine commercial aircraft (e.g. an Airbus A350) is in the climb of a normal medium-haul flight. This results in the following errors.

Error 1: During the climb, the right engine shows an excessive oil temperature. Following standard procedures, this requires the engine to be shut down. Error 2: Due to a fault in the left thrust lever, the left engine can no longer be controlled manually, but can only be controlled via the electronic thrust controller. If this is switched off, the engine delivers either maximum continuous thrust with the flaps retracted or idle with the flaps extended (to enable landing) in an emergency mode (failsafe). There are no restrictions when the throttle controller is active, as it does not require the throttle lever position. Error 3: A sporadic error in the thrust controller only allows it to function in a submode, depending on the vertical trajectory.

The combination of errors 1, 2 and 3 leads to the situation that, in the short term, shutting down the right engine using the standard procedure is appropriate.

However, in relation to the entire flight mission until landing, this is the worst option, since without countermeasures the aircraft will then be at low altitude and low speed with practically no thrust (one engine off, the other idling).

A more far-sighted solution in this case would be to try to reduce the oil temperature in the right engine or to only switch it off temporarily in order to switch it on again in time before landing in order to have a controllable engine available from the moment the flaps are extended.

This is an insight that the flight crew can currently only gain after analyzing the overall situation in conjunction with their own in-depth knowledge of the system.

In particular, the result of accepting a temporary deterioration in order to achieve a long-term improvement would have to be recognized by the pilots themselves in the state of the art, but this certainly cannot be generally accepted. In the prior art, system errors are displayed at system level (“engine 1 high oil temperature”, “thrust lever 1 error” and “thrust controller error”). The recognition of error consequences even for operating phases of the aircraft that are ahead in time, in particular the recognition of critical operating phases that are ahead in time (here: landing and the “go-around”) is made possible by the proposed device.

The proposed device determines the consequences of the identified errors for the current and subsequent operating phases and displays them graphically. This makes it easier for the pilots to understand the consequences of a recognized error condition FZ(t) for the further execution of the current flight.

The consequences for the further course of the flight resulting from the above-mentioned errors (1, 2, 3) are (cf. 2 ): “Engine 1”: “Reduced reliability”: Reduced reliability of the right engine due to increased oil temperature (error 1). This applies to all phases of flight up to landing. This primarily affects the controllability of the aircraft 100. “Engine 1”: “Limited thrust control”: Since the left thrust lever has failed (error 2), the left engine can only be controlled to a limited extent due to the thrust controller error (error 3). This affects the flight phases “Descent” to “Go-Around” in the area of controllability of the aircraft 100. “Auto thrust unreliable": Unreliability of the throttle due to the faulty throttle (error 3). This is mainly a problem for the operational phases in which there is little or no thrust required. This affects the automation of the aircraft. “Reduced ya w control": During landing and the possible transition to go-around, due to the approach with only one engine, there is a lower yaw authority against the direction of the uncontrollable engine (errors 1, 2 and 3). This affects the area of controllability of the aircraft. “Reduced cli mb rate": Due to the impending failure of the right engine (error 1) and the associated protection or even temporary shutdown, there is a lower available climb performance during the "Climb" and "Cruise" flight phases. For the transition to the "Go-Around" operating phase ", the climb performance is lower than usual due to the idling problem with the landing flaps extended. Due to the proximity to the ground and the low speed range, the consequence of this error is higher for the "Go-Around" operating phase than for "Climb" and "Cruise". This error has an effect in the area of flight performance.

$$

Systemparameterraum $P_{erlaubt}$

vorgegeben ist, der einen Normalbetrieb der Systeme SYS_n 101 definiert. 3 shows a schematic structure of the proposed device for determining and displaying the consequences of a fault state of systems of an aircraft 100, the aircraft 100 having a number N of systems SYS _n 101, the time-dependent system state SZ _n (t) each being represented by a number M _n of System parameters PARM _{n,m n} (t) is defined with n = 1, 2, ..., N and N >> 1 and m _n = 1, 2,..., M _n and M _n ≧ 1 and t:= time, where for the entirety of the system parameters PARM _{n,m n} (t) a ${\mathrm{\Pi }}_{n=1}^N{M}_n-\text{more dimensional}$

$$

System parameter space $P_{erlaubt}$

is specified, which defines normal operation of the SYS _n 101 systems.

The device comprises a first unit 102, which is designed and set up to determine a current operating phase BP(t ₀ ) of the aircraft 100.

The device includes a second unit 120, which is designed and set up to receive current system parameters PARM _{n,m n} (t ₀ ) of the systems SYS _n 101 to be determined.

einen vom Normalbetrieb abweichenden Fehlerzustand FZ(t₀) eines oder mehrerer der Systemen SYS_n zu ermitteln, und auf Basis des ermittelten Fehlerzustands FZ(t₀) und der ermittelten aktuellen Betriebsphase BP(t₀) des Luftfahrzeugs für eine Anzahl S vorgegebener Auswirkungskategorien AWK_s je Auswirkungskategorie AWK_s für den aktuellen Fehlerzustand FZ(t₀) Fehlerkonsequenzen FK_AWKs (t) zu ermitteln, mit s = 1, 2, ..., S und S ≧ 1.The device further comprises an evaluation unit 103, which is designed and set up for this purpose based on the current system parameters PARM _{n,m n} (t ₀ ) and the system parameter space $P_{erlaubt}$

to determine an error state FZ(t ₀ ) of one or more of the systems SYS _n that deviates from normal operation, and on the basis of the determined error state FZ(t ₀ ) and the determined current operating phase BP(t ₀ ) of the Aircraft for a number S of predetermined impact categories AWK _s per impact category AWK _s for the current error state FZ(t ₀ ) error consequences FK _{AWK s} (t) to be determined, with s = 1, 2, ..., S and S ≧ 1.

The evaluation unit 103 is also designed and set up to determine the current error consequences FK _{AWK s} (t) to evaluate their criticality in relation to previous operating phases BP(t + Δt) of the aircraft 100, in particular in relation to a safe further flight and, depending on this assessment, each of the determined error consequences FK _{AWK s} (t) into one of a number of predetermined criticality categories KK _g , with g = 1, 2, ..., G and G ≧ 2.

The device finally comprises an output unit 104, which is designed and set up to generate the determined assigned error consequences FK _AWK for one or more of the impact categories AWK _{s s} (t) to output each criticality category KK _g in a color Q(KK _g ) assigned to the criticality category KK _g .

The arrows shown represent the data communication between the units.

Systemparameterraum $P_{erlaubt}$

vorgegeben ist, der einen Normalbetrieb der Systeme SYS_n 101 definiert. Das Verfahren umfasst folgende Schritte. 4 shows a highly schematized flowchart of a proposed method for operating a device for determining and displaying the consequences of a fault state of systems of an aircraft 100, the aircraft 100 having a number N of systems SYS _n 101, the time-dependent system state SZ _n (t) in each case a number M _n of system parameters PARM _{n,m n} (t) is defined, with n = 1, 2, ..., N and N ≧ 1 and m _n = 1, 2,..., M _n and M _n ≧ 1 and t:= time, where for the Totality of system parameters PARM _{n,m n} (t) a ${\mathrm{\Pi }}_{n=1}^N{M}_n-\text{more dimensional}$

System parameter space $P_{erlaubt}$

is specified, which defines normal operation of the SYS _n 101 systems. The procedure includes the following steps.

In a step 201, a current operating phase BP(t) of the aircraft 100 is determined.

In a step 202, the current system parameters PARM _n,m are determined _n (t ₀ ) of the systems SYS _n .

ein Ermitteln eines vom Normalbetrieb abweichenden aktuellen Fehlerzustandes FZ(t₀) eines oder mehrerer der Systeme SYS_n 101.In a step 203, PARM _n,m takes place based on the current system parameters _n (t ₀ ) and the system parameter space $P_{erlaubt}$

determining a current error state FZ(t ₀ ) of one or more of the systems SYS _n 101 that deviates from normal operation.

In a step 204, based on the determined current error state FZ(t ₀ ) and the determined current operating phase BP(t ₀ ) of the aircraft 101, AWK _s for the current error state FZ(t) is entered for a number S of predetermined impact categories AWK _s per impact category Determining current error consequences FK _{AWK s} (t), with s = 1, 2, ..., S and S ≧ 1.

In a step 204, the determined assigned current error consequences FK _AWK are output for one or more of the impact categories AWK _{s s} (t).

Although the invention has been illustrated and explained in detail by preferred embodiments, the invention is not limited by the examples disclosed and other variations may be derived therefrom by those skilled in the art without departing from the scope of the invention. It is therefore clear that a large number of possible variations exist. It is also to be understood that exemplary embodiments are truly examples only and should not be construed in any way as limiting the scope, application, or configuration of the invention. Rather, the preceding description and the description of the figures enable the person skilled in the art to concretely implement the exemplary embodiments, whereby the person skilled in the art can make a variety of changes, for example with regard to the function or the arrangement of individual elements mentioned in an exemplary embodiment, with knowledge of the disclosed inventive concept, without To leave the scope of protection, which is defined by the claims and their legal equivalents, such as a further explanation in the description.

Reference symbol list

100

aircraft

101

Systems SYS _n of the aircraft 100

102

Unit for determining a current operating phase of the aircraft 100

103

Evaluation unit

104

Output unit

201-205

Procedural steps

Claims (10)

Device for determining and displaying the consequences of a fault state of systems of an aircraft (100), the aircraft (100) having a number N of systems SYS _n (101), the time-dependent system state SZ _n (t) each being represented by a number M _n of System parameters PARM _{n,m n} (t) is defined, with n = 1, 2, ..., N and N ≧ 1 and m _n = 1, 2,..., M _n and M _n ≧ 1 and t:= time, where for the Totality of system parameters PARM _{n,m n} (t) a ${\mathrm{\Pi }}_{n=1}^N{M}_n-\text{more dimensional}$

System parameter space $P_{erlaubt}$

is specified, which defines normal operation of the systems SYS _n (101), comprising: - a first unit (102), which is designed and set up to determine a current operating phase BP(t ₀ ) of the aircraft (100), with t ₀ : current time; - A second unit (120), which is designed and set up to receive current system parameters PARM _{n,m n} (t ₀ ) of the systems SYS _n (101) to determine, - an evaluation unit (103), which is designed and set up for this purpose, ◯ based on the current system parameters PARM _{n,m n} (t ₀ ) and the system parameter space $P_{erlaubt}$

to determine a current error state FZ(t ₀ ) of one or more of the systems SYS _n that deviates from normal operation, and ◯ based on the determined error state FZ(t ₀ ) and the determined current operating phase BP(t ₀ ) of the aircraft for a number S of predetermined Impact categories AWK _s per impact category AWK _s for the error state FZ(t ₀ ) Error consequences FK _{AWK s} (t) to be determined, with s = 1, 2, ..., S and S ≧ 1; and - an output unit (104), which is designed and set up to generate the determined assigned error consequences FK _AWK for one or more of the impact categories AWK _{s s} (t) to spend. Device according to Claim 1 , in which the operating phases BP(t) of the aircraft (100) include one or more of the following: operation of the aircraft on the ground at a parking position, holding position, (ParkPosition, Taxi-Holding Position) operation of the aircraft (100) on the ground while taxiing (Taxi) Operation of the aircraft (100) on the ground during the take-off process (T/O-Run) Operation of the aircraft (100) in climb (Climb) Operation of the aircraft (100) in horizontal flight (Cruise) Operation of the aircraft (100) in Descent Operation of the aircraft (100) in horizontal flight (Holding Pattern) Operation of the aircraft (100) in approach Operation of the aircraft (100) during landing Operation of the aircraft (100) during take-off (Go -Around). Device according to one of the Claims 1 or 2 , in which the impact categories AWK _s include one or more of the following: Controllability of the aircraft (100) Flight performance of the aircraft (100) Range of the aircraft (100) Fuel consumption of the aircraft (100) Maximum usable flight altitude of the aircraft (100) Usability of an automatic system control for individual systems SYS _n (101) Usability of a manual system control for individual systems SYS _n (101) Device according to one of the Claims 1 until 3 , in which the evaluation unit is designed and set up for this purpose, the determined error consequences FK _{AWK s} (t) to evaluate their criticality in relation to previous operating phases BP(t + Δt) of the aircraft and, depending on this evaluation, each of the identified error consequences FK _{AWK s} (t) into one of a number G of predetermined criticality categories KK _g , with g = 1, 2, ..., G and G ≧ 2; and the output unit is designed and set up for this purpose, error consequences FK _{AWK s} (t) to output each criticality category KK _g in a quality Q(KK _g ) assigned to the criticality category KK _g . Device according to one of the Claims 1 until 4 , in which the evaluation unit is designed and set up on the basis of the error state FZ(t ₀ ) determined for a current time t ₀ , the development of which for all systems SYS _n for times ahead t = t ₀ + Δt as error states FZ(t) = FZ(t ₀ + Δt) to predict and based on the predicted error states FZ(t) = FZ(t ₀ + Δt) predicted error consequences FK _{AWK s} (t) = FK _{AWK s} (t ₀ + Δt) to be determined, with Δt: time difference and Δt: variable time period that covers a period from the current time t ₀ to the planned termination of the flight at a time t _landing : Δt ∈ {0, t _landing -t ₀ }; and the output unit is designed and set up to detect the determined predicted error consequences. FK _{AWK s} (t) = FK _{AWK s} (t ₀ + Δt) for one or more of the impact categories AWK _s over time t, and/or for previous operating phases BP(t) = BP(t ₀ + Δt) of the aircraft and/or for positions POS(t ) = POS(t ₀ + Δt) along a provided forward flight route of the aircraft (100). Device according to Claim 5 , in which the evaluation unit (104) is designed and set up in such a way that determining the predicted error consequences FK _{AWK s} (t) = FK _{AWK s} (t ₀ + Δt) takes place based on a specified look-up table. Device according to Claim 5 or 6 , in which the evaluation unit (104) is designed and set up in such a way that determining the predicted error consequences FK _{AWK s} (t) = FK _{AWK s} (t ₀ + Δt) based on a given technical system model of the aircraft. Device according to Claim 7 , where the predicted error consequences are FK _{AWK s} (t) = FK _{AWK s} (t ₀ + Δt) can be determined based on the specified system model of the aircraft (100) using a neural network. Aircraft (100) with a device according to one of the Claims 1 until 8th . Method for operating a device for determining and displaying the consequences of a fault state of systems of an aircraft (100), the aircraft (100) having a number N of systems SYS _n (101), whose time-dependent system state SZ _n (t) is each determined by a Number M _n of system parameters PARM _{n,m n} (t) is defined with n = 1, 2, ..., N and N ≧ 1 and m _n = 1, 2,..., M _n and Mn ≧ 1 and t:= time, where for the entirety the system parameter PARM _{n,m n} (t) a ${\mathrm{\Pi }}_{n=1}^N{M}_n-\text{more dimensional}$

System parameter space $P_{erlaubt}$

is specified, which defines normal operation of the systems SYS _n (101), with the following steps: - determining (201) a current operating phase BP(t ₀ ) of the aircraft (100); - Determine (202) the current system parameters PARM _{n,m n} (t ₀ ) of the systems SYS _n (101); - based on the current system parameters PARM _{n,m n} (t ₀ ) and the system parameter space $P_{erlaubt}$

Determining (203) a current error state FZ(t ₀ ) of one or more of the systems SYS _n (101) that deviates from normal operation; - based on the determined current error state FZ(t ₀ ) and the determined current operating phase BP(t ₀ ) of the aircraft (101) for a number S of predetermined impact categories AWK _s per impact category AWK _s for the current error state FZ(t ₀ ) Determine ( 204) of error consequences $$F{K}_{AW{K}_s}\left(t\right),{\text{with}}_s=\mathrm{1.2,}\dots ,S\text{and}S\geqq 1;$$

- for one or more of the impact categories AWK _s output (205) of the determined assigned error consequences FK _{AWK s} (t).

Images