A method and system for evaluating and optimizing the performance of an aero gas turbine shaft engine

Abstract

The present invention belongs to the technical field of turboprop engines, and provides a method and system for evaluating and optimizing the performance of an aero-gas turbine shaft engine. The method includes: calculating the advanced comprehensive coefficient of all selected engines based on the overall influence factor and relative value; comparing the advanced comprehensive coefficients of all engines. If the advanced comprehensive coefficient of the engine in the design group does not reach the target advanced comprehensive coefficient compared with the comparison group, the engine design parameter values of the design group are adjusted until the target advanced comprehensive coefficient is reached. The method of the present invention can evaluate the performance level of the engine according to the design parameters of the engine in combination with the flight efficiency criterion. If the evaluation result cannot meet the target performance level, some design parameters can be optimized and adjusted until the requirements are met. This process effectively takes the influence of the engine design parameters on the aircraft efficiency criterion as the standard for evaluating the advanced performance level of the engine, and can more accurately evaluate the advanced performance of the engine.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention belongs to the technical field of turboprop engines, and particularly relates to a method and system for evaluating and optimizing the performance of an aero-gas turbine engine. Background Art

[0002] The advanced level of the performance of an aero-engine can be understood as the degree of compliance of its design parameters and performance with the best engines in the world's aero-engine manufacturing field.

[0003] Determining the advanced level of the performance of an aero-engine during its development process has great practical significance. In order for the developed engine to reach the world's advanced level, it is first necessary to continuously and detailedly analyze the development of the main parameters of similar types and uses of engines and aircraft studied at home and abroad. Comprehensive evaluation of the advanced level of the performance of a developed gas turbine engine requires comparison with similar engines on the domestic and international markets, comparison with the technical and structural process solutions adopted by it, and even consideration of advanced performance reserves and development plans during design.

[0004] Currently, newly developed engines evaluate the advanced level of the performance of aero-gas turbine engines based on the absolute values of important parameters (indicators) representing main technologies and economy. It is based on the comparison of the important performance parameter values of the engine with the predicted performance parameter values (excluding the relationship with the aircraft platform), and taking the predicted value as the standard. In principle, there are the following deficiencies:

[0005] 1) Inevitably, there will be errors between individual parameters of a gas turbine engine and the specified standards of the technical level, and this method cannot quantitatively evaluate the impact of the errors on the aircraft efficiency.

[0006] 2) When the analyzed parameters cannot all reach the standard parameter values (some parameters are higher than the standard and some are lower than the standard), in fact, it is impossible to give a definite conclusion on whether the overall design performance level meets the requirements.

[0007] 3) Even if some design indicators of a gas turbine engine (such as the mass per unit power, fuel consumption rate, temperature rise, pressure ratio, etc.) are favorable compared to the standard, it is impossible to quantify the benefits brought to the aircraft, because the impact of each of these design indicators on the aircraft efficiency is different, and it may have a large impact or a very small impact.

[0008] It should also be pointed out that the prediction of the technical level standard itself is also a problem, because the development cycle of advanced gas turbine engines is relatively long, generally 7 to 10 years. Therefore, in order to use the predicted value as a standard, it is necessary to predict forward by about 15 years. However, due to the rapid development of aviation technology, a reliable prediction cannot exceed 5 to 7 years forward. That is to say, when proposing an engine design scheme, it cannot be expected that the prediction will still be true at the moment of passing the qualification certification / type approval. Summary of the Invention

[0009] To solve at least one problem in the background art, the present invention proposes an aviation gas turbine shaft engine performance evaluation and optimization method and system.

[0010] To achieve the above object, the present invention adopts the following technical solutions:

[0011] An aviation gas turbine shaft engine performance evaluation and optimization method includes the following steps:

[0012] Determine the type and use of the aircraft equipped with the engine of the design group;

[0013] Based on the type and use of the aircraft, determine the aircraft effectiveness criteria and their importance coefficients;

[0014] Select a group of engines of the same type and use as a comparison group, and determine the engine design parameters and performance indicators to form an evaluation catalog;

[0015] Calculate the single influence factor of a single engine design parameter on a single aircraft effectiveness criterion;

[0016] Based on the single influence factor, calculate the overall influence factor of each engine design parameter on the selected aircraft effectiveness criterion;

[0017] Calculate the relative value of the engine design parameters of the design group corresponding to the benchmark engine of the comparison group;

[0018] Based on the overall influence factor and the relative value, calculate the advanced comprehensive coefficient of all selected engines;

[0019] Compare the advanced comprehensive coefficients of all engines. If the advanced comprehensive coefficient of the engine of the design group does not reach the target advanced comprehensive coefficient compared with the comparison group, adjust the engine design parameter values of the design group until the target advanced comprehensive coefficient is reached.

[0020] Preferably, the aircraft effectiveness criteria include fuel consumption, transportation efficiency, payload, and aircraft life cycle cost.

[0021] Preferably, calculating the single influence factor of each engine design parameter on a single aircraft effectiveness criterion includes:

[0022]

[0023] Wherein, Pr ji represents the single influence factor of the j-th design parameter on the i-th aircraft effectiveness criterion; Y i represents the i-th aircraft effectiveness criterion; represents the influence coefficient of the design parameter on the specific fuel consumption sfc of the engine; represents the influence coefficient of the design parameter on the mass per unit power WP; represents the influence coefficient of the specific fuel consumption sfc of the engine on each aircraft effectiveness criterion; represents the influence coefficient of the mass per unit power WP of the engine on each aircraft effectiveness criterion.

[0024] Preferably, calculate the overall influence factor of each design parameter of the engine on the selected aircraft effectiveness criterion based on the single influence factor, including:

[0025]

[0026] Wherein, Pr j is the overall influence factor of the j-th design parameter W j (1≤j≤M) of the engine on the selected set of aircraft effectiveness criteria; K i is the importance coefficient of the i-th aircraft effectiveness criterion Y i ; N is the number of the selected set of aircraft effectiveness criteria.

[0027] Preferably, calculate the relative values of the engine design parameters of the design group and the corresponding design parameters of the engines in the comparison group, including:

[0028]

[0029] Wherein, W jσ is the j-th design parameter of the reference engine; K HTYj is the relative value corresponding to the j-th design parameter.

[0030] Preferably, calculate the comprehensive coefficient of the advancement of the design parameters of all selected engines based on the overall influence factor and the relative value, including:

[0031]

[0032] Wherein, K HTY represents the comprehensive coefficient of the advancement of the selected engine design parameters.

[0033] Preferably, if the comprehensive coefficient of engine advancement of the design group fails to reach the target comprehensive coefficient of engine advancement compared with the comparison group, all engine design parameter values are adjusted until the target comprehensive coefficient of engine advancement is reached, including the following steps:

[0034] Determine the influence coefficient of the comprehensive coefficient of advancement of each design parameter;

[0035] Select the design parameters to be adjusted based on the influence coefficient;

[0036] Calculate the relative minimum deviation value between the design parameters to be adjusted and the initial values;

[0037] Update the design parameters based on the relative minimum deviation value;

[0038] Check whether the updated design parameters exceed the allowable range. If they do, remove the design parameters to be adjusted and re-select the design parameters to be adjusted until the re-selected design parameters do not exceed the allowable range after update.

[0039] Preferably, calculating the relative minimum deviation value between the design parameters to be adjusted and the initial values includes:

[0040]

[0041] In the formula, δW j represents the relative minimum deviation value to be adjusted for the design parameter W; ξ j is the influence coefficient of the design parameter W j on K j ; HTY ; represents the initially calculated comprehensive coefficient of advancement and the target comprehensive coefficient of advancement the relative deviation between; is the target comprehensive coefficient of advancement to be achieved; is the initial comprehensive coefficient of advancement; m represents the number of design parameters to be adjusted.

[0042] Preferably, updating the design parameters based on the relative minimum deviation value includes:

[0043] W j ' = W j0 (1 + δW j );

[0044] In the formula, W j ' represents the updated value of the j-th design parameter; W j0 represents the initial value of the j-th design parameter.

[0045] An aviation gas turbine shaft engine performance evaluation and optimization system, comprising:

[0046] An initial unit for determining the type and use of the aircraft equipped with the engine of the design group;

[0047] A processing unit for determining the aircraft effectiveness criteria and their importance coefficient based on the type and use of the aircraft;

[0048] A selection unit for selecting a group of engines of the same type and use as a comparison group, determining the engine design parameters and performance indicators, and forming an evaluation catalog;

[0049] A first calculation unit for calculating the single influence factor of a single engine design parameter on a single aircraft effectiveness criterion;

[0050] A second calculation unit for calculating the overall influence factor of each engine design parameter on the selected aircraft effectiveness criterion based on the single influence factor;

[0051] A third calculation unit for calculating the relative value of the engine design parameters of the design group corresponding to the engine design parameters of the comparison group;

[0052] A fourth calculation unit for calculating the comprehensive advancement coefficient of all selected engines based on the overall influence factor and the relative value;

[0053] An evaluation unit, if the comprehensive advancement coefficient of the engines of the design group does not reach the target comprehensive advancement coefficient compared with the comparison group, the evaluation unit is used to adjust the engine design parameter values of the design group until the target comprehensive advancement coefficient is reached.

[0054] Preferably, the evaluation unit includes:

[0055] A determination module for determining the influence coefficient of the comprehensive advancement coefficient of the design parameters;

[0056] An adjustment module for selecting the design parameters to be adjusted based on the influence coefficient;

[0057] A calculation module for calculating the relative minimum deviation value between the design parameters to be adjusted and the initial values;

[0058] An update module for updating the design parameters based on the relative minimum deviation value;

[0059] An inspection module for inspecting whether the updated design parameters exceed the allowable range. If they exceed, the design parameters to be adjusted are removed, and the design parameters to be adjusted are reselected until the reselected design parameters do not exceed the allowable range after updating.

[0060] Advantages of the present invention:

[0061] 1. The method of the present invention can evaluate the performance level of an engine according to the design parameters of the engine in combination with the flight performance criteria. If the evaluation result fails to meet the target performance level, some design parameters can be optimized and adjusted, and then the evaluation can be carried out again until the requirements are met. This process effectively takes the influence of the engine design parameters on the aircraft performance criteria as the standard for evaluating the advanced level of engine performance, and can more accurately evaluate the advanced level of engine performance.

[0062] 2. The method of the present invention compares the engine designs of the same type, size, and use selected, and evaluates the advanced level of the performance of an aero-gas turbine shaft engine based on the method of the influence of engine performance on aircraft performance. At the same time, a solution to its inverse problem (finding the design parameters of a gas turbine engine to achieve a specified performance level) is given, providing a solution for optimizing the engine design parameters.

[0063] 3. The application of the method of the present invention enables the engine design unit to flexibly adjust and optimize the engine design parameters according to the characteristics of its own product development and the engine design ideas it is good at using, so as to achieve the target performance advanced level. During the development process of the engine, the advanced level of the performance of the engine with optimized design parameters can be effectively re-evaluated at any time. At the same time, this method can also be extended to the evaluation of the advanced level of the performance of the main components of the engine.

[0064] Other features and advantages of the present invention will be described in the following specification, and, in part, will be obvious from the specification, or will be understood by implementing the present invention. The objectives and other advantages of the present invention can be realized and obtained by the structure pointed out in the specification and the drawings. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0065] In order to more clearly illustrate the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention or the prior art, the following will briefly introduce the drawings required for the description of the embodiments or the prior art. Obviously, the drawings in the following description are some embodiments of the present invention. For those of ordinary skill in the art, other drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without creative efforts.

[0066] Figure 1 The flowchart of a method for evaluating and optimizing the performance of an aero-gas turbine shaft engine according to the present invention is shown;

[0067] Figure 2 The block diagram of a system for evaluating and optimizing the performance of an aero-gas turbine shaft engine according to the present invention is shown. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE EMBODIMENTS

[0068] To make the objectives, technical solutions, and advantages of the embodiments of the present invention clearer, the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention will be clearly and completely described below with reference to the accompanying drawings in the embodiments of the present invention. Apparently, the described embodiments are some, but not all, of the embodiments of the present invention. All other embodiments obtained by those of ordinary skill in the art based on the embodiments of the present invention without creative efforts shall fall within the protection scope of the present invention.

[0069] An aviation gas turbine shaft engine performance evaluation and optimization method, as Figure 1 shown, includes the following steps:

[0070] S1: Determine the type and use of the aircraft equipped with the engine of the design group; S2: Determine the aircraft effectiveness evaluation criteria and their importance degree coefficients based on the type and use of the aircraft; S3: Select a group of competitive engines as the comparison group, and select the engine design parameters and performance indicators to form an evaluation catalog; S4: Calculate the single influence factor of a single engine design parameter on a single aircraft effectiveness criterion; S5: Calculate the overall influence factor of each engine design parameter on the selected aircraft effectiveness criteria based on the single influence factor; S6: Calculate the relative value of the engine design parameters of the design group and the corresponding design parameters of the engines in the comparison group; S7: Calculate the advanced comprehensive coefficient of all the selected engines based on the overall influence factor and the relative value; S8: Compare the advanced comprehensive coefficients of all the engines. If the advanced comprehensive coefficient of the engine of the design group does not reach the target advanced comprehensive coefficient compared with the comparison group, adjust the engine design parameter values of the design group until the target advanced comprehensive coefficient is reached.

[0071] It should be noted that the gas turbine engine performance advanced level evaluation index system is a hierarchical tree-like organizational structure. The engine performance indicators are at the upper layer of the structure, and the branches are the engine design parameters. The list of design parameters and performance indicators used in evaluating the advanced level of engine performance mainly depends on the type of the engine and the use of the aircraft. In S1, generally, the type, use, and application field of the aircraft suitable for the designed engine need to be given. Then, a group of aircraft effectiveness criteria Y (the number of aircraft effectiveness criteria is N) can be determined in S2. The i-th aircraft effectiveness criterion is denoted as Y i , and its importance degree coefficient is K i , where 1 ≤ i ≤ N.

[0072] Furthermore, in S2, the aircraft effectiveness criteria include fuel consumption, transportation efficiency, payload, and aircraft life cycle cost, etc.

[0073] Further, in S3, according to requirements, design the type and use of the engine, etc., and select an advanced similar gas turbine engine as the comparison group for the evaluation of the advanced level of engine design parameters. The engine can be an engine under development or an engine that has been mass-produced.

[0074] It should be noted that the engine evaluation catalog generally includes the engine's performance indicators: specific fuel consumption sfc, mass per unit power WP, and engine design parameters: turbine inlet temperature Tt4, pressure ratio π, compressor efficiency η c , turbine efficiency η t etc. When using working process parameters such as turbine inlet temperature Tt4 and pressure ratio π as evaluation parameters, the advancement of the engine working process can be evaluated; when selecting compressor efficiency, turbine efficiency, total pressure recovery coefficient of the intake component, etc. as evaluation parameters, the aerodynamic integrity of the engine components can be evaluated. When doing detailed design, this method can also be used to evaluate the design level of each independent component.

[0075] Further, in S4, the influence factor Pr j of the j-th design parameter W i of the engine (1 ≤ j ≤ M) on the aircraft effectiveness criterion Y ji is generally determined by calculating (δY i / δW j ) based on the mathematical models of the engine and the aircraft. The mathematical models reflect the mutual relationship between the engine design parameters and the aircraft effectiveness criterion. The influence of the engine design parameters on the aircraft effectiveness criterion can be carried out in the following steps: First, calculate the influence coefficients of each engine design parameter on the specific fuel consumption sfc and mass per unit power WP of the engine That is, through the engine mathematical model, determine the influence coefficients of each design parameter (turbine inlet temperature Tt4, pressure ratio π, compressor efficiency η c , turbine efficiency η t etc.) on the specific fuel consumption sfc and mass per unit power WP of the engine Then, respectively evaluate the influence coefficients of the specific fuel consumption sfc and mass per unit power WP of the engine on each aircraft effectiveness criterion That is, through the aircraft mathematical model, determine the influence coefficients of the specific fuel consumption sfc and mass per unit power WP of the engine on the aircraft effectiveness criterion Finally, the single influence factor Pr j of the j-th design parameter W i of the engine (1 ≤ j ≤ M) on the i-th aircraft effectiveness criterion Y ji can be calculated using the following formula:

[0076]

[0077] Furthermore, in S5, the jth design parameter W of the gas turbine engine is j The degree and importance of the performance impact of the selected group of aircraft are determined by convolution, and the formula is as follows:

[0078]

[0079] Where, Pr j is the jth design parameter W of the engine j (1≤j≤M) is the overall impact factor on the selected set of aircraft performance criteria; Pr ji is the jth design parameter W of the engine j (1≤j≤M) for the i-th aircraft performance criterion Y i The single impact factor of K i is the i-th aircraft performance criterion Y i The importance coefficient of ; N is the number of selected aircraft performance criteria.

[0080] Furthermore, in S6, the jth design parameter W of the engine is calculated. j (1≤j≤M) Relative value K of design parameters and corresponding design parameters of the benchmark engine HTYj The benchmark engine is a relatively advanced (or most advanced) engine selected from a group of target engines selected in S3 as the benchmark engine. The j-th design parameter W of the engine is j (1≤j≤M) relative value of design parameter K HTYj The formula is as follows:

[0081]

[0082] Where W jσ is the jth design parameter of the benchmark engine.

[0083] Furthermore, the comprehensive coefficient of advancement of the set of engine design parameters selected in S7 is determined by the following formula:

[0084]

[0085] In the formula, K HTY It represents the comprehensive coefficient of advancement of the selected group of engine design parameters.

[0086] Furthermore, in S8, the following steps are specifically included:

[0087] S801: Determine the influence coefficients of the comprehensive coefficients of the advancement of each design parameter; S802: Select the design parameters to be adjusted based on the influence coefficients; S803: Calculate the relative minimum deviation value between the design parameters to be adjusted and the initial values; S804: Update the design parameters based on the relative minimum deviation value; S805: Check whether the updated design parameters exceed the allowable range. If they exceed, remove the design parameters to be adjusted and re-select the design parameters to be adjusted until the re-selected design parameters do not exceed the allowable range after update.

[0088] It should be noted that S8 is based on S1 - S7 to evaluate various evaluation indicators of the engine, so that the performance advancement level of the engine is always above the target level. When the obtained technological level of the design and analysis of the gas turbine engine is lower than the target level, considering the actual design and production capabilities of the design unit, under the condition of the minimum deviation within the specified boundary range from the initial parameter values, re-adjust and optimize the design parameter values of the gas turbine engine to ensure that the engine reaches the required performance advancement level.

[0089] It should be further noted that in S805, check whether the updated design parameters exceed the allowable range. If they exceed the allowable range, the design parameters take the most favorable boundary values within the allowable range, and then re-evaluate the current comprehensive coefficient of advancement and the difference from the target comprehensive coefficient of advancement, and remove the design parameters that reach the allowable range from the design parameters to be adjusted, and re-select and calculate the adjustment amount of the design parameters to be adjusted until the comprehensive coefficient of advancement of the engine after re-selection and adjustment is not less than the target comprehensive coefficient of advancement.

[0090] Furthermore, in S801, determine the influence coefficient of the comprehensive coefficient of advancement K HTY of each design parameter. The specific calculation process is as follows:

[0091]

[0092] In the formula, M is the number of selected design parameters; ξ j is the influence coefficient of the design parameter W j on K HTY ;

[0093] Furthermore, in S802, according to the calculated influence coefficients ξ HTY of each design parameter on the value of K j , considering the design level and difficulty of itself comprehensively, select m (m ≤ M) design parameters to be adjusted from the total M selected design parameters to ensure that the target comprehensive coefficient of advancement

[0094] Further, in S803, calculate the relative minimum deviation between the m design parameters to be adjusted selected in S802 and their initial values. The calculation formula is as follows:

[0095]

[0096] In the formula, δW j represents the relative minimum deviation value of W j to be adjusted; ξ j is the influence coefficient of the index W j on K HTY ; represents the relative deviation between the initially calculated comprehensive coefficient of advancement and the target comprehensive coefficient of advancement ; m represents the number of design parameters to be adjusted selected in S802.

[0097] Further, in S804, update the selected design parameters to be adjusted based on the relative minimum deviation value calculated in S803. The formula is as follows:

[0098] W j ' = W j0 (1 + δW j ); (7)

[0099] In the formula, W j ' represents the updated value of the j-th design parameter; W j0 represents the initial value of the j-th design parameter.

[0100] Further, in S805, check whether the updated value of W j ' exceeds the design allowable range [a j , b j . If W j ' < a j , correspondingly take W jop = a j , or if W j ' > b j , then W jop = b j . Then remove the j-th design parameter from the selected parameters to be adjusted, and restart the calculation from step S802 to further determine the preliminary δK HTY value.

[0101]

[0102] In the formula, δW jop = (W jop - W j0 ) / W j0 , W j0is the initial value of the j-th design parameter, r is the number of design parameters that have reached their design allowable ranges; W jop represents the parameter of the j-th design parameter that has reached its design allowable range, which cannot be adjusted and optimized anymore due to limitations such as design capabilities.

[0103] For complex technical systems such as aircraft systems, the evaluation indicators of subsystem performance should be consistent with the judgment criteria of the overall system. Therefore, based on the classification of aircraft effectiveness criteria, the effectiveness judgment criteria of gas turbine engines suitable for specific-purpose aircraft should be reasonably selected.

[0104] An aviation gas turbine shaft engine performance evaluation and optimization system, as Figure 2 shown, includes an initial unit, a processing unit, a selection unit, a first calculation unit, a second calculation unit, a third calculation unit, a fourth calculation unit, and an evaluation unit. The initial unit is used to determine the type and use of the aircraft equipped with the engines in the design group. The processing unit is used to determine the aircraft effectiveness criteria and their importance coefficient based on the type and use of the aircraft. The selection unit is used to select a group of engines of the same type and use as a comparison group, and determine the engine design parameters and performance indicators to form an evaluation catalog. The first calculation unit is used to calculate the single influence factor of a single design parameter of the engine on the aircraft effectiveness criteria. The second calculation unit is used to calculate the overall influence factor of each design parameter of the engine on the selected aircraft effectiveness criteria based on the single influence factor. The third calculation unit is used to calculate the relative value of the engine design parameters of the design group and the corresponding design parameters of the engines in the comparison group. The fourth calculation unit is used to calculate the comprehensive advancement coefficient of all the selected engines based on the overall influence factor and the relative value. If the comprehensive advancement coefficient of the engines in the design group does not reach the target comprehensive advancement coefficient compared with the comparison group, the evaluation unit is used to adjust the engine design parameter values of the design group until the target comprehensive advancement coefficient is reached.

[0105] Furthermore, the evaluation unit includes a determination module, an adjustment module, a calculation module, an update module, and an inspection module. The determination module is used to determine the influence coefficient of the comprehensive advancement coefficient of the design parameters; the adjustment module is used to select the design parameters that need to be adjusted based on the influence coefficient; the calculation module is used to calculate the relative minimum deviation value between the design parameters that need to be adjusted and the initial value; the update module is used to update the design parameters based on the relative minimum deviation value; the inspection module judges whether the updated design parameters exceed the allowable range. If they exceed, the design parameters that need to be adjusted are removed, and the design parameters that need to be adjusted are reselected until the reselected design parameters do not exceed the allowable range after update.

[0106] It should be noted that the methods and systems of the present invention have a wide range of applications. For example, an aero gas turbine shaft engine includes a single-rotor gas generator turbo-shaft engine, a single-rotor gas generator turbo-shaft engine with a free turbine, and a double-rotor gas generator turbo-shaft engine with a free turbine. For example, the methods and systems can also be used for aero gas turbine propeller engines and turbofan engines. For example, the methods and systems can also be used for evaluating the performance levels of the main components of an engine.

[0107] Although the present invention has been described in detail with reference to the foregoing embodiments, those of ordinary skill in the art should understand that: they can still modify the technical solutions described in the foregoing embodiments, or perform equivalent replacements for some of the technical features; and these modifications or replacements do not cause the essence of the corresponding technical solutions to deviate from the spirit and scope of the technical solutions of the embodiments of the present invention.

Claims

1. An optimization method for evaluating the performance of an aero gas turbine shaft engine, characterized in that It includes the following steps: Determine the type and use of the aircraft equipped with the engine of the design group; Determine the aircraft effectiveness criteria and their importance coefficient based on the type and use of the aircraft; Select a group of engines of the same type and use as the comparison group, and determine the engine design parameters and performance indicators and form an evaluation catalog; Calculate the single influence factor of a single engine design parameter on a single aircraft effectiveness criterion, including: where Pr ji represents the single impact factor of the jth design parameter on the ith aircraft effectiveness criterion; Y i represents the ith aircraft effectiveness criterion; represents the influence coefficient of the design parameter on the specific fuel consumption sfc of the engine; represents the influence coefficient of the design parameter on the mass per unit power WP; represents the influence coefficient of the specific fuel consumption sfc of the engine on each aircraft effectiveness criterion; represents the influence coefficient of the mass per unit power WP of the engine on each aircraft effectiveness criterion; Calculate the overall influence factor of each engine design parameter on the selected aircraft effectiveness criterion based on the single influence factor; Calculate the relative value of the engine design parameter of the design group corresponding to the benchmark engine of the comparison group; Calculate the comprehensive advancement coefficient of all selected engines based on the overall influence factor and the relative value, including: where K HTY represents the comprehensive coefficient of the advancement of the selected engine design parameters; represents the relative value of the j-th design parameter W of the engine j , where 1 ≤ j ≤ M; Pr j is the overall impact factor of the j-th design parameter W of the engine j on the selected set of aircraft effectiveness criteria; Compare the comprehensive advancement coefficients of all engines. If the comprehensive advancement coefficient of the engine of the design group does not reach the target comprehensive advancement coefficient compared with the comparison group, adjust the engine design parameter values of the design group until the target comprehensive advancement coefficient is reached.

2. The performance evaluation and optimization method of an aero gas turbine shaft engine according to claim 1, characterized in that The aircraft effectiveness criteria include fuel consumption, transportation efficiency, payload, and aircraft life cycle cost.

3. The performance evaluation and optimization method of an aero gas turbine shaft engine according to claim 2, characterized in that, Calculate the overall influence factor of each engine design parameter on the selected aircraft effectiveness criterion based on the single influence factor, including: where Pr j is the j-th design parameter W of the engine j for the overall impact factor of the selected set of aircraft performance criteria, 1 ≤ j ≤ M; K i is the importance coefficient of the i-th aircraft performance criterion Y i ; N is the number of the selected set of aircraft performance criteria.

4. A method for evaluating and optimizing the performance of an aero gas turbine shaft engine according to claim 1, characterized in that, Calculate the relative value of the engine design parameter of the design group corresponding to the engine of the comparison group, including: Where W jσ is the jth design parameter of the benchmark engine; is the relative value corresponding to the j-th design parameter.

5. A method for evaluating and optimizing the performance of an aero gas turbine shaft engine according to claim 1, characterized in that, If the comprehensive advancement coefficient of the engine of the design group does not reach the target comprehensive advancement coefficient compared with the comparison group, adjust all engine design parameter values until the target comprehensive advancement coefficient is reached, including the following steps: Determine the influence coefficient of the comprehensive advancement coefficient of each design parameter; Select the design parameters to be adjusted based on the influence coefficient; Calculate the relative minimum deviation value between the design parameter to be adjusted and the initial value; Update the design parameter based on the relative minimum deviation value; Check whether the updated design parameter exceeds the allowable range. If it exceeds, remove the design parameter to be adjusted and re-select the design parameter to be adjusted until the re-selected design parameter does not exceed the allowable range after update.

6. The performance evaluation and optimization method of an aero gas turbine shaft engine according to claim 5, characterized in that Calculate the relative minimum deviation value between the design parameter to be adjusted and the initial value, including: In the formula, δW j Represents the design parameter W j The relative minimum deviation value that needs to be adjusted; ξ j is the design parameter W j K HTY The influence coefficient of Indicates the initial calculated comprehensive coefficient of advancement Comprehensive coefficient of target advancement The relative deviation between The comprehensive coefficient of advancement of the target to be achieved; is the initial comprehensive coefficient of advancement; m represents the number of design parameters that need to be adjusted.

7. The method for evaluating and optimizing the performance of an aviation gas turbine shaft engine according to claim 6, wherein: Update the design parameter based on the relative minimum deviation value, including: IN j '=W j0 (1+δW j ); where, W j ' represents the updated value of the j-th design parameter; W j0 represents the initial value of the j-th design parameter.

8. An aviation gas turbine shaft engine performance evaluation and optimization system, characterized in that: It includes: An initial unit for determining the type and use of the aircraft equipped with the engine of the design group; A processing unit for determining the aircraft effectiveness criteria and their importance coefficient based on the type and use of the aircraft; A selection unit for selecting a group of engines of the same type and use as the comparison group, and determining the engine design parameters and performance indicators and forming an evaluation catalog; A first calculation unit for calculating the single influence factor of a single engine design parameter on a single aircraft effectiveness criterion, including: where Pr ji represents the single impact factor of the j-th design parameter on the i-th aircraft effectiveness criterion; Y i represents the i-th aircraft effectiveness criterion; represents the influence coefficient of the design parameter on the specific fuel consumption sfc of the engine; represents the influence coefficient of the design parameter on the mass per unit power WP; represents the influence coefficient of the specific fuel consumption sfc of the engine on each aircraft effectiveness criterion; represents the influence coefficient of the mass per unit power WP of the engine on each aircraft effectiveness criterion; A second calculation unit for calculating the overall influence factor of each engine design parameter on the selected aircraft effectiveness criterion based on the single influence factor; A third calculation unit for calculating the relative value of the engine design parameter of the design group corresponding to the engine of the comparison group; A fourth calculation unit for calculating the comprehensive advancement coefficient of all selected engines based on the overall influence factor and the relative value, including: Where, K HTY represents the comprehensive coefficient of the advancement of the selected engine design parameters; represents the relative value of the j-th design parameter W of the engine j , where 1 ≤ j ≤ M; Pr j is the overall influence factor of the j-th design parameter W of the engine j on the selected set of aircraft effectiveness criteria; An evaluation unit. If the comprehensive coefficient of the engine's advancement in the design group does not reach the target comprehensive coefficient of advancement compared with the comparison group, the evaluation unit is used to adjust the engine design parameter values of the design group until the target comprehensive coefficient of advancement is reached.

9. An aero gas turbine shaft engine performance evaluation and optimization system according to claim 8, characterized in that, The evaluation unit includes: A determination module, used to determine the influence coefficient of the comprehensive coefficient of the design parameter's advancement; An adjustment module, used to select the design parameters to be adjusted based on the influence coefficient; A calculation module, used to calculate the relative minimum deviation value between the design parameters to be adjusted and the initial values; An update module, used to update the design parameters based on the relative minimum deviation value; An inspection module, used to check whether the updated design parameters exceed the allowable range. If they exceed, the design parameters to be adjusted are removed, and the design parameters to be adjusted are reselected until the reselected design parameters do not exceed the allowable range after being updated.

Images