An aircraft self-organizing traffic control method and system

Abstract

The embodiment of the application discloses an aircraft self-organizing traffic control method and system, which is applied to the aircraft, and the method comprises the following steps: predicting at least one first aircraft which has a conflict risk with the aircraft at a next waypoint according to latest broadcast information from at least one other aircraft; sorting the first aircraft according to the adjustable range of the planned arrival time of the next waypoint of each first aircraft; starting from the first aircraft with the shortest adjustable range, sequentially adding each first aircraft into the control set according to the sorting, taking the planned arrival time of the next waypoint of each second aircraft in the current control set as an optimized solution, searching for a feasible solution in the adjustable range of each second aircraft by using a deep search method, so that each second aircraft can maintain a safe time interval when arriving at the next waypoint; and controlling the flight of the final second aircraft according to the final feasible solution.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of aircraft traffic control, and more particularly to an aircraft self-organizing traffic control method and system. Background Technology

[0002] Traditional manned aircraft (hereinafter referred to as "manned aircraft") have multiple safety assurance measures during operation, especially during the landing phase, which presents higher safety risks, making safe operation during this phase even more crucial. Taking the landing phase as an example, manned aircraft are directed and coordinated by air traffic control units to ensure the flight sequence and safe separation of aircraft. Air traffic control units (such as authorized third-party management departments) communicate with the aircraft pilots via two-way radio. Control measures within the landing area are radar-based. After entering the relevant management area, control personnel are required to direct and manage the aircraft within that area to assist in completing the landing. Control personnel detect, prevent, or avoid potential hazards through interaction with automated systems or manual management.

[0003] Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) currently fly under limited conditions, such as operating in isolated airspaces or other restricted operating conditions to avoid simultaneous and / or shared airspace operations with other aircraft. Simultaneously, multiple UAVs are managed and scheduled through a centralized ground management platform (such as a centralized management platform provided by the UAV manufacturer) to ensure operational safety. The management platform collects information on the aircraft's operational status, including position, speed, and intended flight path, to perform pre-flight and in-flight calculations for landing, and to control aircraft that pose a potential safety threat, thereby ensuring safety.

[0004] However, the above method has the following problems: 1. In the case of air traffic control through air traffic control units: when there are no air traffic control units, the operational safety of aircraft during flight and landing cannot be guaranteed; in low-altitude scenarios, ground radar may not be able to detect the status of aircraft accurately or at all, resulting in a lack of information on operating aircraft, which makes it impossible for controllers to give effective command. 2. In the traffic control method through a centralized ground management platform: the operating rules of various centralized ground management platforms are inconsistent, the management and command methods of different management platforms differ, and no consistent operational performance and functional requirements are put forward. The integration between aircraft and management platforms is difficult; moreover, the service coverage of the management platform is limited by ground communication facilities, resulting in a limited control range. 3. Current aircraft traffic control methods (whether ground control or airborne control) are not timely, and finding solutions is too time-consuming, making it impossible to provide effective conflict solutions within a reasonable timeframe. Summary of the Invention

[0005] This invention provides an aircraft self-organizing traffic control method and system to solve at least one of the above-mentioned problems.

[0006] In a first aspect, embodiments of the present invention provide an aircraft self-organizing traffic control method, applied to the present aircraft, the method comprising: Each time a change in broadcast information from other aircraft is detected, the following traffic control measures will be implemented: S110. Based on the latest broadcast information from at least one other aircraft, predict at least one first aircraft that is at risk of conflict with this aircraft at the next waypoint. S120. Sort each first aircraft according to the adjustable range of the planned arrival time of each first aircraft at the next waypoint; and initialize the control set used to record the traffic control objects for this time to the current aircraft. S130. Starting with the first aircraft with the shortest adjustable range, each first aircraft is added to the control set in order. After each new first aircraft is added: the planned arrival time of the next waypoint of each second aircraft in the current control set is taken as the solution to be optimized. The depth search method is used to search within the adjustable range of each second aircraft for a feasible solution that allows each second aircraft to maintain a safe time interval with each other when arriving at the next waypoint. S140. Based on the final feasible solution, control the flight of each second aircraft.

[0007] In a second aspect, embodiments of the present invention provide an electronic device, the electronic device comprising: One or more processors; Memory, used to store one or more programs; When the one or more programs are executed by the one or more processors, the one or more processors implement the aircraft self-organizing traffic control method described in any embodiment.

[0008] Thirdly, embodiments of the present invention also provide an aircraft self-organizing traffic control system, comprising multiple aircraft, each aircraft being used to execute the following methods: Each time a change in broadcast information from other aircraft is detected, the following traffic control measures will be implemented: S110. Based on the latest broadcast information from at least one other aircraft, predict at least one first aircraft that is at risk of conflict with this aircraft at the next waypoint. S120. Sort each first aircraft according to the adjustable range of the planned arrival time of each first aircraft at the next waypoint; initialize the control set used to record the traffic control objects for this time to this aircraft; S130. Starting with the first aircraft with the shortest adjustable range, each first aircraft is added to the control set in order. After each new first aircraft is added: the planned arrival time of the next waypoint of each second aircraft in the current control set is taken as the solution to be optimized. The depth search method is used to search within the adjustable range of each second aircraft for a feasible solution that allows each second aircraft to maintain a safe time interval with each other when arriving at the next waypoint. S140. Based on the final feasible solution, control the flight of each second aircraft.

[0009] In summary, this embodiment provides an aircraft self-organizing traffic control method that helps aircraft maintain safe distances during flight and landing phases through negotiation and self-organization at the airborne end. This method is particularly suitable for situations without air traffic control units or ground management platforms. Specifically, the airborne end autonomously negotiates conflict detection using broadcast equipment and performs negotiated traffic control once each new broadcast message is received. Based on a heuristic depth-first search algorithm, it starts with the aircraft with the smallest adjustable range and progressively determines feasible solutions to avoid conflict risks. This method can identify conflict risks in feasible solutions most quickly and minimize the number of solution adjustments, improving the accuracy and speed of feasible solution finding and enhancing the timeliness of traffic control. Furthermore, the method in this embodiment considers waypoint names and navigation performance in conflict detection, improving detection efficiency and accuracy; and adjusts the solution range of the optimal solution based on a computational performance scale threshold, further ensuring the timeliness of traffic control. The traffic control method in this embodiment is simple to implement and highly efficient; it is applicable to both ground-based and airborne equipment, with no particular restrictions on the configuration of the UAV; it has low equipment requirements and significantly reduces costs compared to existing ground solutions; the entire process can be implemented autonomously without human intervention; and it can achieve excellent control results. Attached Figure Description

[0010] To more clearly illustrate the specific embodiments of the present invention or the technical solutions in the prior art, the drawings used in the description of the specific embodiments or the prior art will be briefly introduced below. Obviously, the drawings described below are some embodiments of the present invention. For those skilled in the art, other drawings can be obtained from these drawings without creative effort.

[0011] Figure 1 This is a flowchart of an aircraft self-organizing traffic control method provided in an embodiment of the present invention; Figure 2 This is a schematic diagram illustrating the determination of changes in broadcast waypoint information provided by an embodiment of the present invention; Figure 3 This is a schematic diagram illustrating a conflict risk assessment method provided in an embodiment of the present invention; Figure 4 This is a schematic diagram of a three-dimensional merging region provided in an embodiment of the present invention; Figure 5 This is a schematic diagram of the operating area of ​​each aircraft's next waypoint on the horizontal plane, provided in an embodiment of the present invention. Figure 6 This is a flowchart of each traffic control operation provided in an embodiment of the present invention; Figure 7 This is a schematic diagram of the structure of an electronic device provided in an embodiment of the present invention. Detailed Implementation

[0012] To make the objectives, technical solutions, and advantages of this invention clearer, the technical solutions of this invention will be clearly and completely described below. Obviously, the described embodiments are only a part of the embodiments of this invention, and not all of them. Based on the embodiments of this invention, all other embodiments obtained by those skilled in the art without creative effort are within the scope of protection of this invention.

[0013] In the description of this invention, it should be noted that the terms "center," "upper," "lower," "left," "right," "vertical," "horizontal," "inner," and "outer," etc., indicate the orientation or positional relationship based on the orientation or positional relationship shown in the accompanying drawings. They are used only for the convenience of describing the invention and for simplifying the description, and do not indicate or imply that the device or element referred to must have a specific orientation, or be constructed and operated in a specific orientation. Therefore, they should not be construed as limitations on the invention. Furthermore, the terms "first," "second," and "third" are used for descriptive purposes only and should not be construed as indicating or implying relative importance.

[0014] In the description of this invention, it should also be noted that, unless otherwise explicitly specified and limited, the terms "installation," "connection," and "linking" should be interpreted broadly. For example, they can refer to a fixed connection, a detachable connection, or an integral connection; they can refer to a mechanical connection or an electrical connection; they can refer to a direct connection or an indirect connection through an intermediate medium; and they can refer to the internal connection of two components. Those skilled in the art can understand the specific meaning of the above terms in this invention based on the specific circumstances.

[0015] This invention provides an aircraft self-organizing traffic control method. To illustrate this method, a self-organizing traffic system applying this method is first introduced. This system includes multiple freely flying aircraft. "Free flight" refers to independent flight between aircraft, not swarming or similar methods. Each aircraft internally stores its own navigation performance, waypoint sequence, and the name, location, and planned arrival time of each waypoint. During flight, each aircraft cyclically broadcasts its relevant information, including navigation performance, the name, location, planned arrival time, and adjustable range of the next waypoint. The aircraft self-organize and negotiate subsequent flight strategies by exchanging broadcast information to ensure safe operation. This system requires no participation from air traffic control units or centralized ground management platforms, ensuring flight safety entirely through aircraft self-organizing negotiation.

[0016] Based on the above system, Figure 1 This is a flowchart of an aircraft self-organizing traffic control method provided by an embodiment of the present invention. The method is applicable during both the flight and landing phases of the aircraft and is executed by each aircraft or other individual electronic devices in the aforementioned system. For ease of distinction and description, the aircraft executing this method will be referred to as "this aircraft" below. Figure 1 As shown, the method specifically includes: Each time this aircraft detects a change in broadcast information from other aircraft, it initiates traffic control once. A single traffic control action involves this aircraft determining the subsequent flight strategy for all aircraft (including itself) based on the broadcast information from other aircraft, and then transmitting this strategy to the relevant aircraft. These aircraft then proceed with their flights according to this strategy. Each aircraft initiates such traffic control once it detects a change in broadcast information from other aircraft.

[0017] In one specific implementation, each aircraft transmits relevant waypoints and operational status information via a broadcast-enabled device during operation. Optionally, waypoints can be read from the aircraft's internal Flight Management System (FMS) or related systems; a waypoint refers to information about the three-dimensional positioning points the aircraft plans to pass through, and may include the waypoint's name, vertical altitude, longitude, latitude, and estimated arrival time. In this embodiment, waypoints are not limited to those in the air, but also include the destination (such as an airport). Optionally, the aircraft's operational status information may include the maximum operating speed of the airspace where the aircraft is located, the aircraft's maximum operating speed, and the Navigation Integrity Classification (NIC) from the aircraft's navigation system, read from the FMS. Each aircraft can broadcast its next expected waypoint and operational status information at regular intervals during operation. Optionally, the broadcast interval is 10 seconds.

[0018] When an aircraft receives broadcast information from other aircraft, it can follow Figure 2 The illustrated process determines whether to initiate traffic control. Specifically, it involves... Figure 2 When this aircraft receives a broadcast message from another aircraft, it first determines whether it has never received such a broadcast message from that other aircraft before. If it has never received such a broadcast message from that other aircraft, this falls under the "change in broadcast message from another aircraft" scenario in this embodiment, and traffic control is initiated. If it has previously received broadcast messages from that other aircraft, it further determines whether the broadcast message received this time has changed compared to the previously received broadcast message from that other aircraft (by comparing whether the next waypoint information in the two broadcast messages has changed). If it has changed, this also falls under the "change in broadcast message from another aircraft" scenario in this embodiment, and traffic control is initiated; if it has not changed, the broadcast message is ignored, and no traffic control is initiated.

[0019] Furthermore, during each traffic control operation, this aircraft performs the following actions: S110. Based on the latest broadcast information from at least one other aircraft, predict at least one other aircraft that poses a risk of conflict with this aircraft at the next waypoint.

[0020] In this step, based on the latest broadcast information received from all other aircraft, it is determined whether there is a spatial conflict risk and a temporal conflict risk between this aircraft and these aircraft at the next waypoint. If a certain other aircraft has both a spatial conflict risk and a temporal conflict risk with this aircraft, then it is determined that there is a conflict risk. Assuming that this aircraft has currently received broadcast information from M other aircraft, this step will select N other aircraft from the M other aircraft that have a conflict risk with this aircraft, where N≤M, and M and N are natural numbers. For ease of distinction and description, this embodiment refers to each of these N other aircraft as the first aircraft.

[0021] In one specific implementation, combined with Figure 3 The process of predicting the first aircraft may include: still assuming that the aircraft has currently received broadcast information from M other aircraft, then performing the following operations for each other aircraft: Step 1: From the latest broadcast information of other aircraft, read the navigation integrity classification of other aircraft, as well as the name and scheduled arrival time of the next waypoint (i.e. the time when the aircraft is scheduled to arrive at the next waypoint).

[0022] Step 2: Compare the names of the next waypoints for other aircraft with the names of the next waypoints for this aircraft, and handle the situation according to the comparison results: Scenario 1: The name of the next waypoint of another aircraft is the same as the name of the next waypoint of this aircraft, and there is a risk of planned arrival time conflict. Specifically, the name of a waypoint is a code that includes the aircraft's operating rule identifier and the waypoint identifier. When waypoint names are the same, the operating rules are the same by default; under the same operating rules, the waypoint identifier is unique and non-repeating. Therefore, if two aircraft have the same name for their next waypoints, it means that their next waypoints overlap, inevitably creating a spatial conflict risk. In this case, we continue to assess whether there is a conflict risk in the planned arrival times (i.e., planned arrival times) of the two aircraft at their respective next waypoints. Optionally, if the difference between the two times is less than or equal to the safe time interval, then it is determined that there is a time conflict risk between the two aircraft at the next waypoint; if the difference between the two times is greater than the safe time interval, then it is determined that there is no time conflict risk between the two aircraft at the next waypoint. When both spatial and temporal conflict risks exist simultaneously, it can be predicted that there is a safety conflict risk (i.e., potential collision risk) between the two aircraft at the next waypoint, and the other aircraft is treated as the first aircraft.

[0023] Scenario 2: If the name of the next waypoint of another aircraft is different from that of this aircraft, the risk of spatial conflict cannot be directly judged based on the waypoint name. In this case, the vertical altitude and horizontal range of the next waypoint in the broadcast information should be used to determine whether there is a risk of spatial conflict between the two aircraft at the next waypoint.

[0024] Optionally, based on vertical altitude, it can be determined whether there is a risk of vertical space conflict between the two aircraft at the next waypoint. Combined with... Figure 4 Each aircraft's operating area is a three-dimensional cylindrical closed region. Combined with... Figure 3 If the vertical height difference between the two aircraft at the next waypoint is greater than the safe vertical separation (e.g., 300 meters), it means that the aircraft will maintain a safe vertical separation at the next waypoint, and there is no vertical space conflict. It can be directly determined that there is no risk of safety conflict between the two aircraft, and the other aircraft is not the first aircraft at present.

[0025] If the vertical altitude difference between the two aircraft at the next waypoint is less than or equal to the safe vertical separation, there is a risk of vertical spatial conflict. Further analysis is conducted based on the horizontal range of the next waypoint to determine if there is a risk of horizontal spatial conflict at that waypoint. Specifically, this embodiment determines the risk of horizontal spatial conflict based on the navigation performance of the two aircraft. First, the horizontal protection limit for the two aircraft is determined according to their navigation integrity classification. The navigation integrity classification represents the accuracy of each waypoint within the aircraft, while the horizontal protection limit represents the level of accuracy at high confidence (error rate 10%). -7The possible locations where an aircraft may operate at the (flight hours) level. The correspondence between the aircraft's Navigation Integrity Classification (NIC) and Horizontal Protection Limit (HPL) is shown in Table 1: Table 1. Relationship between Horizontal Protection Line and Navigation Integrity Classification

[0026] Based on the above relationships, the horizontal protection limits corresponding to different navigation integrity classifications can be determined. For example, the horizontal protection limit for navigation integrity classification 1 is 37km. Then, based on these horizontal protection limits, the risk of horizontal spatial conflict between this aircraft and other aircraft at the next waypoint can be predicted. Specifically, the risk of horizontal spatial conflict is determined using the following formula:

[0027] in, , These represent the east-west positions of the two aircraft, , These indicate the north-south positions of the two aircraft, respectively. , These represent the horizontal protection limits of the two aircraft, respectively.

[0028] If the above formula is not met, there is no risk of horizontal space conflict, and it can be directly determined that there is no risk of safety conflict between the two aircraft, and the other aircraft is not the primary aircraft at present.

[0029] If the above formula is met, there is a risk of horizontal spatial conflict. The next aircraft's planned arrival time at the next waypoint is used to determine if there is a time conflict risk. The determination method is the same as in Case 1 and will not be repeated here. If there is no time conflict risk, it can be directly determined that there is no safety conflict risk between the two aircraft, and the other aircraft is not the primary aircraft. If there is a time conflict risk, i.e., vertical spatial conflict risk, horizontal spatial conflict risk, and time conflict all exist, then there is a safety conflict risk between the two aircraft, and the other aircraft is the primary aircraft.

[0030] Figure 5 An exemplary diagram shows the operating areas of each aircraft at the next waypoint on the horizontal plane. In the diagram: there may be horizontal space conflict risks between aircraft with waypoint 1 and waypoint 2 as their next waypoints, and between aircraft with waypoint 2 and waypoint 3 as their next waypoints; however, there is no horizontal space conflict risk between the aircraft with waypoint 4 as its next waypoint and the above three aircraft.

[0031] In summary, this embodiment introduces waypoint names to expedite the assessment of spatial conflict risks and considers the impact of navigation performance (NIC) on spatial conflict risks, enabling more accurate prediction of conflict risks between two aircraft. All the first aircraft ultimately selected are the targets of this traffic control measure. This embodiment will control each first aircraft by modifying its expected information (mainly the planned arrival time at the next waypoint).

[0032] Furthermore, in another specific embodiment, since this embodiment will modify the planned arrival time of each first aircraft's next waypoint, and each first aircraft has a certain adjustable range for its planned arrival time at the next waypoint, for example, if the original planned arrival time of a first aircraft's next waypoint is 8:00, and the adjustable range is [7:58, 8:02], then when this embodiment subsequently modifies the planned arrival time of the aircraft's next waypoint, it can only be modified to within [7:58, 8:02]. Therefore, in order to further narrow the control range and thus further improve control efficiency and accuracy, this step can also further screen the objects of this traffic control based on the adjustable range of the planned arrival time of each first aircraft's next waypoint. Optionally, at least one aircraft can be selected from all the first aircraft whose adjustable range of the planned arrival time of its next waypoint is less than or equal to the safe time interval, as the final at least one first aircraft. Assuming the adjustable range of the planned arrival time at the next waypoint for this aircraft is A1, then for each first aircraft, if the adjustable range of the planned arrival time at the next waypoint for that first aircraft is B1, and the minimum distance between A1 and B1 is less than or equal to the safety time interval, it indicates that there is still a risk of conflict between that first aircraft and this aircraft when adjusting the planned arrival time in the future. In this case, the first aircraft is retained as an object that definitely needs to be controlled. If the minimum distance between A1 and B1 is greater than the safety time interval, it indicates that there is no initial risk of conflict between that first aircraft and this aircraft when adjusting the planned arrival time in the future. In this case, the first aircraft can be excluded from the range of first aircraft and not be an object of subsequent control. The minimum distance between A1 and B1 refers to the distance between two points taken from A1 and B1 respectively; the minimum of all these distances is the minimum distance between A1 and B1. If A1 and B1 intersect, the distance is 0; if A1 and B1 do not intersect, the distance is the distance between the two nearest endpoints of the two ranges. Accordingly, given that the first aircraft has undergone a second screening here, the first aircraft in the following steps refers to the final first aircraft.

[0033] S120. Sort each first aircraft according to the adjustable range of the planned arrival time of each first aircraft at the next waypoint; and initialize the control set used to record the traffic control object for this time to this aircraft.

[0034] This step prepares the foundational data for determining the optimal traffic control scheme, including two key data points: One item is the length of the adjustable range of each first aircraft, and they are sorted in descending or ascending order of that length. Optionally, for example, if the adjustable range of first aircraft X is [7:58, 8:02], then the adjustable range length is 4 minutes; if the adjustable range of another first aircraft Y is [7:50, 7:55], then the adjustable range length is 5 minutes; then, if sorted in descending order, X is placed before Y; if sorted in ascending order, Y is placed before X.

[0035] The other item is a control set, which records which aircraft will be controlled during this traffic control operation. This set is automatically cleared each time traffic control is initiated; this step initializes the cleared set, and the initialized control set only includes the current aircraft.

[0036] S130. Starting with the first aircraft with the shortest adjustable range, each first aircraft is added to the control set in order. After each new first aircraft is added: the planned arrival time of the next waypoint of each aircraft in the current control set is taken as the solution to be optimized. Using the depth search method, within the adjustable range of each aircraft in the current control set, a feasible solution is searched that allows each aircraft in the current control set to maintain a safe time interval with each other when arriving at the next waypoint.

[0037] This embodiment, based on the aircraft ordering and control set determined in S120, uses the planned arrival time of the next waypoint for each first aircraft as the optimization object. It employs a depth-first search method, starting with the first aircraft with the shortest adjustable range, and gradually incorporates each first aircraft into the control set, progressively solving for feasible solutions for each aircraft. For ease of distinction and description, this embodiment refers to all aircraft included in the control set (whether this aircraft or a first aircraft) as second aircraft.

[0038] In one specific implementation, the following operation can be performed repeatedly until all first aircraft have been traversed: S1. Add the first aircraft B with the shortest adjustable range (not yet included in the control set) to the control set to obtain the current control set. At this time, B becomes a second aircraft and will also be the priority target for adjustment in this round of iteration. This is the embodiment of the heuristic algorithm in this example, which prioritizes starting with the aircraft with the shortest adjustable range. This is beneficial for quickly locating conflicts and can also quickly obtain feasible solutions within a small range, thus accelerating the search accuracy and speed of the entire method.

[0039] S2. The feasible solution A determined for the control set F in the previous cycle remains unchanged. That is, the optimal planned arrival time determined for each second aircraft in the control set F in the previous cycle remains unchanged. For the first cycle, the previous cycle does not exist, so the feasible solution A at this time is the original planned arrival time of the aircraft's next waypoint. This is precisely the embodiment of depth search in this embodiment, that is, prioritizing the preservation of feasible solutions already found in previous cycles.

[0040] S3. Within the adjustable range of B, select the smallest unselected time value that is closest to the original planned arrival time of the next waypoint of B as the solution for B. Verify whether the solution for B and A can satisfy the objective of ensuring that each second aircraft in the current control set maintains a safe time interval with each other when arriving at the next waypoint. Optionally, the adjustable range of each second aircraft can be discretized. In this embodiment, a feasible solution will be found among multiple discretized value combinations. Assuming that the original planned arrival time of the next waypoint of aircraft B is 8:00, and the adjustable range is [7:58, 8:02], it can be discretized into several time values ​​[7:58, 7:59, 8:00, 8:01, 8:02]. Then, select the smallest time value 7:59 that is closest to 8:00 as the solution for B, and verify whether 7:59 and the planned arrival times of each second aircraft in A can satisfy the condition that the difference between the planned arrival times of each pair of aircraft is greater than the safe time interval.

[0041] S4. If the solutions of B and A can satisfy the objective of ensuring that each second aircraft in the current control set maintains a safe time interval with each other when arriving at the next waypoint, then the solutions of B and A can be combined into a feasible solution for the current set, and the current cycle ends.

[0042] If the solution of B and A can satisfy the objective of maintaining a safe time interval between each second aircraft in the current control set when arriving at the next waypoint, then return to S3 until the objective is satisfied. A special case may arise where all time values ​​within the adjustable range of B have been selected, but the objective is still not satisfied. In this case, the adjustment target can be shifted to each second aircraft in control set F. Optionally, starting with the last unadjusted second aircraft D included in control set F, the solutions of each second aircraft in F are adjusted sequentially in reverse order of inclusion in control set F. The adjustment method can be the same as that of B's ​​solution, i.e., selecting the smallest unselected time value within D's adjustable range that is closest to the original planned arrival time of D's next waypoint as D's solution, or other adjustment methods. After each adjustment, the solution of B is re-determined. For example, taking the first loop as an example, the second aircraft D that is finally included in the control set F is this aircraft. Then, following the same adjustment method as B, within the adjustable range of this aircraft, the first choice is to select the unselected time value that is closest to and has the smallest original planned arrival time to the next waypoint of this aircraft as the solution for this aircraft. This solution is then used as the new A, and the solution of B is adjusted until a feasible solution that satisfies the above objective is obtained. Of course, at this time, there may be a situation where, under all the values ​​of the second aircraft D, no matter how the solution of B is adjusted, a feasible solution that satisfies the objective cannot be obtained. In this case, the solution of the second-to-last aircraft E included in the control set F can be adjusted. Under the new solution of E, the solutions of D and B are adjusted in the same way until a feasible solution that satisfies the objective is obtained.

[0043] This process is repeated until the objective is met, yielding a feasible solution for the current set. During this process, if all aircraft in control set F have been adjusted but no feasible solution for the current set is found, the control strategy of the first aircraft B included in the control set can be adjusted to modify the next waypoint. An instruction is sent to aircraft B, allowing it to decide whether an emergency landing is necessary or to proceed with the flight using the new next waypoint (the new next waypoint will be sent in subsequent broadcast messages). Simultaneously, B is removed from the current control set, and the feasible solution A of the current control set is restored to its value before executing round S1. The process returns to S1 to begin the next round of the loop, continuing until all first aircraft have been traversed.

[0044] The above loop employs a heuristic algorithm, starting with the aircraft with the shortest adjustable range to search for feasible solutions. This approach is most likely to find feasible solutions that mitigate conflict risks and prevent conflicts, thus improving the convergence speed of the entire method. Simultaneously, the depth-first search method minimizes the number of solution adjustments, shortening the solution time. This ensures that the computation of each feasible solution can be controlled within a certain timeframe, not only improving the overall optimization time of the traffic strategy but also clarifying the optimization path of the solution, providing a basis for estimating the computational performance range.

[0045] Furthermore, it can be seen that the number of aircraft is crucial in determining the time required to solve a feasible solution. Therefore, in another specific implementation, the maximum number of aircraft that can be controlled in each traffic control operation can be predetermined based on aircraft operational requirements and equipment performance. For example, assuming that the number of aircraft within the detection range of this aircraft in the current environment (i.e., the potential density scale) typically does not exceed N1 (the time required to calculate feasible solutions for these aircraft is usually much shorter than the broadcast interval, allowing sufficient time for command execution and / or pilot reaction), then N1 can be taken as the maximum number of aircraft N that this aircraft can calculate in a single traffic control operation. max This is also known as the aircraft size threshold for each traffic control operation. If the aircraft equipment is more powerful, a larger N can be set, provided sufficient time is allocated for command execution and / or pilot reaction. max For example, N max =30. Therefore, before executing S120, we can first determine whether the number of the first aircraft, N + 1, exceeds N. max If it does not exceed (N+1≤N) max If the value exceeds (N+1≤N), then continue executing S120; if the value exceeds (N+1≤N), then continue executing S120. max Then, from the set consisting of the N first aircraft and the current aircraft, the aircraft with the latest scheduled arrival time at the next waypoint is removed one by one until the number of remaining aircraft in the set equals N. max Then, execute S120. If the aircraft is removed from the set during the process of removal one by one, then the current traffic control operation ends (S120 to S140 are no longer executed).

[0046] Furthermore, in another specific embodiment, the maximum time required to calculate the feasible solution for the maximum number of aircraft can also be predetermined (i.e., how long it would take in the worst case to calculate N). max (A feasible solution for each aircraft), and use the maximum time as the time threshold for determining a feasible solution. Then, after executing all cycles S1-S4, if the total execution time of all cycles from S110 to S1-S4 in this traffic control operation still does not exceed the maximum time, a new optimization objective can be added to continue optimizing the existing feasible solution. Optionally, the new optimization objective can be: minimizing the deviation between the optimized planned arrival time of each second aircraft at the next waypoint in S130 and their respective original planned arrival times. Based on this new optimization objective and the original optimization objective (that each second aircraft maintains a safe time interval when arriving at the next waypoint), the final feasible solution in S130 continues to be optimized until the total execution time from S110 exceeds the maximum time. At this point, the existing feasible solution is taken as the final feasible solution for this traffic control operation.

[0047] S140. Based on the final feasible solution, control the flight of each second aircraft.

[0048] If only loops S1 to S4 are executed in S130, then the final feasible solution refers to the feasible solution determined in the last loop. If S130 also optimizes the feasible solution determined in the last loop based on the added objective, then the final feasible solution refers to the final feasible solution of this traffic control exercise. The final second aircraft refers to the second aircraft involved in the final feasible solution.

[0049] Having completed the negotiation of traffic plans through S110-S130, this step provides the negotiated traffic plans to each aircraft for implementation, either through guided or automated execution. Optionally, control commands are sent to each of the final second-stage aircraft based on the final feasible solution, enabling each of the final second-stage aircraft to control its flight according to the optimized planned arrival time.

[0050] Regarding the entire traffic control process described above, Figure 6 A specific implementation method is provided, which roughly divides the process into four stages: Phase 1: Determine if the conflict is within the computational scope, i.e., determine if a computational result can be obtained within the longest possible timeframe. Optionally, the safety time interval can be 2 minutes, and the computational scope threshold N... max Thirty aircraft can be selected. Phase 1 corresponds to the part in S110 that filters the final first aircraft according to the adjustable range. The input data for Phase 1 is at least one first aircraft selected in S110.

[0051] Phase 2: Using a heuristic (minimum adjustable range first) greedy depth-first search algorithm, the minimum feasible solution is searched for quickly. Phase 2 corresponds to the cyclic part of S1 to S4 in S120 to S130.

[0052] Phase 3: If the total computation time does not exceed the maximum time limit, continue searching for a solution with the smallest deviation from the expected arrival time using the remaining time. If a better solution is found, it replaces the existing solution. Here, the deviation of each aircraft from its original planned arrival time needs to be considered. Phase 2 corresponds to the part of S130 that continues to optimize feasible solutions based on the added objective.

[0053] Phase 4: Implementation Phase. The final solution is sent to all affected aircraft. Aircraft using the solution request changes to their flight intentions, such as arrival times or next waypoint information. Phase 4 corresponds to part of S140.

[0054] In summary, this embodiment provides an aircraft self-organizing traffic control method that helps aircraft maintain safe distances during flight and landing phases through negotiation and self-organization at the airborne end. This method is particularly suitable for situations without air traffic control units or ground management platforms. Specifically, the airborne end autonomously negotiates conflict detection using broadcast equipment and performs negotiated traffic control once each new broadcast message is received. Based on a heuristic depth-first search algorithm, it starts with the aircraft with the smallest adjustable range and progressively determines feasible solutions to avoid conflict risks. This method can identify conflict risks in feasible solutions most quickly and minimize the number of solution adjustments, improving the accuracy and speed of feasible solution finding and enhancing the timeliness of traffic control. Furthermore, the method in this embodiment considers waypoint names and navigation performance in conflict detection, improving detection efficiency and accuracy; and adjusts the solution range of the optimal solution based on a computational performance scale threshold, further ensuring the timeliness of traffic control. The traffic control method in this embodiment is simple to implement and highly efficient; it is applicable to both ground-based and airborne equipment, with no particular restrictions on the configuration of the UAV; it has low equipment requirements and significantly reduces costs compared to existing ground solutions; the entire process can be implemented autonomously without human intervention; and it can achieve excellent control results.

[0055] It should be noted that all data involved in this application are information and data authorized by the user or fully authorized by all parties, and the collection, use and processing of the relevant data must comply with the relevant laws, regulations and standards of the relevant countries and regions, and corresponding operation portals are provided for users to choose to authorize or refuse.

[0056] Based on the same inventive concept, this embodiment also provides an aircraft self-organizing traffic control system. The system includes multiple aircraft, each of which performs the following method: each time a change in broadcast information from other aircraft is detected, traffic control is performed once: S110. Based on the latest broadcast information from at least one other aircraft, predict at least one first aircraft that is at risk of conflict with this aircraft at the next waypoint. S120. Sort each first aircraft according to the adjustable range of the planned arrival time of each first aircraft at the next waypoint; initialize the control set used to record the traffic control objects for this time to this aircraft; S130. Starting with the first aircraft with the shortest adjustable range, each first aircraft is added to the control set in order. After each new first aircraft is added: the planned arrival time of the next waypoint of each second aircraft in the current control set is taken as the solution to be optimized. The depth search method is used to search within the adjustable range of each second aircraft for a feasible solution that allows each second aircraft to maintain a safe time interval with each other when arriving at the next waypoint. S140. Based on the final feasible solution, control the flight of each second aircraft.

[0057] It should be noted that this embodiment is based on the same inventive concept as any of the above method embodiments, and any limitation in the above method embodiments is applicable to this embodiment, and this embodiment can achieve the same technical effect as any of the above method embodiments.

[0058] Figure 7 This is a schematic diagram of the structure of an electronic device provided in an embodiment of the present invention, such as... Figure 7 As shown, the device includes a processor 60, a memory 61, an input device 62, and an output device 63; the number of processors 60 in the device can be one or more. Figure 7 Taking a processor 60 as an example; the processor 60, memory 61, input device 62, and output device 63 in the device can be connected via a bus or other means. Figure 7 Taking the example of a connection between China and Israel via a bus.

[0059] The memory 61, as a computer-readable storage medium, can be used to store software programs, computer-executable programs, and modules, such as the program instructions / modules corresponding to the aircraft self-organizing traffic control method in this embodiment of the invention. The processor 60 executes various functional applications and data processing of the device by running the software programs, instructions, and modules stored in the memory 61, thereby realizing the aforementioned aircraft self-organizing traffic control method.

[0060] The memory 61 may primarily include a program storage area and a data storage area. The program storage area may store the operating system and at least one application program required for a given function; the data storage area may store data created based on terminal usage. Furthermore, the memory 61 may include high-speed random access memory and non-volatile memory, such as at least one disk storage device, flash memory, or other non-volatile solid-state storage device. In some instances, the memory 61 may further include memory remotely located relative to the processor 60, which can be connected to the device via a network. Examples of such networks include, but are not limited to, the Internet, intranets, local area networks, mobile communication networks, and combinations thereof.

[0061] Input device 62 can be used to receive input digital or character information, and to generate key signal inputs related to user settings and function control of the device. Output device 63 may include display devices such as a display screen.

[0062] This invention also provides a computer-readable storage medium having a computer program stored thereon, which, when executed by a processor, implements the aircraft self-organizing traffic control method of any embodiment.

[0063] The computer storage medium of this invention can be any combination of one or more computer-readable media. A computer-readable medium can be a computer-readable signal medium or a computer-readable storage medium. A computer-readable storage medium can be, for example, but not limited to, an electrical, magnetic, optical, electromagnetic, infrared, or semiconductor system, apparatus, or device, or any combination thereof. More specific examples of computer-readable storage media (a non-exhaustive list) include: an electrical connection having one or more wires, a portable computer disk, a hard disk, random access memory (RAM), read-only memory (ROM), erasable programmable read-only memory (EPROM or flash memory), optical fiber, portable compact disk read-only memory (CD-ROM), optical storage device, magnetic storage device, or any suitable combination thereof. In this document, a computer-readable storage medium can be any tangible medium that contains or stores a program that can be used by or in conjunction with an instruction execution system, apparatus, or device.

[0064] Computer-readable signal media may include data signals propagated in baseband or as part of a carrier wave, carrying computer-readable program code. Such propagated data signals may take various forms, including but not limited to electromagnetic signals, optical signals, or any suitable combination thereof. Computer-readable signal media may also be any computer-readable medium other than computer-readable storage media, capable of sending, propagating, or transmitting programs for use by or in connection with an instruction execution system, apparatus, or device.

[0065] Program code contained on a computer-readable medium may be transmitted using any suitable medium, including but not limited to wireless, wire, optical fiber, RF, etc., or any suitable combination thereof.

[0066] Computer program code for performing the operations of this invention can be written in one or more programming languages ​​or a combination thereof. Programming languages ​​include object-oriented programming languages—such as Java, Smalltalk, and C++—as well as conventional procedural programming languages—such as C or similar programming languages. The program code can be executed entirely on the user's computer, partially on the user's computer, as a standalone software package, partially on the user's computer and partially on a remote computer, or entirely on a remote computer or server. In cases involving remote computers, the remote computer can be connected to the user's computer via any type of network, including a local area network (LAN) or a wide area network (WAN), or it can be connected to an external computer (e.g., via the Internet using an Internet service provider).

[0067] Finally, it should be noted that the above embodiments are only used to illustrate the technical solutions of the present invention, and not to limit them; although the present invention has been described in detail with reference to the foregoing embodiments, those skilled in the art should understand that modifications can still be made to the technical solutions described in the foregoing embodiments, or equivalent substitutions can be made to some or all of the technical features; and these modifications or substitutions do not cause the essence of the corresponding technical solutions to deviate from the technical solutions of the embodiments of the present invention.

Claims

1. An aircraft self-organizing traffic control method, characterized by, Applied to this aircraft, the method includes: Each time a change in broadcast information from other aircraft is detected, the following traffic control measures will be implemented: S110. Based on the latest broadcast information from at least one other aircraft, predict at least one first aircraft that is at risk of conflict with this aircraft at the next waypoint. S120. Sort each first aircraft according to the adjustable range of the planned arrival time of each first aircraft at the next waypoint; and initialize the control set used to record the traffic control objects for this time to the current aircraft. S130. Starting with the first aircraft with the shortest adjustable range, each first aircraft is added to the control set in order. After each new first aircraft is added: the planned arrival time of the next waypoint of each second aircraft in the current control set is taken as the solution to be optimized. The depth search method is used to search within the adjustable range of each second aircraft for a feasible solution that allows each second aircraft to maintain a safe time interval with each other when arriving at the next waypoint. S140. Based on the final feasible solution, control the flight of each second aircraft.

2. The method of claim 1, wherein, S110 includes: Read the navigation integrity classification of any other aircraft, as well as the name and scheduled arrival time of the next waypoint, from the latest broadcast information from any other aircraft. If any other aircraft has the same name as the next waypoint of this aircraft and there is a risk of a planned arrival time conflict, then the other aircraft shall be designated as the first aircraft. If the name of any other aircraft is inconsistent with the name of the next waypoint of this aircraft, the horizontal protection limit of the other aircraft is determined according to the navigation integrity classification, and the horizontal protection limit is used to predict whether there is a horizontal space conflict risk between the other aircraft and this aircraft at the next waypoint; if there is a horizontal space conflict risk, a vertical space conflict risk and a planned arrival time conflict risk at the next waypoint, the other aircraft is designated as the first aircraft.

3. The method of claim 1, wherein, S110 includes: If two aircraft meet the following conditions, it is predicted that there is a risk of horizontal spatial conflict between the two aircraft at the next waypoint: wherein, and respectively denote the first dimension position coordinate of the next waypoint of the two aircrafts in the horizontal space, and respectively denote the second dimension position coordinate of the next waypoint of the two aircrafts in the horizontal space, the first and second dimension directions being perpendicular to each other, and respectively denote the horizontal protection limit of the two aircrafts.

4. The method of claim 1, wherein, S110 includes: Based on the broadcast information from other aircraft, predict at least one first aircraft that has a risk of vertical space conflict, horizontal space conflict and planned arrival time conflict with this aircraft at the next waypoint; From the at least one first aircraft, at least one aircraft whose planned arrival time at the next waypoint of the aircraft is less than or equal to the safe time interval is selected as the final at least one first aircraft.

5. The method of claim 1, wherein, S130 includes: The following loop is executed sequentially until all first-class aircraft have been traversed: S1. Add the first aircraft B with the shortest adjustable range that is not yet included in the control set to the control set to obtain the current control set; S2. Keep the feasible solution A determined for the control set F of the previous cycle unchanged; S3. Within the adjustable range of B, select the unselected time value that is closest to and smallest in terms of the original planned arrival time of the next waypoint of B as the solution of B, and verify whether the solution of B and A can satisfy the objective of ensuring that each second aircraft in the current control set maintains a safe time interval with each other when arriving at the next waypoint. S4. If possible, combine the solution of B with that of A to form a feasible solution for the current control set; If not, return to S3 until the objective is met; if the objective is still not met after all time values ​​in the adjustable range of B have been selected, start with the last included second aircraft D that has never been adjusted, and adjust the solutions of each second aircraft in reverse order of inclusion in the control set F. After each adjustment, redetermine the solution of B in the manner of S3; repeat this process until the objective is met and a feasible solution is obtained for the current control set.

6. The method of claim 1, wherein, Prior to S120, it also included: Determine whether the number of the first aircraft, N+1, exceeds the maximum number of aircraft that can be calculated in a single traffic control operation. If the number of aircraft exceeds the limit, the aircraft with the latest planned arrival time at the next waypoint is removed one by one from the N first aircraft and the current aircraft, until the number of remaining aircraft equals the maximum number before entering S120, or until the current aircraft is removed, and the current traffic control ends.

7. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, Also includes: Based on the maximum number of aircraft that can be calculated in a single traffic control operation, determine the maximum time required to calculate a feasible solution for the maximum number of aircraft. Correspondingly, after S130, the following steps are also included: if the total execution time from S110 to S130 in this traffic control does not exceed the maximum time, the optimized planned arrival time of each second aircraft's next waypoint in S130 is minimized as the new objective, and the final feasible solution in S130 is further optimized to obtain the final feasible solution for this traffic control.

8. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, S140 includes: Control commands are sent to each of the final second aircraft based on the final feasible solution, so that each of the final second aircraft controls its flight according to the optimized planned arrival time.

9. An electronic device, characterized in that, include: One or more processors; Memory, used to store one or more programs; When the one or more programs are executed by the one or more processors, the one or more processors implement the aircraft self-organizing traffic control method according to any one of claims 1-8.

10. An aircraft self-organizing traffic control system, characterized in that, It includes multiple aircraft, each of which is used to perform the following methods: Each time a change in broadcast information from other aircraft is detected, the following traffic control measures will be implemented: S110. Based on the latest broadcast information from at least one other aircraft, predict at least one first aircraft that is at risk of conflict with this aircraft at the next waypoint. S120. Sort each first aircraft according to the adjustable range of the planned arrival time of each first aircraft at the next waypoint; initialize the control set used to record the traffic control objects for this time to this aircraft; S130. Starting with the first aircraft with the shortest adjustable range, each first aircraft is added to the control set in order. After each new first aircraft is added: the planned arrival time of the next waypoint of each second aircraft in the current control set is taken as the solution to be optimized. The depth search method is used to search within the adjustable range of each second aircraft for a feasible solution that allows each second aircraft to maintain a safe time interval with each other when arriving at the next waypoint. S140. Based on the final feasible solution, control the flight of each second aircraft.

Images