Unmanned aerial vehicle weapon double-insurance throwing control method and system

Abstract

The invention relates to an unmanned aerial vehicle weapon double-insurance throwing control method and system. The method comprises the following steps: determining a flight state range of a weapon capable of being safely released based on a flight state and an environmental condition of an unmanned aerial vehicle, and obtaining a releasable flight envelope; comparing the flight state of the unmanned aerial vehicle with the releasable flight envelope to obtain an attitude conformity evaluation result; based on the relative position relation between the throwing target and the unmanned aerial vehicle, the pointing angle needed by weapon release is calculated, and the target pointing angle is obtained; adjusting a difference value between the target pointing angle and a current angle of the orientation mechanism to obtain an in-place state of the orientation mechanism, and performing parallel satisfaction verification on a release condition to obtain a release condition verification result; and generating a weapon release instruction based on the first re-insurance state and the second re-insurance state. By adopting the method, the throwing precision reduction caused by attitude jitter of the unmanned aerial vehicle can be prevented, and the timeliness and robustness of unmanned aerial vehicle weapon throwing are effectively improved.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention belongs to the field of strike trajectory control, and in particular relates to a dual-insurance throwing control method and system for unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) weapons. Background Technology

[0002] With the rapid development of UAV precision strike technology, real-time weapon delivery control technology based on intelligent decision-making and autonomous control has emerged. This technology aims to achieve rapid, accurate, and safe strikes against time-sensitive targets in battlefield environments. Its core feature lies in the deep coupling of attack decision-making and flight control to adapt to highly dynamic and intensely competitive combat environments. Traditional technologies typically employ a serial control approach from remote control to response to handle weapon delivery authorization and execution. Specifically, the ground control station makes real-time judgments and grants manual authorization based on the downlinked UAV status information before sending specific delivery commands. To ensure safety, a dual verification mechanism is commonly used: the first verification ensures the stability of the flight platform itself; the second verification ensures compliance with engagement rules such as target pointing and friend-or-foe identification. Both verifications usually rely on continuous, low-latency uplink and downlink data links to complete status synchronization and command transmission. However, the current traditional remote verification to central decision-making approach has inherent bottlenecks when dealing with high-intensity combat battlefields. First, it is highly dependent on the real-time performance and reliability of the data link. In scenarios with strong electromagnetic interference or high-speed maneuvering, data transmission delays and packet loss can cause the verification window to disappear, leading to delays in aircraft operations. Secondly, its static and fixed safety thresholds cannot effectively adapt to continuous platform disturbances caused by battlefield wind and turbulence, easily leading to frequent interruptions of the attack process due to momentary exceeding of limits, thus reducing the mission success rate. Finally, when facing dynamic targets, complex terrain obstructions, and stringent requirements for preventing friendly fire, remote operators find it difficult to complete multi-source information fusion and risk assessment in a very short time, easily causing friendly fire or missing opportunities, and failing to meet the stringent requirements of modern warfare for the timeliness and robustness of weapon delivery. Summary of the Invention

[0003] Therefore, it is necessary to provide a dual-insurance weapon throwing control method and system for unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) that can improve the timeliness and robustness of weapon throwing, in order to address the aforementioned technical problems.

[0004] Firstly, this application provides a dual-insurance throwing control method for unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) weapons, including:

[0005] Based on the flight status and environmental conditions of the UAV, the flight status range in which the weapon can be safely released is determined, and the releaseable flight envelope is obtained.

[0006] The flight status of the UAV is compared with the releaseable flight envelope to obtain the attitude compliance assessment result; the attitude compliance assessment result is used to generate the first layer of protection state.

[0007] Based on the relative positions of the projectile target and the drone, the pointing angle required for weapon release is calculated, and the target pointing angle is obtained.

[0008] The difference between the target pointing angle and the current angle of the orientation mechanism is adjusted to obtain the orientation mechanism's positioning state. The release conditions are then verified in parallel to obtain the release condition verification results. The orientation mechanism's positioning state and the release condition verification results are used to generate the second layer of insurance state.

[0009] Based on the first and second security states, a weapon release command is generated; the weapon release command is used to instruct the weapon to be thrown.

[0010] Furthermore, based on the UAV's flight status and environmental conditions, the range of flight states within which the weapon can be safely released is determined, resulting in a releaseable flight envelope, including:

[0011] The flight status of the UAV is evaluated based on its three-axis angular velocity, three-axis acceleration, and attitude angle; the flight status includes flight mode and flight speed.

[0012] Based on flight status and environmental conditions, the intensity of environmental disturbances is quantified to obtain the environmental disturbance level; the environmental disturbances include at least one of atmospheric turbulence, vibration, and gusts.

[0013] Based on the physical characteristics of the weapon and the mass distribution of the UAV, the impact of the weapon's throwing on the UAV's attitude is predicted, and the throwing impact is estimated.

[0014] Based on flight status, environmental disturbance level, and predicted impact of throwing, a releaseable envelope is generated through a dynamic envelope calculation algorithm, resulting in a releaseable flight envelope.

[0015] Furthermore, based on flight status, environmental disturbance level, and predicted throw impact, a releaseable envelope under current conditions is generated using a dynamic envelope calculation algorithm, resulting in a releaseable flight envelope, including:

[0016] Based on flight conditions and weapon delivery accuracy requirements, the initial envelope boundary is calculated using the following formula:

[0017]

[0018] in, This is the initial envelope boundary. As the baseline attitude tolerance, For flight mode factors, For flight speed factor, For accuracy requirements;

[0019] Based on the disturbance-expansion mapping function, the environmental disturbance level is mapped to the corresponding expansion coefficient and compensation value, and the expansion coefficient and compensation value are applied to the initial envelope boundary to obtain the disturbance compensation envelope boundary.

[0020] Based on the estimated impact of the throw, the safety margin is calculated, and the safety margin is subtracted from the disturbance compensation envelope boundary to obtain the throw safety envelope boundary.

[0021] Based on the throwing target and control authority, the control compensation factor, emergency relaxation coefficient and stability prediction factor are calculated, and the control compensation factor, emergency relaxation coefficient and stability prediction factor are weighted and summed to obtain the adaptive factor;

[0022] Based on the throw safety envelope boundary and the adaptive factor, the releaseable flight envelope is calculated using the following formula:

[0023]

[0024] in, To enable the release of the flight envelope, To throw the safe envelope boundary, As an adaptive factor, For the minimum safe envelope boundary, The maximum physical envelope boundary, To compensate for the uncertainty in sensor measurements.

[0025] Furthermore, the release conditions are verified in parallel to obtain the release condition verification results, including:

[0026] Based on the multi-dimensional results of the target recognition algorithm, it is determined whether the currently locked target is a thrown target, and the target recognition verification result is obtained.

[0027] The attack authorization data is validated to obtain the attack authorization validation result. Based on the status feedback of the weapon's multiple components, the weapon's readiness is determined to obtain the weapon readiness validation result.

[0028] Based on the predicted trajectory of the weapon and safety constraints, the prevention of accidental injury is verified, and the results of the prevention of accidental injury verification are obtained.

[0029] Based on the communication link status, communication availability is assessed to obtain communication link verification results;

[0030] Based on the target identification verification results, attack authorization verification results, weapon readiness verification results, anti-collateral damage verification results, and communication link verification results, a satisfaction verification is performed to obtain the release condition verification results.

[0031] Furthermore, based on the predicted trajectory of the weapon and safety constraints, accidental injury prevention verification is conducted, and the verification results are obtained, including:

[0032] Based on the weapon's throwing parameters and flight status, the trajectory of the weapon from the throwing point to the impact point is predicted, and the predicted throwing trajectory and impact point are obtained.

[0033] Based on the weapon's damage characteristics and point of impact, the weapon's damage coverage area is calculated.

[0034] By comparing the safety constraints, the estimated throwing trajectory and the damage coverage, the anti-accidental injury verification was carried out, and the preliminary anti-accidental injury verification results were obtained.

[0035] Based on uncertainties, fault-tolerant compensation is applied to the preliminary anti-accidental injury verification results to obtain the final anti-accidental injury verification results.

[0036] Furthermore, by comparing safety constraints, estimated throwing trajectory, and damage coverage, a verification of accidental injury prevention was conducted, yielding preliminary verification results, including:

[0037] Based on the safe airspace constraint in the safety constraints, the predicted throwing trajectory and the no-fly zone are compared to obtain the trajectory safety check results;

[0038] Based on the regional constraints, the legality of the hit point is determined, and the legality result of the landing area is obtained.

[0039] Based on the safety zone boundary, the overlapping part of the damage coverage area and the safety zone boundary is calculated using a spatial overlap algorithm to obtain the damage coverage overlap result;

[0040] Based on personnel dynamic data and damage coverage, the dynamic accidental injury risk is assessed, and the dynamic accidental injury risk assessment result is obtained.

[0041] Based on the results of trajectory safety checks, landing area legality, damage coverage overlap, and dynamic accidental injury risk assessment, preliminary accidental injury prevention verification results are generated.

[0042] Secondly, this application also provides a dual-insurance throwing control system for unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) weapons, comprising:

[0043] The state range module is used to determine the flight state range in which weapons can be safely released based on the UAV's flight state and environmental conditions, and to obtain the releaseable flight envelope;

[0044] The attitude assessment module compares the UAV's flight state with its releaseable flight envelope to obtain an attitude compliance assessment result; the attitude compliance assessment result is used to generate the first layer of protection state.

[0045] The pointing angle module is used to calculate the pointing angle required for weapon release based on the relative positional relationship between the projectile target and the drone, thereby obtaining the target pointing angle;

[0046] The release verification module is used to adjust the difference between the target pointing angle and the current angle of the orientation mechanism to obtain the orientation mechanism's position status, and to perform parallel satisfaction verification of the release conditions to obtain the release condition verification result; the orientation mechanism's position status and the release condition verification result are used to generate the second layer of insurance status;

[0047] The release command module is used to generate weapon release commands based on the first and second security states; the weapon release commands are used to instruct the throwing of weapons.

[0048] Thirdly, this application also provides a computer device including a memory and a processor, the memory storing a computer program, and the processor executing the computer program to implement any step of the method provided in the first aspect of this application.

[0049] Fourthly, this application also provides a computer-readable storage medium having a computer program stored thereon, which, when executed by a processor, implements any step of the method provided in the first aspect of this application.

[0050] The aforementioned UAV weapon dual-insurance throwing control method and system determines the safe weapon release range based on the UAV's flight state and environmental conditions, obtaining a releaseable flight envelope. The UAV's flight state and the releaseable flight envelope are compared to obtain an attitude conformity assessment result. This result is used to generate the first-level insurance state. Based on the relative positional relationship between the throwing target and the UAV, the required pointing angle for weapon release is calculated, obtaining the target pointing angle. The difference between the target pointing angle and the current angle of the directional mechanism is adjusted to obtain the directional mechanism's position state, and the release conditions are verified in parallel, yielding a release condition verification result. The directional mechanism's position state and the release condition verification result are used to generate the second-level insurance state. Based on the first and second-level insurance states, a weapon release command is generated, instructing the weapon to be thrown. The attitude assessment is transferred to the UAV's onboard terminal, avoiding delay conflicts between real-time attitude sensor data and remote control verification. The releaseable boundary is dynamically calculated based on real-time wind field, turbulence intensity, and flight state, ensuring that throwing accuracy is not affected by attitude jitter. Multiple release condition verifications and dual verifications reduce the probability of accidental damage, effectively improving the accuracy and reliability of weapon throwing. Attached Figure Description

[0051] To more clearly illustrate the technical solutions in the embodiments or related technologies of this application, the accompanying drawings used in the description of the embodiments or related technologies will be briefly introduced below. Obviously, the accompanying drawings described below are only some embodiments of this application. For those skilled in the art, other drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without creative effort.

[0052] Figure 1 This is a schematic diagram of the process of a dual-insurance throwing control method for unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) weapons according to an embodiment of the present invention;

[0053] Figure 2 This is a schematic diagram of the structure of a dual-insurance throwing control system for unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) weapons, provided in an embodiment of the present invention. Detailed Implementation

[0054] To make the objectives, technical solutions, and advantages of this application clearer, the following detailed description is provided in conjunction with the accompanying drawings and embodiments. It should be understood that the specific embodiments described herein are merely illustrative and not intended to limit the scope of this application.

[0055] In one embodiment, such as Figure 1 As shown, a dual-insurance throwing control method for UAV weapons is provided. This embodiment illustrates the application of this method to a UAV terminal. It is understood that this method can also be applied to a server, and further to a system including both a UAV terminal and a server, and is implemented through interaction between the UAV terminal and the server. In this embodiment, the method includes the following steps:

[0056] Step 101: Based on the UAV's flight status and environmental conditions, determine the flight status range in which the weapon can be safely released, and obtain the releaseable flight envelope.

[0057] The flight state of a UAV refers to its kinematic parameters at a given moment, typically including its flight mode, flight speed, three-axis angular velocity, three-axis acceleration, and attitude angles, comprehensively describing how the UAV is flying. Environmental conditions refer to the external physical environment factors of the UAV, mainly including atmospheric turbulence, gusts, and airframe vibration, which can interfere with flight stability and weapon release accuracy. The safe flight state range for weapon release is a conceptual description, referring to the set of upper and lower boundaries of the various flight state parameters allowed for the UAV to release weapons to ensure safety and effectiveness. The releaseable flight envelope is the specific quantitative result of the safe flight state range for weapon release; it is a dynamically changing, multi-dimensional safety boundary. Its core content is the allowable range of the UAV's pitch and roll angles, defining the attitude limits at which the UAV can safely and relatively accurately release weapons in its current position and environment. The terminal continuously reads data from airborne sensors in real time, which directly reflects the UAV's flight status. By analyzing the fluctuation characteristics of sensor data or receiving external environmental information, it assesses the current environmental conditions and calls upon the internally pre-built flight dynamics model and safety rule library. The model and rules define the basic requirements for maintaining stable flight of the UAV and ensuring the accuracy of the initial trajectory for weapon release under different flight states and environmental disturbances. The terminal performs comprehensive calculations and comparisons with the real-time sensor data and the model and rules, and through a specific algorithm process, it calculates and outputs a flight state parameter boundary that allows weapon release in real time. The flight envelope is then released and is dynamically updated, constantly adjusted as the flight state and environmental conditions change.

[0058] Step 102: Compare the flight status of the UAV with the releaseable flight envelope to obtain the attitude compliance assessment result; the attitude compliance assessment result is used to generate the first layer of protection state.

[0059] Specifically, the attitude compliance assessment result is a Boolean value indicating whether the UAV's current real-time flight status meets the safety conditions stipulated by the releasable flight envelope. The first-level safety state is the system state directly determined by the attitude compliance assessment result. If the assessment result is compliant, the first-level safety state is ready or unlocked; if it is not compliant, the state is not ready or locked, which is one of the two prerequisites for allowing weapon release. The terminal acquires the latest releasable flight envelope in real time, and also acquires the UAV's current actual flight status data from the sensors in real time. It compares the actual value of each key parameter with the corresponding allowable range in the envelope one by one. The operation logic is: check whether all monitored flight status parameters are simultaneously within their respective safety envelope boundaries. If all checked parameters remain within the safety range for a preset time, it is immediately determined to be compliant; if any parameter exceeds the safety range, it is immediately determined to be non-compliant. The comparison result is the attitude compliance assessment result and is directly mapped to the first-level safety state.

[0060] Step 103: Based on the relative positional relationship between the projectile target and the drone, calculate the pointing angle required for weapon release to obtain the target pointing angle.

[0061] Specifically, the target is a predetermined object or geographical location to be attacked. The relative positional relationship describes the target's position relative to the UAV, typically including horizontal distance, altitude difference, and azimuth. This data can come from airborne electro-optical systems, radar, or ground station commands. The pointing angle required for weapon release is the spatial angle that the weapon release mechanism needs to point at the moment of release, ensuring the weapon hits the target given its own dynamic characteristics. The target pointing angle is the calculated result of the weapon release angle, including azimuth and pitch angles, and is a commanded angle value. The terminal acquires the relative positional relationship data provided by the target detection system. Based on a preset weapon trajectory model or projectile formula, it takes the target's position information and the UAV's own motion parameters as input for calculation. The calculation process comprehensively considers factors such as gravity and the influence of the UAV's speed on the weapon's initial velocity, determining the precise angle the release mechanism needs to point at to compensate for the weapon's descent trajectory. After the calculation is complete, a specific angle command, the target pointing angle, is output.

[0062] Step 104: Adjust the difference between the target pointing angle and the current angle of the orientation mechanism to obtain the orientation mechanism's position state, and perform parallel satisfaction verification of the release conditions to obtain the release condition verification result; the orientation mechanism's position state and the release condition verification result are used to generate the second layer of insurance state.

[0063] The current angle of the orientation mechanism refers to the real-time pointing angle actually measured by the weapon release orientation mechanism. The orientation mechanism's "in position" status is a judgment result indicating whether the actual angle of the orientation mechanism is sufficiently close to the calculated target pointing angle; that is, whether the difference between the two is less than an allowable error threshold. If the difference is within the tolerance, the status is "in position"; otherwise, it is "not in position." Release conditions refer to all logical and safety conditions, excluding the UAV's flight attitude and aiming angle, that must be met before weapon release can be authorized. Parallel satisfaction verification refers to simultaneously checking and judging multiple release conditions; the verification process is independent and simultaneous. The release condition verification result is a comprehensive conclusion obtained after parallel satisfaction verification of multiple release conditions; it is a Boolean value, and the result is true or passes only when all verified conditions are met. The second layer of security is jointly determined by the orientation mechanism's "in position" status and the release condition verification result; only when both are true is the second layer of security either ready or unlocked. The terminal continuously acquires the target pointing angle and compares it in real time with the current angle of the orientation mechanism fed back from the orientation mechanism's angle sensor. It calculates the angle error, which is then sent to the control law for processing. This generates control commands to drive the servo motor of the orientation mechanism to rotate, eliminating the error. Simultaneously, the magnitude of the error is monitored. When the error remains stable within a preset small threshold range, the orientation mechanism is determined to be in position. Multiple independent verification sub-processes are simultaneously initiated, each checking conditions such as target identification accuracy, attack authorization validity, weapon system readiness, communication link reliability, and accidental injury prevention assessment pass. Each sub-process independently determines whether its condition is met. A logic unit summarizes and judges the conclusions of all sub-processes. Only when all sub-process conclusions are met is the release condition verification result finally output as true. The orientation mechanism's position status and the release condition verification result are input into an AND gate. Only when both are true is a second-layer safety state (ready) generated.

[0064] Step 105: Based on the first and second security states, generate a weapon release command; the weapon release command is used to instruct the weapon to be thrown.

[0065] The weapon release command is a final, high-level electronic signal or digital command that directly triggers the weapon's mechanical release mechanism, thus launching the weapon from the drone. The terminal continuously monitors the first and second safety states. Internally, it implements a simple AND logic; the weapon release command is only generated and issued when both input states are continuously and simultaneously indicating either ready or true. The command is a brief or latched electrical signal sent directly to the actuator of the weapon release mechanism. At any time, if either safety state becomes inactive, the generation of the release command is immediately suppressed; if the command has already been issued, it may be interrupted.

[0066] This embodiment provides a dual-safety weapon throwing control method for unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). Based on the UAV's flight state and environmental conditions, it determines the range of flight states within which the weapon can be safely released, obtaining a releaseable flight envelope. The UAV's flight state and the releaseable flight envelope are compared to obtain an attitude conformity assessment result. This result is used to generate the first safety state. Based on the relative positional relationship between the throwing target and the UAV, the pointing angle required for weapon release is calculated, obtaining the target pointing angle. The difference between the target pointing angle and the current angle of the directional mechanism is adjusted to obtain the directional mechanism's position state, and the release conditions are verified in parallel to obtain the release condition verification result. The directional mechanism's position state and the release condition verification result are used to generate the second safety state. Based on the first and second safety states, a weapon release command is generated. This command instructs the weapon to be thrown. By employing the above methods, attitude assessment is transferred to the onboard end of the UAV, avoiding the time delay conflict between real-time attitude sensor data and remote control verification; the release boundary is dynamically calculated based on real-time wind field, turbulence intensity, and flight status to ensure that the throwing accuracy is not affected by attitude jitter; multiple release condition verification and dual verification reduce the probability of accidental damage, effectively improving the accuracy and reliability of weapon throwing.

[0067] In one embodiment, based on the UAV's flight state and environmental conditions, the range of flight states in which the weapon can be safely released is determined, resulting in a releaseable flight envelope, including:

[0068] Step 201: Based on the UAV's three-axis angular velocity, three-axis acceleration, and attitude angle, evaluate the UAV's flight status; the flight status includes flight mode and flight speed.

[0069] Among them, three-axis angular velocity is a physical quantity describing the speed of rotation of a UAV around the three axes of its body coordinate system, directly reflecting the drastic degree of attitude change of the UAV. Three-axis acceleration is a physical quantity describing the speed of linear motion of a UAV along the three axes of its body coordinate system, reflecting whether the UAV is accelerating, decelerating, or moving laterally. Attitude angles describe the angular orientation of the UAV relative to the horizontal plane or geographic coordinate system, mainly including roll angle, pitch angle, and yaw angle. Flight status is a comprehensive judgment conclusion, describing the current macroscopic flight status of the UAV, including at least flight mode, which is a classification judgment of the UAV's dominant motion mode, such as stable hovering, constant speed cruise, accelerated forward flight, high-maneuver turn, takeoff, or landing; flight speed is the airspeed of the UAV relative to the air and / or the ground speed relative to the ground, which is a specific numerical quantity. The terminal continuously reads raw data from sensors such as the inertial measurement unit, namely triaxial angular velocity and triaxial acceleration. The data are high-frequency, direct measurements, but may contain noise. The raw data is processed and analyzed in conjunction with attitude angle information, and pattern recognition is performed based on the characteristics of the data. Optionally, if all three-axis angular velocities are close to zero, the vertical acceleration cancels out the gravitational acceleration, and the horizontal acceleration is close to zero, it is determined to be in hovering mode; if there is significant forward acceleration and a small pitch angle, it may be determined to be accelerating forward. The judgment is usually based on a set of preset logical rules or more complex classification algorithms. Flight speed can be obtained in various ways. For example, airspeed can be directly measured by the pitot tube; ground speed can be provided by the navigation system; or it can be estimated by fusing inertial measurement data and navigation data to obtain more accurate and reliable speed information.

[0070] Step 202: Based on flight status and environmental conditions, quantify the intensity of environmental disturbances to obtain the environmental disturbance level; the environmental disturbances include at least one of atmospheric turbulence, vibration and gusts.

[0071] Specifically, environmental conditions refer to the external atmospheric environment and physical factors such as mechanical vibration experienced by the UAV. Environmental disturbances refer to environmental conditions that constitute random and uncontrollable interference with the flight stability and control system of the UAV. These mainly include atmospheric turbulence, which refers to irregular airflow movements; vibration, which refers to high-frequency shaking of the aircraft caused by the operation of components such as engines and propellers or by airflow; and gusts, which refer to sudden and transient changes in wind speed and direction. The environmental disturbance level is a quantification of the intensity of environmental disturbances. It is a discrete level or a continuous scale value used to uniformly measure the combined impact intensity of different disturbance sources. The terminal uses flight status as background information and focuses on analyzing the noise or fluctuations in angular velocity and linear acceleration that exceed the normal flight control commands of the UAV. It performs time-domain and frequency-domain analysis on data from sensors such as the inertial measurement unit. Optionally, continuous high-frequency small-amplitude fluctuations may originate from engine vibration, while low-frequency large-amplitude oscillations may originate from atmospheric turbulence or gusts. Based on the analyzed fluctuation characteristics, these physical quantity characteristics are transformed into a unified index representing the intensity level according to a preset mapping relationship. Different disturbance sources are quantified separately and then integrated to obtain an overall environmental disturbance level.

[0072] Step 203: Based on the physical characteristics of the weapon and the mass distribution of the UAV, predict the impact of the weapon's throwing on the UAV's attitude, and obtain the throwing impact estimate.

[0073] Specifically, the physical characteristics of a weapon mainly refer to its mass, shape, size, and its mounting position on the UAV. The mass distribution of the UAV refers to the location of its center of gravity and the distribution of mass across its components. The impact of weapon release on the UAV's attitude refers to the physical effect caused by the sudden decrease in total mass and potential torque imbalance when the weapon is released instantaneously, leading to a sudden change in the UAV's attitude. The predicted impact of weapon release is a quantitative prediction of the attitude effect, including the predicted amount of attitude change, the rate of change, and the time required to regain stability. Based on the mass distribution of the UAV and weapon, the terminal establishes a simplified rigid body dynamics model. This model describes the center of gravity and moment of inertia of the UAV and weapon. The calculation simulates the instantaneous release of the weapon, where the total mass in the model suddenly decreases. Furthermore, if the weapon is not mounted at the UAV's center of gravity, a sudden torque change due to the sudden loss of weapon weight will occur. Through the dynamics model, the instantaneous angular acceleration caused by this mass and torque change on the UAV's body is calculated, thereby inferring the expected amount and trend of attitude angle change.

[0074] Step 204: Based on the flight status, environmental disturbance level, and estimated impact of the throw, a releaseable envelope is generated using a dynamic envelope calculation algorithm to obtain the releaseable flight envelope.

[0075] The dynamic envelope calculation algorithm is a core algorithm that integrates multiple input factors to calculate the safe flight boundary in real time. Its key characteristic is its dynamic nature, meaning its output updates in real time as the input conditions change. The releasable envelope is an intermediate result in the algorithm's calculation process; it represents the original safe boundary before final clipping and compensation. The releasable flight envelope can be directly used for comparing the safe flight state range; it is the result after all compensation, margin deduction, and clipping processing. Based on the current flight status, the terminal determines a basic, ideal safety envelope. It considers the level of environmental disturbance; a high disturbance level means the UAV is more likely to deviate from the expected attitude, so the safety envelope needs to be tightened, requiring the UAV to fly in a more stable state before release. In some designs, the boundary is adjusted in a specific direction according to the nature of the disturbance, incorporating the predicted impact of the throw. The greater the predicted throw impact, the more the algorithm deducts the corresponding safety margin from the current safety boundary, ensuring that even if the UAV's attitude undergoes an expected abrupt change after weapon release, it can remain within the safe flight envelope and will not become unstable. Through multi-factor weighted adjustment and compensation, a comprehensive, conservative, and applicable releaseable flight envelope suitable for the current rapidly changing conditions is output.

[0076] This embodiment, through forward-looking prediction of the negative effects of the key action of weapon release, can capture the impact of the release action on the stability of the UAV terminal, thereby reserving space for this in advance within the safety boundary to avoid the risk of loss of control caused by the release of the weapon itself; it intelligently balances mission requirements and flight safety, and achieves safe and effective weapon delivery.

[0077] In one embodiment, based on flight status, environmental disturbance level, and estimated throw impact, a releaseable envelope under current conditions is generated using a dynamic envelope calculation algorithm to obtain a releaseable flight envelope, including:

[0078] Step 301: Based on the flight status and weapon delivery accuracy requirements, calculate the initial envelope boundary using the following formula:

[0079]

[0080] in, This is the initial envelope boundary. As the baseline attitude tolerance, For flight mode factors, For flight speed factor, This is the accuracy requirement factor.

[0081] Specifically, weapon delivery accuracy requirements are tactical indicators of the weapon's accuracy in hitting the target, usually expressed as circular error probable (CEP). Higher requirements mean stricter control over release conditions. The initial envelope boundary is the preliminary attitude angle safety boundary calculated considering only the two basic factors of flight status and accuracy requirements; it serves as the baseline for subsequent adjustments. The baseline attitude tolerance is a baseline value for the allowable range of attitude angle variation defined under standard or ideal conditions; it is a preset constant or basic value. The flight mode factor is a scaling factor determined based on the flight mode in the flight state. Different modes have different stability and control accuracy; this factor is used to adjust the baseline tolerance. The flight speed factor is a scaling factor determined based on the flight speed in the flight state. Speed ​​changes affect aerodynamic characteristics and control response; this factor is used to compensate for the speed effect. The accuracy requirement factor is a scaling factor determined based on the weapon delivery accuracy requirements. Higher accuracy requirements result in a smaller factor value to tighten the safety boundary; when accuracy requirements can be relaxed, the factor value can be increased. The terminal retrieves or calculates the corresponding factor values ​​from a preset database or configuration file based on the current assessed flight status and the accuracy requirements set for the mission. It then substitutes the factors and the baseline attitude tolerance into a given formula for multiplication. This multiplication means that each factor scales the baseline value, together determining the initial safety boundary.

[0082] Step 302: Based on the disturbance-expansion mapping function, the environmental disturbance level is mapped to the corresponding expansion coefficient and compensation value, and the expansion coefficient and compensation value are applied to the initial envelope boundary to obtain the disturbance compensation envelope boundary.

[0083] Specifically, the disturbance-expansion mapping function is a predefined function or lookup table. The input is the environmental disturbance level, and the output is a set of parameters used to adjust the safety boundary. The expansion coefficient is a numerical value used to scale the initial envelope boundary. The compensation value is a numerical value used to adjust the initial envelope boundary by a fixed amount of offset. The disturbance-compensated envelope boundary is a new safety boundary obtained by incorporating environmental disturbance compensation on top of the initial envelope boundary. The terminal takes the environmental disturbance level as input, queries the predefined disturbance-expansion mapping function, obtains a specific pair of expansion coefficients and compensation values, and applies these two parameters to the initial envelope boundary. If the environmental disturbance is severe, the mapping function may output an expansion coefficient less than 1 and a negative compensation value, thereby tightening the safety boundary to cope with greater attitude fluctuation risks.

[0084] Step 303: Based on the predicted impact of throwing, calculate the safety margin and subtract the safety margin from the disturbance compensation envelope boundary to obtain the throwing safety envelope boundary.

[0085] The safety margin is a boundary buffer reserved to cope with the expected attitude impact caused by weapon release. It is directly calculated based on the estimated impact of the throwing attack; the larger the estimated impact, the larger the margin. The throwing safety envelope boundary, after considering the internal impact of the weapon release itself, ensures that the UAV remains stable after release and is the net safety boundary before subsequent adaptive adjustments. Based on the estimated throwing impact, the terminal calculates the safety margin to be deducted by multiplying the predicted attitude change by a safety factor greater than 1 using preset rules. This safety margin is then subtracted from the disturbance compensation envelope boundary to obtain the throwing safety envelope boundary. This deduction operation reserves space in advance for the expected impact, ensuring that the UAV's attitude remains within a safe range after release.

[0086] Step 304: Based on the throwing target and control authority, calculate the control compensation factor, emergency relaxation coefficient and stability prediction factor, and then sum the control compensation factor, emergency relaxation coefficient and stability prediction factor by weight to obtain the adaptive factor.

[0087] The target to be attacked is determined by several factors, including its characteristics (e.g., whether it is a moving target, mission urgency), control authority (e.g., whether it is in manual confirmation or automatic attack mode, and whether an emergency attack rule has been triggered), control compensation factor (adjustment factor related to the current performance and capabilities of the UAV flight control system), emergency relaxation factor (factor used to appropriately relax safety boundaries to seize opportunities in urgent missions or when special authorization is granted), stability prediction factor (factor derived from predicting UAV stability in the near future based on current flight status and historical data), and adaptive factor (adjustment factor integrating tactical, control, and prediction information). The terminal calculates the control compensation factor, emergency relaxation factor, and stability prediction factor based on the target's attributes and current control authority. These three factors are then weighted and summed according to preset weights to calculate the final adaptive factor. This weighted summation allows for a balance of importance between different factors; optionally, stability is prioritized in general situations, while mission completion opportunities are prioritized in emergency situations. For example, the control compensation factor is calculated by applying the permission-envelope relationship to the control permission margin, the emergency relaxation coefficient is calculated by applying the emergency-relaxation mapping to the task urgency, and the stability prediction factor is calculated by applying the statistical learning algorithm to the historical attitude stability.

[0088] Step 305: Based on the throw safety envelope boundary and the adaptive factor, the releaseable flight envelope is calculated using the following formula:

[0089]

[0090] in, To enable the release of the flight envelope, To throw the safe envelope boundary, As an adaptive factor, For the minimum safe envelope boundary, The maximum physical envelope boundary, To compensate for the uncertainty in sensor measurements.

[0091] Specifically, the minimum safe envelope boundary is an absolute lower limit value. Regardless of the specific circumstances, the safe boundary cannot be less than this value; it represents the ultimate bottom line for flight stability. The maximum physical envelope boundary is the maximum permissible attitude angle boundary determined by the UAV's airframe structure, aerodynamic characteristics, and the physical limits of its actuators. Sensor measurement uncertainty compensation is a small margin deducted to compensate for measurement errors and noise inherent in the sensors themselves. The releasable flight envelope is a safe attitude angle range that has been comprehensively adjusted by all factors and ensured to be within the range of physical limits and measurement errors, and can be directly used for comparison. The terminal multiplies the throw safe envelope boundary by an adaptive factor for adaptive adjustment. The adjusted result is input into a max function and compared with the minimum safe envelope boundary to ensure that the result is not too risky and falls below the safety bottom line. Then, the result is input into a min function and compared with the maximum physical envelope boundary to ensure that the result does not exceed the UAV's physical capabilities. From the boundary after double limiting, sensor measurement uncertainty compensation is subtracted to address sensor errors, ultimately yielding an extremely conservative and reliable releasable flight envelope.

[0092] This embodiment uses rigorous mathematical processing to integrate all physical constraints, safety baselines, and measurement errors, ensuring that the output releaseable flight envelope is optimal and absolutely safe under current conditions. At the same time, it introduces tactical and adaptive considerations, allowing optimization based on actual combat situations and system states while ensuring safety baselines.

[0093] In one embodiment, the release condition is verified in parallel to obtain the release condition verification result, including:

[0094] Step 401: Based on the multi-dimensional results of the target recognition algorithm, determine whether the currently locked target is a throwing target, and obtain the target recognition verification result.

[0095] The multi-dimensional results of the target recognition algorithm refer to the comprehensive judgment information output by the airborne target recognition system, including target type (e.g., vehicle, personnel), confidence level, motion state, feature matching degree, and deviation from the predetermined target position. The currently locked target refers to the potential target that the UAV fire control system is currently automatically tracking. The thrown target is a specific target predetermined in the mission planning and authorized for attack. The target recognition verification result is a Boolean conclusion used to determine whether the currently locked target and the thrown target are the same object. The terminal receives the multi-dimensional results from the target recognition algorithm. The verification process is a confidence assessment based on multi-dimensional information fusion. It meticulously compares various features of the currently locked target with the thrown target information pre-stored in the mission system. Optionally, it checks whether the target is within the expected area, whether the visual feature matching degree exceeds a threshold, and whether the behavior pattern matches expectations. It integrates information from all dimensions, weighs their confidence levels, sets a comprehensive confidence threshold, and generates a verification conclusion. If the evidence from all key dimensions strongly indicates that the currently locked target is the predetermined thrown target, the output is "yes"; if there is any significant uncertainty or feature mismatch, the output is "no".

[0096] Step 402: Verify the validity of the attack authorization data to obtain the attack authorization verification result, and determine the weapon's readiness status based on the weapon's multi-component status feedback to obtain the weapon readiness verification result.

[0097] Specifically, attack authorization data is a data packet issued by a higher-level system, authorizing an attack on a specific target. This data typically includes encrypted information, a timestamp, and a target identifier. The attack authorization verification result is a Boolean value indicating whether the received attack authorization instruction is legal, valid, and not expired. Weapon multi-component status feedback refers to the status information of each critical component fed back by the weapon itself through the data bus. The weapon readiness verification result is a Boolean value indicating whether all critical components of the weapon have reported normal status, and whether the weapon as a whole is in a state where it can be safely released. The terminal re-examines the validity of the attack authorization command, verifying the digital signature or encrypted checksum of the command to confirm that the command's source is legitimate and has not been tampered with; it checks the timestamp of the command to ensure that it is within the valid time window and is not an expired or duplicate command; it verifies whether the target identifier in the command is consistent with the throwing target planned for the current mission. Only after all security checks are passed will the attack authorization verification result be considered true; it polls or receives status information actively reported by each component of the weapon through the internal bus, including whether the physical safety mechanism has been disarmed, whether the power supply of the circuit system is normal, the fuze system, and the mechanical and electrical connection status with the mounting bracket. Based on a predefined list of ready states, it compares the feedback status of each component with the ready state on the list. When the status of all monitored components shows normal, the weapon ready verification result is considered true.

[0098] Step 403: Based on the predicted trajectory of the weapon and the safety constraints, conduct a verification to prevent accidental injury and obtain the verification results.

[0099] Specifically, the estimated trajectory of the weapon is calculated using a ballistic model based on the weapon's release parameters and current flight status, representing the projected flight path from separation to impact with the target. Safety constraints are a series of spatial, temporal, and object-related constraints set to prevent friendly fire, including no-fly zones, friendly positions, civilian population areas, and mission-restricted areas. The friendly fire prevention verification result is a Boolean conclusion, indicating whether, based on the prediction, the weapon will not pose a threat to non-target personnel, facilities, or equipment after release. The terminal uses a ballistic model, combined with current environmental information, to calculate the weapon's estimated trajectory and impact point. It compares the estimated trajectory and damage range with the safety constraints in the database, checking whether the estimated trajectory crosses any no-fly zones or sensitive airspace; calculating whether the impact point is within an area where attack is permitted; and assessing whether the weapon's damage radius spatially overlaps with friendly units, civilian facilities, or protective boundaries. Rigorous geometric calculations and conflict detection are performed. If the estimated trajectory and damage effect completely avoid all protected safety constraints, the verification passes; if any potential conflict risk exists, the verification fails.

[0100] Step 404: Based on the communication link status, perform a communication availability assessment to obtain the communication link verification results.

[0101] The communication link status refers to the quality parameters of the data transmission channel between the UAV and the ground control station or other command nodes, such as signal strength, signal-to-noise ratio, bit error rate, and link latency. The communication link verification result is a Boolean value indicating whether the current primary communication link meets the reliability and real-time requirements of the weapon release mission. The terminal continuously monitors the communication link status parameters of the primary command link with the ground control station, comparing real-time parameters with preset mission thresholds. Signal strength must be above a certain minimum threshold, and bit error rate must be below a certain maximum value. It checks whether heartbeat signals or status queries have been continuously received from the ground station in the recent period to confirm that the link is not only connected but also effective. If all communication quality indicators meet the mission requirements, the link is deemed usable, and the verification result is true, ensuring that possible termination or update commands can still be received before weapon release.

[0102] Step 405: Based on the target identification verification results, attack authorization verification results, weapon readiness verification results, anti-collateral damage verification results, and communication link verification results, a satisfaction verification is performed to obtain the release condition verification results.

[0103] The satisfaction verification is a logical aggregation operation, which refers to performing a logical AND operation on all independent verification sub-results. The release condition verification result is a comprehensive Boolean conclusion, representing whether all release conditions have been met. The terminal takes the target identification verification result, attack authorization verification result, weapon readiness verification result, anti-collateral damage verification result, and communication link verification result as inputs. The adjudication logic is very simple and extremely strict. It performs a logical AND operation, and the final release condition verification result is only set to true if all input verification results are true simultaneously. If any one of the verification results is false, the final result is false, which is a typical veto system.

[0104] This embodiment generates a key component of the second layer of security by aggregating the results of multiple parallel security verifications into a single, clear final authorization signal, ensuring that the authorization for weapon release is based on the absolute certainty of all security and compliance conditions.

[0105] In one embodiment, based on the weapon's predicted throwing trajectory and safety constraints, a collision prevention verification is performed to obtain the collision prevention verification results, including:

[0106] Step 501: Based on the weapon's throwing parameters and flight state, predict the trajectory of the weapon from the throwing point to the impact point, and obtain the predicted throwing trajectory and impact point.

[0107] The weapon's throwing parameters refer to the specific settings or inherent properties of the weapon at the time of release, including the initial velocity vector at release, the weapon's aerodynamic characteristics, and the fuze's operating mode. Flight state refers to the motion state of the UAV at the moment of weapon release, mainly including flight speed, altitude, attitude angle, and geographical coordinates. The estimated throwing trajectory is calculated and simulated; it is the entire expected flight path of the weapon from detachment from the UAV to final impact with the target or ground, a three-dimensional curve. The impact point is the endpoint of the estimated throwing trajectory, i.e., the geographical coordinate point where the weapon is expected to explode or produce its main destructive effect. The terminal takes the weapon's throwing parameters and flight state as input, feeding them into a built-in projectile motion model for calculation. This model comprehensively considers gravity, air resistance, Coriolis force, and the initial kinetic energy imparted to the weapon by the UAV's speed. The calculation process starts from the release point and iterates in small time steps to calculate the weapon's position, velocity, and attitude at every future moment, thus connecting them to form a complete estimated throwing trajectory. The endpoint of the trajectory is the impact point. For different types of weapons, the model complexity and considered factors will be adjusted accordingly.

[0108] Step 502: Calculate the damage coverage area of ​​the weapon based on its damage characteristics and the point of impact.

[0109] Specifically, the damage characteristics of a weapon refer to a quantitative description of its destructive power after it takes effect. Optionally, this includes explosive yield, effective kill radius of fragments, destructive range of shock wave overpressure, and damage distance for different protection levels. The damage coverage area is a spatial region centered on the point of impact, within which personnel, equipment, or facilities will be substantially threatened or damaged by the weapon's damage effects. The terminal obtains specific damage parameters of the currently carried weapon from a weapon damage characteristics database, uses the point of impact as the center or reference point, and applies a corresponding damage model to calculate the damage coverage area. For example, for a high-explosive warhead, the model may calculate concentric circles of different damage levels based on the yield. The calculation can simply consider the influence of terrain slope on fragment distribution, generating a geospatial graphic representing the weapon's damage range.

[0110] Step 503: Compare the safety constraints, estimated throwing trajectory and damage coverage to conduct accidental injury prevention verification and obtain preliminary accidental injury prevention verification results.

[0111] Specifically, safety constraints are a series of geospatial and logical rules pre-loaded into the system to prevent friendly fire, such as the location of friendly units, the boundary of civilian protection zones, the protection range of critical infrastructure, and the boundary of no-fly zones. The initial friendly fire prevention verification result is an initial Boolean value conclusion based on a direct comparison of geometric spatial relationships, without considering the uncertainties of various predictions and measurements. The terminal performs a rigorous geometric comparison between the estimated projectile trajectory and damage coverage and the safety constraints in the database, determining whether the estimated projectile trajectory crosses any no-fly zones or sensitive areas during flight, whether the weapon's damage coverage spatially intersects or overlaps with the protection range of any friendly units, civilian protection zones, or critical facilities, and whether the impact point itself is located within the mission area where attacks are permitted. It performs precise geometric calculations, determining the relationship between points and polygons, calculating the intersection of lines and surfaces, and calculating the overlapping area of ​​surfaces. If all checks show no conflicts, a passed initial friendly fire prevention verification result is generated; if any check finds a conflict, the result is failed.

[0112] Step 504: Based on the uncertainty factors, perform fault tolerance compensation on the preliminary anti-accidental injury verification results to obtain the anti-accidental injury verification results.

[0113] Uncertainty factors refer to various error sources that exist in practical applications and may cause deviations between predicted and actual results. These mainly include target positioning errors, ballistic model errors, environmental prediction errors, weapon manufacturing tolerances, and sensor measurement errors. Fault tolerance compensation is a conservative safety handling strategy designed to absorb or offset the risks that uncertainty factors may bring by expanding safety boundaries or raising judgment thresholds. The collateral damage prevention verification result is the final Boolean conclusion used for decision-making after fault tolerance processing, which is more conservative and reliable than the preliminary result. The terminal softens the preliminary result, creating an expanded buffer zone for the protected area in the safety constraints, multiplying the damage coverage by a safety factor, and re-executing spatial conflict detection using the more stringent boundaries after fault tolerance compensation. Only if the check passes under this more stringent condition will the final collateral damage prevention verification result be deemed passed; if the preliminary result is already failed, the final result will inevitably be failed.

[0114] This embodiment, through rigorous geometric calculations, arrives at a preliminary conclusion on the risk of accidental injury under an ideal model. Furthermore, through compensation, the accidental injury prevention verification is elevated from an ideal, fragile model calculation to a robust and engineering-reliable safety decision. This ensures that the terminal can make extremely conservative choices even in the presence of various expected errors, thereby greatly reducing the residual risk of accidental injury and achieving accidental injury prevention for highly reliable weapon delivery.

[0115] In one embodiment, the safety constraints, estimated throwing trajectory, and damage coverage are compared to perform a collision prevention verification, yielding preliminary collision prevention verification results, including:

[0116] Step 601: Based on the safe airspace constraint in the safety constraints, compare the predicted throwing trajectory with the no-fly zone to obtain the trajectory safety check result.

[0117] Among them, safe airspace constraints refer to three-dimensional restricted areas set to protect specific airspace, i.e., no-fly zones, including airspace around civilian airports, politically sensitive areas, and airspace for friendly aircraft activities. No-fly zones are defined by geographical boundaries and upper and lower altitude limits. The trajectory safety check result is a Boolean conclusion, specifically used to determine whether the weapon's estimated launch trajectory illegally crosses any no-fly zone during flight. The terminal performs conflict detection of three-dimensional spatial line segments and polyhedra, geometrically comparing the estimated launch trajectory with all relevant no-fly zones in the database. The core is to calculate whether the trajectory line segment intersects with any no-fly zone polyhedron. This is achieved through spatial geometric algorithms, comparing the trajectory line segment with all boundary faces of the no-fly zone to determine if there are any intersections. If the calculation finds that the trajectory intersects with any no-fly zone, it means that the weapon's flight path is unsafe, and the check result is a failure; if the trajectory is completely outside all no-fly zones, the result is a success.

[0118] Step 602: Based on the regional constraints, determine the legality of the hit point and obtain the result of the legality of the landing area.

[0119] Specifically, the area constraint refers to the two-dimensional ground area that restricts the geographical location of the weapon's final impact point. This includes tactical areas where attacks are permitted, civilian protected areas where attacks are prohibited, or specific target areas designated by the mission. The impact area validity result is a Boolean value, specifically used to determine whether the weapon's estimated impact point lies within the permitted attack area. The terminal compares the impact point with the area constraints in the database. The core algorithm uses a "point within polygon" approach to determine whether the impact point falls within a permitted attack polygon. If the impact point lies within any permitted attack area, the result is valid; if the impact point lies outside all permitted attack areas or falls within a clearly prohibited attack area, the result is invalid.

[0120] Step 603: Based on the safety zone boundary, calculate the overlapping part of the damage coverage area and the safety zone boundary using a spatial overlap algorithm to obtain the damage coverage overlap result.

[0121] Specifically, the security zone boundary refers to the boundary of a specific ground area or facility that needs protection, such as the geographical boundaries of friendly positions, hospitals, schools, and residential areas. Damage coverage overlap is a quantitative result or a Boolean conclusion, used to indicate whether there is a spatial intersection between the weapon's damage coverage area and the security zone boundary, and the severity of the intersection. The terminal is simplified to a circular or polygonal area, and its damage coverage area is geometrically calculated against all relevant security zone boundaries in the database. The core is to use a spatial overlay analysis algorithm to calculate the intersection between the damage coverage polygon and each security zone boundary polygon, simply determining whether any overlap exists. If overlap exists, it is considered a failure; if no overlap exists, it is considered a success.

[0122] Step 604: Based on personnel dynamic data and damage coverage, assess the dynamic accidental injury risk to obtain the dynamic accidental injury risk assessment result.

[0123] Personnel dynamic data refers to real-time or near-real-time location and movement information of non-target personnel. This data can come from reconnaissance systems, friendly force tactical data links, or pre-set patrol routes and schedules. The dynamic friendly fire risk assessment result is a Boolean value or risk level conclusion used to determine whether non-target personnel will enter or be within the damage coverage area at the moment the weapon is expected to reach its impact point. Based on personnel dynamic data, the terminal predicts the possible location distribution of relevant personnel at a specific future moment when the weapon reaches its impact point. It then performs a spatiotemporal overlay analysis of the predicted locations and the damage coverage area. The core objective is to determine whether the predicted personnel locations or movement trajectories intersect with the damage area at the time the weapon takes effect, both in time and space. The assessment result takes into account the uncertainty of the prediction and provides a risk conclusion.

[0124] Step 605: Based on the trajectory safety check results, the landing area legality results, the damage coverage overlap results, and the dynamic accidental injury risk assessment results, generate preliminary accidental injury prevention verification results.

[0125] The preliminary verification result for preventing collateral damage is a comprehensive Boolean conclusion that summarizes the results of all specific checks, forming an overall preliminary assessment of the risk of collateral damage in this attack. The terminal takes the trajectory security check result, the landing area legality result, the damage coverage overlap result, and the dynamic collateral damage risk assessment result as input, applying a pre-defined and strict aggregation logic and relationship. The most basic rule is that the preliminary verification result is considered passed only when all of the following conditions are met: the trajectory security check result is passed; the landing area legality result is legal; the damage coverage overlap result indicates no overlap; and the dynamic collateral damage risk assessment result indicates no risk. If any check fails or the risk is too high, the overall preliminary result is considered failed.

[0126] This embodiment, by comprehensively assessing the flight path, final landing point, and static and dynamic collateral damage, produces a single, clear preliminary verification result for preventing collateral damage, thereby improving the reliability and safety of weapon throwing.

[0127] It should be understood that although the steps in the flowcharts of the embodiments described above are shown sequentially according to the arrows, these steps are not necessarily executed in the order indicated by the arrows. Unless explicitly stated herein, there is no strict order restriction on the execution of these steps, and they can be executed in other orders. Moreover, at least some steps in the flowcharts of the embodiments described above may include multiple steps or multiple stages. These steps or stages are not necessarily completed at the same time, but can be executed at different times. The execution order of these steps or stages is not necessarily sequential, but can be performed alternately or in turn with other steps or at least some of the steps or stages of other steps.

[0128] Based on the same inventive concept, this application also provides a UAV weapon dual-insurance throwing control system for implementing the aforementioned UAV weapon dual-insurance throwing control method. The solution provided by this system is similar to the implementation described in the above method; therefore, the specific limitations of one or more UAV weapon dual-insurance throwing control system embodiments provided below can be found in the limitations of the UAV weapon dual-insurance throwing control method described above, and will not be repeated here.

[0129] In one exemplary embodiment, such as Figure 2 As shown, a dual-insurance throwing control system 700 for unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) weapons is provided, comprising:

[0130] The state range module 701 is used to determine the flight state range in which the weapon can be safely released based on the flight state and environmental conditions of the UAV, and to obtain the releaseable flight envelope.

[0131] The attitude assessment module 702 is used to compare the flight state of the UAV with the releaseable flight envelope to obtain the attitude compliance assessment result; the attitude compliance assessment result is used to generate the first layer of protection state.

[0132] The pointing angle module 703 is used to calculate the pointing angle required for weapon release based on the relative positional relationship between the projectile target and the UAV, and to obtain the target pointing angle;

[0133] The release verification module 704 is used to adjust the difference between the target pointing angle and the current angle of the orientation mechanism to obtain the orientation mechanism's position status, and to perform parallel satisfaction verification of the release conditions to obtain the release condition verification result; the orientation mechanism's position status and the release condition verification result are used to generate the second layer of insurance status;

[0134] Release command module 705 is used to generate weapon release commands based on the first security state and the second security state; the weapon release command is used to instruct the throwing of the weapon.

[0135] Furthermore, the state range module 701 is also used for:

[0136] The flight status of the UAV is evaluated based on its three-axis angular velocity, three-axis acceleration, and attitude angle; the flight status includes flight mode and flight speed.

[0137] Based on flight status and environmental conditions, the intensity of environmental disturbances is quantified to obtain the environmental disturbance level; the environmental disturbances include at least one of atmospheric turbulence, vibration, and gusts.

[0138] Based on the physical characteristics of the weapon and the mass distribution of the UAV, the impact of the weapon's throwing on the UAV's attitude is predicted, and the throwing impact is estimated.

[0139] Based on flight status, environmental disturbance level, and predicted impact of throwing, a releaseable envelope is generated through a dynamic envelope calculation algorithm, resulting in a releaseable flight envelope.

[0140] Furthermore, the state range module 701 is also used for:

[0141] Based on flight conditions and weapon delivery accuracy requirements, the initial envelope boundary is calculated using the following formula:

[0142]

[0143] in, This is the initial envelope boundary. As the baseline attitude tolerance, For flight mode factors, For flight speed factor, For accuracy requirements;

[0144] Based on the disturbance-expansion mapping function, the environmental disturbance level is mapped to the corresponding expansion coefficient and compensation value, and the expansion coefficient and compensation value are applied to the initial envelope boundary to obtain the disturbance compensation envelope boundary.

[0145] Based on the estimated impact of the throw, the safety margin is calculated, and the safety margin is subtracted from the disturbance compensation envelope boundary to obtain the throw safety envelope boundary.

[0146] Based on the throwing target and control authority, the control compensation factor, emergency relaxation coefficient and stability prediction factor are calculated, and the control compensation factor, emergency relaxation coefficient and stability prediction factor are weighted and summed to obtain the adaptive factor;

[0147] Based on the throw safety envelope boundary and the adaptive factor, the releaseable flight envelope is calculated using the following formula:

[0148]

[0149] in, To enable the release of the flight envelope, To throw the safe envelope boundary, As an adaptive factor, For the minimum safe envelope boundary, The maximum physical envelope boundary, To compensate for the uncertainty in sensor measurements.

[0150] Furthermore, releasing the verification module 704 is also used for:

[0151] Based on the multi-dimensional results of the target recognition algorithm, it is determined whether the currently locked target is a thrown target, and the target recognition verification result is obtained.

[0152] The attack authorization data is validated to obtain the attack authorization validation result. Based on the status feedback of the weapon's multiple components, the weapon's readiness is determined to obtain the weapon readiness validation result.

[0153] Based on the predicted trajectory of the weapon and safety constraints, the prevention of accidental injury is verified, and the results of the prevention of accidental injury verification are obtained.

[0154] Based on the communication link status, communication availability is assessed to obtain communication link verification results;

[0155] Based on the target identification verification results, attack authorization verification results, weapon readiness verification results, anti-collateral damage verification results, and communication link verification results, a satisfaction verification is performed to obtain the release condition verification results.

[0156] Furthermore, releasing the verification module 704 is also used for:

[0157] Based on the weapon's throwing parameters and flight status, the trajectory of the weapon from the throwing point to the impact point is predicted, and the predicted throwing trajectory and impact point are obtained.

[0158] Based on the weapon's damage characteristics and point of impact, the weapon's damage coverage area is calculated.

[0159] By comparing the safety constraints, the estimated throwing trajectory and the damage coverage, the anti-accidental injury verification was carried out, and the preliminary anti-accidental injury verification results were obtained.

[0160] Based on uncertainties, fault-tolerant compensation is applied to the preliminary anti-accidental injury verification results to obtain the final anti-accidental injury verification results.

[0161] Furthermore, releasing the verification module 704 is also used for:

[0162] Based on the safe airspace constraint in the safety constraints, the predicted throwing trajectory and the no-fly zone are compared to obtain the trajectory safety check results;

[0163] Based on the regional constraints, the legality of the hit point is determined, and the legality result of the landing area is obtained.

[0164] Based on the safety zone boundary, the overlapping part of the damage coverage area and the safety zone boundary is calculated using a spatial overlap algorithm to obtain the damage coverage overlap result;

[0165] Based on personnel dynamic data and damage coverage, the dynamic accidental injury risk is assessed, and the dynamic accidental injury risk assessment result is obtained.

[0166] Based on the results of trajectory safety checks, landing area legality, damage coverage overlap, and dynamic accidental injury risk assessment, preliminary accidental injury prevention verification results are generated.

[0167] In one embodiment, a computer device is provided, including a memory and a processor, the memory storing a computer program, the processor executing the computer program to implement the steps of the aforementioned dual-insurance throwing control method for unmanned aerial vehicle weapons.

[0168] In one embodiment, a computer-readable storage medium is provided having a computer program stored thereon, which, when executed by a processor, implements the steps in the above method embodiments.

[0169] For the device embodiments, since they basically correspond to the method embodiments, the relevant parts can be referred to in the description of the method embodiments. The device embodiments described above are merely illustrative. The components described as separate parts may or may not be physically separate, and the components shown as units may or may not be physical units, that is, they may be located in one place or distributed across multiple network units. Some or all of the modules can be selected to achieve the purpose of this disclosure according to actual needs. Those skilled in the art can understand and implement this without creative effort.

[0170] The above-described embodiments are merely illustrative of several implementation methods of the embodiments of this application, and their descriptions are relatively specific and detailed. However, they should not be construed as limiting the scope of the patent application. It should be noted that those skilled in the art can make various modifications and improvements without departing from the concept of the embodiments of this application, and these modifications and improvements all fall within the protection scope of the embodiments of this application.

Claims

1. A dual-insurance throwing control method for unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) weapons, characterized in that, The method includes: Based on the flight status and environmental conditions of the UAV, the flight status range in which the weapon can be safely released is determined, and the releaseable flight envelope is obtained. The flight state of the UAV and the releasable flight envelope are compared to obtain the attitude compliance assessment result; the attitude compliance assessment result is used to generate the first layer of protection state. Based on the relative positional relationship between the projectile target and the UAV, the pointing angle required for weapon release is calculated, and the target pointing angle is obtained; The difference between the target pointing angle and the current angle of the orientation mechanism is adjusted to obtain the orientation mechanism's positioning state, and the release conditions are verified in parallel to obtain the release condition verification result; the orientation mechanism's positioning state and the release condition verification result are used to generate the second layer of insurance state; Based on the first and second security states, a weapon release command is generated; the weapon release command is used to instruct the weapon to be thrown.

2. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The process of determining the safe flight state range for weapon release based on the UAV's flight state and environmental conditions, and obtaining the releaseable flight envelope, includes: The flight state of the UAV is evaluated based on its three-axis angular velocity, three-axis acceleration, and attitude angle; the flight state includes flight mode and flight speed. Based on the flight state and the environmental conditions, the intensity of the environmental disturbance is quantified to obtain the environmental disturbance level; the environmental disturbance includes at least one of atmospheric turbulence, vibration and gusts. Based on the physical characteristics of the weapon and the mass distribution of the UAV, the impact of the weapon's launch on the UAV's attitude is predicted, and the launch impact is estimated. Based on the flight state, the environmental disturbance level, and the estimated impact of the throw, a releasable envelope is generated using a dynamic envelope calculation algorithm to obtain the releasable flight envelope.

3. The method according to claim 2, characterized in that, The process of generating a releaseable envelope under the current conditions based on the flight state, the environmental disturbance level, and the estimated impact of the throw, using a dynamic envelope calculation algorithm, to obtain the releaseable flight envelope includes: Based on the aforementioned flight conditions and weapon delivery accuracy requirements, the initial envelope boundary is calculated using the following formula: in, This is the initial envelope boundary. As the baseline attitude tolerance, For flight mode factors, For flight speed factor, For accuracy requirements; Based on the disturbance-expansion mapping function, the environmental disturbance level is mapped to the corresponding expansion coefficient and compensation value, and the expansion coefficient and compensation value are applied to the initial envelope boundary to obtain the disturbance compensation envelope boundary; Based on the predicted impact of the throwing, a safety margin is calculated, and the safety margin is subtracted from the disturbance compensation envelope boundary to obtain the throwing safety envelope boundary. Based on the throwing target and control authority, calculate the control compensation factor, emergency relaxation coefficient, and stability prediction factor, and then sum the control compensation factor, emergency relaxation coefficient, and stability prediction factor by weight to obtain the adaptive factor; Based on the throw safety envelope boundary and the adaptive factor, the releasable flight envelope is calculated using the following formula: in, To enable the release of the flight envelope, To throw the safe envelope boundary, As an adaptive factor, For the minimum safe envelope boundary, The maximum physical envelope boundary, To compensate for the uncertainty in sensor measurements.

4. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The parallel satisfaction verification of the release conditions, to obtain the release condition verification results, includes: Based on the multi-dimensional results of the target recognition algorithm, it is determined whether the currently locked target is the thrown target, and the target recognition verification result is obtained. The attack authorization data is validated to obtain the attack authorization validation result. Based on the status feedback of the weapon's multiple components, the weapon's readiness status is determined to obtain the weapon readiness validation result. Based on the estimated throwing trajectory and safety constraints of the weapon, an accidental injury prevention verification was performed, and the accidental injury prevention verification results were obtained. Based on the communication link status, communication availability is assessed to obtain communication link verification results; Based on the target identification verification result, the attack authorization verification result, the weapon readiness verification result, the anti-collateral damage verification result, and the communication link verification result, a satisfaction verification is performed to obtain the release condition verification result.

5. The method according to claim 4, characterized in that, Based on the estimated throwing trajectory and safety constraints of the weapon, the anti-collateral damage verification is performed to obtain the anti-collateral damage verification results, including: Based on the weapon's throwing parameters and flight state, the trajectory of the weapon from the throwing point to the impact point is estimated, and the estimated throwing trajectory and impact point are obtained. Based on the weapon's damage characteristics and the point of impact, the weapon's damage coverage area is calculated. By comparing the safety constraints, the estimated throwing trajectory, and the damage coverage, a preliminary verification of the prevention of accidental injury is conducted to obtain preliminary verification results. Based on uncertainties, fault-tolerant compensation is applied to the preliminary anti-accidental injury verification results to obtain the anti-accidental injury verification results.

6. The method according to claim 5, characterized in that, The comparison of the safety constraints, the estimated throwing trajectory, and the damage coverage area is used to perform accidental injury prevention verification, and preliminary accidental injury prevention verification results are obtained, including: Based on the safe airspace constraint in the aforementioned safety constraints, the predicted throwing trajectory and the no-fly zone are compared to obtain the trajectory safety check result; Based on the regional constraints, the legality of the hit point is determined, and the result of the legality of the landing area is obtained. Based on the safety zone boundary, the overlapping part between the damage coverage area and the safety zone boundary is calculated using a spatial overlap algorithm to obtain the damage coverage overlap result; Based on personnel dynamic data and the damage coverage area, the dynamic accidental injury risk is assessed, and the dynamic accidental injury risk assessment result is obtained. Based on the trajectory safety check results, the landing area legality results, the damage coverage overlap results, and the dynamic accidental injury risk assessment results, the preliminary accidental injury prevention verification results are generated.

7. A dual-insurance throwing control system for unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) weapons, characterized in that, The system includes: The state range module is used to determine the flight state range in which weapons can be safely released based on the UAV's flight state and environmental conditions, and to obtain the releaseable flight envelope; The attitude assessment module is used to compare the flight state of the UAV with the releasable flight envelope to obtain an attitude compliance assessment result; the attitude compliance assessment result is used to generate the first layer of protection state. The pointing angle module is used to calculate the pointing angle required for weapon release based on the relative positional relationship between the projected target and the UAV, thereby obtaining the target pointing angle; The release verification module is used to adjust the difference between the target pointing angle and the current angle of the orientation mechanism to obtain the orientation mechanism's positioning state, and to perform parallel satisfaction verification of the release conditions to obtain the release condition verification result; the orientation mechanism's positioning state and the release condition verification result are used to generate a second layer of insurance state; The release command module is used to generate a weapon release command based on the first security state and the second security state; the weapon release command is used to instruct the weapon to be thrown.

8. A computer device comprising a memory and a processor, wherein the memory stores a computer program, characterized in that, When the processor executes the computer program, it implements the steps of the method according to any one of claims 1 to 6.

9. A computer-readable storage medium having a computer program stored thereon, characterized in that, When the computer program is executed by a processor, it implements the steps of the method according to any one of claims 1 to 6.

Images