Comparative monitoring method for multi-signal-source attitude signals

Abstract

The invention provides a multi-signal-source attitude signal comparison monitoring method. The method comprises the following steps: step 1, sorting attitude signals; wherein the attitude signal is an effective attitude signal of multiple signal sources; step 2, performing pairwise comparison on adjacent attitude signals of the sorted attitude signals to obtain a plurality of difference values; step 3, determining a threshold based on a rate signal corresponding to the attitude signal; step 4, based on the difference value and the threshold, judging whether the attitude signal has a fault or not; according to the method and the device, the problem of false alarm caused by deviation due to inconsistent transmission time sequences of different signal sources is solved, and the reliability and the safety of using different source attitude signals are ensured.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This application belongs to the field of signal processing technology, and in particular relates to a method for comparing and monitoring attitude signals from multiple signal sources. Background Technology

[0002] In the aviation field, flight control systems typically employ redundancy management technology to improve system reliability by addressing redundant signals. Redundancy management technology primarily involves eliminating faults that occur during the operation of redundant systems and utilizing valid redundant signals. Comparison monitoring is an indispensable and important part of redundancy management, which can detect the correctness of signals and locate fault signals, thereby significantly improving the reliability and integrity of the system.

[0003] To meet future needs, aircraft are transitioning from manned to manned / unmanned configurations. To ensure system reliability, the corresponding attitude signal redundancy configuration has changed. Previously, in manned mode, the attitude signal was a single-redundant signal, transmitted from the inertial navigation system (INS) to the flight control computer via a 1553B bus. For unmanned mode, a single-redundant attitude signal is insufficient for system reliability. Therefore, in addition to the manned configuration, three attitude signals from different INS sources are added and transmitted to the flight control computer via RS422 serial ports, forming a quadruple-redundant attitude signal from different sources. If the original standard quadruple-redundant signal voting monitoring algorithm is used, the redundant signals must first be sorted. Adjacent signals are then compared pairwise to determine if they exceed a fixed fault detection threshold (a fixed value) to obtain the corresponding signal status. The fault signal is then located based on the signal status.

[0004] This method has the following problems for monitoring signals from different sources: Since different signal sources have different transmission methods, the signal transmission and acquisition time of different transmission methods is different. If a fixed value is used as the fault monitoring threshold, when the aircraft is performing large maneuvers, the greater the attitude change, the easier it is to exceed the monitoring threshold, leading to false alarms and fault cutoff, affecting the availability of the signal, and increasing the burden on the pilot. Summary of the Invention

[0005] The purpose of this invention is to provide a method for comparing and monitoring attitude signals from multiple signal sources in order to solve the above-mentioned technical problems, improve the availability of signals, ensure the reliability and security of signals, and reduce the burden on pilots.

[0006] This application provides a method for comparing and monitoring attitude signals from multiple signal sources, the method comprising: Step 1: Sort the attitude signals; wherein the attitude signals are valid attitude signals from multiple signal sources; Step 2: Compare adjacent attitude signals pairwise after sorting to obtain multiple differences; Step 3: Determine the threshold based on the rate signal corresponding to the attitude signal; Step 4: Based on the difference and the threshold, determine whether the attitude signal is faulty.

[0007] Preferably, step 3 includes: If the rate signal corresponding to the attitude signal is available and the absolute value of its voting value is less than the value A, the threshold is determined to be a fixed value; If the rate signal corresponding to the attitude signal is available and the absolute value of its voting value is greater than the B value, the threshold is determined to be a dynamic threshold.

[0008] Preferably, step 3 further includes: If the rate signal corresponding to the attitude signal is unavailable, the threshold is determined to be a fixed value.

[0009] Preferably, the dynamic threshold is a fixed value + C * |rate signal voting value|; wherein the coefficient C is determined according to the time delay.

[0010] Preferably, the value of A is different from the value of B.

[0011] Preferably, for roll angle monitoring, the value of A is 35° / s.

[0012] Preferably, for roll angle monitoring, the value of B is 40° / s.

[0013] Preferably, step 4 includes: If the difference is greater than the threshold, the attitude signal is faulty.

[0014] The beneficial effects of this invention are: This application proposes a "dual-threshold" fault threshold design. A fixed threshold is used for monitoring during low-maneuvering operations, while a dynamic threshold is used for high-maneuvering operations. This solves the problem of false alarms caused by inconsistencies in the timing of transmissions from different signal sources. Furthermore, when a real signal problem occurs, the corresponding fault can be monitored based on different thresholds. This design ensures both the accuracy and availability of the monitoring signal and improves the reliability and safety of using attitude signals from different sources. Attached Figure Description

[0015] To more clearly illustrate the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention or the prior art, the drawings used in the description of the embodiments or the prior art will be briefly introduced below. The drawings described below are only some embodiments of the present invention. For those skilled in the art, other drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without creative effort.

[0016] Figure 1 This is a flowchart illustrating a method for comparing and monitoring attitude signals from multiple signal sources, as provided in an embodiment of this application. Detailed Implementation

[0017] To make the objectives, technical solutions, and advantages of the embodiments of the present invention clearer, the technical solutions of the embodiments of the present invention will be clearly and completely described below with reference to the accompanying drawings. Obviously, the described embodiments are only some embodiments of the present invention, not all embodiments. Based on the embodiments of the present invention, all other embodiments obtained by those skilled in the art without creative effort are within the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0018] The features and illustrative embodiments of various aspects of the present invention will now be described in detail. Numerous specific details are set forth in the following detailed description to provide a thorough understanding of the invention. However, it will be apparent to those skilled in the art that the invention may be practiced without requiring some of these specific details. The following description of embodiments is merely intended to provide a better understanding of the invention by illustrating examples of the invention. The invention is by no means limited to any specific setups and methods set forth below, but covers any improvements, substitutions, and modifications to structures, methods, and devices without departing from the spirit of the invention. Well-known structures and techniques are not shown in the drawings and the following description to avoid unnecessarily obscuring the invention.

[0019] In the description of this invention, it should be noted that the directions or positional relationships indicated by terms such as "center," "upper," "lower," "left," "right," "vertical," "horizontal," "inner," and "outer" are based on the directions or positional relationships shown in the accompanying drawings and are only for the convenience of describing and simplifying the invention, and should not be construed as limiting the invention. Furthermore, the use of ordinal numbers (e.g., "first and second," etc.) is for distinguishing objects and is not limited to this order, and should not be construed as indicating or implying relative importance.

[0020] In the description of this invention, it should be noted that, unless otherwise explicitly specified and limited, the terms "installation," "connection," and "linking" should be interpreted broadly, encompassing both direct connection and indirect connection via an intermediate medium. Those skilled in the art can understand the specific meaning of these terms in this invention based on the specific circumstances.

[0021] It should be noted that, unless otherwise specified, the embodiments of the present invention and the features thereof can be combined with each other, and the various embodiments can be referenced and cited in each other. The present invention will now be described in detail with reference to the accompanying drawings and embodiments.

[0022] The technical solutions of the embodiments of the present invention will be clearly and completely described below with reference to the accompanying drawings. Obviously, the described embodiments are only some embodiments of the present invention, and not all embodiments. Based on the embodiments of the present invention, all other embodiments obtained by those of ordinary skill in the art without creative effort are within the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0023] Please see Figure 1 This application provides a method for comparing and monitoring attitude signals from multiple signal sources. The specific comparison and monitoring method is as follows: a) When the attitude and navigation source is available, or the wheel speed voting value is greater than 28 km / h, or the main wheel load voting value is in the air, turn on the attitude monitor; b) Monitor communication failures and the effectiveness of the signal itself; c) Based on the number of effective redundancies of the monitored signals in step b), perform monitoring and processing on the attitude signals: If all four redundancies of the signal are valid: 1) Sort the four redundancy signals and calculate the absolute difference between the maximum and minimum values; 2) If the absolute difference is less than the threshold (see below for the threshold), then reduce the fault counters of all signals, but not less than zero; 3) If the absolute difference is greater than or equal to the threshold value, calculate the absolute difference between each pair of inputs: If the absolute difference between each pair of inputs does not exceed the threshold, then reduce the fault counter for all signals, but not less than zero. If the absolute difference of each pair of inputs exceeds the threshold, then (1x1x1x1 separated): increase the fault counter of all signals but not more than N (N is determined by the monitoring delay time of each signal), and set the monitoring status of the signal to the separated state. If the input signal is split into two pairs and the difference between the two pairs is greater than the tolerance, the fault counter for all valid signals is incremented by 1 but not greater than N (in the case of 2x2).

[0024] If the absolute difference between a pair of inputs exceeds the tolerance, the fault counter for the corresponding signal is incremented by 1, and the fault counters for other signals (with differences less than the tolerance) are decremented by 1 but not less than zero.

[0025] For example, if the monitor is turned on and both signal communication and signal validity are valid, the monitoring will proceed as follows if the following situations occur: Scenario 1: The effective signal channel values ​​for the roll angle redundancy are 50°, 53.5°, 53°, and 52° respectively. At this time, the roll rate is 10° / s. The monitor then processes the following: The four redundancy signals are sorted into 50°, 52°, 53° and 53.5°. The absolute difference between the maximum value of 53.5° and the minimum value of 50° is 3.5°. Since the roll rate is less than 35° / s, the threshold is set to 4°. The difference between the maximum and minimum values ​​does not exceed the threshold, so all signals are valid.

[0026] Scenario 2: The effective signal channel values ​​for the roll angle redundancy are 100°, 98°, 113°, and 103° respectively. At this time, the roll rate is -100° / s. The monitor then processes the following: The four redundancy signals are sorted into 98°, 100°, 103° and 118°. The absolute value of the difference between the maximum value of 118° and the minimum value of 98° is 20°. Since the roll rate is greater than 40° / s, the threshold is 14.5°. The difference between the maximum and minimum values ​​exceeds the threshold. Calculate the absolute difference between each pair of inputs. The differences for each pair are 2°, 3° and 15°. Since 103° and 100° are within the tolerance, while 103° and 118° are outside the tolerance, the channel corresponding to 118° is judged to be faulty.

[0027] Scenario 3: The effective signal channel values ​​for the roll angle redundancy are -150°, -148°, -123°, and -128° respectively. At this time, the roll rate is 150° / s. The monitor then processes the following: The four redundancy signals are sorted into -150°, -148°, -128° and -123°. The absolute value of the difference between the maximum value -123° and the minimum value -150° is 27°. Since the roll rate is greater than 40° / s, the threshold is 19.5°. The difference between the maximum and minimum values ​​exceeds the threshold. Calculate the absolute difference between each pair of inputs, with differences of 2°, 20°, and 5° for each pair. The signal is split into two pairs, and the difference between the two pairs is greater than the tolerance. All valid signals are considered faulty.

[0028] Scenario 4: The effective signal channel values ​​for the roll angle redundancy are 21°, 25°, 22°, and 20° respectively. At this time, the roll rate is 5° / s. The monitor then processes the following: The four redundancy signals are sorted into 20°, 21°, 22° and 25°. The absolute value of the difference between the maximum value of 25° and the minimum value of 20° is 5°. Since the roll rate is less than 35° / s, the threshold is set to 4°. The difference between the maximum and minimum values ​​exceeds the threshold. Calculate the absolute difference between each pair of inputs, with each pair having a difference of 1°, 1° and 3° respectively. The absolute difference between each pair of inputs does not exceed the threshold, and all valid signals are valid.

[0029] Case 5: The effective signal channel values ​​for the roll angle redundancy are 121°, 135°, 148°, and 158° respectively. At this time, the roll rate is 50° / s. The monitor will process the following: The four redundancy signals are sorted into 121°, 135°, 148° and 158°. The absolute difference between the maximum value of 150° and the minimum value of 121° is 29°. Since the roll rate is greater than 40° / s, the threshold is set to 9.5°. The difference between the maximum and minimum values ​​exceeds the threshold. Calculate the absolute difference between each pair of inputs, with each pair having a difference of 14°, 13°, and 10°. If the absolute difference between any pair of inputs exceeds the threshold, all valid signals are invalidated.

[0030] If all three redundancies of the signal are valid: 1) Sort the three redundancy signals and calculate the absolute difference between the maximum and minimum values; 2) If the absolute difference is less than the threshold value, then reduce the fault counters of all signals, but not less than zero; 3) If the absolute difference is greater than or equal to the threshold value, calculate the absolute difference between the minimum and median values, and the absolute difference between the maximum and median values: If none of them exceed the threshold, then reduce the fault counters of all signals, but not less than zero; Otherwise, if all exceed the threshold, then (1x1x1 separated): increase the fault counter of all signals but not more than N (N is determined by the monitoring delay time of each signal), and set the monitoring status of the signal to the separated state; Otherwise, if the absolute difference between the minimum and intermediate values ​​exceeds the limit, the fault counter for the minimum value signal is increased, but not by more than N; if the absolute difference between the maximum and intermediate values ​​exceeds the limit, the fault counter for the maximum value signal is increased, but not by more than N.

[0031] If the signal has only two valid redundancies: 1) Calculate the absolute difference between the two effective redundancy signals; 2) If the absolute difference is less than the threshold value, reduce the fault counters of all signals but not less than zero, and set the monitoring status of the signal to fully active; 3) Otherwise (1x1 separation): Increment the two redundancy fault counts by 1 but not more than N (N is determined by the monitoring delay time of each signal), and set the monitoring status of the signal to the separation state.

[0032] If only one redundancy of the signal is valid: do not process it.

[0033] If a certain redundancy fault counter of a signal is ≥N (reaching the monitoring time threshold), a fault is reported for this signal, the monitoring status of the signal redundancy is set to invalid, and participation in voting is prohibited. Only after a successful reset can the signal be allowed to rejoin the voting.

[0034] The key point of the above monitoring logic is the reasonable setting of fault monitoring thresholds. Instead of using the original fixed-value monitoring thresholds, a design combining a "fixed threshold" and a "dynamic threshold" is adopted. Since the deviation of attitude signals from different sources is strongly correlated with the aircraft's velocity signal, the aircraft's velocity signal is used as the basis for the dual-threshold judgment and the threshold setting for the dynamic threshold. The specific threshold settings are as follows: 1) When the rate signal is available and the absolute value of its voting value is less than A, the monitoring threshold of the attitude signal uses a fixed value; 2) When the rate signal is available and the absolute value of the voting value is greater than B, the attitude signal monitoring threshold uses a dynamic threshold. The dynamic threshold is a fixed value + C * |rate signal voting value|, and the coefficient C is determined according to the time delay. 3) When the rate signal is unavailable, the monitoring threshold for the attitude signal uses a fixed value.

[0035] Here, the value of A is not equal to the value of B, which is equivalent to setting a buffer band of x° / s. Within the buffer band, the monitoring threshold remains unchanged, reducing the sensitivity of the threshold value to the rate signal and avoiding repeated changes in the threshold value when the rate signal fluctuates slightly.

[0036] The setting of the fixed value takes into account factors such as sensor characteristics, signal transmission errors, and aircraft aerodynamic characteristics. In one feasible implementation, the fixed value is equal to 4°.

[0037] This invention adopts a fault threshold design of "fixed threshold" + "dynamic threshold". It uses the rate signal that is strongly correlated with attitude as the judgment basis for the dual thresholds and the setting of the dynamic threshold. It takes into account the cases of valid and invalid rate signals and sets a threshold transition buffer to avoid repeated changes in the threshold value when the rate signal fluctuates slightly, which would affect the monitoring results.

[0038] The above detailed embodiments are a description of the present invention. It should not be considered that the specific embodiments of the present invention are limited to these descriptions. For those skilled in the art, several simple deductions and substitutions can be made without departing from the concept of the present invention, and all of these should be considered to fall within the protection scope of the present invention.

Claims

1. A method for comparing and monitoring attitude signals from multiple signal sources, characterized in that, The method includes: Step 1: Sort the attitude signals; wherein the attitude signals are valid attitude signals from multiple signal sources; Step 2: Compare adjacent attitude signals pairwise after sorting to obtain multiple differences; Step 3: Determine the threshold based on the rate signal corresponding to the attitude signal; Step 4: Based on the difference and the threshold, determine whether the attitude signal is faulty.

2. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, Step 3 includes: If the rate signal corresponding to the attitude signal is available and the absolute value of its voting value is less than the value A, the threshold is determined to be a fixed value; If the rate signal corresponding to the attitude signal is available and the absolute value of its voting value is greater than the B value, the threshold is determined to be a dynamic threshold.

3. The method according to claim 2, characterized in that, Step 3 further includes: If the rate signal corresponding to the attitude signal is unavailable, the threshold is determined to be a fixed value.

4. The method according to claim 3, characterized in that, The dynamic threshold is a fixed value + C * |rate signal voting value|; where the coefficient C is determined according to the time delay.

5. The method according to claim 2, characterized in that, The value of A is different from the value of B.

6. The method according to claim 5, characterized in that, For roll angle monitoring, the value of A is 35° / s.

7. The method according to claim 5, characterized in that, For roll angle monitoring, the value of B is 40° / s.

8. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, Step 4 includes: If the difference is greater than the threshold, the attitude signal is faulty.

Images