Envelope extension type flight test state point risk level assessment method
By constructing a risk metric calculation model and a grading scale, the problem of risk assessment at flight test status points in envelope-extended flight tests was solved, and the risk level of flight test status points was optimized and safety was improved.
Patent Information
- Authority / Receiving Office
- CN · China
- Patent Type
- Applications(China)
- Current Assignee / Owner
- CHINESE FLIGHT TEST ESTAB
- Filing Date
- 2025-12-27
- Publication Date
- 2026-05-12
AI Technical Summary
In flight envelope extension tests, the lack of effective risk assessment methods leads to the selection of flight test status points relying on experience, making it difficult to intuitively express the risk level and affecting flight test safety.
By constructing a risk metric calculation model for flight test status points, and combining initial safety values, limit values, and risk factor weights, a risk grading scale is designed to intuitively represent the risk level of flight test status points and optimize flight test design.
It has made the risk assessment of flight envelope extension flight test state points feasible and safe, provided an intuitive risk level assessment method, and improved the optimization capability of flight test design.
Smart Images
Figure CN122020238A_ABST
Abstract
Description
Technical Field
[0001] This invention belongs to the field of flight test technology, specifically relating to a method for assessing the risk level of flight test state points in envelope extension category. Background Technology
[0002] Flight test projects, characterized by high risk, high investment, and high technology content, face challenges due to the increasing number of newly developed aviation equipment, heavy workloads, rapid iteration of new technology verification needs, and tight development schedules. These factors make flight test safety issues particularly prominent. The first challenge in flight testing of new aircraft platforms is the expansion of important flight envelopes such as speed, altitude, overload, and angle of attack. Flight tests involving envelope expansion often involve significant risks.
[0003] Currently, GJB626A-2006 specifies the criteria for classifying risk subjects and the classification of risk subjects for each flight test subject. However, in the specific design and implementation of typical high-risk envelope extension flight tests, the selection of test state points and the determination of extension step size often rely on existing experience. There is currently a lack of a method for risk assessment of extended flight test state points to guide the selection of test state points and intuitively express the risk level of flight test state points. Summary of the Invention
[0004] The purpose of this invention is to provide a method for assessing the risk level of flight state points in envelope-extended flight test designs. This method addresses the challenge of assessing the risk level of flight state points in envelope-extended flight test designs, guides the selection of test state points, intuitively expresses the risk level of flight state points, and improves the operability of risk assessment for flight state points in envelope-extended subjects. It provides flight test designers with an intuitive risk level assessment method for optimizing flight test designs, balancing flight test schedules, costs, and risks. Simultaneously, it avoids the flight test risks arising from neglecting the extended envelope range in the design of non-envelope-extended flight test subjects during the initial stages of new aircraft flight testing.
[0005] The technical solution of the present invention: The embodiments of the present invention provide a method for assessing the risk level of flight test state points with envelope extension, comprising the following steps: Step 1: Based on the initial safety values and limit values of the proposed extended envelope (speed, overload, angle of attack, etc.) involved in the test flight subjects, design the test flight state points for the envelope extension test flight subjects; Step 2: Construct a risk metric calculation model for single envelope extended flight test state points during flight testing; Step 3: Based on the risk measurement calculation model of a single envelope extended flight test state point, establish a calculation model for the risk measurement values of multiple envelope extended flight test state points involved in flight tests. Step 4: Based on the historical data of relevant subjects in the envelope extension, design a risk grading scale, and use grades and color bands to visually represent the risk level of the test flight status point; Step 5: Using the risk metric value obtained in Step 2, compare it with the position of the risk grading scale designed in Step 4 to confirm the risk level of the test flight status point; Step 6: Designers visually determine whether the risk level of the state point is suitable for execution. If the risk level of the state point is high, the parameters of the test flight state point need to be optimized, and then the calculation and evaluation of steps 1 to 5 are performed. If the risk level of the designed test flight state point meets the design expectations, the mission is executed.
[0006] Optionally, in step 1, the initial safety value represents the safety baseline value of the aircraft's envelope, that is, the state point has been flown multiple times before the extended test flight and has been verified to meet the design expectations.
[0007] Optionally, the three factors used to calculate the risk metric value for the single envelope extended flight test status point in step 2 are: (1) In the area where the envelope is to be expanded, the closer to the boundary, the higher the risk; (2) In the expansion, the larger the experimental step size, the higher the risk; (3) During the envelope expansion process, the more flying state points are accumulated, the lower the risk.
[0008] The method for calculating the risk metric includes: Step 21: Based on the three factors used to calculate the risk metric value of the single envelope extended flight test state point, as well as the initial safety value and limit value of the single envelope calculated in Step 1, design risk metric value calculation formulas for the three factors respectively, and make the calculation results of the risk metric value calculation formulas for the three factors all be a value between 0 and 1. The closer the risk metric value is to 1, the greater the risk. Step 22: Calculate or evaluate the weighting coefficients of the three factors on which the risk metric for a single envelope extended flight test status point is based. Each of the three weighting coefficients is a value between 0 and 1, and the sum of the three weighting coefficients is 1. Step 23: Calculate the sum of the products of the risk metric value of each factor in step 21 and the weight coefficient of the corresponding factor in step 22 to form the risk metric value of the single envelope extended test flight state point. The closer the risk metric value is to 1, the greater the risk.
[0009] Optionally, in step 21, for a single envelope expansion test flight status point in the envelope expansion area, the closer to the boundary, the higher the risk. The risk metric calculation model at the envelope extension state point is as follows: (1) in, : is a value between 0 and 1, representing a linear increase in risk as the extended value gets closer to the boundary.
[0010] Optionally, in step 21, in step 2, for the single envelope extended flight test state point during the extension, the larger the test step size, the higher the risk; The risk metric calculation model at the envelope extension state point is as follows: (2) in: : is a value between 0 and 1, representing a linear increase in risk as the expansion step size increases.
[0011] Optionally, in step 21, for a single envelope expansion test flight status point, the more flight status points accumulated during the envelope expansion process, the lower the risk. The risk metric calculation model at the envelope extension state point is as follows: (3) in: : A value between 0 and 1, representing the gradual decrease in danger as the number of flight-expanded state points accumulates.
[0012] Optionally, the weighting coefficients of the three factors in step 22 as described above are formed by the following method: Step 221: Using the initial suggested values of the three weighting coefficients as unknowns, expand the flight test state point data with the relevant envelope of historical similar type aircraft, obtain the risk metric data of each flight test state point with the initial suggested values of the three weighting coefficients, construct the objective function with the minimum variance of the risk metric values of all design state points, and use the range of each weighting coefficient from 0 to 1 and the sum of the three weighting coefficients as the condition of the optimization problem, solve the constructed optimization problem, and obtain the initial suggested values of the three weighting coefficients in the single envelope expansion; Step 222: Directly adopt the initial suggested values of the three weighting coefficients in the single envelope expansion formed in step 221 as the final weighting coefficient values; or, based on each specific flight test state point in the expanded envelope, consider the differences in risk for the three factors for different envelopes and different flight test state points, and adjust the values of the three weighting coefficients in step 221 at each flight test state point based on the initial values of the three weighting coefficients to determine the final weighting coefficient values. The adjusted final weighting coefficient values still need to meet the condition that the value range of each weighting coefficient is 0 to 1, and the sum of the three weighting coefficients is 1.
[0013] Optionally, in the envelope extension type flight test state point risk level assessment method described above, step 3 includes: Step 31: Calculate the risk metric value of each state point with a single envelope extension in the designed test flight state points; Step 32: Select the maximum value of each single envelope expansion risk metric value in the test flight status point as the principal value of the risk metric values of multiple envelope expansion test flight status points. Take the sum of the products of each pair of single envelope expansion risk metric values of the test flight status points as the coupling risk value brought about by multiple envelope expansions. Add the principal value and the coupling risk value of the risk metric values as the reference value of the risk metric values of multiple envelope expansion test flight status points. Step 33: If the reference value of the risk metric for multiple envelope expansion test flight status points is greater than 1, then take 1 directly, and finally form multiple risk metric values for envelope expansion test flight status points. The closer the risk metric value is to 1, the greater the risk.
[0014] Optionally, in the risk level assessment method for flight envelope extension type flight test status points as described above, the risk grading scale in step 4 is filled with color bands within the value range of 0 to 1 to divide risk areas, mark danger warnings, and mark corresponding implementation suggestions; by comparing the risk measurement value obtained in step 2 with the position of the risk grading scale designed in step 3, the risk level of the flight envelope extension type flight test status point is confirmed.
[0015] The beneficial effects of this invention: This invention provides a method for assessing the risk level of flight envelope extension-type flight test state points, ultimately obtaining the risk level of these state points. The technical solution provided by this invention specifically has the following beneficial effects: (1) By constructing a method for calculating the risk metric of flight state points with single or multiple envelope extensions, and by constructing a risk grading scale, a risk level assessment method for flight state points with envelope extensions is finally obtained. This achieves the goal of providing flight test designers with an intuitive risk level assessment method for optimizing flight state points with envelope extensions, and has high application value.
[0016] (2) By adopting the technical solution provided in the embodiments of the present invention, the risk assessment of the flight state point of the flight test with high risk characteristics is made operable, the optimization path of the flight state point of the flight test based on the risk level of the flight state point is realized, and a non-quantitative risk qualitative assessment method of the flight state point based on the risk metric is formed, which has important application value for improving flight test safety.
[0017] (3) It solves the problem of risk level assessment of flight state point in envelope extension flight test design, and the technical solution provided by the embodiments of the present invention can be extended to other test designs that need to carry out boundary extension engineering tests, and has high application value. Attached Figure Description
[0018] The accompanying drawings are provided to further understand the technical solutions of the present invention and constitute a part of the specification. They are used together with the embodiments of this application to explain the technical solutions of the present invention and do not constitute a limitation on the technical solutions of the present invention.
[0019] Figure 1 A flowchart is provided for the application of risk level assessment and design optimization of flight test state points with envelope extension in this invention. Figure 2 This is a schematic diagram of a risk level scale designed in an embodiment of the present invention. Detailed Implementation
[0020] To make the objectives, technical solutions, and advantages of the present invention clearer, the embodiments of the present invention will be described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings. It should be noted that, unless otherwise specified, the embodiments and features described in this application can be arbitrarily combined with each other.
[0021] As explained in the background, the primary challenge in new aircraft platform flight testing is currently the expansion of important flight envelopes such as speed, altitude, G-forces, and angle of attack. Envelope expansion flight tests often involve significant risks. In the design and implementation of typical high-risk envelope expansion flight tests, the selection of test state points and the determination of expansion step sizes often rely on existing experience. Currently, there is no method for risk assessment of expanded flight test state points to guide their selection or intuitively express their risk level.
[0022] To address the challenge of assessing the risk level of flight test status points in envelope-extended flight test design, guide the selection of test status points, and intuitively express the risk level of flight test status points, thereby improving the operability of risk assessment for flight test status points in envelope-extended subjects.
[0023] Based on the above requirements, this invention provides a method for assessing the risk level of state points in envelope-extended flight tests, specifically applied in envelope-extended flight tests.
[0024] The present invention provides the following specific embodiments, which can be combined with each other. For the same or similar concepts or processes, they may not be described again in some embodiments.
[0025] This invention, based on the initial safety values and limits of the proposed extended flight envelopes (speed, overload, angle of attack, etc.) involved in flight test subjects, designs flight test state points for envelope extension flight test subjects; establishes a method for calculating the risk metric value of a single envelope extension flight test state point in flight testing; based on the risk metric value of a single envelope extension flight test state point, establishes a method for calculating the risk metric values of multiple envelope extension flight test state points in flight testing; designs a risk grading scale, visually representing the risk level of flight test state points through grades and color bands; obtains the risk level of flight test state points by the position of the risk metric value of the flight test state point in the risk analysis scale; and forms an optimization method for flight test state points of envelope extension flight tests based on the risk level of the flight test state points.
[0026] like Figure 1 The diagram shows a flowchart illustrating the application of envelope extension-type flight test state point risk level assessment and design optimization in an embodiment of the present invention. The method provided in this embodiment may include the following steps: Step 1: Based on the initial safety values and limit values of the proposed extended envelope (speed, overload, angle of attack, etc.) involved in the test flight subjects, design the test flight state points for the envelope extension test flight subjects.
[0027] In step 1, it is assumed that the initial security value of a certain extended envelope is It represents the safety baseline value of the aircraft's envelope (speed, overload, or angle of attack), meaning that the state point has been flown multiple times and verified to meet design expectations before the extended flight test; This represents the design limit value, or boundary value, for the aircraft's envelope. The first design for aircraft envelope extension One state point; The first design for aircraft envelope extension The parameter values for each state point.
[0028] Step 2: Establish a method for calculating the risk metric value of a single envelope extended flight test state point during flight testing.
[0029] In step 2, the three main factors used to calculate the risk metric for the single envelope extended flight test status point are: (1) In the area where the envelope is to be expanded, the closer to the boundary, the higher the risk; Considering this first factor, let's assume that when designing envelope expansion tests, the test aircraft is considered as potentially deviating from the design at a certain state point within the allowable envelope to be expanded, with the probability of deviation increasing and the risk rising closer to the boundary. Therefore, the risk metric for this factor at the envelope expansion state point is: (1) in, : is a value between 0 and 1, representing a linear increase in risk as the extended value gets closer to the boundary.
[0030] (2) In the expansion, the larger the experimental step size, the higher the risk; Considering this second factor, let's assume that during the envelope expansion test, the larger the step size at the current test state point, the higher the risk. Then, the hazard measure of this factor at the envelope expansion state point is: (2) in: : is a value between 0 and 1, representing a linear increase in risk as the expansion step size increases.
[0031] (3) During the envelope expansion process, the more flying state points are accumulated, the lower the risk.
[0032] Considering this third factor, assuming that during the envelope expansion test, as the test progresses and more test points are completed, the understanding of the system characteristics affected by this aircraft envelope index increases, leading to more accurate predictions of related stability and other indicators. Consequently, the risk gradually decreases as the hazard is released. Therefore, the hazard measure of this factor at the envelope expansion state point is: (3) in: : A value between 0 and 1, representing the gradual decrease in danger as the number of flight-expanded state points accumulates.
[0033] It should be noted that in this embodiment, the risk metric calculation formula for each of the three factors is constructed by using two linear change functions and one reciprocal function. The formulas in the above construction method do not constitute a limitation on this patent. They can also be constructed as other types of monotonic functions to characterize the impact of these three factors on the risk level at the state point in a single envelope expansion.
[0034] In constructing the flight test risk metric for a specific design state point within a single envelope extension, the goal is to ultimately create a value between 0 and 1, where a larger value indicates a higher risk level. The final risk metric for the state point within this extended envelope is constructed using indicator weights. (4) in: : A value of 0 to 1, representing the risk metric of the designed test flight state point on the extended envelope.
[0035] : These are the weighting coefficients for the three factors considered, with values ranging from 0 to 1. .
[0036] The three weighting coefficients can be obtained and adjusted using the following method: Let the initial suggested values for the three weighting coefficients be... Aircraft of similar historical types are undergoing flight testing with the same extended envelope. The first design for historical envelope extension The parameter values for each state point are known values. Using equations (1), (2), and (3), the risk metric values for each state point are calculated based on the three considered factors, which are known values. Each state point uses the initial suggested values as the weighting coefficients of the three factors. Using equation (4), the risk metric values for all state points are calculated as follows: (5) The objective function is constructed by minimizing the variance of the risk metrics at all design state points. The conditions for the optimization problem are that the weight coefficients range from 0 to 1, and the sum of the three weight coefficients is 1. Finally, the solution to the initial suggested values (unknown quantities) of the three weight coefficients in the single envelope expansion is transformed into the optimization problem of equation (6). This optimization problem is similar to the mean-variance theory in investment, where variance reflects the risk level. That is, it is assumed that in historical flight test practices, the selected envelope expansion flight state points are those with the smallest fluctuations at each point and the smallest overall risk. This optimization problem is a quadratic programming problem under constraints, which can be solved using the active set method in optimization theory.
[0037] (6) For specific flight test envelope characteristics, the initial suggested values of the three weighting coefficients in the single envelope expansion formed in step 221 can be directly used as the final weighting coefficient values. Alternatively, based on each specific flight test state point in the expanded envelope, and considering the differences in risk for different envelopes and different flight test state points regarding the three factors mentioned in claim 3, the values of the three weighting coefficients in step 221 at each flight test state point can be adjusted based on the initial values of the three weighting coefficients to determine the final weighting coefficient values. These adjusted weighting coefficients still need to meet the condition that their values range from 0 to 1 and their sum is 1.
[0038] Step 3: Based on the risk metric value of a single envelope extended flight test state point, establish a calculation method for the risk metric value of multiple envelope extended flight test state points involved in flight tests; Considering that some subjects involve multiple envelope expansion types during implementation, such as angle-of-attack expansion in load testing, simultaneous expansion of overload and angle of attack in buffeting testing, and envelope expansion that may be overlooked in flight test design for complex maneuvers, the risk metric value of a flight test state point involving multiple envelope expansions cannot be replaced by the metric value of a single envelope expansion flight test state point. Therefore, the risk metric value of a flight test state point with multiple envelope expansions is taken as the maximum value among the individual envelope metrics involved, while also considering the coupling effects between the individual envelopes. The buffeting test in the implementation example is an example of this situation.
[0039] In step 3, the maximum value of each individual envelope expansion risk metric value in the flight test status points is selected as the principal value of the risk metric values for multiple envelope expansion flight test status points. The sum of the pairwise products of each individual envelope expansion risk metric value in the flight test status points is used as the coupled risk value brought about by multiple envelope expansions. The principal value and the coupled risk value are added together to obtain the reference value of the risk metric values for multiple envelope expansion flight test status points. If the reference value is greater than 1, it is directly taken as 1, thus forming the risk metric values for multiple envelope expansion flight test status points. For example, the flight test status point parameters of a certain flight test subject design involve the velocity envelope. Overload envelope and angle of attack envelope In the case of the expansion, the final flight test state point risk metric value is: (7) in: The value may exceed 1. If it exceeds 1, then the value is 1.
[0040] Step 4: Based on the historical data of relevant subjects in the envelope extension, design a risk grading scale, and use grades and color bands to visually represent the risk level of the test flight status point; In step 4, a design diagram of a risk grading scale is shown below. Figure 2 As shown, the color bands are filled mainly within the value range of 0 to 1. The color band design needs to conform to the intuition of risk perception in daily life and engineering. The color bands gradually change from cool colors for low risk to warm colors for high risk. Risk areas are divided according to historical data of relevant subjects, and danger warnings and corresponding implementation suggestions are marked.
[0041] Step 5: Using the risk metric value obtained in Step 2, compare it with the position of the risk grading scale designed in Step 4 to confirm the risk level of the test flight status point; Step 6: Designers visually determine whether the risk level of the state point is suitable for execution. If the risk level of the state point is high, the parameters of the test flight state point need to be optimized, and then the calculation and evaluation of steps 1 to 5 are performed. If the risk level of the designed test flight state point meets the design expectations, the mission is executed.
[0042] This invention provides a method for assessing the risk level of flight test state points in envelope extension categories. The technical solution provided by this invention has the following beneficial effects: (1) By constructing a method for calculating the risk metric of flight state points with single or multiple envelope extensions, and by constructing a risk grading scale, a risk level assessment method for flight state points with envelope extensions is finally obtained. This achieves the goal of providing flight test designers with an intuitive risk level assessment method for optimizing flight state points with envelope extensions, and has high application value.
[0043] (2) By adopting the technical solution provided in the embodiments of the present invention, the risk assessment of the flight state point of the flight test with high risk characteristics is made operable, the optimization path of the flight state point of the flight test based on the risk level of the flight state point is realized, and a non-quantitative risk qualitative assessment method of the flight state point based on the risk metric is formed, which has important application value for improving flight test safety.
[0044] (3) It solves the problem of risk level assessment of flight state point in envelope extension flight test design, and the technical solution provided by the embodiments of the present invention can be extended to other test designs that need to carry out boundary extension engineering tests, and has high application value.
[0045] The following specific implementation examples illustrate a method for assessing the risk level of flight test state points with an envelope extension category, as provided in this invention.
Claims
1. A method for assessing the risk level of flight test state points in envelope extension category, characterized in that, Includes the following steps: Step 1: Based on the initial safety and limit values of the proposed extended envelope involved in the test flight subjects, design the test flight state points for the envelope extension test flight subjects; Step 2: Construct a risk metric calculation model for single envelope extended flight test state points during flight testing; Step 3: Based on the risk measurement calculation model of a single envelope extended flight test state point, establish a calculation model for the risk measurement values of multiple envelope extended flight test state points involved in flight tests. Step 4: Based on the historical data of relevant subjects in the envelope extension, design a risk grading scale, and use grades and color bands to visually represent the risk level of the test flight status point; Step 5: Using the risk metric value obtained in Step 2, compare it with the position of the risk grading scale designed in Step 4 to confirm the risk level of the test flight status point; Step 6: Designers visually determine whether the risk level of the state point is suitable for execution. If the risk level of the state point is high, the parameters of the test flight state point need to be optimized, and then the calculation and evaluation of steps 1 to 5 are performed. If the risk level of the designed test flight state point meets the design expectations, the mission is executed.
2. The method for assessing the risk level of flight test state points with envelope extension as described in claim 1, characterized in that, In step 1, the initial safety value represents the safety baseline value of the aircraft's envelope, that is, the state point has been flown multiple times before the extended test flight and has been verified to meet the design expectations.
3. The method for assessing the risk level of flight test state points with envelope extension as described in claim 1, characterized in that, The three factors used in calculating the risk metric for the single envelope extended flight test status point in step 2 are: (1) In the area where the envelope is to be expanded, the closer to the boundary, the higher the risk; (2) In the expansion, the larger the experimental step size, the higher the risk; (3) During the envelope expansion process, the more flying state points are accumulated, the lower the risk; The method for calculating the risk metric includes: Step 21: Based on the three factors used to calculate the risk metric value of the single envelope extended flight test state point, as well as the initial safety value and limit value of the single envelope calculated in Step 1, design risk metric value calculation formulas for the three factors respectively, and make the calculation results of the risk metric value calculation formulas for the three factors all be a value between 0 and 1. The closer the risk metric value is to 1, the greater the risk. Step 22: Calculate or evaluate the weighting coefficients of the three factors on which the risk metric for a single envelope extended flight test status point is based. Each of the three weighting coefficients is a value between 0 and 1, and the sum of the three weighting coefficients is 1. Step 23: Calculate the sum of the products of the risk metric value of each factor in step 21 and the weight coefficient of the corresponding factor in step 22 to form the risk metric value of the single envelope extended test flight state point. The closer the risk metric value is to 1, the greater the risk.
4. The method for assessing the risk level of flight test state points with envelope extension as described in claim 3, characterized in that, In step 21, for the single envelope expansion test flight status point in the envelope expansion area, the closer to the boundary, the higher the risk. The risk metric calculation model at the envelope extension state point is as follows: （1） in, : is a value between 0 and 1, representing a linear increase in risk as the extended value gets closer to the boundary.
5. The method for assessing the risk level of flight test state points with envelope extension according to claim 3, characterized in that, In step 21, in step 2, for the single envelope expansion test state point during expansion, the larger the test step size, the higher the risk. The risk metric calculation model at the envelope extension state point is as follows: （2） in: : is a value between 0 and 1, representing a linear increase in risk as the expansion step size increases.
6. The method for assessing the risk level of flight test state points with envelope extension according to claim 3, characterized in that, In step 21, for a single envelope expansion test flight status point, the more flight status points accumulated during the envelope expansion process, the lower the risk. The risk metric calculation model at the envelope extension state point is as follows: （3） in: : A value between 0 and 1, representing the gradual decrease in danger as the number of flight-expanded state points accumulates.
7. The method for assessing the risk level of flight test state points with envelope extension as described in claim 3, characterized in that, The weighting coefficients of the three factors in step 22 as described above are formed by the following method: Step 221: Using the initial suggested values of the three weighting coefficients as unknowns, expand the flight test state point data with the relevant envelope of historical similar type aircraft, obtain the risk metric data of each flight test state point with the initial suggested values of the three weighting coefficients, construct the objective function with the minimum variance of the risk metric values of all design state points, and use the range of each weighting coefficient from 0 to 1 and the sum of the three weighting coefficients as the condition of the optimization problem, solve the constructed optimization problem, and obtain the initial suggested values of the three weighting coefficients in the single envelope expansion; Step 222: Directly adopt the initial suggested values of the three weighting coefficients in the single envelope expansion formed in step 221 as the final weighting coefficient values; or, based on each specific flight test state point in the expanded envelope, consider the differences in risk for the three factors for different envelopes and different flight test state points, and adjust the values of the three weighting coefficients in step 221 at each flight test state point based on the initial values of the three weighting coefficients to determine the final weighting coefficient values. The adjusted final weighting coefficient values still need to meet the condition that the value range of each weighting coefficient is 0 to 1, and the sum of the three weighting coefficients is 1.
8. The method for assessing the risk level of flight test state points with envelope extension according to claim 1, characterized in that, Step 3 specifically includes: Step 31: Calculate the risk metric value of each state point with a single envelope extension in the designed test flight state points; Step 32: Select the maximum value of each single envelope expansion risk metric value in the test flight status point as the principal value of the risk metric values of multiple envelope expansion test flight status points. Take the sum of the products of each pair of single envelope expansion risk metric values of the test flight status points as the coupling risk value brought about by multiple envelope expansions. Add the principal value and the coupling risk value of the risk metric values as the reference value of the risk metric values of multiple envelope expansion test flight status points. Step 33: If the reference value of the risk metric for multiple envelope expansion test flight status points is greater than 1, then take 1 directly, and finally form multiple risk metric values for envelope expansion test flight status points. The closer the risk metric value is to 1, the greater the risk.
9. The method for assessing the risk level of flight test state points with envelope extension according to claim 1, characterized in that, In step 4, the risk grading scale is filled with color bands within the range of 0 to 1 to divide risk areas, mark danger warnings, and mark corresponding implementation suggestions; by comparing the risk measurement value obtained in step 2 with the position of the risk grading scale designed in step 3, the risk level of the flight envelope extension category flight test status point is confirmed.