A flight instruction feasible region projection and envelope guardian method and system based on real-time aerodynamic constraints

Abstract

The application discloses a flight instruction feasible region projection and envelope guardian method and system based on real-time aerodynamic constraints, and the method comprises the following steps: collecting flight speed, dynamic pressure, static pressure, angle of attack, bank angle, rudder surface capacity and structure load estimation data of the current flight state, calculating maximum available normal load and required overload, judging whether the maximum available normal load is less than the required overload or whether the angle of attack is not less than the angle of attack setting value, and ensuring that the flattening maneuver can be reliably executed within the available overload range. Based on the multi-constraint coupled feasible region constructed by the normal load constraint, the rudder surface deflection angle constraint and the angle of attack constraint, the input instruction of the current flight state is projected to the multi-constraint coupled feasible region by adopting the weighted least square method principle, and different levels of executable instructions are output according to the projection situation; and the method avoids directly issuing unexecutable instructions, and reduces the accident risk coefficient.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention belongs to the field of UAV flight control and flight safety protection technology, specifically relating to a method and system for flight command feasible domain projection and envelope protection based on real-time aerodynamic constraints. Background Technology

[0002] With the widespread application of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) in integrated reconnaissance and strike missions and in new platforms such as low-altitude economical aircraft, these vehicles often face extreme operating conditions when performing high-speed maneuvers. For example, a fixed-wing UAV's speed is approximately 50 m / s during level flight cruise. When entering a dive attack or rapid altitude reduction maneuver, the speed rapidly increases to 80–90 m / s, resulting in a sharp increase in dynamic pressure and nonlinear changes in aerodynamic characteristics and control surface effectiveness. During this process, the aircraft typically needs to execute attitude control input commands issued by external systems (including pitch and yaw angle commands from the seeker). If these commands are executed directly without constraints, the following problems are likely to occur: 1. Control surface saturation and control failure: At high speeds, the control surface effect is enhanced, and the command step may exceed the actuator's capability, leading to saturation and loss of control; 2. Structural over-limit risk: Instantaneous normal loads may exceed the airframe's design limits, causing structural damage or failure; 3. Angle of attack spikes and stall: During leveling, to quickly recover level flight, the longitudinal angle of attack α suddenly increases, easily approaching or exceeding the stall angle of attack; 4. External input uncertainty: Guidance information may be interfered with or experience significant maneuvering jumps, forcing the aircraft platform to withstand sudden attitude and speed changes. Existing protection measures are mostly single-variable limiting (such as limiting angle of attack or overload) or hysteresis-triggered protection logic. These methods cannot handle the coupling problem of multiple constraints such as speed, dynamic pressure, control surface capability, and structural loads, and also lack a "closest executable mapping" to external commands.

[0003] A new control method is needed that can map external input commands in real time under multiple constraints. Summary of the Invention

[0004] The purpose of this invention is to provide a flight command feasible domain projection and envelope protection method based on real-time aerodynamic constraints, which can solve the technical problems in the prior art such as the inability to execute external attitude control input commands, control surface saturation, structural over-limit and high stall risk of aircraft under high-speed maneuvering conditions.

[0005] The present invention also aims to provide a system for a flight command feasible domain projection and envelope protection method based on real-time aerodynamic constraints.

[0006] The technical solution of this invention to solve its technical problem is as follows:

[0007] A method for projecting the feasible region of flight commands and protecting the flight envelope based on real-time aerodynamic constraints includes the following steps:

[0008] S1: Collect flight speed, dynamic pressure, static pressure, angle of attack, angle of attack, control surface capability, and structural load estimation data for the current flight status; calculate the maximum available normal load and required overload; determine whether the maximum available normal load is less than the required overload or whether the angle of attack is not less than the set angle of attack value; if yes, proceed to step S2; if no, maintain the current status.

[0009] S2: Based on the constructed multi-constraint coupled feasible region containing normal load constraints, control surface deflection angle constraints and angle of attack constraints, the input commands of the current flight state are projected onto the multi-constraint coupled feasible region using the weighted least squares method, and different levels of executable commands are output according to the projection situation.

[0010] S3: Provide different types of responses based on the level of the executable instruction.

[0011] Preferably, the calculation of the maximum available normal load and required overload in step S1 is specifically formulated as follows:

[0012] ;

[0013] ;

[0014] in, The maximum available normal load under velocity and dynamic pressure conditions. For flight speed, For dynamic pressure, For bank corner reduction factor, For the bank corner, Due to demand overload, It is the acceleration due to gravity. To flatten the radius;

[0015] Angle of attack setting: ,in, This is the stall critical value at the angle of attack. This is the safe threshold for the angle of attack.

[0016] Preferably, the multi-constraint coupled feasible region in step S2 is specifically a set of piecewise linear inequalities.

[0017] Preferably, the set of piecewise linear inequalities specifically includes:

[0018] ;

[0019] ;

[0020] ;

[0021] ;

[0022] in, For the currently available normal load, The maximum available normal load under the current velocity and dynamic pressure conditions. The maximum deflection angle of the actuator. To limit the maximum deflection angle of the elevator, The maximum deflection rate of the actuator. To limit the maximum deflection angle of the ailerons, Angle of attack.

[0023] Preferably, the weighted least squares method in step S2 is:

[0024] ;

[0025] ;

[0026] in, Executable instructions Input commands for the current flight status. For piecewise linear inequalities, For the set of feasible regions, For weighted matrices, For normal load weights, Elevator deflection weight, As the weight of the aileron deflection angle, and .

[0027] Preferably, in step S2, the multi-constraint coupled feasible region is pre-calculated and stored offline using a three-dimensional mesh. During flight, the feasible region boundary under the current state is obtained by looking up a table and using trilinear interpolation. The three-dimensional mesh data includes: velocity, angle of attack, and angle of repose.

[0028] Preferably, in step S2, the projection operator in the process of projecting the input command of the current flight state to the multi-constraint coupled feasible region using the weighted least squares method is solved by a closed-form solution or a small-scale quadratic programming.

[0029] Preferably, in step S3, the different types of responses based on the level of the executable instruction are as follows: the allowable level corresponds to the allowable level response, that is, the executable instruction is directly issued; the correction level corresponds to the correction level response, that is, the normal load, elevator deflection angle, and aileron deflection angle are corrected in order of weight level before the corrected executable instruction is issued; the blocking level corresponds to the blocking level response, that is, the current attitude is maintained or the safe mode is entered; wherein, when the correction level response or the blocking level response occurs, the correction reason or the blocking reason is fed back to the upper-level task planner.

[0030] A system employing a flight command feasible region projection and envelope protection method based on real-time aerodynamic constraints includes:

[0031] Flight status sampling module: used to collect flight speed, dynamic pressure, static pressure, angle of attack, angle of attack, control surface capability, and structural load estimation data of the current flight status;

[0032] Critical determination module: used to calculate the maximum available normal load and required overload based on the collected current flight status data, and to determine whether the maximum available normal load is less than the required overload or whether the angle of attack is not less than the angle of attack set value.

[0033] Feasible Domain Projection Module: Based on the constructed multi-constraint coupled feasible domain containing normal load constraints, control surface deflection angle constraints, and angle of attack constraints, it uses the weighted least squares method to project the input commands of the current flight state onto the multi-constraint coupled feasible domain, and outputs different levels of executable commands according to the projection situation;

[0034] Tiered Guardian Module: Used to provide different types of responses based on the level of the executable instruction.

[0035] Preferably, the feasible region projection module uses the weighted least squares method to project the input command of the current flight state to the projection operator in the multi-constraint coupled feasible region process through closed-form solution or small-scale quadratic programming.

[0036] The beneficial effects of this invention are as follows: By collecting flight speed, dynamic pressure, static pressure, angle of attack, angle of attack, control surface capability, and structural load estimation data of the current flight state, the maximum available normal load and required overload are calculated. It is then determined whether the maximum available normal load is less than the required overload or whether the angle of attack is not less than the set angle of attack value, ensuring reliable execution of leveling maneuvers within the available overload range. Based on the constructed multi-constraint coupled feasible region containing normal load constraints, control surface deflection angle constraints, and angle of attack constraints, the weighted least squares method is used to project the input commands of the current flight state onto the multi-constraint coupled feasible region, outputting different levels of executable commands according to the projection situation; avoiding the direct issuance of non-executable commands, reducing the accident risk coefficient. Different types of responses are performed according to the level of executable commands, achieving a balance between mission performance and flight safety. Through critical judgment and leveling protection, entering the stall angle of attack region is avoided, improving robustness and safety under extreme conditions. Attached Figure Description

[0037] Figure 1 This is a flowchart illustrating the method of the present invention;

[0038] Figure 2 This is the simulated speed-overload-pitch angle curve of a single test flight in Embodiment 1 of the present invention;

[0039] Figure 3 This is a schematic diagram of the angle-of-attack-normal load constraint in Embodiment 1 of the present invention;

[0040] Figure 4 This is a record of the pitch angle and airspeed of six dives in a single sortie in Embodiment 2 of the present invention;

[0041] Figure 5 This is a record of airspeed and pull-up overload for a single sortie of six dives in Embodiment 2 of the present invention;

[0042] Figure 6 This is a record of the pitch angle and elevator for six dives in a single sortie in Embodiment 2 of the present invention;

[0043] Figure 7 This is a record of attitude angles and rudder inputs for six dives in a single sortie, as shown in Embodiment 2 of the present invention.

[0044] Figure 8 This is a magnified detail of the maximum single flight speed of 400 km / h recorded in Embodiment 2 of the present invention (corresponding to a pitch angle of -60° and a 12g overload state).

[0045] Figure 9 This is a magnified detail of the maximum pitch angle recorded during a single flight in Embodiment 2 of the present invention (corresponding to 400 km / h and 12g overload conditions).

[0046] Figure 10 This is a magnified detail of the maximum overload record for a single flight in Embodiment 2 of the present invention (corresponding to 400 km / h and 60° pitch angle).

[0047] Figure 11 This is a schematic diagram of the system of the present invention. Detailed Implementation

[0048] The technical solutions of the present invention will be clearly and completely described below with reference to the accompanying drawings in the embodiments of the present invention.

[0049] like Figure 1 As shown, this invention discloses a method for projecting the feasible region of flight commands and protecting the flight envelope based on real-time aerodynamic constraints, comprising the following steps:

[0050] S1: Collect current flight speed, dynamic pressure, static pressure, angle of attack, angle of attack, control surface capability, and structural load estimation data; calculate the maximum available normal load and required overload; determine whether the maximum available normal load is less than the required overload or whether the angle of attack is not less than the set angle of attack value; if yes, proceed to step S2; if no, maintain the current state; specifically:

[0051] The formula for calculating the maximum available normal load and required overload is as follows:

[0052] ;

[0053] ;

[0054] in, The maximum available normal load under velocity and dynamic pressure conditions. The flight speed is calculated by combining dynamic and static pressure measurements with atmospheric density. This is dynamic pressure, which is measured by the airspeed tube. For bank corner reduction factor, The bank angle is calculated by the inertial measurement unit (IMU). Due to demand overload, It is the acceleration due to gravity. To flatten the radius;

[0055] Angle of attack setting: ,in, This is the stall critical value at the angle of attack. This is the safe threshold for the angle of attack.

[0056] S2: Based on the constructed multi-constraint coupled feasible region including normal load constraints, control surface deflection angle constraints, and angle of attack constraints, the weighted least squares method is used to project the input commands of the current flight state onto the multi-constraint coupled feasible region, and different levels of executable commands are output according to the projection. The multi-constraint coupled feasible region is pre-calculated and stored offline using a 3D mesh. During flight, the feasible region boundary under the current state is obtained through table lookup and trilinear interpolation. The 3D mesh data includes: velocity, angle of attack, and angle of attack. The projection operator in the process of projecting the input commands of the current flight state onto the multi-constraint coupled feasible region using the weighted least squares method is implemented through closed-form solution or small-scale quadratic programming. The multi-constraint coupled feasible region is specifically a set of piecewise linear inequalities, which specifically includes:

[0057] ;

[0058] ;

[0059] ;

[0060] ;

[0061] in, For the currently available normal load, The maximum available normal load under the current velocity and dynamic pressure conditions is obtained by looking up a table and structural design parameters. The maximum deflection angle of the actuator. To limit the maximum deflection angle of the elevator, The maximum deflection rate of the actuator. To limit the maximum deflection angle of the aileron, the maximum deflection angle and the maximum deflection rate of the actuator are estimated by the actuator specifications and real-time status. The angle of attack is estimated from the velocity direction and the aircraft attitude angle.

[0062] The weighted least squares method in step S2 is as follows:

[0063] ;

[0064] ;

[0065] in, Executable instructions Input commands for the current flight status. For piecewise linear inequalities, For the set of feasible regions, For weighted matrices, For normal load weights, Elevator deflection weight, As the weight of the aileron deflection angle, and .

[0066] S3: Responses vary depending on the level of the executable command. Specifically: The Permissive level corresponds to a Permissive response, which directly issues the executable command; the Correction level corresponds to a Correction response, which corrects the normal load, elevator deflection, and aileron deflection in order of weight before issuing the corrected executable command; the Blocking level corresponds to a Blocking response, which maintains the current attitude or enters a safe mode. When a Correction or Blocking level response occurs, the reason for the correction or the cause of the blockage is fed back to the upper-level task planner.

[0067] The specific technical effects of the wire protection device protected by this invention will be verified through two specific embodiments:

[0068] Example 1:

[0069] Its effectiveness in high-speed dive-and-flattening scenarios was verified through hardware-in-the-loop simulation and actual flight tests.

[0070] like Figure 1 As shown, this illustrates the typical trends in speed, G-force, and pitch angle during a single test flight. Figure 3As shown, the solid red line represents the structural limit overload (14g), the dashed black line represents the operational limit overload (10g), the dotted green line represents the recommended control target overload (8g), the blue vertical dashed line represents the design limit for angle of attack (20°), the cyan dotted line represents the angle of attack safety margin line (18°), the light blue area represents the operationally feasible region, and the light green area represents the recommended control region. Following the method of this invention, flight status data was collected, normal load was calculated, demand overload was calculated, and flight criticality was determined sequentially. When the protection mechanism was triggered, the guardian automatically lowered the command target, extended the leveling radius, and output the corrected command to avoid entering the stall zone. Finally, a schematic diagram of the angle of attack-normal load constraints was obtained. It can be seen that the test flight trajectories all fell within the recommended control region or the operationally feasible region, without reaching the structural limit, verifying the effectiveness and safety of the envelope guardian described in this invention under dual constraints of angle of attack and overload.

[0071] Example 2:

[0072] A phased speed strategy was adopted: the dive-pull speed was gradually increased (50→60→75→90m / s), and the following indicators were recorded at each stage: Correction rate: the proportion of external input commands corrected by the controller; Trajectory deviation: the deviation between the corrected trajectory and the original command trajectory; Safety events: whether risk events such as control surface saturation, structural over-limit, or angle-of-attack spikes occurred; the correction effect and safety at different speed stages were compared to verify the robustness of the controller under extreme conditions: the intervention effect of the controller on different state variables was recorded through multiple dive test flights.

[0073] like Figure 4 As shown, during six consecutive dives, the pitch angle and airspeed curves of the aircraft remained within a controllable range. The controller corrected external commands during the high-speed pull-up phase, resulting in smooth pitch angle changes and avoiding sharp angle-of-attack spikes caused by sudden command changes. The curves show that although the peak airspeed was close to the limit, it did not trigger a stall or overspeed risk, verifying the effectiveness of the projection operator.

[0074] like Figure 5 As shown, during the pull-up phase, the overload curve recorded a maximum of approximately 12g in airspeed and pull-up overload, but all remained within the structural design limits. The guard automatically corrected the command when the overload approached the upper limit, extending the pull-up radius to ensure structural safety. The curves show that the overload peak was effectively suppressed, and no over-limit events occurred, demonstrating the effectiveness of the criticality judgment and pull-up protection mechanisms.

[0075] like Figure 6As shown, the pitch angle and elevator records during execution, along with the elevator deflection curve, indicate that the actuator did not saturate under high-speed maneuvers. The guard device prevented excessive control surface deflection through projection correction, ensuring the continuity and executability of the control law. The consistency between pitch angle and control input changes demonstrates that longitudinal energy management was effectively guaranteed.

[0076] like Figure 7 As shown, the attitude angle and control force records during execution, along with the aileron control force curves, indicate that the guard allows for a certain trajectory deviation during lateral maneuvers, but it remains within an acceptable range. The aileron deflection angle did not exceed the set threshold, demonstrating that the priority-weighted projection strategy effectively balances structural safety and mission performance.

[0077] Overall effect: From Figures 4 to 7 The flight test records show that the invention can intervene in real time during high-speed dive and pull-out scenarios, avoiding risks such as control surface saturation, structural overreach, and angle-of-attack spikes. All curves show that the corrected commands maintain minimal deviation from the original commands, and the mission trajectory exhibits good continuity, verifying the safety, robustness, and engineering feasibility of the invention under extreme conditions.

[0078] Furthermore, the effectiveness of the protection mechanism was further verified through extreme speed, overload, and angle of attack details:

[0079] like Figure 8 As shown, based on the details of speed and pitch angle, when the speed approaches 400 km / h and the pitch angle reaches approximately -60°, the guard intervenes to correct external commands, ensuring a smooth pull-up process and avoiding angle-of-attack spikes. The curve shows that stall was not triggered even at the maximum speed, demonstrating the advantages of angle-of-attack protection.

[0080] like Figure 9 As shown, based on the pitch angle and overload details, the peak overload reaches approximately 12g during the phase of rapid pitch angle change, but remains within the structural design limit (14g). The protector, through projection correction to extend the flattening radius, suppresses further overload increases, demonstrating that this invention can ensure structural safety under extreme operating conditions.

[0081] like Figure 10 As shown, based on the details of overload and pitch angle, the curves indicate that during high-speed pull-up, the peak overload and pitch angle changes are synchronized, but no control surface saturation or structural overrun occurs. The tiered protection mechanism of the safeguard ensures command executability while maintaining trajectory continuity, demonstrating a balance between mission performance and flight safety.

[0082] Figures 8 to 10Note: A maximum overload of approximately 12g means that the aircraft is approaching its structural load limit under extreme maneuvers, but is still within a safe range. The envelope protector of this application effectively intervenes at this critical stage, preventing overload and angle-of-attack stall, and ensuring the safety and robustness of the aircraft under high-speed dive and flattening conditions at 400 km / h. This clearly demonstrates the advantages of this invention: maintaining controllable control surfaces, structural safety, and trajectory continuity under extreme speed and overload conditions.

[0083] The hardware platform used in this invention is a TMS320F28M35H52C (150MHz, approximately 150MIPS), with a flight control main cycle set to 10ms. The computational load of the projection operator on this platform mainly consists of constraint determination and small-scale linear algebra (not exceeding tens of thousands of scalar operations / cycles). Based on an estimated 150 MIPS, the average latency can be controlled within 0.3–0.8ms, with 99% latency less than 2ms, meeting real-time performance and inner-loop compatibility requirements. To ensure control stability and margin, the recommended acceptance criteria are: average latency <1ms, 99% latency <2ms; all of these indicators are significantly lower than the 10ms task cycle threshold, meeting real-time performance and compatibility requirements.

[0084] The above data are examples for verification purposes, intended to illustrate the engineering feasibility and safety effects of the present invention, and do not constitute a limitation on the scope of protection.

[0085] This invention collects flight speed, dynamic pressure, static pressure, angle of attack, angle of attack, control surface capability, and structural load estimation data of the current flight state. It calculates the maximum available normal load and required overload, and determines whether the maximum available normal load is less than the required overload or whether the angle of attack is not less than the set angle of attack value, ensuring reliable execution of leveling maneuvers within the available overload range. Based on a constructed multi-constraint coupled feasible region including normal load constraints, control surface deflection angle constraints, and angle of attack constraints, the weighted least squares method is used to project the input commands of the current flight state onto the multi-constraint coupled feasible region. Different levels of executable commands are output according to the projection, avoiding the direct issuance of non-executable commands and reducing the accident risk factor. Different types of responses are performed according to the level of executable commands, achieving a balance between mission performance and flight safety. Through criticality judgment and leveling protection, entry into the stall angle of attack region is avoided, improving robustness and safety under extreme conditions.

[0086] like Figure 11 As shown, this invention also discloses a system employing a flight command feasible region projection and envelope protection method based on real-time aerodynamic constraints, comprising:

[0087] Flight status sampling module: used to collect flight speed, dynamic pressure, static pressure, angle of attack, angle of attack, control surface capability, and structural load estimation data of the current flight status;

[0088] Critical determination module: used to calculate the maximum available normal load and required overload based on the collected current flight status data, and to determine whether the maximum available normal load is less than the required overload or whether the angle of attack is not less than the angle of attack set value.

[0089] The feasible region projection module is used to project the input commands of the current flight state onto the multi-constraint coupled feasible region based on the constructed multi-constraint coupled feasible region containing normal load constraints, control surface deflection angle constraints, and angle of attack constraints, using the weighted least squares method. It outputs executable commands of different levels according to the projection situation. Specifically, the projection operator in the process of projecting the input commands of the current flight state onto the multi-constraint coupled feasible region using the weighted least squares method is implemented by closed-form solution or small-scale quadratic programming.

[0090] Tiered Guardian Module: Used to provide different types of responses based on the level of the executable instruction.

[0091] 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.

Claims

1. A method for projecting the feasible region of flight commands and protecting the flight envelope based on real-time aerodynamic constraints, characterized in that, Includes the following steps: S1: Collect flight speed, dynamic pressure, static pressure, angle of attack, angle of attack, control surface capability, and structural load estimation data for the current flight status; calculate the maximum available normal load and required overload; determine whether the maximum available normal load is less than the required overload or whether the angle of attack is not less than the set angle of attack value; if yes, proceed to step S2; if no, maintain the current status. S2: Based on the constructed multi-constraint coupled feasible region containing normal load constraints, control surface deflection angle constraints and angle of attack constraints, the input commands of the current flight state are projected onto the multi-constraint coupled feasible region using the weighted least squares method, and different levels of executable commands are output according to the projection situation. S3: Provide different types of responses based on the level of the executable instruction.

2. The method for projecting the feasible region of flight commands and protecting the flight envelope based on real-time aerodynamic constraints according to claim 1, the specific formula for calculating the maximum available normal load and required overload in step S1 is as follows: ； ； in, The maximum available normal load under velocity and dynamic pressure conditions. For flight speed, For dynamic pressure, For bank corner reduction factor, For the bank corner, Due to demand overload, It is the acceleration due to gravity. To flatten the radius; Angle of attack setting: ,in, This is the stall critical value at the angle of attack. This is the safe threshold for the angle of attack.

3. The method for projecting the feasible region of flight commands and protecting the flight envelope based on real-time aerodynamic constraints according to claim 1, characterized in that, The multi-constraint coupled feasible region in step S2 is specifically a set of piecewise linear inequalities.

4. The method for projecting the feasible region of flight commands and protecting the flight envelope based on real-time aerodynamic constraints according to claim 3, characterized in that, The set of piecewise linear inequalities specifically includes: ； ； ； ； in, For the currently available normal load, The maximum available normal load under the current velocity and dynamic pressure conditions. The maximum deflection angle of the actuator. To limit the maximum deflection angle of the elevator, The maximum deflection rate of the actuator. To limit the maximum deflection angle of the ailerons, Angle of attack.

5. The method for projecting the feasible region of flight commands and protecting the flight envelope based on real-time aerodynamic constraints according to claim 4, characterized in that: The weighted least squares method in step S2 is as follows: ； ； in, Executable instructions Input commands for the current flight status. For piecewise linear inequalities, For the set of feasible regions, For weighted matrices, For normal load weights, Elevator deflection weight, As the weight of the aileron deflection angle, and .

6. The method for projecting the feasible region of flight commands and protecting the flight envelope based on real-time aerodynamic constraints according to claim 3, characterized in that: In step S2, the multi-constraint coupled feasible region is pre-calculated and stored offline using a three-dimensional mesh. During flight, the feasible region boundary under the current state is obtained by looking up a table and using trilinear interpolation. The three-dimensional mesh data includes: velocity, angle of attack, and angle of repose.

7. The method for projecting the feasible region of flight commands and protecting the flight envelope based on real-time aerodynamic constraints according to claim 6, characterized in that: In step S2, the weighted least squares method is used to project the input command of the current flight state onto the multi-constraint coupled feasible region. The projection operator in this process is solved by a closed-form solution or a small-scale quadratic programming.

8. The method for projecting the feasible region of flight commands and protecting the flight envelope based on real-time aerodynamic constraints according to claim 5, characterized in that: In step S3, the different types of responses based on the level of the executable command are as follows: the allowable level corresponds to the allowable level response, that is, the executable command is directly issued; the correction level corresponds to the correction level response, that is, the normal load, elevator deflection angle, and aileron deflection angle are corrected in order of weight level, and then the corrected executable command is issued; the blocking level corresponds to the blocking level response, that is, the current attitude is maintained or the safe mode is entered; wherein, when the correction level response or the blocking level response occurs, the correction reason or the blocking reason is fed back to the upper-level task planner.

9. A system employing the flight command feasible region projection and envelope protection method based on real-time aerodynamic constraints as described in any one of claims 1-8, characterized in that, include: Flight status sampling module: used to collect flight speed, dynamic pressure, static pressure, angle of attack, angle of attack, control surface capability, and structural load estimation data of the current flight status; Critical determination module: used to calculate the maximum available normal load and required overload based on the collected current flight status data, and to determine whether the maximum available normal load is less than the required overload or whether the angle of attack is not less than the angle of attack set value. Feasible Domain Projection Module: Based on the constructed multi-constraint coupled feasible domain containing normal load constraints, control surface deflection angle constraints, and angle of attack constraints, it uses the weighted least squares method to project the input commands of the current flight state onto the multi-constraint coupled feasible domain, and outputs different levels of executable commands according to the projection situation; Hierarchical Guardian Module: Used to respond to different types of commands according to their level.

10. The system according to claim 9, employing a flight command feasible region projection and envelope protection method based on real-time aerodynamic constraints, is characterized in that... The feasible region projection module uses the weighted least squares method to project the input commands of the current flight state to the feasible region. The projection operator in the multi-constraint coupled feasible region process is solved by closed-form solution or small-scale quadratic programming.

Images