Aircraft Control Surface Actuator Voting for Fast Median Selection

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current flight control systems face challenges in determining control signals for actuators with a large number of redundant values, as existing algorithms require multiple execution steps and memory storage, leading to delays and complexity in visual programming representation.

Innovation Solution

A voter system with N inputs is implemented using a module to determine two intermediate values from a subset of 2×p values, comprising a set of voters with 2×p−1 inputs and sub-modules for maximum and minimum value determination, allowing representation in a single execution step and reducing memory storage needs.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Measurement precision

If sorting algorithms are used to produce a voter with N inputs greater than 3, then the median value can be determined, but intermediate results must be stored in memory requiring multiple execution steps which causes delays

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemedian value determinationVSAvoidexecution delay
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the voter function into multiple sub-voters with fewer inputs each. Instead of sorting all N inputs simultaneously (which requires memory storage), the system divides inputs into groups, processes each group through separate sub-voters to produce intermediate results, then combines these results. This segmentation eliminates the need for storing intermediate results in memory while still determining the median value correctly.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent performs preliminary actions by pre-processing subsets of inputs through sub-voters before the final median determination. The sub-voters compute intermediate values from input subsets in advance, and these pre-computed values are then used in the final voting step. This preliminary processing allows the system to avoid memory storage requirements while maintaining accurate median calculation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

2Measurement precision

If sorting algorithms are used to produce a voter with N inputs greater than 3, then the median value can be determined, but the representation using visual programming language becomes complex making it difficult to read

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemedian value determinationVSAvoidvisual programming complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the complex voter representation into multiple simpler sub-voter representations in the visual programming language. Each sub-voter handles a manageable subset of inputs, making individual representations simple and readable. The overall complex voting function is represented as a composition of these simple sub-voter blocks, maintaining readability while achieving the required functionality.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements a nested structure where sub-voters are nested within the main voter representation. The visual programming language representation shows sub-voters as nested functional blocks, where each sub-voter processes a subset of inputs and feeds results to the next level. This nesting organizes the complexity hierarchically, making the overall system easier to visualize and understand compared to a flat sorting algorithm representation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #7Nested doll (Nesting)

3Reliability

If a greater number of redundant values (5 or 7 or more) are used for parameters, then the parameter measurement availability and reliability are improved, but the processor time and computational resources required increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveparameter measurement availabilityVSAvoidprocessor time
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSUse of energy by moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the processing of N input values into multiple parallel sub-voter operations, each handling a subset of inputs. This segmentation allows the system to process more input values (improving reliability) without proportionally increasing processor time, because the segmented operations can be executed more efficiently than a single comprehensive sorting operation. The computational complexity is distributed across multiple simpler operations.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent applies partial action by having sub-voters process subsets of inputs rather than all inputs simultaneously. Each sub-voter performs a partial voting operation on its subset, and these partial results are then combined. This partial processing approach allows the system to handle a greater total number of inputs (improving reliability) while keeping the computational burden of each individual operation manageable, thus controlling overall processor time usage.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Data Source

PatentUS11866154B2System and method for controlling an actuator for a control surface of an aircraft
Publication Date: 2024.01.09 AIRBUS OPERATIONS (SAS)
  • US11866154B2 patent drawing
  • US11866154B2 patent drawing
  • US11866154B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A system and method for controlling an actuator for a control surface of an aircraft includes a processing unit configured for acquiring a set of N values of the same parameter, N being equal to 2×p or to 2×p+1, p being an integer greater than or equal to 2, and determining a voted value of the parameter by a voter (15) with N inputs. The voter with N inputs includes a module for determining two intermediate values from among the values of a subset of 2×p values of the set of N values of the parameter, this module including at least p+1 voters with 2×p−1 inputs, receiving as input distinct subsets of 2×p−1 inputs of the subset of 2×p inputs, two sub-modules for determining a maximum value and a minimum value, respectively, each receiving as input the outputs of the various voters with 2×p−1 inputs and delivering as output the two intermediate values.