Aircraft Component Switching Using Scenario-Based Control

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Conventional aircraft systems lack the ability to selectively choose between primary and secondary components based on specific scenario data, leading to suboptimal performance during varying operational conditions, as they primarily rely on redundancy rather than scenario-specific component selection.

Innovation Solution

A controller utilizing a machine learning model to receive scenario data and select between primary and secondary sets of components to perform aircraft system functions, considering factors like component state, service life, wear, and performance capability, as well as environmental conditions, to tailor the system's operation to the specific scenario.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If conventional aircraft systems use primary components for normal operations with secondary components as backup, then system reliability is maintained through redundancy, but system performance is not optimized for specific operational scenarios

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesystem reliabilityVSAvoidscenario-specific performance
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The system dynamically selects between primary and secondary components based on real-time scenario data and operational conditions. The controller continuously monitors parameters such as component wear, environmental conditions, and operational requirements to determine the most appropriate component set, transforming a static redundancy system into a dynamic adaptive system that optimizes performance for each specific scenario.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes operational parameters by switching between different component sets based on varying conditions. The controller evaluates multiple parameters including component service life, wear levels, environmental factors, and scenario-specific requirements to determine when to switch from primary to secondary components, thereby adapting system characteristics to match optimal performance requirements for each scenario.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

2Ease of operation

If aircraft systems always use the primary set of components, then system operation is simplified, but component lifespan is reduced and maintenance needs increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesystem operation simplicityVSAvoidcomponent lifespan
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSDuration of action of stationary object

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary evaluation of component status and scenario requirements before selecting which component set to use. The controller assesses component wear, service life, and operational conditions in advance, allowing it to proactively switch between primary and secondary components to distribute usage and extend overall system lifespan while maintaining operational simplicity through automated decision-making.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

3Productivity

If aircraft systems implement scenario-based component selection, then system performance is optimized for specific conditions, but system complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesystem performanceVSAvoidsystem complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The controller is designed with multi-functionality to handle both primary and secondary component sets within a single unified system. Rather than requiring separate control systems for each component set, the universal controller can manage either set based on scenario requirements, thereby optimizing performance while minimizing the increase in system complexity through consolidated control architecture.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

4Duration of action of stationary object

If aircraft systems use secondary components more frequently, then primary component lifespan is extended, but system reliability during normal operations may be compromised

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveprimary component lifespanVSAvoidnormal operation reliability
Core Design Contradiction:
Duration of action of stationary objectVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system implements feedback mechanisms where the controller continuously monitors component performance, wear, and operational status. Based on this feedback, the system makes informed decisions about when to switch between primary and secondary components, ensuring that secondary components are used in scenarios where they can perform optimally while preserving primary components for scenarios where they provide superior reliability, thus extending lifespan without compromising normal operation reliability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentEP4074559B1An aircraft system
Publication Date: 2024.12.11 AIRBUS OPERATIONS LTD
  • EP4074559B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP4074559B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP4074559B1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

Disclosed is an aircraft system having a first set of components for performing a function of the aircraft system, and a second, alternative, set of components for performing the function of the aircraft system. The aircraft system has and a controller configured to receive scenario data indicative of a scenario during which the function of the aircraft system is to be performed, and, where each of the first and second sets of components are operational, the controller is configured to select between the first or the second set of components to perform the aircraft system function during the scenario based on the received scenario data. The controller is configured to control the selected set of components to perform the function during the scenario.