Aircraft Navigation Integrity Budget Optimization
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Existing navigation methods for low-altitude aircraft do not optimize the total budget allocated to position and guiding errors, leading to frequent alarms and increased risk during tricky operations where ground controls are unavailable, as they rely on a single integrity risk for both errors.
Innovation Solution
The method calculates two budgets for position errors at different integrity risks, comparing protection ranges at these risks to optimize the total budget and reduce unnecessary alarms, allowing for safer navigation by considering two integrity risks for sizing the budgets allocated to position and guiding errors.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Device complexity
If a single integrity risk is used to calculate both position error budget and guiding error budget, then the calculation is simple, but the total budget is not optimized leading to frequent unnecessary alarms
Solution Approach 1:
The patent segments the integrity risk assessment into two distinct levels: a first integrity risk (e.g., 10^-7 per hour) for calculating the position error budget, and a second integrity risk (e.g., 10^-4 per hour) for calculating the guiding error budget. This segmentation allows each budget to be optimized for its specific safety requirements, preventing unnecessary alarms while maintaining navigation safety.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent changes the parameter of integrity risk from a single value to two distinct values. By using a first integrity risk for position error and a second, higher integrity risk for guiding error, the system optimizes the total budget allocation. This parameter change enables the position error budget to be larger (reducing false alarms) while the guiding error budget remains appropriately constrained (maintaining safety).
2Reliability
If a weak integrity risk is selected to ensure safety, then the protection range is large, but the budget allocated to position error must be large to prevent frequent alarms, increasing the total budget
Solution Approach 1:
The patent segments the integrity risk into two levels: a first integrity risk (e.g., 10^-7 per hour) that ensures safety for the position error budget, and a second integrity risk (e.g., 10^-4 per hour) that allows a smaller, more efficient budget allocation for guiding error. This segmentation resolves the contradiction by allowing the position error budget to be optimized for safety while the guiding error budget is optimized for efficiency.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent changes the integrity risk parameter from a single weak value to two distinct values. By using a first integrity risk for position error and a second, higher integrity risk for guiding error, the system reduces the total budget required. The position error budget maintains safety with the weaker risk, while the guiding error budget uses the stronger risk to reduce its allocation, optimizing the total budget.
3Reliability
If the protection range exceeds the budget allocated to position error, then an alarm is triggered to ensure safety, but this leads to frequent alarms during tricky operations, reducing operational efficiency
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies local quality by differentiating the integrity risk requirements for different error types. Position error uses a first integrity risk (e.g., 10^-7 per hour) requiring stricter monitoring, while guiding error uses a second integrity risk (e.g., 10^-4 per hour) allowing more flexibility. This local differentiation reduces false alarms during tricky operations while maintaining safety monitoring where critical.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent changes the monitoring parameters by using two distinct integrity risks instead of one. The first integrity risk for position error maintains strict safety monitoring, while the second integrity risk for guiding error reduces false alarms during operational challenges. This parameter differentiation resolves the contradiction between safety monitoring and operational efficiency.
Data Source
AI summary
A method and device for aiding the navigation of an aircraft flying at low altitude as described. The device (1) includes positioning means (2) generating the current position of the aircraft, and calculation means (4) for detecting when the budgets allocated to a position error of the aircraft are exceeded by protection ranges.