Aircraft Network Architecture Segmentation for Wiring Weight Reduction
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Current aircraft network architectures require lengthy testing for airworthiness certification due to interwoven hub and spoke topologies with long wiring runs, high wire weight, and high I/O density, complicating LRU designs and necessitating additional switches, while mission systems undergo rapid change cycles.
Innovation Solution
A high availability aircraft network architecture is introduced, dividing the aircraft into districts with separate mission systems (MS) and air vehicle systems (AVS) networks, using smart points of presence (SPoP) to create distinct yet interconnected networks with adaptable I/O and power components, allowing for flexible topology configurations and reduced wiring.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If interwoven hub and spoke topologies are used to connect mission systems and air vehicle systems, then network connectivity is achieved, but wiring length and weight increase significantly
Solution Approach 1:
The aircraft network is segmented into separate mission systems (MS) network and air vehicle systems (AVS) network, each with its own hub and spoke topology. This segmentation eliminates the need for interwoven connections between systems, reducing overall wiring length and weight while maintaining full connectivity within each network domain.
2Weight of stationary object
If separate MS and AVS networks are created, then wiring weight is reduced, but network complexity increases due to interconnection requirements
Solution Approach 1:
Network bridges serve as intermediary devices that connect the MS network and AVS network. These bridges simplify the interconnection architecture by providing standardized interface points, eliminating the need for complex direct interweaving between individual components of different systems, and reducing overall network topology complexity.
3Area of stationary object
If long wiring runs are used in hub and spoke topologies, then network coverage is extended, but I/O density at hubs increases and LRU designs are complicated
Solution Approach 1:
The network is divided into separate MS and AVS domains, each with dedicated hubs serving specific functional areas. This segmentation concentrates I/O connections within each domain's hubs, preventing the accumulation of high I/O density at centralized intersystem hubs, and simplifying LRU designs by reducing the number of interconnections required.
4Reliability
If interwoven architectures are used, then airworthiness certification is achieved, but testing time increases due to system interdependencies
Solution Approach 1:
The separation of MS and AVS networks into independent but interoperable systems allows for modular certification testing. Each network can be tested and certified independently according to its specific requirements, eliminating the need for exhaustive end-to-end testing of all interwoven paths, thereby significantly reducing total testing time while maintaining airworthiness certification.
Data Source
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
AI summary
A high availability aircraft network architecture incorporating smart points of presence (SPoP) is disclosed. In embodiments, the network architecture divides the aircraft into districts (102), or physical subdivisions. Each district includes one or more mission systems (MS) smart network access point (SNAP) devices for connecting MS components and devices located within its district to the MS network. Similarly, each district includes one or more air vehicle systems (AVS) SNAP devices for connecting AVS components and devices within the district to the AVS network. The AVS network may remain in a star or hub-and-spoke topology, while the MS network may be configured in a ring or mesh topology. Selected MS and AVS SNAP devices may be connected to each other via guarded network bridges to securely interconnect the MS and AVS networks.