Brake Actuator Sensor Error Compensation via Conformance Testing

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Aircraft braking systems are vulnerable to failure when a sensor fails, causing the entire system to become inoperable due to dependence on the faulty sensor, leading to over-driving or under-driving of electro-mechanical brake actuators.

Innovation Solution

Implementing a fault-tolerant system with a controller that performs conformance tests using Euclidean, medial least squares, and planar fits to identify and reject non-conforming inputs from sensors, allowing for compensation signals to adjust braking force and maintain system functionality even with sensor malfunctions.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Measurement precision

If the system uses sensor feedback for brake actuator control, then braking precision is improved, but system reliability deteriorates when sensor failure occurs

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvebraking precisionVSAvoidsystem reliability
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary conformance tests on sensor inputs using Euclidean, medial least squares, and planar fits to establish expected relationships between multiple sensors before actual braking operation. This preliminary validation creates a baseline for detecting sensor failures during operation, allowing the system to maintain reliability while using sensor feedback for precision control.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system implements continuous feedback by polling multiple sensors (current, position, force) and using conformance tests to validate their relationships. When sensor feedback is received, the controller checks if the inputs conform to expected physical relationships, accepting valid feedback for precision control while rejecting inconsistent feedback that indicates sensor failure, thus maintaining both precision and reliability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

2Measurement precision

If the system polls multiple sensor inputs for feedback, then measurement accuracy is improved, but computational complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemeasurement accuracyVSAvoidcomputational complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system segments the computational task into distinct conformance test modules: Euclidean fit calculations, medial least squares fit calculations, and planar fit calculations. Each test processes sensor inputs independently to check specific relationships, allowing the controller to systematically validate multiple sensors without overwhelming computational complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The conformance tests act as intermediaries between raw sensor inputs and control decisions. Rather than directly processing all sensor data for control, the system uses these mathematical tests as intermediary validation steps to filter and verify sensor relationships, reducing the computational burden on the main control algorithm while maintaining measurement accuracy.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

3Reliability

If the system rejects non-conforming sensor inputs, then system reliability is improved, but loss of information increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesystem reliabilityVSAvoidsensor data loss
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of information

Solution Approach 1:

The system changes the parameters of sensor inputs by applying mathematical transformations through conformance tests (Euclidean, medial least squares, planar fits). These transformations reveal the relationships between sensors and identify which inputs deviate from expected physical relationships, allowing the system to reject only the specific parameter values that are inconsistent rather than losing all sensor information.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The conformance test framework serves multiple functions simultaneously: it validates sensor relationships, identifies failed sensors, provides compensation signals for borderline cases, and maintains system reliability. This multi-functionality allows the system to reject only the minimum necessary information (non-conforming inputs) while using the same computational framework for multiple purposes, minimizing information loss.

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

Data Source

PatentEP3187385B1System and method for brake actuator operation sensor error compensation
Publication Date: 2020.10.14 GOODRICH CORP
  • EP3187385B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP3187385B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP3187385B1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

The present disclosure provides systems and methods for brake actuator operation sensor error compensation. In various embodiments, a system for brake actuator operation sensor error compensation determines the existence of potential sensor errors and compensates for the effects of such errors.