Aircraft Control Surface Jamming Detection Without Extra Sensors
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Existing aircraft control surface feedback control systems struggle to detect jamming issues quickly and accurately, which can lead to adverse consequences such as non-compliance with ETOPS regulations and increased structural loads, especially since current methods require additional sensors and are not robust enough to handle minor jamming effectively.
Innovation Solution
A method and device that automatically detect jamming in aircraft control surfaces by calculating a comparison signal from the difference between control instructions and actual positions, comparing it to a threshold value, and confirming the jamming within a specified period, without the need for additional sensors, allowing for swift action to prevent adverse consequences.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If additional sensors are installed to detect control surface jamming, then detection reliability is improved, but device complexity and cost increase
Solution Approach 1:
The control surface system uses its own existing sensors (position sensors and actuation instruction signals) to detect jamming conditions. The system monitors itself by comparing the relationship between control instructions and actual position changes, eliminating the need for separate detection sensors. This self-diagnosis approach improves reliability while avoiding additional hardware complexity.
Solution Approach 2:
Existing sensors in the control surface system are made multi-functional by using them both for normal position feedback control and for jamming detection. The position sensors that already exist in the system are repurposed to detect abnormal conditions, making the detection system universal rather than requiring dedicated sensors.
2Measurement precision
If detection threshold is set low to detect minor jamming, then detection precision is improved, but false detection rate increases
Solution Approach 1:
The system continuously monitors the relationship between control instructions and position changes in real-time. By establishing a feedback loop that compares expected position changes (based on control instructions) with actual position changes, the system can dynamically adjust detection sensitivity and distinguish between normal variations and actual jamming conditions, reducing false detections while maintaining high sensitivity.
Solution Approach 2:
The system pre-establishes the relationship between control instructions and expected position changes before detecting jamming. By having this reference model ready in advance, the system can accurately compare actual performance against expected behavior, enabling precise detection of deviations without triggering false alarms from normal operational variations.
3Reliability
If detection response time is extended to confirm jamming, then false detection is reduced, but response speed decreases
Solution Approach 1:
The system performs periodic monitoring of the control surface position and control instruction relationship at predetermined time intervals. This periodic sampling allows the system to accumulate evidence over time to confirm jamming conditions, reducing false detections while maintaining relatively fast response through efficient periodic rather than continuous monitoring.
Solution Approach 2:
The system pre-defines confirmation criteria and time thresholds for jamming detection before operation. By having these decision rules established in advance, the system can quickly evaluate whether detected anomalies meet the criteria for confirmed jamming, enabling fast response when true jamming occurs while maintaining reliability through pre-established validation rules.
Data Source
AI summary
The detection device includes, but is not limited to a device that is configured to determine a control error corresponding to the difference between a first control instruction and a control surface position, a second device that is configured to calculate the difference between this control error and a second control instruction in such a way as to form a comparison signal, and a third device that is configured to detect a jamming of the control surface if this comparison signal is greater than a threshold value.