Automated Flight Control Actuator Diagnostics via CBM

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Conventional aircraft diagnostic systems require time-consuming disassembly and visual inspections, risking foreign object damage and necessitating skilled mechanics, which increases maintenance costs, downtime, and safety risks.

Innovation Solution

A diagnostic system that utilizes the existing flight control system to assess mechanical flight control components for functionality and structural integrity without disassembly, using a portable Condition-Based Monitor (CBM) to interface with aircraft systems, perform tests, and analyze data for friction and backlash issues, reducing the need for skilled labor and minimizing risks.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If conventional visual inspection methods are used, then structural integrity can be checked, but the process requires time-consuming disassembly and increases risk of foreign object damage

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvestructural integrity verificationVSAvoidmaintenance downtime
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces mechanical disassembly and visual inspection with an automated electronic diagnostic system that interfaces with the aircraft's existing flight control computer. The system uses software algorithms to command and monitor flight control components, eliminating the need for physical disassembly while maintaining inspection reliability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent introduces a portable computer with diagnostic software as an intermediary between the inspector and the flight control system. This intermediary communicates with the aircraft's flight control computer through standardized interfaces, enabling remote assessment of component health without direct physical access to internal components.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Reliability

If disassembly is performed to access flight control components, then inspection can be conducted, but foreign object damage risk increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecomponent functionality assessmentVSAvoidforeign object damage risk
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces mechanical disassembly with electronic diagnostics. The system commands flight control components through the existing flight control computer and monitors their responses, allowing full functionality assessment without physical access to internal components, thereby eliminating foreign object damage risks entirely.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Solution Approach 2:

The flight control components are made to self-diagnose by responding to commands from the diagnostic system. The components perform their own functional assessments under software control, providing data about their health status without requiring external physical intervention or disassembly.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

3Measurement precision

If skilled mechanics perform inspections, then accurate assessment is achieved, but labor costs and complexity increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvediagnostic accuracyVSAvoidinspection process complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces skilled human mechanics with an automated diagnostic system using a portable computer and specialized software. The system automatically commands flight control components, collects response data, and analyzes results using algorithms, eliminating the need for highly trained inspectors while maintaining or improving diagnostic accuracy.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Solution Approach 2:

The diagnostic system implements closed-loop feedback by commanding flight control components and monitoring their responses. The system compares actual component behavior against expected performance criteria, automatically identifying deviations that indicate potential failures, thereby achieving accurate assessment without human interpretation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

4Reliability

If traditional inspection procedures are used, then component health can be evaluated, but maintenance costs and aircraft downtime increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveflight control functionalityVSAvoidmaintenance efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces traditional mechanical inspection procedures with automated electronic diagnostics. The portable system interfaces with the flight control computer to rapidly assess component health, reducing inspection time from hours of disassembly to minutes of electronic testing, thereby dramatically improving maintenance productivity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Solution Approach 2:

The diagnostic system performs preliminary assessments of flight control component health before failures occur. By continuously monitoring component responses to commanded movements, the system can identify developing issues early, allowing proactive maintenance scheduling that minimizes aircraft downtime and prevents catastrophic failures.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Data Source

PatentEP2749979B1Automated diagnostic inspection of mechanical controls
Publication Date: 2016.04.20 BELL HELICOPTER TEXTRON INC
  • EP2749979B1 patent drawingFigure 1~2
  • EP2749979B1 patent drawingFigure 3
  • EP2749979B1 patent drawingFigure 4

AI summary

A system (301) and method to diagnosis an actuator (401, 403, 405) of a flight control system (309a, 309b). The system (301) and method includes interfacing a diagnostic computer (303, 305) to the flight control system (309a, 309b), commanding movement of an actuator (401, 403, 405) with the diagnostic computer (303, 305) via the flight control system, measuring performance of the actuator (401, 403, 405) via the diagnostic computer (303, 305), and comparing the measured performance of the actuator (401, 403, 405) with allowable performance values.