Flying Wing Control via Sensor-Model Switching

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current flying wing control systems are prone to mechanical fatigue, high costs, and reduced reliability due to the use of numerous mechanical and electrical components and sensors exposed to harsh environments, leading to imprecise control and increased maintenance needs.

Innovation Solution

A method that controls a flying wing along a predetermined trajectory using a fluid stream, minimizing sensor input by switching from sensor feedback to model feedback after a predetermined distance, reducing noise and mechanical stress on control surfaces, and utilizing robust, low-noise sensors for accurate positioning and heading adjustments.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If traditional sensor feedback control is used continuously, then control precision may be maintained, but sensor noise causes mechanical fatigue and increased wear on control surfaces

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecontrol surface durabilityVSAvoidposition control accuracy
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSMeasurement precision

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements periodic switching between sensor feedback mode and model feedback mode. The controller alternates between using actual sensor measurements and predicted model values, thereby reducing the impact of continuous sensor noise on control surfaces while maintaining acceptable control accuracy through periodic model updates.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #19Periodic action

Solution Approach 2:

The patent introduces a model-based prediction mechanism as an intermediary between the sensor feedback and control surface actuation. This model acts as a buffer that filters sensor noise while preserving essential control information, reducing mechanical fatigue on control surfaces.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Measurement precision

If more sensors are used to improve measurement accuracy, then control precision improves, but system complexity and cost increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveposition and heading measurement accuracyVSAvoidsensor system complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces physical sensors with a mathematical model-based measurement system. Instead of using additional physical sensors to measure position and heading, the system uses a dynamic model that predicts these parameters based on control inputs and fluid stream characteristics, thereby reducing hardware complexity while maintaining measurement capability.

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

Solution Approach 2:

The system uses its own control inputs and dynamic model to generate position and heading information, rather than relying on external sensors. The model serves the measurement function that would otherwise require additional sensing hardware.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

3Reliability

If model feedback is used exclusively, then sensor noise is eliminated, but control accuracy deteriorates due to model deviations

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecontrol surface wear reductionVSAvoidtrajectory control accuracy
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSMeasurement precision

Solution Approach 1:

The patent employs periodic switching between sensor feedback and model feedback modes. During sensor feedback mode, actual measurements correct model deviations. During model feedback mode, sensor noise is eliminated. This periodic alternation ensures both control accuracy and reliability are maintained.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #19Periodic action

Solution Approach 2:

The system uses feedback from actual sensor measurements to update and correct the model predictions. When sensor data is available and reliable, it feeds back to adjust the model state, ensuring the model remains accurate while still providing noise filtering during model-only operation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Applied Scientific Principles

This section explains which scientific principles are used to turn an abstract innovation direction into a practical engineering solution.

Function Achieved in This Case

This approach enhances the robustness and reliability of the flying wing, reduces maintenance costs, and improves energy generation efficiency by minimizing unnecessary sensor noise and control surface wear, while maintaining precise control and optimal positioning.

Implementation Method 1

a flying wing (2) arranged to be controlled to move along a predetermined trajectory by means of a fluid stream (10) passing the wing (3)

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectLift force: Aerofoil

Data Source

PatentEP2932090B1Method and system for controlling a flying wing
Publication Date: 2020.10.14 MINESTO
  • EP2932090B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP2932090B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP2932090B1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

The invention relates to a method for control of a flying wing (2). The flying wing (2) is arranged to be controlled to move along a predetermined trajectory (12) by means of a fluid stream (10) passing a wing of the flying wing. The flying wing comprises at least one control surface (7) for controlling the movement of the flying wing (2) along the predetermined trajectory (12). The flying wing (2) is positioned in a reference frame where the x-axis is directed horizontally along a level L above which the flying wing (2) moves, the y-axis is perpendicular to the x-axis in a vertical direction and the z-axis is perpendicular to the x-axis along the level L in a direction along the principal direction of the fluid stream (10). The invention further relates to a system (1) comprising a flying wing (2) and a computer-readable medium for use with a flying wing (2).