Aircraft Route Forecasting With HMM for Maintenance Scheduling

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current methods for predicting aircraft engine component failures lack accuracy in capturing non-linearity and seasonality, leading to inadequate maintenance scheduling and inventory management.

Innovation Solution

A method utilizing a Hidden Markov Model (HMM) and bootstrapping procedure to forecast aircraft operational data, building a transition probability matrix from historical flight data and applying it to predict future sensor parameters, ensuring accurate maintenance scheduling and inventory management.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Measurement precision

If traditional linear prediction methods are used for aircraft component failure prediction, then the prediction process is simple, but the accuracy in capturing non-linearity and seasonality is insufficient

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveprediction accuracyVSAvoidmodel complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies dynamic modeling by using Hidden Markov Models to capture the non-linear and seasonal variations in aircraft component degradation. The HMM dynamically adapts to changing operational conditions and flight patterns, allowing the prediction system to respond to varying stress conditions rather than assuming constant degradation rates. This resolves the contradiction by introducing dynamic complexity that accurately captures real-world non-linear behavior.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The patent changes the parameters of the prediction model by incorporating multiple state variables and transition probabilities in the HMM framework. Instead of using simple linear parameters, the model uses state transition matrices and emission probabilities that can capture complex seasonal patterns and non-linear degradation. This parameter transformation enables accurate prediction of non-linear trends while maintaining a structured modeling approach.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

2Reliability

If accurate prediction of component failures is achieved through complex models, then maintenance scheduling is improved, but computational resources and processing time increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecomponent reliabilityVSAvoidprocessing time
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent performs preliminary action by pre-computing the transition probability matrices and state models during periods when computational resources are abundant. The HMM parameters are trained offline using historical flight data, and these pre-computed models are then applied for real-time prediction with minimal processing time. This resolves the contradiction by separating the computationally intensive model training from the time-sensitive prediction phase.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The patent applies partial action by focusing computational efforts on predicting only the critical failure modes and high-risk components rather than analyzing all possible failure scenarios. The HMM model prioritizes prediction for components with limited lifetime and high failure consequences, allocating computational resources efficiently to where they provide the most value for reliability improvement.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

3Reliability

If periodic servicing is scheduled based on limited lifetime prediction, then component failure is prevented, but unnecessary maintenance may occur reducing productivity

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecomponent reliabilityVSAvoidmaintenance efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements feedback by continuously updating the HMM predictions with actual flight data and component performance measurements. The system compares predicted degradation trajectories with actual sensor readings and adjusts maintenance scheduling accordingly. This feedback mechanism prevents unnecessary maintenance by only scheduling service when the predicted reliability threshold is approached, rather than following fixed periodic intervals. This resolves the contradiction by making maintenance decisions based on actual component condition predictions rather than conservative time-based scheduling.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The patent applies dynamic maintenance scheduling by adjusting service intervals based on real-time predictions of component degradation rates. Instead of fixed periodic maintenance, the system dynamically determines when maintenance is actually needed based on the HMM-predicted failure probabilities and operational conditions. This dynamic approach prevents unnecessary maintenance activities while ensuring reliability, resolving the contradiction between over-maintenance and under-maintenance.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Data Source

PatentEP4432188A1Systems, methods, and storage media for forecasting aircraft operation data
Publication Date: 2024.09.18 GENERAL ELECTRIC CO
  • EP4432188A1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP4432188A1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP4432188A1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

A method of forecasting operation data of an aircraft includes receiving, by a computer system, historical flight data (104) of the aircraft, the historical flight data (104) including historical departure and arrival airports, and historical period of flight occurrence, calculating a transition probability matrix (106) based on the historical flight data (104), determining, based on the transition probability (106), using a hidden Markov model (HMM) (108), forecasted arrival airports, and time of arrival of the aircraft to the arrival airports to build a forecasted sequence of future routes (110), receiving, past aircraft sensor parameters (115), calculating, using a bootstrapping procedure (114) based on the past aircraft sensor parameters (115) and the forecasted sequence of future routes (110), forecast future aircraft operational data (116), and determining, based on the forecast future aircraft operational data (116), a maintenance schedule of one or more systems of the aircraft to prevent failure of the one or more system.