Hybrid Flight Control System with Segmented Natural Feedback

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Large and fast aircraft require more forceful control than manual systems can provide, leading to complexity and failure risks in mechanical and fully powered systems, with a lack of natural feedback and inadequate fault tolerance.

Innovation Solution

A flight control system with independent segments, where one segment is mechanically linked to the operator for feedback and the others are powered by servo actuators controlled by a computing device, allowing for both manual and computer-assisted control with redundant pathways for fault tolerance.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If manual mechanical linkages are used to control flight surfaces, then natural feedback to the operator is provided, but the system has poor failure tolerance and requires redundant load paths

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvefailure toleranceVSAvoidredundant load paths
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The control surface is divided into multiple independent segments that can be controlled by different systems. This segmentation allows the manual mechanical linkage to control one segment while powered actuators control other segments, providing redundancy without requiring complete duplication of the mechanical linkage system.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

A computing device serves as an intermediary between the operator's manual inputs and the powered servo actuators. The computing device receives input from the manual control system, processes it, and commands the powered actuators to move the control surface segments, thereby providing failure tolerance without direct mechanical redundancy.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Force

If powered control systems are used to provide additional force for larger aircraft, then manual control capability is enhanced, but natural force feedback to the operator is lost

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecontrol surface forceVSAvoidnatural force feedback
Core Design Contradiction:
ForceVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

By dividing the control surface into segments controlled by different systems, the patent preserves the natural force feedback pathway for the manually controlled segment while using powered actuators to provide additional force through other segments. This allows the operator to feel aerodynamic forces through the mechanical linkage while the powered segments provide the necessary force augmentation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent merges manual mechanical control with powered actuation in a hybrid system. The manual mechanical linkage provides natural feedback for one segment while powered actuators control other segments, combining the benefits of both systems without eliminating the natural feedback pathway.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #5Merging (Combining)

3Power

If fully powered control systems are implemented, then control capability for large aircraft is sufficient, but system complexity and dependency on power sources increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecontrol capabilityVSAvoidpower source dependency
Core Design Contradiction:
PowerVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The control surface is segmented so that one portion is controlled by simple manual mechanical linkages that are independent of power sources, while other portions are controlled by powered actuators. This segmentation reduces overall system complexity and eliminates complete dependency on power sources, as the manual segment can still provide control capability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The manual mechanical linkage segment serves as a backup or cushion against complete system failure. In the event of power source failure, the manual mechanical segment ensures that control capability is not completely lost, providing a safety margin beforehand.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #11Beforehand cushioning (Prior cushioning)

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 system reduces manual control requirements, enhances performance, and provides natural feedback while ensuring continued safe flight and landing capabilities by distributing control authority across independent parallel systems, reducing mechanical linkage failures and power dependency.

Implementation Method 1

The aerodynamic forces acting on the flight control surface are transmitted by the mechanical linkage to the operator's control means, and felt by the operator

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectAerodynamic forces: Drag

Implementation Method 2

A signal is sent from the computing device to a servo actuator, which in turn, moves a segment of the flight control surface to the desired position

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectElectromagnetic conversion: Electromagnetic Induction

Data Source

PatentUS8380364B2Manual and computerized flight control system with natural feedback
Publication Date: 2013.02.19 TEXTRON INNOVATIONS INC
  • US8380364B2 patent drawing
  • US8380364B2 patent drawing
  • US8380364B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A system and method for a controlling an aircraft with flight control surfaces that are controlled both manually and by a computing device is disclosed. The present invention improves overall flight control operation by reducing the mechanical flight control surface components while providing sufficient back-up control capability in the event of either a mechanical or power-related failure. Through the present invention, natural feedback is provided to the operator from the mechanical flight control surface which operates independent of computer-aided flight control surfaces.