Vehicle Dynamics Model Optimization via Numerical Tuning

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

The development of accurate vehicle simulation models, particularly for helicopters, is complex and time-consuming due to the lack of comprehensive theories governing flight mechanics, requiring iterative tuning processes that are labor-intensive and often rely on brute-force methods, which are inefficient and prone to inaccuracies.

Innovation Solution

A method that combines system identification and numerical optimization to develop a blade element model, using state-space models to target stability and control derivatives, reducing the need for manual tuning and accommodating incomplete aeromechanical configuration data, thereby improving the accuracy and efficiency of simulation models.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Measurement precision

If iterative tuning processes are used to develop accurate vehicle simulation models, then model accuracy is improved, but development time and labor intensity increase significantly

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemodel accuracyVSAvoiddevelopment time
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces manual iterative tuning (mechanical/process-based approach) with automated numerical optimization algorithms. The system uses computer-implemented optimization to automatically adjust model parameters and identify aeromechanical configuration data, substituting the manual trial-and-error process with an automated computational system that reduces development time while maintaining model accuracy.

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

2Reliability

If comprehensive aeromechanical configuration data are used, then model fidelity is improved, but data acquisition complexity and time increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemodel fidelityVSAvoiddata acquisition complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent enables the simulation model to self-identify missing aeromechanical configuration data through numerical optimization. Instead of requiring external sources to provide all configuration data, the system automatically determines the data by optimizing model parameters against available information and flight test data, making the model self-sufficient and reducing external data acquisition requirements.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The patent introduces numerical optimization algorithms as an intermediary between available configuration data and the complete aeromechanical model. This intermediary process fills in missing data by mathematically optimizing model parameters to match observed vehicle behavior, serving as a bridge that connects partial data to comprehensive model fidelity without requiring direct acquisition of all original configuration data.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

3Measurement precision

If manual tuning methods are used to determine model parameters, then model accuracy can be achieved, but the process becomes labor-intensive and prone to human error

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveparameter accuracyVSAvoidoperation simplicity
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces manual parameter tuning operations with automated numerical optimization algorithms. The system uses computer-implemented optimization processes to automatically determine model parameters, eliminating the need for manual adjustment and reducing human error while improving operational simplicity and consistency.

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

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements a feedback mechanism where the numerical optimization algorithm continuously adjusts model parameters based on the difference between simulated and observed vehicle behavior. This closed-loop feedback process automatically refines parameter accuracy by comparing model predictions with flight test data and iteratively improving the match, replacing manual judgment with systematic feedback-driven optimization.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentUS9760660B2Methods of developing a mathematical model of dynamics of a vehicle for use in a computer-controlled vehicle simulator
Publication Date: 2017.09.12 CAE INC
  • US9760660B2 patent drawing
  • US9760660B2 patent drawing
  • US9760660B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A method of developing a mathematical model of dynamics of a vehicle for use in a computer-controlled simulation, comprising: selecting a coefficient of a state-space model mathematically modelling the dynamics of the vehicle, the selected coefficient having a value for a predetermined state of the vehicle; and varying, a parameter of a physically-based computerized model mathematically modelling the dynamics of the vehicle, the parameter related to at least one of physical characteristics of the vehicle and phenomena influencing the dynamics of the vehicle, to improve the accuracy of the physically-based model via computer-implemented numerical optimization, the computer-implemented numerical optimization targeting the coefficient of the state-space model such that the difference between a value predicted by the physically-based model and the value of the coefficient of the state-space model for the predetermined vehicle state is within a predetermined range.