Mission Planning and Flight Control: Meeting the Challenge with Intelligent Techniques

Vachtsevanos, George; Kim, Wonoh; Al-Hasan, Sami A.; Rufus, Freeman; Simon, Miguel; Schrage, Daniel P.; Prasad, J. V. R.

doi:10.20965/jaciii.1997.p0062

Cited by 13 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The mission adaptation component via state or waypoint parameter adaptation enables the system/aircraft to accomplish an altered yet admissible mission. Changes to the parameters can be implemented within the receding window employed by the middle level control redistribution or path re-planning stage [21]- [25].…”

Section: High-level Flight / Mission Adaptationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fault diagnosis, failure prognosis and fault tolerant control of aerospace/unmanned aerial systems

Vachtsevanos

Georgoulas

Nikolakopoulos

2016

2016 24th Mediterranean Conference on Control and Automation (MED)

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fault-tolerant control and operation of complex unmanned and aircraft systems is an emerging technology intended to provide the designer and operator with flexibility, interoperability, sustainment and reliability under changing operational requirements or mission profiles. Moreover, it is intended to reconfigure online hardware and software to maintain the operational integrity of the system in the event of contingencies (fault/failure modes). This paper presents an hierarchical architecture that uses available sensor information, fault isolation, failure prognosis, system restructuring and controller reconfiguration. The fault tolerant control framework relies on prognostic information to reconfigure system components and preserve the operational integrity of the aircraft. The hierarchical structure starts at the lowest component level and migrates to the middle system/subsystem level ending with the final mission level. We illustrate the methodology using an electro-mechanical actuator (EMA).

show abstract

Section: High-level Flight / Mission Adaptationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fault diagnosis, failure prognosis and fault tolerant control of aerospace/unmanned aerial systems

Vachtsevanos

Georgoulas

Nikolakopoulos

2016

2016 24th Mediterranean Conference on Control and Automation (MED)

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The prognostics research that is reported in the literature largely focuses on solutions to specific problems, such as electronic prognostics (Vichare and Pecht 2006;Ridgetop Group 2004;Mishra and Pecht 2002;Kalgren et al 2007), vibration analysis (Carden and Fanning 2004;Doebling et al 1996;Catbas and Atkan 2002), helicopter gearbox monitoring (Engel et al 2000;Heng et al 2009;Vachtsevanos et al 1997;Wang and Vachtsevanos 2001;Orchard and Vachtsevanos 2007;Kacprzynski et al 2004), Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) applications (Keller et al 2006;Orsagh et al 2005;Roemer et al 2005;Ferrell et al 1999;Ferrell et al 2000;Smith et al 1997;Hess and Fila 2002;Line and Clements 2005), etc. There are now papers in several major meeting series including the Machinery Failure Prevention Society annual meeting, the IEEE Reliability Society meetings, the PHM Society annual conference, and sessions within application-specific meetings, such as those for aerospace systems.…”

Section: Prognostic Algorithmsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lifecycle Prognostics Architecture for Selected High-Cost Active Components

Lybeck¹,

Pham²,

Tawfik³

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There are an extensive body of knowledge and some commercial products available for calculating prognostics, remaining useful life, and damage index parameters. The application of these technologies within the nuclear power community is still in its infancy. Online monitoring and condition-based maintenance is seeing increasing acceptance and deployment, and these activities provide the technological bases for expanding to add predictive/prognostics capabilities. In looking to deploy prognostics there are three key aspects of systems that are presented and discussed: component/system/structure selection, prognostic algorithms, and prognostics architectures. Criteria are presented for component selection: feasibility, failure probability, consequences of failure, and benefits of the prognostics and health management (PHM) system. The basis and methods commonly used for prognostics algorithms are reviewed and summarized. Criteria for evaluating PHM architectures are presented: open, modular architecture; platform independence; graphical user interface for system development and/or results viewing; web-enabled tools; scalability; and standards compatibility.Thirteen software products were identified and discussed in the context of being potentially useful for deployment in a PHM program applied to systems in a nuclear power plant (NPP). These products were evaluated by using information available from company websites, product brochures, fact sheets, scholarly publications, and direct communication with vendors. The thirteen products were classified into four groups of software: research tools, PHM system development tools, deployable architectures, and peripheral tools. Eight software tools fell into the deployable architectures category. Of those eight, only two employ all six modules of a full PHM system. Five systems did not offer prognostic estimates, and one system employed the full health monitoring suite but lacked operations and maintenance support. Each product is briefly described in Appendix A, "Assessment Criteria." Selection of the most appropriate software package for a particular application will depend on the chosen component, system, or structure. Ongoing research will determine the most appropriate choices for a successful demonstration of PHM systems in aging NPPs.iv v SUMMARYAt the start of 2011, there were 439 nuclear power plants (NPPs) in the commercial global fleet; these plants started operation with 30-or 40-year licenses. The 104 NPPs in the United States represent about 10% of the installed capacity and currently provide about 20% of U.S. electricity. They have become highly efficient with an average capacity factor in excess of 91%, and they are a key element in the delivery of base-load electricity. They were originally licensed for 40 years, and a process has been established to enable license extension, to permit operation from 40 to 60 years. As of July 2011, license extensions have been granted for 71 plants at 40 sites. An additional 13 plants at nine sites are currently ...

show abstract

“…Notions of "control" are expanding from the traditional loop-control concept to include such other functionalities as supervision, coordination and planning, situation awareness, diagnostics, and optimization [9]- [11]. Consider, for example, the control system for an uninhabited aerial vehicle (UAV) such as a vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) UAV of the helicopter type [12].…”

Section: Current Practice In Control System Configurationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

An open platform for reconfigurable control

et al. 2001

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

omplex dynamic systems such as aircraft, power systems, and telecommunication networks present major challenges to control systems designers. Both the military and civilian sectors of our economy are demanding new and highly sophisticated capabilities from these systems that traditional controls technology is not offering. Among these capabilities are the following: • Adaptability/dynamic reconfigurability: Large-scale engineered systems must have the ability to quickly and gracefully react to a changing environment or to changes in their own configuration without compromising their operational integrity. Extreme performance dynamic systems must be able to support online switching of algorithmic components and rapid redirection of the interconnections among them, as well as changing the priorities at which information is flowing. This ability is particularly useful for hybrid control systems. • Plug-and-play extensibility: New advances are continually being made in control algorithm design, communications and sensor technology, and high-performance hardware platforms. To take full advantage of these innovations as they become available, we must be able to insert new technology into the system architecture without redesigning the components already in the system. • Interoperability: Today's control systems operate in distributed, heterogeneous environments; that is, the software components may be running on different processors, using different programming languages, hardware platforms, and network protocols, often over wireless links. Real-time communication must be provided among these distributed components while satisfying stringent constraints on bandwidth, response time, and reliability. • Openness: Reconfigurability and component interchangeability require software architectures that are flexible and that support tools and algorithms from a variety of sources and domains. This requires a shift away from traditional control system implementation, which tends to be practiced with a particular ap-June 2001 IEEE Control Systems Magazine 49

show abstract

Mission Planning and Flight Control: Meeting the Challenge with Intelligent Techniques

Cited by 13 publications

References 0 publications

Fault diagnosis, failure prognosis and fault tolerant control of aerospace/unmanned aerial systems

Fault diagnosis, failure prognosis and fault tolerant control of aerospace/unmanned aerial systems

Lifecycle Prognostics Architecture for Selected High-Cost Active Components

An open platform for reconfigurable control

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About