1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates generally to a system for electrically heating and de-icing the wing of an airplane, and more particularly to a system and method for providing power and control through a wing de-icing system in an airplane using stackable, scalable elements and a system for serial load leveling, and more particularly to a load leveling system for avoidance of compounded emissions in high energy, parallel, or distributed, pulse-modulated power control systems.
2. Description of the Related Art
Ice buildup on the wings of aircraft can cause flight delays and flight hazards. Typical wing de-icing systems include multiple individual heating elements spaced about the wing surface of the aircraft. These heating elements are typically powered by electricity. Many aircraft have wing de-icing systems built into the craft, but often these systems are inefficient or under-equipped for the aircraft into which they are installed.
Existing electro-thermal wing de-icing systems are less flexible, unreliable, and inefficient. What is needed is a flexible, scalable, and reliable wing ice protection system solution for the next generation of more electric aircraft.
More information can be found in U.S. Pat. No. 7,602,081 which is incorporated herein by reference.
Avoidance of the effects of simultaneous or coincidental switching of high currents is a challenge for systems having multiple pulse-width modulation (PWM) power switching circuits that share common supplies, enclosures, and other components. Part of the concern is the conducted and radiated EMI emissions resulting from compounded switching transients, but electrical and mechanical effects on the power source are also important.
Such a PWM power switching circuit is disclosed in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/479,105, filed on May 23, 2012, which is incorporated herein by reference.
Synchronized switching is preferred in such systems for reasons of determinacy. However, the conducted and radiated EMI effects of switching are compounded when multiple switches change at the same time. For example,
As such, it is valuable to consider methods that provide determinant switching but reduce emissions, particularly those associated with simultaneous or compounded switching. This can be particularly important on aircraft where certain frequencies must be avoided for the safety of the vehicle.
Existing systems commonly generally distribute the switching events to reduce simultaneous switching. However, these methods retain a wide range of dynamic emissions, a significant portion of which have harmonic characteristics stronger than desired. It is very difficult to determine which of emissions these systems will experience at any moment in operation, so worst case emissions must be accounted.
Given a system with N switches and M possible pulse widths, using current phase spreading techniques, the range of emissions to characterize is on the order of NM. With Serial Load Leveling, the range of emissions with the technique is M, and those emissions are the minimum possible.
There are existing no-spread synchronized switching techniques that are fairly common. In Non-Spread Synchronized Switching systems, PWM switches are synchronized, share a common clock, and turn on simultaneously, but each one turns off separately according to individual duty cycles. An example of such a system is shown in
There are also existing phase spreading techniques. A few methods exist to mitigate the effects of simultaneous switching loads. In general, they distribute or spread the individual PWM phases over the PWM cycle. However, they suffer either from lack of determinacy required for absolute characterization or from retention of significant transient or harmonic effects.
One such example is non-coherent phase spreading. One method of phase spreading is to introduce pseudorandom or non-coherent phase spreading to the PWM switch timing. This may be achieved by such means as random scattering of switch phasing or, more commonly, by reliance on presumed frequency drift of multiple non-coherent (wild) clocks. However, a lack of coherency complicates absolute system verification, that is, verification becomes a statistical exercise. Neither does non-coherent phase spreading eliminate the possibility of transient peaks, sustained problematic waveforms, or resonance.
Phase spreading has additional limitations in AC applications. Whereas phase spreading may have a relatively continuous switching distribution in DC applications, zero-cross AC switching quantizes the distribution—zero-cross AC switching imposes a common clock on all switches, regardless of any spreading.
Heretofore there has not been available an electro-thermal wing ice protection system with the features and elements, including a load leveling system, of the present invention.
The present invention relates to an electro-thermal wing ice protection solution controller for managing and controlling electrical power generated to heat and de-ice the wing of an aircraft. The system is comprised of a number of power control modules (PCMs) and at least one master control unit (MCU). These elements can be stacked together and mounted into rack systems in order to provide scalable organized power distribution for a wing de-icing and ice protection system.
The present invention also relates to a load leveling system and method capable of controlling switches such that it appears to a generator that the load is constant. The purpose is to prevent high-load simultaneous switching or multiple synchronous switching from damaging sensitive equipment. The present invention utilizes a central controller communicating to a number of switches such that the switches turn off and on in a synchronized, serialized manner. As one switch turns “off,” another should be turning “on” until a cycle is completed. In this manner, the generator will only see a single “on” and a single “off” load per cycle.
The drawings constitute a part of this specification and include exemplary embodiments of the present invention illustrating various objects and features thereof.
As required, detailed aspects of the present invention are disclosed herein, however, it is to be understood that the disclosed aspects are merely exemplary of the invention, which may be embodied in various forms. Therefore, specific structural and functional details disclosed herein are not to be interpreted as limiting, but merely as a basis for the claims and as a representative basis for teaching one skilled in the art how to variously employ the present invention in virtually any appropriately detailed structure.
Certain terminology will be used in the following description for convenience in reference only and will not be limiting. For example, up, down, front, back, right and left refer to the invention as orientated in the view being referred to. The words, “inwardly” and “outwardly” refer to directions toward and away from, respectively, the geometric center of the aspect being described and designated parts thereof. Forwardly and rearwardly are generally in reference to the direction of travel, if appropriate. Said terminology will include the words specifically mentioned, derivatives thereof and words of similar meaning.
An embodiment of the present invention is generally designed to interface with an aircraft's electrical and control systems to implement an “ice protection control law” to control and operate the ice protection system which prevents ice from forming on the aircraft's wings.
Referring to the drawings in more detail, the reference numeral 2 generally indicates a wing ice protection system. This system is primarily comprised of a number of power control modules (PCMs) 4 and at least one master control unit (MCU) 6. As shown in
The PCMs 4 provide power to the individual heating zones located on the wings of the aircraft (not shown). The PCM units are scalable, ideally in increments of 4 zones per line-replaceable unit (LRU), to accommodate any number of zones required for ice protection. The PCMs 4 use a modern solid-state proportional control design to deliver the exact amount of power needed, and only when desired or requested by the MCU 6. The solid state design provides for high reliability and efficiency over conventional mechanical or pneumatic systems. Each PCM 4 contains extensive built-in-test and the ability to provide fault isolation in the event of critical controller or system failures without affecting the remaining non-faulted zones, thus providing N+1 redundancy and high system availability. In addition, the PCM architecture embodies an asymmetric proof design to eliminate the possibility of asymmetric icing failure conditions.
Each PCM 4 may be linked to a single heating zone or multiple heating zones. The ice protection system 2 could be arranged such that each PCM feeds output to a single heating zone on the right wing of an aircraft while also feeding output to the mirror-imaged zone on the left wing. In the case of fault or failure of a single PCM, such an arrangement would prevent asymmetrical heating which could destabilize the plane during flight.
The MCU 6 interfaces with the aircraft's systems 7 and is responsible for implementing the ice protection control law. The MCU can be used in dual redundant arrangement as shown in
Each PCM and MCU contains a number of fault sensors, temperature sensors, and other sensors for determining failure of a PCM or MCU and allowing redundant systems to boot up. This ensures that the failure of a single PCM will not result in the failure of the entire ice protection system 2.
As stated above, the PCM 4 and MCU 6 stack typically includes 4 PCM devices and one or two MCUs. These “stacks” can be mounted into a rack unit 38 as shown in
An embodiment of the present invention is generally designed to interface with an aircraft's electrical and control systems.
The reference numeral 102 generally indicates a power distribution system.
Unlike conventional systems where PWM periods and phase are static constants, the period, duty cycle, and phase are dynamic. The PWM phase offset is described in terms of the time difference in turn-on transitions relative to a shared PWM cycle. In the AC case, phase may be counted by the number of AC supply cycles offset between individual PWM circuits. In
The general circuits and methods that follow apply to both AC and DC power supplies, but this discussion will generally use an AC supply as the example. For AC systems, whole cycle, zero-cross switching is presumed, so switching on or off is synchronized to the rising zero-cross. As such, a difference between emissions in the DC versus AC case is the convolution of the DC rectangle wave distribution by the modulating AC sine wave distribution.
The present invention generally introduces synchronized phase spreading system 102 which relies on spreading a number of switches 109 apart by a portion of a cycle. In coherent or synchronized phase spreading, the phases of the PWM switches are synchronized but individually offset by fixed amounts to evenly distribute either the switch-on or switch-off events over the shared PWM cycle, i.e., the switch-on points of: 2 switches are distributed 1/2 PWM cycle apart; 3 switches are distributed ⅓ PWM cycle apart; and 4 switches are distributed ¼PWM cycle apart as shown in
This method gives some improvement over Non-Spread Switching (compare the harmonic distributions in
While many if not most load combinations of phase-spread emissions could be much lower than that of non-spread equipment, emissions could approach that of non-spread equipment in some other load combinations. Exhaustive testing would be required to completely characterize all arbitrary waveform emissions that the system is capable of sustaining
The present system consists of a number of high power (e.g., tens of kilowatts per switch) PWM zero-cross, switching Power Control Modules (PCMs). These circuits share a smaller number of power supplies; that is, multiple PCMs may share a single generator that is presumed to be susceptible to large load transients and know resonance.
Additionally, this system is intended for critical and EMI-sensitive applications. As such, it is desired to provide a qualifiable and deterministic system that consistently minimizes load transients and harmonic emissions. With this design objective, the present system has, at any instant, the emissions of no more than one PWM load superpositioned with zero or more constant, non-modulated (100%) loads.
The main feature of the present invention is an apparent constant load on the power source generator. One load can be set to turn off at the same zero-cross that another load turns on and thereby present no transient to the power supply at the transition between loads. Furthermore, in this system, the PWM switches are independently and arbitrarily controllable with respect to period, duty cycle, and phase. As such, a set of independent PWM duty cycles may be scheduled such that just as one ON-time ends, another ON-time starts in a manner that maintains a constant load on the source.
In the example of
When the combination of ON-time duty cycles exceeds the PWM cycle, excess ON-time can be folded modulo fashion to the beginning of the common PWM cycle as needed to completely distribute all of the ON-time duty cycles.
In this manner, an arbitrary schedule of PWM loads may be combined and serially “transmitted”, yet have no more transient effect on the supply than a single PWM load. The switches may be viewed as receiving trains of power cycles from the source, which they break up and route to the different PWM cycles. Thus, an arbitrary number of arbitrary width pulses may be serially drawn from the power source without transient effects or emissions above that of a single PWM load.
This method presents the smallest number of possible waveforms to the supply and to the conducted and radiated EMC environment. Any load combination is convertible to a single PWM load superposed on a finite number of constant 100% loads. Thus, for any combination of Phase Leveled Loads, the EMI characteristics are a superposition of the characteristics of one PWM load superposed on the characteristics of one constant load.
It should be observed that as individual loads are split and excess load that exceeds the length of the PWM cycle is wrapped to the beginning of the cycle, these split loads do not necessarily experience switching at the PWM cycle boundaries. In the example shown in
Key to performing Serial Load Leveling is the ability to coordinate individual PWM switch cycles into a system schedule and then control the switches according to that schedule. The following describes important features of the system necessary for this scheduling.
The scheduling of PWM switch cycles is based on a common PWM cycle. The common PWM cycle is provided for all PWM switches either through a common PWM counter or through distributed synchronized counters. The counter(s) runs at a fixed rate from an initial preset value to the value that indicates the end of the common PWM cycle. When the end value is reached, the schedule for the next PWM cycle is set, the preset value is loaded into the counter, and the next common PWM cycle is started.
Individual Switch Scheduling can be used to achieve the results of load leveling. The system 102 has provision to start each individual switch's PWM ON-time at any discrete time within each common PWM cycle.
The “void” space between the ON-times of the subsequent PWM cycles of the single switch represents time that could be allocated to the ON-time of other switches. System switch scheduling comes into play here. With the ability to individually schedule distinct switches, the system may coordinate all of the switch cycles into a coherent system switch schedule. In the scheduling process, the system will determine a start time (offset) for each switch within each switch's PWM cycle.
Given PWM duty cycle ON-times for a set of switches, the Serial Load Leveling process determines a coordinated set of start times that, following a single “first switch”, cause one switch to close at the instant another opens.
Given an ordered set of switches, the system schedules the first switch to close at the same time the common PWM cycle starts; the second switch to close at the same time the first switch is scheduled to open, and so forth through to the last of the set of switches.
Alternatively, in Wrap Scheduling, switch ON-times that overrun the end of the common PWM cycle are wrapped around to the beginning of the PWM cycle as follows.
When, for a given start time, the duty cycle for the switch is less than the remaining PWM cycle, the switch will have a single ON-time for that period. However, if the duty cycle for the switch is less than the remaining PWM cycle, any excess is allocated to the beginning of the PWM cycle.
Wrap Scheduling requires a central coordinator (e.g., software on a microcontroller) to calculate and set the schedule for all switches. The control of the individual switch PWM cycles may also be centrally controlled; however, in the present system, the control of each switch's PWM cycle is distributed to the individual switches.
The scheduling of PWM cycles may be implemented in sets of independent control registers provided for each PWM switch. For this method of control, while one collective system PWM cycle is in operation, the schedule for the next PWM cycle is calculated and then written to the control register buffers (as defined below).
When the end value of the system PWM cycle is reached, schedule for the next PWM period is loaded into the control registers, the preset value is loaded into the common PWM counter, and the next common PWM cycle is started.
At a minimum, one register is required for each switch to maintain the ON-time setting for the present PWM period. One or more additional register may be required depending on the scheduling method, e.g., implementation of Wrap Scheduling requires a few more registers to define the additional transitions that occur when an ON-time is split.
Multiple register control methods are available. An array of registers could schedule the initial state (ON/OFF) followed by values that cause the state to toggle as the PWM counter passes those settings. Alternatively, an array of registers could schedule pairs of subsequent turn-on and turn-off events as the PWM counter passes those settings. Additionally, state logic could be employed to provide additional robustness as needed.
To decouple the register servicing from PWM operations, these registers are buffered. Communication/Control services write to the buffers asynchronous to the PWM operations while PWM services read from these buffers synchronous to the PWM operations. In this manner, the registers may be updated with settings for the next PWM period at any time without disrupting the ongoing PWM cycle.
While Wrap Scheduling is the scheduling method used by the present system, Token Passing is an alternative scheduling technique that eliminates the need for a central processor for scheduling. Each switch has knowledge of its own ON-time duration (as in the wrapping method), but only the “first switch” operates precisely synchronized to the common PWM cycle. As each switch finishes its ON-time, it passes a signal to the next switch permitting that switch to perform its ON-time.
Only the first switch starts its ON-time at the beginning of each common PWM cycle. Every other switch starts its ON-time only when it receives a token from the preceding switch. Each switch passes said token when it completes its ON-time. The last switch passes no token. Multiple tokens will be passing through the system when the total ON-time for all switches exceeds the common PWM cycle. The result of Token Passing is to modulate the PWM period of each switch forward or back in time to affect a serial stream of uninterrupted power cycles from the source.
Token Passing may be used in systems with minimal digital circuitry. For example, in relatively non-digital systems, Token Passing may be used in an analog PWM system to align ramp oscillators such that as one switch opens another closes, i.e., the opening of one switch starts the ramp cycle of the next switch.
The methods and system capabilities required for Serial Load Leveling may be used to accomplish other applications. The ability to dynamically control the duty cycle, period, and phase permits manipulation of AC loads to a relatively fine degree (e.g., changing these parameters in an AC system on a cycle by cycle basis, within the limits of the system's bandwidth).
Where such action would result in further improvement of other effects of concern, the single PWM load modulation remaining after Serial Load Leveling may be rotationally distributed. In such cases, power distribution can be balanced “around” the cycle at the expense of additional single-load power transitions. For example, consider that either a single 7-out-of-12 pulse or a combination of one 1-out-of-4 and two 1-out-of-6 rotationally symmetric pulses transmit equal power. See
Since this system is capable of modulating the PWM period, the system could alternatively be used to increase resolution below the single cycle limit by manipulating pulse period relative to pulse width. Also, where there is a limit for minimum on or off pulse width, pulse-period modulation could be used to effect smaller duty cycles. If, for example, a system is limited to a pulse minimum of 10 ms, then 10%, 5% and 1% duty cycles may be produced by modulating the period to 100 ms, 200 ms, and 1000 ms, respectively.
Likewise, a Serial Load Leveling system with central processing would alternatively be capable of Delta-Sigma Modulation and Pulse-Density Modulation. Limited by the number of switches, these methods and system capabilities facilitate formation of arbitrary waveforms.
In systems where remote switching of a sequence of N register-less switches is affected by cycling of applied power, such as the system described in U.S. Pat. No. 7,355,302 which is incorporated herein by reference, duty cycle is nominally limited to 1/N. Application of Token Passing in the remote components could permit extension of the duty cycle in such systems to 100%. The power cycling system is adjusted such that the power cycling sets the ON-time of a designated “first switch”, which then generates tokens to control subsequent switch timings as duplicates of the first switch timing.
It is to be understood that the invention can be embodied in various forms, and is not to be limited to the examples discussed above. The range of components and configurations which can be utilized in the practice of the present invention is virtually unlimited.
This application is a continuation in part of and claims priority in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/479,105, filed May 23, 2012, now U.S. Pat. No. 8,820,683, issued Sep. 2, 2014, which claims priority in U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 61/489,141, filed May 23, 2011, and is also a continuation-in-part of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/672,619, filed Nov. 8, 2012, which claims priority in U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 61/557,159, filed Nov. 8, 2011, all of which are incorporated herein by reference.
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61489141 | May 2011 | US | |
61557159 | Nov 2011 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 13479105 | May 2012 | US |
Child | 14475451 | US | |
Parent | 13672619 | Nov 2012 | US |
Child | 13479105 | US |