The present invention relates to a method and a device for detecting a risk of collision of an aircraft, in particular a transport aircraft, with the surrounding terrain.
It is known that the purpose of such a device, for example of the TANS (“Terrain Avoidance and Warning System”) type or of the GPWS (“Ground Proximity Warning System”) type is to detect any risk of collision of the aircraft with the surrounding terrain and to warn the crew when such a risk is detected, such that the latter can then implement a terrain avoidance maneuver. Such a device generally comprises:
In general, said third means uses a model, intended to represent an avoidance maneuver carried out by an aircraft, for calculating the corresponding path. However, the model used which generally takes account of a constant load factor and a fixed path representative of a stabilized state of the aircraft, reproduces fairly well the maneuver implemented by the aircraft. Furthermore, the approximations made make it necessary to take account of large error margins, in order not to overestimate the real performance of the aircraft during an avoidance maneuver. However, the taking into account of the error margins can in particular result in false alarms. The calculation mode and the checking mode used by said third means are not therefore completely reliable.
The present invention relates to a method for detecting a risk of collision of an aircraft with the surrounding terrain which makes it possible to overcome these disadvantages.
For this purpose, according to the invention, said method, according to which the following series of successive steps is carried out automatically and repetitively:
Thus, because of the invention, there is taken into account a height variation of the aircraft which is due to a transfer of energy and to a thrust variation during the avoidance maneuver, which makes it possible to optimize the model used in step c) and described below. The processings used during this step c) are therefore adapted to be as close as possible to reality. Consequently, the detection of a risk of collision with the terrain takes account of an avoidance maneuver which is very close to the avoidance maneuver actually used if necessary by the aircraft, which, in particular, makes it possible to avoid false alarms and to obtain particularly reliable monitoring.
In a first embodiment, said total slope variation generated by a speed reduction corresponds to a thrust variation.
Advantageously, in this first embodiment:
Moreover, in a second embodiment, in step c), said height variation is calculated, step by step, by producing the sum:
Moreover, advantageously, in order to optimize an initial pull-out phase of the avoidance maneuver:
In this case, preferably,
In a particular embodiment, at least certain of said predetermined parameters and if necessary said constant values depend on the effective flight configuration of the aircraft. This makes it possible to improve the representativeness of the modeled avoidance maneuver, in comparison with the maneuver likely to be actually carried out by the aircraft.
The present invention also relates to a device for automatically detecting a risk of collision of an aircraft with the surrounding terrain, said device comprising:
According to the invention, said device is noteworthy in that said third means comprises at least:
In a particular embodiment, said third means furthermore comprises:
The figures of the appended drawing will give a good understanding of how the invention may be embodied. In these figures, identical references indicate similar units.
The purpose of the device 1 according to the invention and shown diagrammatically in
Such a device 1, for example of the TAWS (“Terrain Avoidance and Warning System”) type or of the GPWS (“Ground Proximity Warning System”) type, which is installed in the aircraft A, comprises in the usual manner:
According to the invention, said central unit 9 comprises:
In order to do this, said unit 3 uses an assistance curve 18 (or avoidance curve) which is calculated by the unit 16, which is shown in
However, when during the movement of the assistance curve 18, said assistance curve 18 encounters the terrain profile 6, there is a risk of collision with the latter such that the unit 3 then orders the means 13 to transmit a warning signal, as illustrated by a symbol 19 in
Up until the present, a usual assistance curve 18A (intended to reproduce an avoidance maneuver) comprised, as shown in dotted line in
Such a usual assistance curve 18A does not exactly reproduce the avoidance maneuver actually carried out by the aircraft A if necessary, which can in particular give rise to false alarms (relating to a collision risk).
The assistance curve 18 according to the invention makes it possible to overcome this disadvantage by reproducing in an optimized manner the avoidance maneuver actually carried out by the aircraft A. For this purpose, according to the invention, said assistance curve 18 comprises, in addition to a special pull-out part 20 described below and a usual constant slope part 21, an intermediate part 22 taking said height variation ΔH into account. This assistance curve 18 therefore takes account of a dynamic increase in the altitude, starting from the end of said pull-out part 20 and doing this up until the start of said constant slope part 21 (which is therefore vertically shifted upwards by said height variation ΔH, with respect to said usual part 21A).
In order to do this, said means 7 comprises units not shown specifically in order, respectively:
Moreover, in a first embodiment, for which said total slope variation corresponds to a thrust variation, said unit 15 determines the height variation ΔH, using the preceding effective values and the following expressions:
ΔH=[K1·(VO2−VF2)/2·g+(K2·(VO−VF)+K3)/(GW−GWO)]·f(x)
f(x)=f(X−XO;VF;GW;γF−γO)=X−XO)/[K4·GW·VF·(γF−K5·γO)]
f(x)ε[O;1]
in which:
This height variation ΔH is due, as mentioned previously, to an energy transfer (giving rise to a height variation ΔH1) and to a thrust variation (giving rise to a height variation ΔH2):
ΔH=ΔH1+ΔH2.
The height variation ΔH1 illustrates a conversion of kinetic energy into potential energy:
ΔH1=K1·(VO2−VF2)/2·g.
Moreover, in this first embodiment, the height variation ΔH2 is due to a thrust variation, which is generated by a speed reduction.
Moreover, in a second embodiment, for which the height variation ΔN is due to an energy transfer and to a total slope variation generated by a speed reduction, said height variation ΔH is a function of the geometric slope γ:
ΔH≈∫γ·dx
This geometric slope is however equal to the sum of the total slope γTOT and of an acceleration term:
γ=γTOT−(dVSOL/dt)/g
The total slope is equal to the propulsive balance, that is to say to the difference between the thrust and the drag over the mass:
γTOT≈(P−T)/m·g
This total slope γTOT contributes to a height increase ΔH, because it increases as the speed reduces. This increase in total slope, which is inversely proportional to the speed, is due to the increase in thrust inversely proportional to the speed.
In fact, this physical phenomenon is particularly accentuated in a turboprop where the preponderant term for the thrust is expressed by:
P≈Useful power/V
The height variation ΔH can therefore be calculated by the unit 15, in this second embodiment, step by step, as the sum of two contributions:
Moreover, according to the invention, said central unit 9 furthermore comprises:
In a particular embodiment, said unit 23 determines said load factor Nz, using the following expression:
Nz=n0+(n1·GW)+(n2·VO)
in which n0, n1 and n2 are predetermined parameters.
This load factor Nz is closer to reality than is a constant load factor used in the prior art, which makes it possible to increase the conformity of the pull-out part 20 of the assistance curve 18.
The avoidance path TE actually followed by the aircraft A, in the case of detection of a collision risk by the device 1 and of initiation of an avoidance maneuver, is thus reproduced faithfully by the assistance curve 18 determined according to the present invention, as shown in
Consequently, the detection of a risk of collision with the terrain 2 used by the device 1 takes account of an avoidance maneuver (in the form of the assistance curve 18) which is very close to an avoidance maneuver actually used if necessary by the aircraft A, which in particular makes it possible to avoid false alarms and thus to obtain a particularly reliable monitoring.
In a particular embodiment, at least some of said predetermined parameters n0, n1, n2, K1, K2 and K3 or of said constant values GWO, VF and γF (recorded in the central unit 9 or in the assembly 8 of data sources) depend on the effective flight configuration of the aircraft A. In this case, the assembly 8 of data sources comprise means intended for measuring parameters making it possible to determine the current flight configuration of the aircraft A, which depends for example on the flight phase, the aerodynamic configuration (slats, flaps) of the aircraft A, its altitude, etc.
Number | Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
05 07922 | Jul 2005 | FR | national |
Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind | 371c Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
PCT/FR2006/001811 | 7/25/2006 | WO | 00 | 1/21/2008 |
Publishing Document | Publishing Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
WO2007/012749 | 2/1/2007 | WO | A |
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3396391 | Anderson | Aug 1968 | A |
5892462 | Tran | Apr 1999 | A |
5995903 | Smith et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
6021374 | Wood | Feb 2000 | A |
6088654 | Lepere et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6445310 | Bateman et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6480120 | Meunier | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6538581 | Cowie | Mar 2003 | B2 |
6691004 | Johnson et al. | Feb 2004 | B2 |
6940994 | Nixon et al. | Sep 2005 | B2 |
7006904 | Pippenger | Feb 2006 | B2 |
7403132 | Khatwa | Jul 2008 | B2 |
7917289 | Feyereisen et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
8068038 | Engels et al. | Nov 2011 | B2 |
20010013836 | Cowie | Aug 2001 | A1 |
20020069019 | Lin | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020080059 | Tran | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020080145 | Ishihara | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020153485 | Nixon et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20030107499 | Lepere et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030122701 | Tran | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030132860 | Feyereisen et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20040181318 | Redmond et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040215372 | Bateman et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040239529 | Tran | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050261811 | Artini et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050269448 | Chardon | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20050273221 | Artini et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060004497 | Bull | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060052912 | Meunier | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060097895 | Reynolds et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060273929 | Tran | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20060290532 | Persson et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20070182589 | Tran | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070265776 | Meunier et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20100125381 | Botargues et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2 740 570 | May 2004 | FR |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20080215197 A1 | Sep 2008 | US |