This patent application claims priority from Italian patent application no. 102021000019682 filed on Jul. 23, 2021, the entire disclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference.
The present invention relates to a method and a device for monitoring the operation of a pair of turboprop engines through the numerical processing of an acoustic magnitude.
Studies conducted on aeronautical propulsion have shown that turbo-prop technologies (aeronautical engine consisting of an aeronautical propeller driven by a turbine) have lower fuel consumption than turbofan technologies (which is known to be a particular category of turbojet engine using two separate airflows).
Although turboprop engines are not able to achieve cruising performances comparable to those of the turbofan engines, they have maximum thermodynamic efficiency at typical operating speeds for regional flights and lend themselves to the integration into the hybrid propulsion.
On the other hand, turboprop engines require continuous monitoring of the performances provided to predict faulty operations well in advance.
For example, the US Federal Specification FAR Part 43 Appendix D stipulates in relation to the inspection of turboprop propulsion to “ . . . perform an inspection annually or every 100 flight hours regarding the following events: cracks, fissures, oil leaks, . . . ”; for this reason the turboprop engines are subjected to periodic scheduled maintenance regardless of the detection of faults.
Aim of the present invention is to realise a method and a device for monitoring the operation of a pair of turboprop engines (a pair or previous one) through the numerical processing of an acoustic magnitude, in particular sound pressure levels acquired in flight.
European Patent Application EP2305958B1 describes a method in which the sound pressure level generated by the flying turboprop engines for a predefined operating speed is measured by analysing and comparing, in the time domain, the stored behaviour of the turboprop engines or by comparing them in pairs. One or more of the stored impact sounds correspond to unfavourable weather conditions. The method involves determining whether the noise of the particle impacts corresponds to one or more stored impact sounds.
Aim of the Present Invention.
The foregoing aim is achieved by the present invention in that it relates to a method and a device for monitoring the operation of a pair of turboprop engines through the numerical processing of an acoustic magnitude of the type described in claims 6 and 1.
In
An electronic processing unit 8 receives, at input, the first and second signals x(t),y(t) and provides, at output, data indicative of the operating state of the first and/or second turbo-prop engine 4 and 5. The electronic unit 8 is also conveniently designed to record flight parameters such as altitude, cruising speed, route, etc.
According to the present invention, the electronic unit 8 is configured to iteratively calculate by means of a function Rx the similarity between the first signal x(t) at a time T1 and the first signal at a time T2 subsequent to the time T1 or, by means of a function Ry, the similarity between the second signal y(t) at a time T1 and the second signal at a time T2 subsequent to the time T1.
Typically, the function Rx is obtained by the auto-correlation function which for a signal of finite energy x is defined as:
R
x(t)∫−∞∞x*(τ)x(t+τ)dτ
where X*indicates the conjugated complex of x.
The function Rx Ry provides, in the interval τ(space of the delays), the degree of similarity of the first/second signal in two different times.
As is well known, a degree of similarity close to a first value 1 indicates two signals that are very similar or substantially the same, while a degree of similarity close to a second value (zero) indicates two signals that have no similarity at all.
The electronic unit 8 is designed to detect and store the degrees of similarity calculated in successive iterations in order to detect situations of normal operation of the engines when the degrees of similarity calculated in successive iterations (and therefore for successive flights) remain within a safety interval of a first value close to 1 and to detect a potential fault in the engines when the degrees of similarity calculated in successive iterations depart from this safety interval tending to a second value equal to zero and therefore lower than the first value.
These operations will be shown by the following examples.
the degree of similarity ‘0’ flight hours is worth 1.000;
the degree of similarity at ‘1000’ flight hours compared to that at ‘0’ is worth 0.950 (first iteration);
the degree of similarity at ‘2000’ flight hours compared to that at ‘0’ is worth 0.900 and compared to 1000 flight hours is worth 0.92 (second iteration);
the degree of similarity at ‘5000’ flight hours compared to that at ‘0’ is worth 0.85, compared to 1000 flight hours is worth 0.87 and compared to 2000 flight hours is worth 0.88 (third iteration); and
the degree of similarity at ‘10000’ flight hours compared to that at ‘0’ is worth 0.8, compared to 1000 flight hours is worth 0.81, compared to 2000 flight hours is worth 0.83 and compared to 5000 flight hours is worth 0.86 (fourth iteration).
The data shown above indicate a slow descent of the degree of similarity within the safety interval during successive iterations and are indicative of a normal degradation of engine performances requiring an ordinary maintenance session.
the degree of similarity ‘0’ flight hours is worth 1.000;
the degree of similarity at ‘1000’ flight hours compared to that at ‘0’ is worth 0.950 (first iteration);
the degree of similarity at ‘2000’ flight hours compared to that at ‘0’ is worth 0.900 and compared to 1000 flight hours is worth 0.92 (second iteration);
the degree of similarity at ‘5000’ flight hours compared to ‘0’ is worth 0.85, compared to 1000 flight hours is worth 0.82 and compared to 2000 flight hours is worth 0.84 (third iteration);
the degree of similarity at ‘10000’ flight hours compared to that at ‘0’ is worth 0.8, compared to 1000 flight hours is worth 0.69, compared to 2000 flight hours is worth 0.73 and compared to 5000 flight hours is worth 0.79 (fourth iteration).
As can be seen between 5,000 and 1,000 flight hours, there is a rapid decrease in the degree of similarity that abruptly departs from the safety interval (for example, the safety interval can vary between 1 and 0.8). There is therefore an indication to proceed ahead of the scheduled maintenance.
the degree of similarity ‘0’ flight hours is worth 1.000;
the degree of similarity at ‘1000’ flight hours compared to that at ‘0’ is worth 0.950 (first iteration);
the degree of similarity at ‘2000’ flight hours compared to that at ‘0’ is worth 0.900 and compared to 1000 flight hours is worth 0.92 (second iteration);
the degree of similarity at ‘5000’ flight hours compared to ‘0’ is worth 0.85, compared to 1000 flight hours is worth 0.87 and compared to 2000 flight hours is worth 0.64 (third iteration);
the degree of similarity at ‘10000’ flight hours compared to that at ‘0’ is worth 0.8, compared to 1000 flight hours is worth 0.81, compared to 2000 flight hours is worth 0.43 and compared to 5000 flight hours is worth 0.39 (fourth iteration).
This table shows the significant worsening of the degree of similarity at 5000 hours compared to 2000 hours, which is confirmed by the further decrease to 0.43 compared to 2000 hours and 0.39 compared to 5000 hours.
In this case, immediate maintenance is required to repair a “major” fault.
In other words, the electronic unit 8 is designed to calculate the derivative of the degree of similarity between successive interactions and to detect a situation of potential danger if this derivative exceeds a value greater than a threshold.
In addition to the maintenance aid functions shown above according to the present invention, indications are also provided concerning the operation of the engines.
For this purpose, the electronic unit 8 is configured to calculate the cross-correlation function of the signals x(t) and y(t) which for two finite energy signals is defined as:
R
xy(t)=(x*y)(t)∫−∞∞x*(τ)y(t+τ)dτ
where X*indicates the conjugated complex of x.
The function Rxy provides, in the interval τ(space of the delays) the degree of similarity between the first and second signals and provides the pilot with an indication of the operation of the two engines which should rotate at the same rotation speed.
Since the rotation speeds of the engines are of the sinusoidal type, a high value of degree of similarity (close to 1) means that the two engines rotate at the same speed, a very low value of degree of similarity indicates that the two engines rotate at different speeds. In this case, the pilot can act manually on one of the two engines so as to reduce the speed variation.
For example, the cross-correlation between the two signals x(t) and y(t) as the hours vary takes on the following values:
As shown in the table below:
The cross-correlation value therefore remains in the safe interval 1-0.8 for successive flights, although it indicates an onset of degradation after 5000 flight hours.
Number | Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
102021000019682 | Jul 2021 | IT | national |