Data processing: vehicles – navigation – and relative location – Vehicle control – guidance – operation – or indication – With indicator or control of power plant
Reexamination Certificate
1999-08-13
2001-09-11
Zanelli, Michael J. (Department: 3661)
Data processing: vehicles, navigation, and relative location
Vehicle control, guidance, operation, or indication
With indicator or control of power plant
C060S039010
Reexamination Certificate
active
06289274
ABSTRACT:
FIELD OF THE INVENTION
This invention relates to feedback control techniques, for example, those used in gas turbine engine fuel controls using a plurality of engine operating parameters to regulate fuel control as function of commanded engine power.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
The conventional gas turbine fuel control is complex electro-mechanical device that uses a number of engine operating conditions (parameters) to regulate fuel flow to the burner to achieve and maintain a commanded engine speed, such as rotor speed N
1
. The fuel control, using feedback, responds to power lever setting (PLA) to match commanded power and rotor (fan) speed. Among the engine operating parameters that the control typically uses are N
1
and N
2
, respectively the speed of the low and high speed rotors. Other parameters include the temperature and pressure at the inlet and within the compressor stage and exhaust nozzle orientation, in the case of high performance engines employing variable pitch and area exhaust nozzles.
Depending on engine and flight conditions, such a command for peak acceleration from cruise, the control may select one parameter over another on which to “close the loop” for fuel flow to the engine. The transfer function for the control path for each parameter is a so-called proportional integral control, which provides good response and accuracy for aircraft engine applications. The basic transfer for fuel flow WF may be expressed as:
WF
t
=K
1
·∫
WF
Return
+K
2
·&Dgr;&dgr;
t
where WF
t
is the total fuel flow at time t. Ideally, the output from each loop (for each engine operating parameter) produces the same scheduled fuel flow (WF
Return
) at all times, and if that were true, selecting one loop over another would be invisible in the sense that there would be no immediate change in WF
Return
at selection. This is not the case, however, because the parameters have different relationships to engine operation at any instant and thus one may command more or less WF
Return
than another at any instant in time, creating a significant stability problem when selecting one channel (loop) over another.
Presently, selection is made between multiple control loops (e.g., N
1
, N
2
and acceleration/deceleration loops) to control a common output. Each loop's response characteristic is defined independently of the other loops by using the current output from the control, i.e., the output for each loop is calculated based on the current control output. The output of all loops are then compared to determine which loop should be selected to produce the control output. Selection is typically based on a series of minimum and maximum selection gates on the output of each control loop. Accordingly, each loop is designed and optimized as a standalone. However, when these loops are configured to work together as a system, using such a selection method, less than optimal control is provided.
One such less than optimal control scenario is found in the interrelationship between the rotor speed (N
1
, N
2
) loops and the acceleration/deceleration loops. The rotor speed loops seek to hold a particular engine rotor speed at a particular operating point, such control loops are traditionally designed to be very conservative. The acceleration/deceleration loops seek to take the engine from one power setting to another as fast as possible without exceeding any physical engine operating parameters, whereby such control loops are designed to be very aggressive. It has been found that when a traditional minimum gate is used to select between these control loops, the system will switch off of the acceleration/deceleration loops at a less than optimal time. This results in a transition from one power setting to another that is not as fast as it could have been, had the system continued with the acceleration/deceleration loops for a slightly longer period of time.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
The above-discussed and other drawbacks and deficiencies of the prior art are overcome or alleviated by the fuzzy logic based fuel flow selection (control) system of the present invention. Rotor Speed Governing Loops, Acceleration/Deceleration Loops and Limiting Loops are control loops that provided the desired engine fuel flow control. These loops receive engine operating parameters and provide fuel flow command values in accordance with corresponding transfer functions, as is known. These command values are presented to selection logic, which provides a command value based on outputs of the control loops. The command value integrated by a common integrator to provide an integrated command value which is the fuel flow command that is presented to a fuel metering unit at the engine. Each loop has a level of authority assigned to it, which is computed in terms of fuzzy rules and membership functions. Thus at any given moment, more than one loop may be in control to differing levels of authority, whereby the present invention provides a smoother transition between loops competing for control with an attendant increase in system performance.
The above-discussed and other features and advantages of the present invention will be appreciated and understood by those skilled in the art from the following detailed description and drawings.
REFERENCES:
patent: 4756667 (1988-07-01), Wyrostek et al.
patent: 4984425 (1991-01-01), Smith
patent: 5022224 (1991-06-01), Smith
patent: 5023793 (1991-06-01), Schneider et al.
patent: 5029091 (1991-07-01), Schneider et al.
patent: 5174718 (1992-12-01), Lampeter et al.
patent: 5249417 (1993-10-01), Duesler et al.
patent: 5303545 (1994-04-01), Larkin
patent: 5357421 (1994-10-01), Tautz et al.
patent: 5379583 (1995-01-01), Zickwolf, Jr.
patent: 5391055 (1995-02-01), Carvalho
patent: 5408412 (1995-04-01), Hogg et al.
patent: 5416699 (1995-05-01), DiValentin et al.
patent: 5433079 (1995-07-01), Badami et al.
patent: 5447023 (1995-09-01), Meisner et al.
patent: 5452200 (1995-09-01), Barry
patent: 5481648 (1996-01-01), Volponi et al.
patent: 5524599 (1996-06-01), Kong
patent: 5553449 (1996-09-01), Rodgers et al.
patent: 5687564 (1997-11-01), Kelly et al.
patent: 5718111 (1998-02-01), Ling et al.
patent: 5735122 (1998-04-01), Gibbons
patent: 5752379 (1998-05-01), Schafer et al.
patent: 5784884 (1998-07-01), Poerio et al.
patent: 5806052 (1998-09-01), Bonissone et al.
patent: 5865599 (1999-02-01), Pruden et al.
patent: 5915917 (1999-06-01), Eveker et al.
patent: 6119446 (2000-09-01), Shon
Martucci Angelo
Volponi Allan J.
United Technologies Corporation
Zanelli Michael J.
LandOfFree
Fuzzy logic based fuel flow selection system does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.
If you have personal experience with Fuzzy logic based fuel flow selection system, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Fuzzy logic based fuel flow selection system will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-2504783