MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2119317347 · doi:10.1109/acc.2006.1657454

Hardware-in-the-loop simulator for research on fault tolerant control of electrohydraulic flight control systems

2006· article· en· W2119317347 on OpenAlexaff
Mark Karpenko, Nariman Sepehri

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsActuatorHardware-in-the-loop simulationFlight simulatorSimulationAerodynamicsComputer scienceFault (geology)Control systemHydraulic circuitMotion simulatorFlight control surfacesControl engineeringEngineeringControl theory (sociology)Control (management)Aerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes the development of a hardware-in-the-loop (HIL) simulator to support the design and testing of novel fault tolerant control and condition monitoring schemes for fluid power systems emphasizing flight control applications. The simulator uses a distributed architecture to share, in a synchronized manner, the demanding computational load associated with the real-time simulation amongst a number of desktop workstations connected by a dedicated Ethernet network. The simulator runs a high-fidelity model of the F-16 fighter aircraft that is augmented in this paper by the addition of realistic nonlinear models of the hydraulic flight control surface actuators and a model of the nonlinear control surface aerodynamic loads. A specially designed state-of-the-art hydraulic test rig, which has the capacity to experimentally simulate common failure modes of a typical fluid power circuit, is used to emulate a F-16 horizontal tail actuator. The experimental actuator can thus be exercised against the realtime simulation of a F-16 aircraft operating under a variety of normal or faulty conditions. To add further realism to the simulation, a second experimental hydraulic actuator is used to generate the aerodynamic disturbing load. Novel fault tolerant control and diagnosis algorithms can therefore be verified in a realistic application scenario. Pilot-in-the-loop simulations are supported by the inclusion of a graphical visualization of the aircraft motions. The results of a typical HIL experiment, for a normally functioning hydraulic system, are presented to illustrate the operation of the simulator

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.390
Threshold uncertainty score0.668

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.264 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFault Detection and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207