Highly integrated digital electronic control: Digital flight control, aircraft model identification, and adaptive engine control

The highly integrated digital electronic control (HIDEC) program at NASA Ames Research Center, Dryden Flight Research Facility is a multiphase flight research program to quantify the benefits of promising integrated control systems. McDonnell Aircraft Company is the prime contractor, with United Technologies Pratt and Whitney Aircraft, and Lear Siegler Incorporated as major subcontractors. The NASA F-15A testbed aircraft was modified by the HIDEC program by installing a digital electronic flight control system (DEFCS) and replacing the standard F100 (Arab 3) engines with F100 engine model derivative (EMD) engines equipped with digital electronic engine controls (DEEC), and integrating the DEEC's and DEFCS. The modified aircraft provides the capability for testing many integrated control modes involving the flight controls, engine controls, and inlet controls. This paper focuses on the first two phases of the HIDEC program, which are the digital flight control system/aircraft model identification (DEFCS/AMI) phase and the adaptive engine control system (ADECS) phase

Fault detection and accommodation testing on an F100 engine in an F-15 airplane

The fault detection and accommodation (FDA) methodology for digital engine-control systems may range from simple comparisons of redundant parameters to the more complex and sophisticated observer models of the entire engine system. Evaluations of the various FDA schemes are done using analytical methods, simulation, and limited-altitude-facility testing. Flight testing of the FDA logic has been minimal because of the difficulty of inducing realistic faults in flight. A flight program was conducted to evaluate the fault detection and accommodation capability of a digital electronic engine control in an F-15 aircraft. The objective of the flight program was to induce selected faults and evaluate the resulting actions of the digital engine controller. Comparisons were made between the flight results and predictions. Several anomalies were found in flight and during the ground test. Simulation results showed that the inducement of dual pressure failures was not feasible since the FDA logic was not designed to accommodate these types of failures