Welcome to the
Aerospace Instrumentation and Controls Collaboration Forum
Ohio Aerospace Institute, 22800 Cedar Point Road, Cleveland, OH 44142
For
The Building Blocks of Smart Sensors and other Technologies for
Distributed High Temperature Intelligent Integrated Controls Networks
for Aerospace Applications
25 August, 2011
Smart Sensors for Distributed Controls
Mr. Dewey Benson
Honeywell International
Topics – For This Section
• DECWG plans
• Possible Areas of Collaboration
What Does The DECWG Want To Do?
• Develop requirements for:
• Engine-level architecture  Open, scalable
– Allow any engine manufacturer to design an engine-level
distributed system
• Node-level  Flexible, scalable node design
– Allow anyone making high temperature electronic parts or
assemblies to be able to plug into the engine-level system
• Develop high temperature electronics to enable distributed controls
• Scalable, flexible to accommodate several network configurations
• Demonstrate a complete system
• In a Hardware-In-The-Loop environment
• On an engine
• Develop industry base of suppliers and users of high temp electronics
• Sustainable, supports decades long aero applications
What is Distributed Engine Control Architecture?
FEDERATED
MORE DISTRIBUTED
DISTRIBUTED
COLD
FAD E C B E C O M E S
C AR D I N AV I O N I C S
C ONTROL L AW P ROCESSOR
O FF E NGINE
FAD E C
NETWORK
C ORE- M OUNTED
W ITH ACTIVE C OOLING
NETWORK
D ATA C ONCENTRATOR
NETWORK
ANALOG
HOT
ANALOG
C ORE- M OUNTED,
U NCOOLED
NETWORK
S M AR T
E F F E C TO R S
L E G AC Y
L E G AC Y
E F F E C TO R S
E F F E C TO R S
NETWORK
S M AR T
S M AR T
E F F E C TO R S
E F F E C TO R S
LOWER WEIGHT
MORE EMBEDDED, MORE MODULAR
The Evolution of Engine Control Architecture
Requirements for Distributed Controls
•
•
•
•
•
•
Thermal Environment
Generic Physical/Functional Interface
Rapid Reconfiguration / Upgradability
Certification
Integration Testing
Cost targets that allow commercial viability
Focus on Near-Term Objectives
•
•
Leverage commercial applications with production volumes
Design for flexibility on multiple applications
Considerations for Certifying a
Distributed Engine Control Architecture
• Different from the Norm
– Failure Modes
• Loss of Power
• Single Point/Multi Point Failures
• Software
– Unintended Interactions
• Latency
• Data Integrity
– Increased Connections
• Reliability
– Potential Harsher Environment
• Smart nodes in hot section
– Communications Protocol(s)
• Coordination of multiple protocols?
– EMI/HIRF/Lightning Susceptibility
– Software Validation (DO-178B)
– Dispatchable failures?
Must Be As Good As Current Architecture
DECWG Objective –
Leverage a Common Set of Parts
Data Concentrator Node
Sensor or Actuator
LVDT
Torque Motor
MUX
A-to-D
D-to-A
Signal
Cond.
Gate
Array
Power
To be handled by
Supply
FC power supply
A
•
•
B
A
Same set of SOI parts scaled from
smart sensors to single loop module
to complete core data concentrator
Leverage commonality & quantity to
drive down cost
P3, T3
DP
N2
LVDT
Fuel Temp
Fuel Press
Torque Motor
Overspeed
Signal
Cond.
Processor
Signal
Cond.
Signal
Cond.
MUX
A-to-D
D-to-A
Gate
Array
Power
To be handled by
Supply
FC power supply
A
B
A
Common Set of High Temp Parts Allows Scalable Hi-T Controls
Collaboration Opportunities
• Sensor I/O needs
• Electronic HW needs
• Wireless radio
• Programmability needs
• Smart sensors
DECWG
• System/Node Specs
• Comm/Network Stds
• Power Stds
• Electronic parts
• Host for System Demo
PIWG
+
Other
“wigs”
Is there a preferred network architecture?
Example: Redundant linear bus
Aircraft
Computing
Resource
Power
Pre-cond A
Comm
Hub A
Node-1 Node-1
B
A
Fan
LPC
HPC
Node-2 Node-2
B
A
HPT
LPT
LPT
Node-3 Node-3
B
A
Aircraft
Computing
Resource
Power
Pre-cond B
Comm
Hub B
• One transceiver per node
• Supports
• Command and respond
• TDMA round
• Other
• Physical Layer
• LVDS
• RS-485
•1394
• Plus others below
•Possible protocols
• 429, Flexray
• Simplified TTP
• Simplified TT-Ethernet
• No single point failure recovery
Simplicity versus fault tolerance
Do we need mixed network capability?
Example: Braided Ring + Comm-Over-Power + Wireless
Aircraft
Computing
Resource
Sensor
Power
Pre-cond A
Comm
Hub A
Node-2
A
Node-1
A
Node-2
B
Node-1
B
Fan
LPC
Comm over Power for smart sensors
2 wire comm + power network
HPC
HPT
LPT
LPT
Wireless Sensors
And Hub
Node-4
A
Aircraft
Computing
Resource
Power
Pre-cond B
Node-4
B
Node-3
A
Node-3
B
Comm
Hub B
Can high temp digital electronics enable a 2-wire interface?
Wireless interfaces?
Which architecture provides best availability?
Comparison of Different Physical Layers
Example: RS-485 vs LVDS – Speed/Low Power vs Robustness
Comparison of Signal Levels
Large DC offset already
built into several
standards
Can smart sensors be accommodated using ‘power over comm’?
Allows two wire sensor solution.
QUESTIONS?