Challenges in Aircraft Engine Control

and Gas Path Health Management

Dr. Sanjay Garg Donald L. Simon

Chief, Controls and Dynamics Branch Controls and Dynamics Branch
NASA Glenn Research Center NASA Glenn Research Center
Ph: (216) 433-2685 Ph: (216) 433-3740
email: [Link]@[Link] email: [Link]@[Link]
[Link] [Link]

Glenn Research Center

Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
Challenges in Aircraft Engine Controls

Dr. Sanjay Garg

Chief, Controls and Dynamics Branch
NASA Glenn Research Center
Ph: (216) 433-2685
email: [Link]@[Link]
[Link]

Glenn Research Center

Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 Outline

• Fundamentals of Aircraft Engine Control

• Intelligent Engine Concept – from a controls
perspective
• Advanced Engine Control Logic
• Active Component Control
• Distributed Engine Control
• Summary

Glenn Research Center

Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 Turbofan Engine Basics
N2

LPC - Low Pressure Compressor

HPC - High Pressure Compressor
HPT - High Pressure Turbine
LPT - Low Pressure Turbine
N1 - Fan Speed
N2 - Core Speed

N1

• Dual Shaft – High Pressure and Low Pressure

• Two flow paths – bypass and core
• Most of the thrust generated through the bypass flow
• Core compressed air mixed with fuel and ignited in the
Combustor
• Two turbines extract energy from the hot air to drive the
compressors
Glenn Research Center
Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 Basic Engine Control Concept
• Objective: Provide smooth, stable, and stall free operation of
the engine via single input (PLA) with no throttle restrictions
• Reliable and predictable throttle movement to thrust
response

• Issues:
• Thrust cannot be measured
• Changes in ambient condition and aircraft maneuvers
cause distortion into the fan/compressor
• Harsh operating environment – high temperatures and
large vibrations
• Safe operation – avoid stall, combustor blow out etc.
• Need to provide long operating life – 20,000 hours
• Engine components degrade with usage – need to have
reliable performance throughout the operating life

Glenn Research Center

Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 Basic Engine Control Concept
• SinceThrust (T) cannot be measured, use Fuel Flow WF to
Control shaft speed N
• T = F(N)
Pump fuel
flow from Accessories
fuel tank

Control
Sensor
Throttle

Pilot’s Compute Meter the Inject fuel Measure

power desired fuel computed flow into produced
request flow fuel flow combustor power

Valve / Fuel nozzle

Actuator
No Yes
Determine
Power
operating desired?
condition

Control Logic

Glenn Research Center

Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 Environment within a gas turbine
Aerodynamic 2000+ºC
20000+ hours
Buffeting Flame temperature Cooling air Between service
120 dB/Hz to 10kHz - 40ºC ambient at 650+ºC

40+ Bar
Gas pressures

Foreign objects
Birds, Ice, stones
Air mass flow
~2 tonne/sec
8mm+
Shaft movement

50 000g centrifugal
2.8m 1100+ºC
acceleration
Diameter Metal temperatures
>100g casing vibration
to beyond 20kHz
10 000rpm
0.75m diameter

Glenn Research Center

Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 Operational Limits
N2

LPC - Low Pressure Compressor

HPC - High Pressure Compressor
HPT - High Pressure Turbine
LPT - Low Pressure Turbine
N1 - Fan Speed
N2 - Core Speed

N1

• Structural Limits:
• Maximum Fan and Core Speeds – N1, N2
• Maximum Turbine Blade Temperature
• Safety Limits:
• Adequate Stall Margin – Compressor and Fan
• Lean Burner Blowout – minimum fuel
• Operational Limit:
• Maximum Turbine Inlet Temperature – long life
Glenn Research Center
Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
Fuel flow rate
(Wf) or fuel ratio Historical Engine Control
unit (Wf/P3)
Safe operating
region

Max. flow limit

Droop
slope
Proportional
control gain or
droop slope
Required fuel flow
@ steady state

Min. flow limit

Idle Max.
power power GE I-A
(1942)
Engine shaft speed

• Fuel flow is the only controlled variable.

- Hydro-mechanical governor.
- Minimum-flow stop to prevent flame-out.
- Maximum-flow schedule to prevent over-temperature
• Stall protection implemented by pilot following cue cards for
throttle movement limitations
Glenn Research Center
Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 Typical Current Engine Control
• Allows pilot to have full throttle movement throughout the flight envelope
- There are many controlled variables – we will focus on fuel flow

• Engine control logic is developed using an engine model to provide

guaranteed performance (minimum thrust for a throttle setting) throughout
the life of the engine
- FAA regulations provide a maximum allowable rise time of 5 sec
to reach 95% and a maximum settling time for thrust from idle to max
Glenn Research Center
Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 Implementing Limits for Engine Control
Wf
surge
Ps30

blowout

N 2R
• Limits are implemented by limiting fuel flow based on rotor speed
• Maximum fuel limit protects against surge/stall, over-temp, over-
speed and over-pressure
• Minimum fuel limit protects against combustor blowout
• Actual limit values are generated through simulation and analytical studies
Glenn Research Center
Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 Control Law Design Procedure
• The various control gains K are determined using linear engine models and
linear control theory
• Proportional + Integral control provides good fan speed tracking
• Control gains are scheduled based on PLA and Mach number
• Control design evaluated throughout the envelope using a nonlinear engine
simulation and implemented via software on FADEC processor
• Control gains are adjusted to provide desired performance based on engine
ground and altitude tests and finally flight tests

Math Prob Control

Specs Eval
Model Form Logic

Yes Spec Hardware Software

Good to Go Met? Testing & V&V

No
Adjust Control Gains
Glenn Research Center
Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 Outline

• Fundamentals of Aircraft Engine Control

• Intelligent Engine Concept – from a controls
perspective
• Advanced Engine Control Logic
• Active Component Control
• Distributed Engine Control
• Summary

Glenn Research Center

Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 Intelligent Engine Technologies
- A Systems Viewpoint -
Engine System
Controller Actuators
PLA
+
-

D
T

S
1
I
s
o
la
t
i
on
N
1
Diagnostics
&
O
1

S
e
n
s
o
rS
2 O
2
S
en
s
o
r
R
e
a
d
i
n
gs E
s
t
i
m
at
es

S
8

W
e
i
g
h
ts
N
6 O
8

Prognostics
I
n
f
o
C
o
m
r
m
a
p
r
e
t
i
o
nI
s
s
i
on
n
f
R
e
o
r
m
a
t
g
e
n
e
i
o
n
r
a
t
io
n Modeling
Sensors

• Components such as actuators, • Simplified models are essential for

sensors, control logic, & diagnostic controller design. Understanding
systems have to be designed with the physics of the phenomena is
overall system requirements in required to capture critical system
mind. dynamics in these models.

Glenn Research Center

Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 Intelligent Propulsion Systems
Control System perspective
Multifold increase in propulsion system Affordability, Capability
Environmental Compatibility, Performance, Reliability and Safety
Advanced Health
Active Control Technologies Management technologies
for enhanced performance for self diagnostic and
and reliability, and reduced prognostic propulsion
emissions system
- active control of - Life usage monitoring and
combustor, compressor, prediction
vibration etc. - Data fusion from multiple
- MEMS based control sensors and model based
applications information
Distributed, Fault-Tolerant Engine Control for
enhanced reliability, reduced weight and optimal
performance with system deterioration
- Smart sensors and actuators
- Robust, adaptive control

Glenn Research Center

Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 Modeling Engine Faults and Performance Deterioration*
A general influence coefficient matrix may be derived for any particular gas turbine
cycle, defining the set of differential equations which interrelate the various
dependent and independent engine performance parameters.

Physical Problems Degraded

Component Changes in
• Erosion Performance Measurable
• Corrosion Result in Producing
Parameters
• Fouling • Flow capacities
• Built up dirt • Efficiencies • Spool speeds
• FOD • Effective nozzle • Fuel flow
• Worn seals or areas • Temperatures
Permitting Allowing
excessive • Expansion • Pressures
correction isolation of
clearance coefficients • Power output
of
• Burned, bowed
or missing
blades
• Plugged nozzles

* From “Parameter Selection for Multiple Fault Diagnostics of Gas Turbine Engines” by Louis A. Urban, 1974

Glenn Research Center

Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 Outline

• Fundamentals of Aircraft Engine Control

• Intelligent Engine Concept – from a controls
perspective
• Advanced Engine Control Logic
• Active Component Control
• Distributed Engine Control
• Summary

Glenn Research Center

Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 Advanced Engine Control Logic
• Multi-variable Control (MVC) – extensive research on
engine application in the mid1970s-90s
• LQR based MVC demonstrated on F-100 engine at NASA
GRC in 1979
• LQG/LTR based engine control studies in mid 1980s with
engine test in UK
• H-infinity based robust engine control studies at NASA GRC
in mid 1990s
• Life Extending Control demonstrated in simulation
studies at GRC in early 2000s
• Modify the acceleration logic to increase on-wing life while
still meeting the performance requirements
• Various research studies on Sensor Fault Detection,
Isolation and Accommodation

Glenn Research Center

Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
Engine Performance Deterioration Mitigation Control
• Motivation—Thrust-to-Throttle Relationship Changes
with Degradation in Engines Under Fan Speed Control

Throttle Fan Speed Thrust

Degradation-
induced shift

Glenn Research Center

Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 EPDMC Architecture
• The proposed retrofit architecture:

• Adds the following “logic” elements to existing FADEC:

• A model of the nominal throttle to desired thrust response
• An estimator for engine thrust based on available measurements
• A modifier to the Fan Speed Command based on the error between desired
and estimated thrust
- Since the modifier appears prior to the limit logic, the operational safety
and life remains unchanged
Glenn Research Center
Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 EPDMC Evaluation
Thrust response for Typical Mission
With EPDMC
• Throttle to thrust
response is maintained
– no “uncommanded”
thrust asymmetry

Without EPDMC

Glenn Research Center

Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
Commercial Modular Aero-Propulsion System Simulation 40k
Simulation programmed in
graphical language

C-MAPSS40k
PAX200 Commercial Turbofan Engine and Controller Models

out_Nf
Alt alt Alt nf_sens
altitude Nlp sens
Wf _act
out_Nc
Mach mach Nhp sens nc_sens

VSV_act dTamb dTamb

out_T2
T2 sens T2_sens
NcR NcR
out_T24

Engine flight data NfR Nf R

VBV_act
Mach Mach
T24 sens T25_sens

out_T30

used to tune Controller T30 sens T30_sens

out_T50
T50 sens egt_sens
Nf_zro Nf _zro

physics-based P2 sens
out_P2
P2_sens

model
out_P25
Nc_zro Nc_zro
P25 sens P25_sens

out_P30
P30 sens P30_sens
Simulation Inputs corrected speeds f uel f low out_P50

Plotting and graphical out_Wf P50 sens

Fdrag
P50_sens

out_Fdrag

analysis capability Health Parameters Engine Outputs Displays

out_VSV
VSV

Fnet
out_Fnet
Fnet

VBV Fgross out_Fgross

out_VBV

Engine Model

GUI driven operation

C-MAPSS40k thrust and stall margin

response to throttle movements
Glenn Research Center
at Lewis Field
Model-Based Control and Diagnostics Concept

Actuator Engine
Commands Instrumentation
• Fuel Flow • Pressures
• Variable Geometry Actuator • Fuel flow
• Bleeds Positions • Temperatures
• Rotor Speeds
“Personalized” Engine
Control
On-Board Model
Selected Sensors Component & Tracking Filter
Performance
Estimates • Efficiencies
• Flow capacities
Sensor Sensor Estimates • Stability margin
Validation &
• Thrust
Fault Detection Sensor Measurements
On Board

Ground Ground-Based Diagnostics

Level • Fault Codes
• Maintenance/Inspection
Advisories

Glenn Research Center

Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 Model-Based Engine Control
Objective: Develop and demonstrate the
capability to provide more efficient engine
control using an on-board real-time model.
Approach:
- Develop a self-tuning engine model for the
C-MAPSS40k engine simulation – using
the optimal tuner approach
- Validate the self-tuning model's ability to
track changes in engine gas path
performance parameters
- Develop direct thrust and limited variable Self-tuning engine model vs. “un-tuned”
control using model based estimated value piecewise linear model response (top),
and corresponding model tuning
parameter adjustments (bottom)

Tight control of Thrust

achieved – preliminary
linear design

Glenn Research Center

at Lewis Field
 Adaptive Engine Control
• The traditional engine control logic consists of a fixed set of control
gains developed using an average model of the engine
• Having an on-board engine model which “adapts” to the condition of
the engine, opens up the possibility of adapting the control logic to
maintain desired performance in the presence of engine degradation
or to accommodate any faults while obtaining best achievable
performance
• An emerging technique for such an adaptive engine control is the
Model Predictive Control (MPC)
Reference
At each time step
model is matched
to measurements
(estimation)
Prediction with impact of
control horizon action
• MPC solves a constrained
optimization problem online
Prediction horizon

Control horizon
Prediction with
fixed control action
to obtain the “best” control
at current value action - based on a tracked
engine model, constraints, and
Past Future
Only first control action
the desired optimization
is implemented objective

Glenn Research Center

at Lewis Field
 Outline

• Fundamentals of Aircraft Engine Control

• Intelligent Engine Concept – from a controls
perspective
• Advanced Engine Control Logic
• Active Component Control
• Distributed Engine Control
• Summary

Glenn Research Center

Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 Separation Control in Intake Ducts

Glenn Research Center

at Lewis Field
 Active Stall Control

• Detect stall precursive signals from

pressure measurements. Injector
• Develop high frequency actuators and Intake
Rotor scoop
injector designs.
• Actively stabilize rotating stall using high
Compressor Stability Enhancement Using
velocity air injection with robust control. Recirculated Flow
• Demonstrated significant performance improvement with an advanced high speed
compressor in a compressor rig with simulated recirculating flow
Glenn Research Center
Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 Active Flow Control - Compressors
Compressor Stator Suction Surface Separation Control
49 50 51 52
47 48 1
46 2
45 3
44 4

41
42
43 5
6
7
Flow Delivery
40 8
System

West Accumulator

East Accumulator
39 9
38 10
37
Flow Control
Stator Annulus
11 35%
36 12
35
34 14
13
Chord
33 15
32 16
31 17
30 18
29 19
28
27 26
25 24 23 22
21
20
30º

Flow
Injection
Multistage Axial Compressor Filter
Mass Flow
Meter
Control
Valve
75

F+ (Non-dimensional
Injection frequency)
Net total pressure loss reduction
0
50 0.47
within the vane, c (%)
0.56
1.12
25 1.68

Installed Smart Vane Stators 0

Rapid Prototype -25

Flow Control Vane 0 10 20 30 40 50
Injected momentum coefficient, Cμ x 103
 Active Combustion Controls

Downstream Dynamic Pressure Trace

P3=97 psi, T3=561F, f/a=.040,
Wair=3.71lbs/sec

-8
-6
-4
-2

psi
0
2
4
6
8
0.00 0.08 0.17 0.25 0.33

time (sec)

Pattern Factor Combustion

Control Instability Control
Objective: Actively
reduce combustor Objective: actively
pattern factor suppress thermo-acoustic
driven pressure
Status: Concept oscillations
Emission Minimizing Control
demonstrated in Status: Concept
collaboration with Objective: Actively reduce NOx demonstrated on a single
Honeywell Engines production combustion rig in 2003.
under the AST Status: Fuel actuation concept and Continuing research under
program - 2000. hardware developed under AST program. current projects.
Preliminary low order emission models
developed under the HSR program 2000.
Glenn Research Center
edmond wong 970728
at Lewis Field
 Active Control of Combustion Instability
High-frequency fuel valve
Advanced Control Methods NL Acoustics

White Noise Instability Pressure

+
Pressure from +
Fuel
Valve
Fuel lines, Injector
& Combustion
Fuel Modulation +
 Combustor Pressure
Flame

Phase Shift
Controller

Filter

Fuel delivery system model and hardware

Accumulator

Modulated Combustor Instrumentation

Modulating Fuel Flow (pressures, temp’s)
Fuel Valve
In

Fuel Fuel Injector

Nozzle
Assy Emissions Probe

Research combustor rig

Glenn Research Center

Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 Active Instability Control on a Low Emission Combustor Prototype
Pressure Results from testing Oct-Nov 2011
Sensor
Closed-Loop Self-Excited System
Combustion Combustor
Combustor Φ’ Process Acoustics
P’
+ Natural feed-back process
Fuel-air
Mixture system Artificial control process
Actuator Controller Sensor
Fuel Actuator
(other side) Run 1018, Date 101123, Variable filtered_plant Page 1/1

0.7 2
Time RMS=1.61, Mean=0.33
Max=0.6 @ 626Hz Time RMS=0.54, Mean=0
2.5 0.6
1
2 0.5

1.5 0.4 Controller Off

plant
064

0
psi

1 0.3

0.5 0.2
-1
0 0.1

-0.5 0 -2

-1
0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02
Time, sec
0.025 0.03 0.035 0.04 Instability Prevention
0.5
0.05 2
Time RMS=1.3, Mean=0
0 Max=0.05 @ 631Hz Time RMS=0.11, Mean=0

0.04
-0.5 1

-1 0.03
Controller On
plant
067
psi

-1.5 0
0.02
-2
-1
-2.5 0.01

-3
0 -2
1 2 3 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Instability Suppression Frequency, Hz Time, sec
Intelligent Management of Turbine Tip Clearance
Time Scales: Flights Minutes Seconds Milliseconds
Problem: Engine Cruise Pinch Eccentric
Wear Clearance Points Shaft Motion
Approach: Regen. Case Case Magnetic
Seals Cooling Actuation Bearings

Notional Mission Profile

Take-off Decel Re-Accel
Turbine Tip Clearance

Cruise

Pinch Points

Time
Glenn Research Center
Controls and Dynamics Technology Branch at Lewis Field
 Outline

• Fundamentals of Aircraft Engine Control

• Intelligent Engine Concept – from a controls
perspective
• Advanced Engine Control Logic
• Active Component Control
• Distributed Engine Control
• Summary

Glenn Research Center

Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 Distributed Engine Control
Objectives:
• Enable new engine concepts
• Enable new engine performance
enhancing technologies
• Improve reliability
• Reduce overall cost
• Reduce control system weight

Challenges:
• High temperature electronics
• Communications based on
open system standards
• Control function distribution
Government – Industry Partnership
Distributed Engine Control Working Group

Glenn Research Center

Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 Distributed Control Technology Roadmap
T=0 years 5 10 15 20

CORE I/O .
Core-Mounted :
Data Concentrator
Digital Communications
Distributed Power
SOI μP, logic, analog
SiC power

NETWORKED CONTROL .
Engine Network
Smart System Devices
>300 Celsius Electronics
SOI μP, logic, analog
Medium Scale Integration SiC μP, logic, analog
SiC power

FULLY DISTIBUTED
Common Network Communications (Wireless)
Embedded Control Law
Embedded Power Harvesting

SOI μP, logic, analog

Large Scale Integration SiC μP, logic, analog
SiC power
 Summary
• There are tremendous opportunities to improve
and revolutionize aircraft engine performance
through “proper” use of advanced control
technologies
– Intelligent engine control integrated with reliable condition
monitoring and fault diagnostics to extend on-wing
operating life, maintain performance with aging, safely
accommodate faults while maintaining best achievable
performance etc.
– Active control of engine components to provide the desired
performance characteristics throughout the flight envelope
and enable low emission higher performance components
– Distributed engine control to enable new engine concepts,
reduce “control system” weight, increase operational
reliability, and flexibility to easily incorporate new and
improved capabilities

Glenn Research Center

Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 References
• H. Austin Spang III and Harold Brown, “Control of Jet Engines”,
Control Engineering Practice, Vo. 7, 1999, pp. 1043-1059
• Link Jaw and Jack D. Mattingly, “Aircraft Engine Controls,” AIAA
Education Series Book
• Jonathan A. DeCastro, Jonathan S. Litt, and Dean K. Frederick, “A
Modular Aero-Propulsion System Simulation of a Large Commercial
Aircraft Engine”, NASA TM 2008-215303.
• Jeffrey Csank, Ryan D. May, Jonathan S. Litt, and Ten-Huei Guo,
“Control Design for a Generic Commercial Aircraft Engine”, NASA
TM-2010-216811
• Sanjay Garg, “Propulsion Controls and Diagnostics Research in
Support of NASA Aeronautics and Exploration Mission Programs,”
NASA TM 2011-216939.
NASA TMs are available for free download at:
[Link]

Engine Simulation Software C-MAPSS40k – available to U.S. citizens

[Link]

Glenn Research Center

Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 Challenges in Aircraft Engine
Gas Path Health Management

Don Simon
Controls and Dynamics Branch
NASA Glenn Research Center
Cleveland, OH, USA
[Link]@[Link]
(216) 433-3740

Glenn Research Center

Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 Challenges in Aircraft Engine Gas Path Health Management
Outline
• Aircraft Engine Gas Path Health Management Background
– Goals and Benefits
– Approaches
• Future Challenges
– Data quantity, data access, and data sharing
– New sensor suites
– Benchmarking and verification & validation methods
– Models and model-based controls & diagnostics
– Engine fault testing
– Information fusion
– Practical design considerations
• Summary

Glenn Research Center

Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 Challenges in Aircraft Engine Gas Path Health Management
Background

Glenn Research Center

Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 Gas Path Health Management is a Critical Element
of an Aircraft Engine Health Management System

Closely Coupled

Electronic
Lubrication Component Gas Path Engine
Vibration
System Life Usage Control

Engine Health Management System

Glenn Research Center

at Lewis Field
 Aircraft Engine Gas Path Diagnostics Architecture

Engine

Sensed Measurements
• Pressures,
temperatures, rotor
speeds, etc.

• Enabled by digital
FADEC
engine controls and
data acquisition On-Board
Diagnostics
systems

• Both on-board and On-Board

off-board Data - Transmission
functionality
Off-Board
Fleet-wide Trend & (Ground-Based)
Condition Monitoring
Ground
Station

Glenn Research Center

Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 Aircraft Engine Gas Path Health Management
Goal: Through the interpretation of measured aircraft engine gas
path parameters…..
• Accurately assess engine component performance deterioration
over an engine’s lifetime of use
- and -
• Accurately detect and isolate any engine system and/or
instrumentation malfunctions that occur

Benefits: Inherently tied to …

• Safety
- and -
• Affordability

Reduced in-flight Reduced Reduced fuel burn

malfunctions maintenance-related and operating costs
delays and
cancellations
Glenn Research Center
Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 Aircraft Engine Gas Path
Deterioration and Fault Examples

Turbomachinery Controls and

Turbomachinery Faults Accessories Faults
Deterioration
• Foreign object • Sensor faults
• Fouling damage • Actuator faults
• Corrosion • Blade/Vane • Wiring harness
• Erosion failure faults

Glenn Research Center

Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 Aircraft Engine Maintenance Actions

On-Wing
Maintenance

Engine Water
Wash

Engine
Overhaul

Glenn Research Center

Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
Gas Path Diagnostics Engine Fault Isolation Approach *
Deteriorated Resulting in
Turbomachinery
and Gas Path
Faults
Degraded Producing
module
performance

Changes in
measured
parameters

Rapid shift
Permitting (potentially
correction of due to a
fault event)

Gradual
deterioration
* Adapted From “Parameter Selection
for Multiple Fault Diagnostics of Gas
Turbine Engines” by Louis A. Urban, Allowing Gradual
1974. deterioration
isolation of
(# flights)

Glenn Research Center

Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 Ground Station Performance Trend Monitoring and
Gas Path Fault Diagnostic Process*

Compare to
reference Fault diagnostics
model
Engine
snapshot y + Δy Fault ΔΔ y Fault
measurement - detection isolation Reconcile
data & report
Reference No results
(nominal) Record
Engine model no fault
operating
conditions
Performance trend
monitoring

* Reference: Volponi, A., Wood, B., (2005), “Engine Health Management for Aircraft
Propulsion Systems,” The Forum on Integrated System Health Engineering and
Management (ISHEM) in Aerospace, November 7-10, Napa, CA.

Glenn Research Center

at Lewis Field
 Conventional Performance Estimation
and Gas Path Fault Diagnostics
(based on “snapshot” measurements)
Performance Estimation Gas Path Fault Diagnostics
Steady-state measurement process: Steady-state measurement process:
y  H h  v y  Hf f  v
y sensed output vector Hf fault influence coefficient matrix
 h health parameter vector  f fault vector
H influence coefficient matrix
v measurement uncertainty Diagnostics performed applying a
(N(0,σ) with covariance R) single fault assumption:
• Assumes that rapid/abrupt
Performance estimation: performance change is most likely
due to a single root cause
hˆ   Ph1  H T R 1H  H T R 1  y
1
• Weighted least squares estimation
applied to produce an estimated fault
Ph health parameter covariance magnitude for each fault type.
matrix (defined a priori)
• Estimated fault that best matches
observed fault signature is classified
as fault type.

Glenn Research Center

at Lewis Field
 Challenges in Aircraft Engine
Gas Path Health Management

Glenn Research Center

Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 Expanding Quantity of Available Data
Example Commercial Aircraft Engine Flight Data
Data
Denotes conventional “snapshot” measurement point
Transfer

Emerging Trends
• Increasing flight data recording
capabilities
• Flight Operations Quality Assurance
(FOQA) programs provide operators
access to full-flight data
• Dedicated processors for analyzing
data on-board

Expanded Data Quantity

Provides both Challenges
and Opportunities!

Glenn Research Center

Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 Expanding Quantity of Available Data (cont.)

Potential Benefits:
• Reduced diagnostic latency
• Improved fault detection and
isolation capabilities
Data • Improved prognostics and remaining
Transfer useful life calculations
• Applied for development of improved
engine models
Fleet-wide Trend &
Condition Monitoring Challenges:
Ground • Streaming data analysis capabilities
Station • Transient diagnostic techniques
• Data mining techniques for
information discovery and extraction
• Efficient data compression and data
management strategies
• Effective leveraging of redundant
sensor measurement information

Glenn Research Center

Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 Data Access and Data Sharing

• Access to aircraft engine data is often limited

due to proprietary issues and liability
concerns

• Access to faulty engine data is rare

– Engine faults occur infrequently, and when
they do occur “ground truth knowledge” of
actual fault condition is not always available

• Mechanisms to sanitize and share data

between “data owners” and solution providers
are desired
– NASA Ames DASHlink (Discovery in
Aeronautics System Health) provides an online
resource for data and algorithm development
and sharing

Glenn Research Center

Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 New Sensor Suites
• Gas path methods primarily rely upon the sensors installed for engine
control purposes
– In some cases the trend is to reduce the number of control sensors in order
to reduce cost and weight and increase reliability
– Health management benefits of sensors is often a secondary consideration

• It is difficult to justify adding additional engine sensors solely for health

management purposes
– Reduce cost/weight and increased reliability of existing sensors is desired
– Additional sensors must have strong cost-benefit justification
– Often dual-use functionality is necessary

• New sensors added for advanced control purposes can potentially be

leveraged for health management benefits
– Examples: tip clearance sensors, active control sensors, etc.
– Requires new feature extraction and data synchronization techniques
– Must relate any new information back to engine health

• Effective sensor selection tools are necessary to help end users assess
the health management consequences of adding/removing sensors

Glenn Research Center

Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 Benchmarking and Comparison of Candidate
Health Management Methods
• Engine Health Management (EHM) related R&D
Algorithm Algorithm Algorithm
activities have increased significantly since the late #1 #2 #3
1990’s. However, due to the use of different
terminologies, applications, proprietary data, and
metrics there is no basis of comparison

• Standardized metrics can enable diagnostic method System

performance to be reflected in a common format Designer
– SAE Committee E32 Aerospace Propulsion Systems
Health Management publication ARP5783, “Health and
Usage Monitoring Metrics: Monitoring the Monitor”
Engine Fleet
Simulator User’s
• Public benchmarking problems can facilitate the Diagnostic
Evaluation
Metrics
development and comparison of candidate health Solutions

management methods against a common problem Results

– The Prognostics and Health Management (PHM) Society

Conference puts forth a data challenge problem annually
– NASA’s Propulsion Diagnostic Method Evaluation ProDiMES Architecture
Strategy (ProDiMES) enables gas path benchmarking

Glenn Research Center

Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 Verification and Validation
Tools and Techniques
Engine health management technology is
growing in its breadth of application and
its complexity

Presents a need for improved

verification and validation tools and
techniques to reduce development
time and cost

• Certification applicants must adhere to regulatory

agency certification requirements
– DO-178C, Software Considerations in Airborne
Systems and Equipment Certification, will be the Verification and Validation
primary document by which the certification authorities Process
will approve all commercial software-based aerospace
systems
– SAE E32 will soon publish ARP 5987, Guidelines for
Engine Health Management System Software and
Airborne Electronic Hardware Assurance Levels

Glenn Research Center

Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 Models for Health Management
Applications
• Algorithm developers must keep in mind that engine
models are imperfect
–
–
Engine models are 1D; actual engine is multi-dimensional
No two engines are the same
≠
– Sensors aren’t modeled correctly
– Model accuracy during transients and at off-design operating Engine Engine Model
conditions is notoriously poor
– Models developed during engine design phase aren’t
necessarily updated once engine goes into production;
design changes aren’t always modeled

• Model-based health management algorithms must be

robustly designed to account for model imperfections Pratt & Whitney’s eSTORM Architecture
Empirical Neural
Network Model
Engine
• Cost effective techniques to update/maintain models 

over an engine type’s lifetime of use are desired Analytical State

Variable Model
+ +

+ -
• Hybrid modeling (analytical + empirical) techniques
Hybrid Model Kalman Filter
hold promise for capturing engine-model mismatch Tuner

Glenn Research Center

Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 Model-Based Control and Diagnostics
Concept
Related Technology Challenges:
Engine
Actuator Instrumentation • Model Accuracy
Commands
– At steady-state and transient operation
Actuator – Sensor dynamics
“Personalized” Positions
– Ability of tuning parameter adjustments to
Engine reflect engine performance deterioration
Control effects in engine outputs
On-Board
– Hybrid modeling (e.g., eSTORM) helps
Model address engine-model mismatch
Sensor
& Tracking
Validation &
Filter • Verification and Validation
Fault
On Detection – Coupling with control necessitates
Board higher level of software assurance

Ground
Level
Ground-Based • Underdetermined estimation problem
Diagnostics
(fewer sensors than unknown health
parameters reflecting deterioration)
Model-Based Control and – NASA-developed optimal tuner
Diagnostics Architecture selection methodology provides
systematic design approach for
minimizing error
Glenn Research Center
Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 Kalman Filter-Based Performance Estimation
(based on streaming measurement data)
Performance Estimation Reduced-order state space equations
(replacing h with q)
Dynamic measurement process:
xk 1  Axk  Buk  Lhk  w k  xk 1   A L*   xk  B   wk 
q    
     k w 
u 
y k  Cxk  Duk  Mhk  v k  k 1   0 I  qk   0   q ,k 
x 
k discrete time index  
y k  C M *  k   Duk  v k
qk 
y sensed output vector
h health parameter vector
x state vector Optimal tuner selection
u actuator command vector • Define q = V*h
v measurement noise (N(0,σ) with covariance R) • V* is selected through an optimal
w process noise (N(0,σ) with covariance Q) iterative search to minimize Kalman
filter mean squared estimation error in
the parameters of interest*
Full-order state space equations: • Health parameter estimation:

 xk 1  A L   xk  B   wk 
h    
 0 I  h   0  k w 
u hˆ  V *†qˆ
 k 1    k     h ,k 
x  *Reference: Simon, D.L., Garg, S., (2010), “Optimal Tuner
y k  C M  k   Duk  v k Selection for Kalman Filter-Based Aircraft Engine
Performance Estimation,” Journal of Engineering for Gas
 hk  Turbines and Power, Vol. 132 / 0231601-1.

Glenn Research Center

at Lewis Field
 Engine Fault Test Opportunities
EHM technology development is challenging:
• Expensive to intentionally fault/fail aircraft engines
Fleet insertion
• However, dedicated testing is desired to demonstrate
technology against known system “ground truth” state

Partnerships often make it possible: On-engine testing

• Sharing of costs, results and benefits
• “Piggy-backing” on related tests such as mission endurance
testing, acceptance testing, etc.
Component rig testing
Examples of past engine fault testing:
• Australian DSTO fault testing on F404 Engine (1990’s)
• Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) Program F100 engine seeded fault
testing (1998-1999) Simulation test and evaluation
• FAA/Navy/NASA TF-41 engine seeded disk crack testing
• NASA Vehicle Integrated Propulsion Research (VIPR) engine
testing (2011-current) Conceptual design

Engine Test Opportunities are Rare. When they Testing is a necessary and challenging
do arise, they should be leveraged as much as component of Engine Health Management
(EHM) technology development
possible in order to derive maximum benefits

Glenn Research Center

Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 Information Fusion

Leverage all available information

Health inferences do not have to be Propulsion Level
based solely on gas path Reasoning
measurements!

• Other subsystem health information Information Fusion

(e.g., vibration, lubrication, etc.)
• Recent maintenance actions
• Opposite engine health information
Gas Path Vibration Lubrication Other
• Control information—fault codes, limit Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring Information
activation
• Fleet-wide engine statistics
• Domain expert knowledge / heuristics Information Fusion
• Negative information (the absence of Architecture
information can be significant)

Glenn Research Center

Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 Practical Design Considerations
Keep end user in mind Keep maintainer of tool in mind

• Keep in mind that the skill of individual end • Keep in mind verification and validation
users may vary considerably, and not all requirements.
users will be proficient in computers or • Keep expense to develop, update and
engineering terminology. maintain tool at a minimum.
• Humans are not infallible. Consideration • Avoid the need for substantial redesign
must be given to the fact that they may each time the engine undergoes a
misinterpret or ignore information. hardware change or maintenance.
• If the user cannot operate the system, or • Avoid the need to manually tailor the
lacks confidence in its capabilities, it may tool for each individual engine.
lose credibility.
• Keep in mind that tool will probably be
• Provide quality documentation and training. integrated into existing architecture
Try to keep the tool simple!
Glenn Research Center
Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 Challenges in Aircraft Engine Gas Path Health Management
Summary

Aircraft propulsion gas path health management is a

key element of an overall engine health
management system, providing …
• Improved safety
• Improved affordability

Challenges:
• Techniques to take advantage of expanding quantity of data including
the processing, mining, and sharing of data
• New sensor suites
• The need for improved models/modeling
• Engine fault test opportunities
• Leverage all available information
• Keep the design practical

Glenn Research Center

Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field
 Challenges in Aircraft Engine Gas Path Health Management
References
Doel, D. L., (1994), “TEMPER – A Gas Path Analysis Tool for Commercial Jet Engines,” Journal of Engineering for Gas
Turbines and Power, Vol. 116, No. 1, pp.82-89.
Jaw, L.C., “Recent Advances in Aircraft Engine Health Management (EHM) Technologies and Recommendations for the Next
Step,” ASME Paper GT2005–68625, 2005.
Kumar, A., Viassolo, D., (2008), “Model-Based Fault Tolerant Control,” NASA Contractor Report CR-2008-215273.
Li, Y.G., (2002), “Performance-Analysis-Based Gas Turbine Diagnostics: A Review”, Proceedings of the Institution of
Mechanical Engineers, Part A: J. Power and Energy, Vol. 216, pp. 363-377.
Luppold, R.H. Roman, J.R., Gallops, G.W., Kerr, L.J., (1989), “Estimating In-Flight Engine Performance Varaiations Using
Kalman Filter Concepts,” AIAA-89-2584, AIAA 25th Joint Propulsion Conference, July 10-12, Monterey, CA.
Simon, D.L., Garg, S., (2010), “Optimal Tuner Selection for Kalman Filter-Based Aircraft Engine Performance Estimation,”
Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power, Vol. 132 / 0231601-1.
Simon, D. L., (2010), “An Integrated Architecture for Onboard Aircraft Engine Performance Trend Monitoring and Gas Path
Fault Diagnostics,” Proceedings of The 2010 JANNAF Joint Subcommittee Meeting, Colorado Springs, CO, May 3-7.
Simon, D.L., “Propulsion Diagnostic Method Evaluation Strategy (ProDiMES) User’s Guide,” NASA/TM—2010-215840,
January, 2010.
Society of Automotive Engineers E-32, (2005), “A Guide to the Development of a Ground Station for Engine Condition
Monitoring,” SAE Aerospace Information Report 4175A.
Volponi, A.J., et al, (2003), “Gas Turbine Condition Monitoring and Fault Diagnostics”, Von Kármán Institute Lecture Series,
VKI LS 2003-01, Rhode-Saint-Genèse, Belgium.
Volponi, A., Wood, B., (2005), “Engine Health Management for Aircraft Propulsion Systems,” The Forum on Integrated System
Health Engineering and Management (ISHEM) in Aerospace, November 7-10, Napa, CA.
Volponi, A., (2008), “Enhanced Self-Tuning On-Board Real-Time Model (eSTORM) for Aircraft Engine Performance Health
Tracking,” NASA CR-2008-215272.

Glenn Research Center

Controls and Dynamics Branch at Lewis Field