Engine signature assessment system

• US 9,097,199 B2
• Filed: 06/21/2012
• Issued: 08/04/2015
• Est. Priority Date: 06/21/2012
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: Rtx Corporation
• Original Assignee: United Technologies Corporation (Raytheon Technologies Corporation d/b/a RTX)
• Inventors: Neama, Roger, London, Brian, Breen, Larry R., Cuva, Rocco S., Buttermore, Alun L.
• Primary Examiner(s): Shafi, Muhammad
• Application Number:
  US13/529,305
• Publication Number:
  US 20130345923A1
• Time in Patent Office: 1,139 Days
• Field of Search: 701/29.4, 701/29.1, 701/31.4, 701/32.7, 701/33.2, 701/34.3, 701/34.4, 340/539.11, 340/539.24, 340/572.1
• US Class Current: 1/1
• CPC Class Codes: F02D 41/22 Safety or indicating devices for abnormal conditions in air/fuel ratio feedback systems F02D41/1495, in electric control linkage F02D11/107, in purge control systems F02M25/0809
• CPC Class Codes: F02D 41/26 using computer, e.g. microprocessor

Abstract

The disclosed method and system utilizes inspection information from individual components to predict a value for a system performance parameter. The predicted system performance parameter is utilized to determine if corrective action is required for any of the system components. No corrective action is recommended if the predicted system performance parameter is within desired limits. Further, corrective action for a specific component of the system is performed and indicated independent of the inspection results of a specific component.

Claims

1. A method of maintaining a system comprising:

inspecting at least one feature of a plurality of components of a system and recording at least one inspection result;

inputting the inspection results of the feature into an assessment system, the assessment system including a model of a system including the at least one component that determines a system performance parameter based on the input results of the inspected at least one feature;

determining a predicted value of the system performance parameter with the model of the system based on the input inspection results of the feature utilizing the predicted value to determine instructions for corrective action; and

displaying the determined instructions for the corrective action on a display device.

2. The method as recited in claim 1, including evaluating the inspection results includes comparing the inspection results of the features of the plurality of components to a predefined set of inspection results and selecting from a plurality of predicted values corresponding to the selected one of the predefined inspection results.

3. The method as recited in claim 1, wherein the feature of the plurality of components comprises a coating loss and the system performance parameter comprises radar cross-section.

4. The method as recited in claim 3, including measuring the coating loss on a plurality of engine exhaust system components and predicting a radar cross-section based on the measured coating loss.

5. The method as recited in claim 4, including identifying a component of the engine exhaust system that requires corrective action responsive to the radar cross-section being outside of predefined limits.

6. The method as recited in claim 4, including indicating that no corrective action is required responsive to the predicted radar cross-section being within predefined limits.

7. The method as recited in claim 1, including identifying a component of the system for corrective action based on the predicted value of the system performance parameter independent of the inspection results for the feature of that component.

8. The method as recited in claim 7, including predicting a mean time to component replacement based the predicted value of the system performance parameter.

9. A signature assessment system comprising:

an input device configured to record inspection information from a plurality of components of a system; and

an evaluation module configured to predict a value of a system performance parameter based on the inspection information from the plurality of components, wherein the evaluation module includes a model for predicting system performance based on the component inspection information of the plurality of components of an aircraft system, wherein the evaluation module is also configured to determine a predicted value of the parameter and configured to utilize the predicted value to determine instructions for a corrective action and to display the instructions for the corrective action on a display device.

10. The signature assessment system as recited in claim 9, wherein the evaluation module determines a disposition of each of the plurality of components based on the predicted value of the system performance parameter.

11. The signature assessment system as recited in claim 9, wherein the component inspection information comprises a coating characteristic of an aircraft exhaust system component.

12. The signature assessment system as recited in claim 11, wherein the coating characteristic comprises a coating loss.

13. The signature assessment system as recited in claim 11, wherein the performance parameter comprises a radar cross-section of the aircraft exhaust system.

14. The signature assembly system as recited in claim 9, wherein the evaluation module predicts a mean time to component replacement based on the predicted value of the system performance parameter.