architecting aircraft power distribution systems via redundancy allocation

352 Pages·2014·16.33 MB·English

ARCHITECTING AIRCRAFT POWER DISTRIBUTION
SYSTEMS VIA REDUNDANCY ALLOCATION
A Dissertation
Presented to
The Academic Faculty
by
Angela Campbell
In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree
Doctor of Philosophy in the
School of Aerospace Engineering
Georgia Institute of Technology
December 2014
Copyright (cid:13)c 2014 by Angela Campbell
ARCHITECTING AIRCRAFT POWER DISTRIBUTION
SYSTEMS VIA REDUNDANCY ALLOCATION
Approved by:
Professor Dimitri N. Mavris, Dr. Elena Garcia
Committee Chair School of Aerospace Engineering
School of Aerospace Engineering Georgia Institute of Technology
Georgia Institute of Technology
Professor Dimitri N. Mavris, Advisor Dr. Kirsten Duffy
School of Aerospace Engineering NASA Glenn Research Center
Georgia Institute of Technology
Professor Daniel Schrage Dr. Gerald Brown
School of Aerospace Engineering NASA Glenn Research Center
Georgia Institute of Technology
Date Approved: 14 November 2014
DEDICATION
To my family,
your love and support made my dreams possible.
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
So many people made this work possible, and I would like to thank everyone. I will
begin with my husband. Thank you for being at my side for the past four and half
years. Every day you provide me with the love and encouragement that I needed to
reach my goals. Next, I would like to thank my parents. Throughout my life you
have made me feel loved, and you gave me the confidence that I needed to believe
that I could achieve any goal.
I would also like to thank all of my committee members. Dr. Mavris, thank you
for your guidance over my last five years at Georgia Tech. Reaching my academic
goals would not have been possible without your assistance. Dr. Garcia and Dr.
Schrage, thank you for your support of my work during my time at Georgia Tech.
Lastly, I would like to thank Dr. Brown and Dr. Duffy of NASA Glenn Research
Center for their mentorship for the past four years.
I would also like to thank Dr. Ajay Misra and George Stefko of NASA Glenn
Research Center for their support through the NASA Graduate Student Research
Program(GSRP).TheGSRPmademuchoftheworkpresentedinthisthesispossible.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DEDICATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv
LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix
LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi
NOMENCLATURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xxi
SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xxix
I INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1 The Turboelectric Aircraft Concept . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.2 Previous TeDP Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1.3 Problem Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1.4 System Reliability Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
II METHODOLOGY OVERVIEW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.1 The Engineering Decision Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.2 Formulation of RAAPS and Research Questions . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2.2.1 Define the Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
2.2.2 Select a Baseline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
2.2.3 Evaluate the Baseline to Determine Gaps . . . . . . . . . . . 33
2.2.4 Identify Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
2.2.5 Identify Candidate Architectures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
2.2.6 Evaluate Candidate Architectures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
2.2.7 Select a Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
III BASELINE SYSTEM EVALUATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
3.1 Capacity Requirement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
3.1.1 Graph Theory Application . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
3.1.2 Adjacency Matrix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
v
3.1.3 Calculating Component Capacities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
3.2 Weight Calculation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
3.2.1 Cable Sizing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
3.2.2 Converter and Machine Sizing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
3.3 Failure Rate Requirement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
3.3.1 Reliability of Complex Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
3.3.2 Stochastic Flow Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
3.3.3 Component Reliability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
3.3.4 Baseline Reliability Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
3.4 Baseline Evaluation Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
IV IDENTIFY ALTERNATIVES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
4.1 Architecture Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
4.1.1 Required Components . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
4.1.2 Redundancy Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
4.2 Technology Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
4.3 Hypothesis 2 and Experiment Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
V ARCHITECTURE DOWN-SELECTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
5.1 Problem Decomposition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
5.1.1 Architecture Design Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
5.1.2 Component Design Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
5.2 Methods for Architecture Down-selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
5.2.1 Design of Experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
5.2.2 Global Optimization Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
5.2.3 Optimization Methods Observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
5.3 Requirements and Objective Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
5.3.1 Capacity Requirement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
5.3.2 Weight Calculation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
5.3.3 Reliability Requirement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
vi
5.3.4 Solution Fitness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
5.4 Down-selection Implementation and Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131
5.4.1 Genetic Algorithm Optimization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131
5.4.2 Particle Swarm Optimization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138
5.4.3 Ant Colony Optimization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141
5.5 Down-selection Observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152
5.5.1 Optimization Method Comparison . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156
5.5.2 Selected Architectures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157
VI ARCHITECTURE EVALUATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168
6.1 Component Dynamic Modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168
6.1.1 Rectifier Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168
6.1.2 Inverter Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175
6.1.3 Cable Modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180
6.1.4 Machine Modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180
6.2 System Dynamic Modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180
6.2.1 One Motor Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181
6.2.2 Baseline System Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188
6.2.3 Architecture 1 Steady-State Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196
6.2.4 Architecture 2 Engine 1 Failure Results . . . . . . . . . . . . 201
6.2.5 Architecture 3 Engine 2 Failure Results . . . . . . . . . . . . 207
6.2.6 Performance Model Observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213
6.3 Decreasing Model Runtime . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213
6.3.1 Literature Search . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214
6.3.2 Model Alteration Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217
6.4 Stability Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230
6.4.1 Stability Analysis Approaches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232
6.4.2 Admittance Space Stability Criterion . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233
6.5 Stability Analysis Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 239
vii
6.5.1 DC Stability Analysis Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240
6.5.2 AC Stability Analysis Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 244
6.5.3 Stability Analysis Observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256
6.6 Architecture Evaluation Observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 257
VIIARCHITECTURE SELECTION AND CONCLUSIONS . . . . . 258
7.1 Methodology Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 258
7.2 Selected Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 262
7.2.1 Detailed Design Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 263
7.3 Hypotheses Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 264
7.4 Contributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266
7.4.1 Methodology Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266
7.4.2 Capacity Evaluation Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266
7.4.3 Cable Sizing Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266
7.4.4 Power System Reliability Calculation Method . . . . . . . . . 267
7.4.5 Architecture Optimization Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 267
7.4.6 Architecture Insights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 268
7.5 Future Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 268
7.5.1 Superconducting Component Reliability . . . . . . . . . . . . 268
7.5.2 Shock Modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269
7.5.3 Protection Components . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269
7.5.4 Multi-state Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 270
7.5.5 Large Signal Stability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 270
7.5.6 Uncertainty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 270
7.6 Final Thoughts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 271
APPENDIX A — AC STABILITY RESULTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . 272
REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 303
viii
LIST OF TABLES
1 NASA Subsonic Fixed Wing Program Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2 Commercial aircraft generator capacities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
3 Commercial aircraft battery capacities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
4 Baseline adjacency matrix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
5 Baseline four-step connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
6 Room temperature component efficiencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
7 Component capacities required by the engine-out scenario . . . . . . 44
8 Updated component capacities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
9 Cable model variable list . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
10 Cable model parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
11 Bus weights (kg) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
12 Component power to weight ratios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
13 Baseline component weights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
14 Room temperature component failure rates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
15 Path set initialization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
16 Baseline adjacency matrix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
17 Baseline 4-step connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
18 Baseline 3-step connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
19 Baseline 2-step connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
20 Baseline system path sets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
21 Updated path sets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
22 Baseline path sets used for decomposition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
23 Component Reliabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
24 Example system path sets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
25 System weights (lbs) for maximum reliability cases . . . . . . . . . . 85
26 Superconducting cable parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
27 Component weight calculation variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128
ix
28 GA component settings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135
29 GA component capacities and weights (lbs) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135
30 PSO component settings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142
31 PSO component capacities and weights (lbs) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142
32 Ant colony component settings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152
33 Ant colony component capacities and weights (lbs) . . . . . . . . . . 152
34 Outcome of optimization methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156
35 Architecture motor requirement and weight . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159
36 Rectifier design variable settings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
37 Single motor system model design variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182
38 Baseline system model design variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192
39 DQ motor model parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227
x